Skip to comments.Boy Scouts delay vote on end of gay membership ban (in detail)
Posted on 02/07/2013 5:38:25 AM PST by NYer
.- The Boy Scouts of America have announced that they will delay voting on the decision to reverse a ban on gay individual and troop leader participation within the organization until May.
“After careful consideration and extensive dialogue within the Scouting family, along with comments from those outside the organization,” said Deron Smith, Director of Public Relations for the organization, “the volunteer officers of the Boy Scouts of America’s National Executive Board concluded that due to the complexity of this issue, the organization needs time for a more deliberate review of its membership policy."
Smith noted that committees will continue “to further engage representatives of Scouting’s membership and listen to their perspectives and concerns.”
The announcement comes on Feb. 6, the day the 1,400 voting members of the national council were supposed to either re-affirm or overturn the organization’s ban on gay members- including scout leaders. The decision affecting nearly 2.7 million members will now be delayed until May 2013.
In late January, Boy Scouts of America announced that they were considering ending their national ban on gay individuals and troop leaders in the organization following the loss of funding from high-profile donors such as UPS for their policy.
Smith added in a Jan. 28 statement that organizations that sponsor and oversee scouting groups, such as churches, would not be ordered “to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.”
President Barack Obama has expressed support of an end to the organization’s current policy, which was upheld as a constitutional expression of free speech by the Supreme Court in 2000. “My attitude,” Obama said, “is that gays and lesbians should have access and opportunity the same way everybody else does, in every institution and walk of life.”
Family Research Council said it was “encouraged” by the delay in changing the national policy. Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council thanked the Boy Scouts for continuing to maintain their national membership standards and thanked the Scout parents who expressed “an overwhelming outpouring of support for maintaining the Scouts' timeless values.”
Perkins continued, saying that the delay was “not enough,” calling officials within the Boy Scouts of America to “publicly re-affirm their current standards, as they did just last July.” He also warned of “grave consequences,” should the Boy Scouts change their policy and compromise their moral standards in the face of threats from corporate elites and homosexual activists."
Over 40 organizations including Media Research Center, Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, Concerned Women for America, Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty and others have joined Family Research Council in asking Boy Scouts of America to retain the current national rule.
The organizations took out an advertisement in USA Today on Feb. 4, saying that the current rule is consistent with the Scout oath keep oneself “morally straight.” The ad also added that the current policy helps to protect scouts from sexual abuse and helps parents maintain control over their children’s sexual education. “To compromise moral principles under political and financial pressure,” the ad said, “would teach boys cowardice, not courage.”
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Why the faggots don’t start their own scout groups and leave the Boy Scouts alone is beyond me.
Just think, they could advertise that they have homo leaders and would be glad to have your children in their basement for meetings and with them on overnite campings. If they’re so damn proud of being homosexuals, then why not have their own groups.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Not a good sign.
This should be cut and dried.
No Homo’s in the Scouts.
The fact that they kicked the can down the road has a bad feeling.
For the simple reason that they have an organization that is already established. All they need to do is show up. On the other hand how can you convince the main stream public that a "Gay scouts" is a reasonable alternative?
I disagree with you. If they had this much opposition in such a short period of time imagine what can be done if we have until May to inundate them with email, calls and letters.
Imagine the merit badges... hair styling, interior decorating, figure skating, fashion design...
The fact that they delayed the vote tells me 3 things:
A) The BSA leadership (ie. whoever has the power to delay the vote) wants to go lavender.
B) At present, they don’t have enough votes to go lavender.
C) The leadership believes they can find a way to get the votes given enough time.
Rather than do anything about the stagnant economy, the ticking time bomb of debt, or Irans rush to acquire nuclear weapons, the sick joke we are asked to regard as a president has turned his attention to promoting openly homosexual scoutmasters in the Boy Scouts................
Here is one I built.
ACTUALLY: Boy Scouts delay vote on removal of morality & God from the organizations founding principles
The leftist media always frames these issues with false premise like any leftist propagandist would.
I’d like to really know what is happening inside the organization. Seems almost airtight in this regard.
truthful analysis. My wife and have already stopped buying girl scout cookies due to their chosen path. We will have to add any support for boy scouts to the list as well.
