Posted on 01/26/2009 5:03:57 AM PST by IbJensen
http://www.thebulletin.us/articles/2009/01/26/commentary/editorials/doc4976c02a91af7940488985.txt
Boy Scout Troop 358, one of the oldest African-American troops in the county, participated in history as it marched in the Inaugural Parade in Washington, D.C. as the first African-American became President of the United States.
Truly an honor for any Scout troop, however have the leaders of this troop taken a close look at an issue that will directly affect the very existence of Boy Scouting in America? The American Family Association of Pennsylvania (AFA of PA), a statewide family group, is questioning whether they realize President Barack Obama supports the very policies that are targeting their headquarters in Philadelphia.
Troop 358 is part of the Cradle of Liberty Scout Council, which has been in a pitched battle with the City of Philadelphia to retain the headquarters they built and have maintained since 1929 on property the 1928 City Council gave the Scouts free use of in perpetuity or forever.
Last May, the Cradle of Liberty Scout Council sued the city to prevent their eviction. That case was given a green light to proceed by a judge last fall,” remarked Diane Gramley, president of the AFA of PA.
Why is the City of Philadelphia seeking to evict the Scouts? It is because of their ban on allowing open homosexual leaders and members.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Scouts have the right, as a private organization, to choose who they want to be leaders and members. Ever since that time they have been targeted by homosexual organizations and activists who are trying to remold the Boy Scouts of America in their image.
In 1983 Philadelphia added “sexual orientation” to its Fair Practices Ordinance. Two decades later, under pressure from homosexual groups, the attack against the Scouts began.
Pressure on the Cradle of Liberty Scout Council, one of the largest in the nation serving more than 69,000 youth, has been intense over the past six years as they lost hundreds of thousands of dollars of support from Pew Charitable Trust and Southeastern Pennsylvania United Way, in addition to the threat of eviction.
“Yes, it is a great honor to be part of the inaugural parade, but at what costs? Do these Boy Scout leaders fully realize that President Obama supports a wide range of so-called ‘gay rights’ measures. He has said he will use the Office of President as a bully pulpit to advance their causes.
“Mr. Obama, knowingly or unknowingly, may be a part of the end of the Boy Scouts of America as we know them,” Ms. Gramley further stated.
The homonazi pederasts have relentlessly attacked the BSA for years.....
Same deal with the Catholic Church...
Yet here and your “budd” are here on this thread defending the perverts.
Last time I checked; Male +
Male + sex = homosexuality!
The ones after the “boys” are homosexual pederasts.
perversion cheerleader alert.
I do not have access to my files. Perhaps one of you guys still have links..
“Actually, it has never been scientifically proven that homosexual adults are any more likely to molest children than heterosexual adults.”
ACTUALLY -it has never ever been proven that there are homosexual adults -there are only those that ‘feel’ predisposed to enegage in homosexual activities and or those that choose to engage in homosexual activities -of these some reveal the claim and some do not///
How does one prove they are a homosexual adult there Einstein...
You must concede that any study premised upon a group such as those that claim to be homosexually inclined YET claim not to engage in sexual activities with minors would of course be completely subjective and as such irrelevent...
Maybe better put would be my study that claims 100% of men that molest boys are by definition homosexual...
“Have a good afternoon”
Nino Fan? Boy fan? This is surreal...
Don’t even go there, you sicko. Nino is Antonin Scalia’s nickname. I’m a huge fan of his jurisprudence.
Sicko? Suggest you recalibrate...
I understand your love of Scalia now. How would Scalia decide this issue?
Hey, you’re the one who jumped to the conclusion about it meaning ‘boy fan’...
As for Scalia’s opinion on gay issues, I don’t really know. I do know his opinion on the Constitution and the equal protection and due process clauses in relation to gay rights (such as his dissents in Romer and Lawrence), but I have no idea how he thinks as a private individual and voter on gay issues. One thing I like about him is that he’s able to separate his personal views from his judging. It’s what a judge should be able to do. He recognizes that legislatures and courts have different functions. I like Justice Thomas for that reason, too. (And, in fact, Justice Thomas has indicated that he finds criminalizing homosexuality to be a silly thing for a legislature to do.)
