Troops quietly defy Scout policy on gays

Providence Journal ^ | July 20, 2003 | Jennifer Levitz

[EdReform]

Thanks! Bump for later...

[ArGee]

While I don't have too much of a problem with a scout discovering that he is gay and remaining in scouts, I have a major problem with gay scout leaders who could use their position to influence confused adolescents.

This is a key point of the gay agenda, whether individual gays understand this or not.

Confused young men might be able to be convinced they are gay, or convinced they are straight and that one day the other boys will stop teasing them for not being macho. It's all a matter of who provides the influence.

Gays want to provide that influence for the same biological reason that straights want to have sex - to reproduce.

Shalom.

[yoe]

"...if a teen is "gay" it means he is sexually active with many men. If you are straight, you are not promiscuous.

Nor does the article mention the spread of AIDs among the young.

[GrandMoM]

BUMP

[ArGee]

Why not start a "diversity scouts"

If you really want to push the line of reasoning maybe you need to demonstrate by absurdity. Have a woman ASM demand to be able to lead teenage boys who are not her children. Demand it as a right that she be able to go camping with them the same way the male ASMs can.

See how many people think her reasoning is innocent.

Shalom.

[EdReform]

Bump!

Good Morning, ArGee! Good to see you! Hope all has been well with you and your family.

[ThomasMore]

Is Rhode Island becoming the San Fransico of New england? (looking at the source)

No, but it's terribly liberal, especially in northern Rhode Island (the city areas).

[EdReform]

"Confused young men might be able to be convinced they are gay, or convinced they are straight and that one day the other boys will stop teasing them for not being macho. It's all a matter of who provides the influence.

Gays want to provide that influence for the same biological reason that straights want to have sex - to reproduce."

Precisely! Well said!

[ThomasMore]

discussed this issue with their "church" or other "concerned" group.

Mainstream protestant denominations have chosen a different gospel, I guess. Of course, we have liberal priests and bishops in the Catholic Church who have turned a blind eye, as well, to the gospel teachings on homosexual acts as being sinful.

[Great_Dame]

FYI - adults and boys are not allowed to sleep in the same tent, unless it is a father/son relationship. (Boy Scout Mom and Committee Member for 8 years.)

These people are sick, sick, sick. Homosexuality is a choice and a private one at that. They are not, and should not be, a special interest group, or any kind of "protected class" of people. Society has rules, if you choose to flout the rules...well then, you have made your choice, haven't you?

And yes I know plenty of gays and even have some in my family, fortunately, they don't feel the compulsion to crusade this "cause" in every aspect of their lives.

[Freedom4US]

It's just amazing how well the lefties have sold this nightmare to everyday people. Any honest thinker knows who the *real* bigots are - the people who wish to subvert a fine organization to their own political ends.

I don't much care what people do on their own time - but to impugn the Boy Scouts as a "hate group" is just beyond the pale. Orwell would be impressed, I'm sure.

[Kahonek]

"if a teen is "gay" it means he is sexually active with many men."

No, if a (male) teen is "gay," it means he is romantically and sexually attracted to males, and may or may not be sexually active. Virtually everybody has a sexual orientation before ever engaging in sex -- didn't you, or were you just experimenting?

"If you are straight, you are not promiscuous."

Whew! That's a relief! Otherwise, we'd have real societal problems like unintended pregancies, abortions, and STDs among straight people. Fortunately for society, straight people aren't promiscuous...

"Notice no one mentions this in the story?"

Perhaps because it's patently ridiculous?

[scripter]

I used to not believe that there was a sinister homo agenda.

With your posted examples you demonstrated there is indeed a gay agenda. For more on the gay agenda I recommend a number of links and/or books:

1. Targeting Children Part 1 
2. Targeting Children Part 2 
3. "Queering" Moral Education 
4. The Homosexual Propaganda and Media Manipulation Game 
5. Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy 
6. Invasion of the mind snatchers 

The book summarized in link number 4 is an eye-opener.

[ArGee]

No, if a (male) teen is "gay," it means he is romantically and sexually attracted to males, and may or may not be sexually active.

Generally, romantic and sexual attraction are not joined together in the teen stage - although some confuse the two.

Men love for a variety of different reasons. But men do not have sex with everyone they love. Healthy men love both men and women, but control their sexual urges. In a healthy society, they have sex only with their wives.

Boys have fantasies. In normal development, they will be guided not to give in to their fantasies, but to channel their thoughts into constructive patterns. Some people don't develop normally and their fantasies rule their lives. (Not all of those are homosexual.)

Homosexuality is not a constructive pattern, and boys should be discouraged from channeling their thoughts in that direction.

Shalom.

[EdReform]

BTTT

[F16Fighter]

What is remarkable about this event is that under the Boy Scout's national policy that bans gay Scouts and leaders, Cicilline, who leads a city of 173,000 people, could not lead a Boy Scout troop."

A gay Mayor may "lead" a city; Richard Simmons may still "lead" an exorcise class; and Calvin Klein may still "lead" the fashion industry, but NONE of them have the credentials to "lead" young boys to become "men."

Since when should the rest of us lie down and allow the moral relativists hijack and redefine even the word "leader" for the rest of us?

WE will still stand by OUR definition of "leadership," and follow our own criteria for "morally straight" -- despite gay hate-mongering hypocrites who would enforce their militant behavioral fascism upon ALL of us IF they could.

[jimt]

"Morally straight means doing what is right, and what is right is clearly not to peddle hate," he said.

This despicably Orwellian comment is typical of liberal non-thinkers.

The utterer of this nonsense apparently feels that complete lack of judgement about Scout leaders is "right". I guess it's "right" for bestiophiles to teach animal husbandry merit badge courses. Perhaps they could demonstrate for the entire troop. It's apparently also "right" for atheists to teach on spiritual matters. After all, one can't discriminate, now can one?

The dickwad also clearly says that not embracing avowed homosexuals into Scouting is "hate". The pinhead has redefined a simple choice not to associate into an active hatred. But hey, being liberal is about not telling the truth - "it all depends on what is is."

[Clint N. Suhks]

"We said we would not consider (sexual orientation) as reason to exclude someone,"

Those oriented towards relatives, animals and children too or just thier pet perversion? I'm betting they're hypocrites.

[luckystarmom]

Okay, I don't know about straights not being promiscuous. I knew (know) many straight people that are promiscuous.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Pervert Alert!