If homosexuals can control the youth of our nation, which they already seem to thru our culture and shows like Glee, then there is no turning back for our civilization without massive upheaval.
“I don’t want the whole world. Just your half.”
This has now shifted from the mere board of directors to the 1400 voting members of the BSA councils.
The time now is to “hit them when they are down”. The two insitgators, one of which is to assume the leadership, must now face a unified chorus demanding their resignations BEFORE the next meeting.
I think your points are right on target.
Sounds like they're assessing plans for damage control. No, not good.
Is there any way we can lobby them to stay pure?
Maybe we need to let them know they will not be getting any more money from the public —— us.
I reember back a few days when the names and email addresses of those in charge was posted on FR, try the search function.
The Sea Scouts are an offshoot of the Boy Scouts, i wonder if they are also involved in this mess.
Agreed. Do you have the names of the instigators? They should definitely be shoveled out, or they'll just wait until the next opportune moment. It's good news because they've backed off, but it's bad news because they ONLY backed off because they saw the resistance was growing too strong to act right now.
And prayer and fasting.
you don’t make sacrifices at the temple when there is a tiger at the gates of the city...
Ernst & Young CEO
who are actively seeking to change the Boy Scouts long standing policy
Call me an idiot who never gets enough sleep, if you like ... but could you please explain your point carefully in literal English? I have NO IDEA what you mean.
There is a time to pray and there is a time to fight. Now is the time to fight.
Subject: What really happened in Dallas ( was Re: Decision Delayed)
Date: 10:51, Feb 7 2013
These people are much more interested in money than Scouting's long-time values. Calvin, a SM in TX
I'm sorry, Calvin, but I can't let this pass. I was in Dallas for the meetings the past Monday and Tuesday (I'm not on the National Board and was not in the Wednesday Board meeting.). I had personal discussions with many members of the National Board and the National Advisory council. NEVER ONCE DID I HEAR MONEY MENTIONED AS A PRIMARY DRIVER. I heard many, many discussions about the short and long term future of the organization and how the BSA can best be positioned for short and long term health and growth. I was personally present in the meeting where Wayne Perry, the National President who is a lifelong member of the LDS Church and a lifelong Scouter and the founder of a billion dollar company, was in tears about having to go to Salt Lake City and discuss with his Prophet why he believes that a change in the membership standards (gay policy) is essential to the health of the organization to protect, among other things, the right of the BSA to maintain the Duty to God standard. NEVER ONCE DID HE MENTION MONEY. He and Tico Perez, the National Commissioner, and Wayne Brock, the Chief Scout Executive, did mention the personal values and beliefs of todays youth and today's parents and the persons that we serve. There also was mention of the personal heartache caused by communication from parents and Scout leaders of older youth who realize they are gay. Wayne Brock too appeared close to tears when he discussed a phone call from a Scout leader who said that one of his older Scouts had been a member of the group of boys since they were 8. The boys all love each other in the best, Scoutlike, family-like sense. That boy is now 16 and has realized he is gay and so informed the Scoutmaster. The Scout leader asks "Am I supposed to tear this group of youth apart by expelling this one boy? His friends know about and don't care about his sexual orientation. What will it say to each of these older boys if we expel their highly respected friend. Should we not expect to lose all of them to Scouting and to the Scout Oath and Scout Law?" I heard a 78 year veteran Scouter who has received every honor the BSA has, in a public meeting, discuss the heartache caused when his Eagle Scout youngest son came to him and said he was gay. The heartache was not over the son's sexual orientation. Rather, when he asked his son "when did you know?" The son said, "I realized my feelings about this were different when I was about 10." Then when he asked his son "Why did you take so long to tell me?" and the son said "I know how important the Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts are to you and I didn't want to cause trouble for you." There were a lot of us close to tears there. NEVER ONCE WAS MONEY MENTIONED. I'm not saying money is not a factor; just that it appeared there are many, many other factors just as compelling if not more so. The National Key 3 said that personally, they were probably the most conservative National Key 3 in 20 years and in their personal beliefs, none of them particularly wanted a change. However, they said they had concluded that the change was absolutely essential to the short and long term survival, health and growth of the BSA. I fully admit that I am not neutral in this and my council and I have a dog in this fight. I