BTW, I fully support the right of private groups to exclude whoever they want for ANY reason no matter how much I may disagree, because frankly, who private individuals choose to associate with is none of my business. If the Boy Scouts don’t want gays, that’s their right, IMO. If a women’s gardening club wants to exclude men, that’s just fine. I’m rather libertarian in that sense.
Also, an article from 1999 Homosexuality and child molestation: the link, the likelihood, the lasting effects
And from my profile:
Targeting Children, Part 1: How the gay movement intends to capture the next generation
Targeting Children, Part 2: How the homosexual movement uses public schools as instruments of change
Targeting Children, Part 3: Activists encouraging experimentation
Targeting Children, Part 4: Access to children: homosexuality and molestation
Nobody is saying all homosexuals are child molestors... in fact far from it — most homosexuals do not molest children. Still, the issue is the disproportionate number of child molestations by homosexuals.
Thank you, Scripter - I should (re)familiarize myself with what you’ve got on your profile page.
(I’ve been laid low the last couple of weeks but will be able to send a little something soon.)
He is, indeed, polite, but most agenda sycophants are to a certain point. They can become ranting, foaming at the mouth zealots if they can't obtain some concession in debate.
Best not discourse.
See. His moderate tone has fled. He realizes that he's not going to obtain any converts here, so he resorts to name calling.
How would anyone know that Scalia is his 'hero' thence the 'Nino' fan.
Nino could have meant 'little' something else.
Yep.
In the past on FR I was very active on this topic and had a lot of “debates” with all kinds of pro-homosexual agenda people, and eventually the pro-agenda people would get banned. That’s the way it is on FR. If someone is a pro-homosexual agenda promoter, whether they themselves are homosexual or not, they will eventually get banned, if they keep at it.
I’ve had many private conversations on FR with people struggling with same sex attraction - who did not want to remain that way. I can think of two in particular who became healed. Just because someone experiences same sex desires doesn’t mean they have to always remain in the “gay life”. It is in many cases a treatable condition, and that is one of the main lies of the “gay” agenda that is so tragic, as it dooms many - especially very young kids - to a life of misery, sickness, loneliness, and death.
With all these “gay” high schools - and now a “gay” MIDDLE SCHOOL! This should be illegal as it is nothing more than child abuse.
Excuse me, sir. I am polite with anyone who is polite with me. My moderate tone did not go anywhere. DBeeers is the one whose own mind ‘went there’ in terms of my username.
BTW, it is considered proper FReeper etiquette to ping someone when you talk about them. Since you, IbJensen, are so new to this website, it is perhaps understandable that you are not aware of this.
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.
Nice try, but that has nothing to do with what I just posted. I was talking about the response and his choice to criticize me without pinging me, which is considered rude here on Free Republic. It’s clear you lack the ability to debate intelligently or even focus on the content of posts, so any further discussion with you is pointless.
Again, if you choose to harass me, I will hit abuse on you. Otherwise, we don’t have a problem. Now, I’m going to go back and enjoy Free Republic, as I have done for years. I wish you nothing but the best. God Bless.
What other posters do, in the field of rudeness, has nothing to do with me.
Meant to add - I am not on this thread to debate rudeness or lack of same by anyone, but about the inappropriateness of the promoting the homosexual agenda on FR.
Well, you chose to post it as a reply to the comment I made in response to his criticism, so the context made it seem that way. If I misunderstood your purpose, I apologize.
Just to make clear, I feel no ill will towards you. I’m sure you’re a nice person. And based on your profile page, it looks like you’re a fellow Christian, so that’s great. Even if you disagree with me strongly on the topic of this thread (and given the fact that I take the libertarian position that the Boy Scouts should be able to keep out whoever they want, we really don’t disagree on the conclusion, even if we disagree on homosexuality in general), I think it’s important that we at least acknowledge that we’re fighting against the same evil enemy when it comes to abortion mills, Islamic fascists, etc.
However, to be frank, I find it difficult to discuss things with you because I almost get the feeling that you’re trying to push buttons. I am here to discuss issues, not to create enemies, so I hope that I’m just being sensitive. The way I see it is that we’ve made our positions clear and we’ll both do what we think is best in the future. Perhaps it’s time to shake hands, agree that we’ll both do what we feel we need to do in the future with respect to this topic, and move on.
Christian eh?
What stand does Jesus take on homosexuality (in your opinion)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.