had a lot of discussions with persons from conservative religions about their beliefs and how they find homosexuality morally repugnant and do not want homosexual leaders around their youth. I get it and I understand how it is absolutely essential to have policies and procedures to protect the beliefs of those religions. At the same time, when I was discussing the problems that the policy causes for the more welcoming religions, more inclusive persons and many of today's youth and parents, I did not get the feeling that the reception by many rank and file members (and even in some cases leaders) of the conservative religions was particularly empathetic or that the effort was being made to find a working procedure which would enable all persons to have Scouting in line with their religious and personal beliefs. Either they do not get it or they do not want to get it or they believe their personal beliefs trump any consideration for the beliefs of others. I heard a lot about the Bible and Leviticus. I heard a lot about the "gay agenda" and concern about lawsuits to force sponsors to take gay leaders. I heard very little about "friendly" and "kind" and about respect for the customs and beliefs of others. And I certainly heard threats to leave if the policy is changed. To me the proposed change to local sponsor option on membership is the only possible policy to protect the rights of all sponsors and to honor our long standing Declaration of Religious Principles. The threats to leave and lack of empathy and understanding to me are exceedingly disappointing. I don't believe that anyone has suggested that individual sponsors and individual units who do not want gay or lesbian leaders should have them. I would only hope that, in the spirit of Scouting, the opposite prerogative would be given to sponsors and units which have different beliefs and theologies. There are concerns about multi-unit activities like camp and camporees. I believe those can be worked out by people of good faith, just as they were when woman were universally permitted to become BSA leaders at all levels in the late '70s. I do hope we can continue to have one BSA. It would be an incredible shame if this issue, which as a practical matter should probably be a very rare occurrence in a program primarily for 7 to 14 year olds, would tear apart the BSA.
What sort of fighting do you plan to do, and how would this preclude your also praying and fasting, if you wanted to?
What sort of fighting do you plan to do,
If it comes to gun confiscation I will not be one of the sheep who turns their guns in so my answer is whatever it takes including lethal force.
and how would this preclude your also praying and fasting, if you wanted to?
I take it you have never been in a gun or knife fight. Both, unlike the TV representations require one's full concentration. If one wants to they can pray prior to and after the fight but it is not really feasible to be on one's knees during a fight.
Under no circumstances do I see any value in fasting.
Wow. That’s not very encouraging.
When the Tiger’s at the gates of the city, it’s helpful to have God on your side.
I couldn’t agree more, but I wouldn’t stand in the open praying under the delusion that God will prevent me from being shot.
I have free will with his grace and that free will allows me to grab cover.
I see your point, Eaker ... although being an ornamental fluffy pink bunny (i.e., female) the fight-or-pray issue wouldn’t come up for me. A man will appear to protect me, while I stand about being appealing, or so I read on FR. (Or let’s get real ... Anoreth will protect me, if I need any help.)
However, my earlier post was specific to the situation involving the upcoming vote on open homosexuality in the Boy Scouts. I was wondering, in this situation, what sort of fighting was planned that would prevent one’s also fasting and praying, with allowances for the difficulty of (for example) praying and making a telephone call at the exact same time.
Fasting is ongoing, and so it doesn’t interfere with other actions.
Your reply to me and the others were spot on.
This message is a carefully constructed argument. Note that the opponents are painted as evil non-charitable Christians who hate homosexuals, and the homosexuals are painted as completely sympathetic people. It's all emotional and based on a few examples, not considering the real issue.
The response to this is that the message ignores two problems: the philosophical and the practical.
1. Philosophical. Are you going to change the accepted definition of "morally straight" to include discussion of sex as a Scout value? Not just homosexual, but any sex is inappropriate for discussion in BSA. That's why homosexuals are barred, because they self-identify and focus their lives around what they do with their genitals. Our troop expelled a scoutmaster who put some very inappropriate heterosexual posts on his FB page.
2. Practical. Not just leaders, but older Scouts, who self-identify as homosexual should not be in groups of boys on campouts and trips because it is an ongoing temptation to them and a source of scandal. That's why we don't let 20-something boys lead Girl Scout troops. Incoming lawsuits in 3, 2, 1 . . . .