Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SilentPanda, Jan 28, 2013.
It is a cop out. They are allowing decision to be made at the local level rather than making the policy a national one of acceptance. It is their right as a private organization to deny who they want, but it doesn't make it right. Many troops are sponsored/hosted by churches and are afraid of losing the support of the ultraconservatives.
***Disclaimer: former Eagle Scout
The Hell that the leaders are afraid the Gays will send them must've frozen over.
I'd rather each group made the decision themselves rather than a complete ban, at least then you can argue where the discrimination still stands strong. I'm quite sure there are plenty of church members who don't give a rat's behind whether a scout or a scout leader is gay supporting their local group based on other attributes.
Didn't take long for the hate groups to regurgitate their bile. Just repulsive human beings.
Agreed. They either do it as a whole or not at all.
And, even if they do change their policy on a national level (which I don't think will happen anytime soon) I still would never let my son near the Boy Scouts.
Their history of discrimination and hypocrisy in hiding and withholding information about child abusers will always be a dealbreaker for me.
It's a poor start, but a start.
I think some (not all of course) scouting groups will have a harder time saying "Billy can't be in or stay in our troop because he's gay and our troop doesn't agree with that." Previously they could just say "That's national policy" and alleviate their conscience. There will certainly be some holdouts no doubt. But there are likely many gay individuals in scouts already that can now attempt to come out if they like. There is a comradery in scouts and only the most hard of hard headed people would kick out somebody that's been in their troop for several years. Not only is the decision left up to the local groups but they have more direct pressure from the parents. That can certainly go either way of course. But I'd guess most parents wouldn't bother voicing their opinions at the national level but would at the local level.
Troops end up meeting other troops. At camp, at giant scouting events, at community service events... even if your troop doesn't allow it, the troop you're serving with at an even might. They'll have to interact and play nice.
It's not going to happen overnight as most of these type of issues don't. But it's a good slow start. Many troops won't have an issue with it, many will. They're going to eventually work together anyway so they best get used to it.
I can't believe I read this stuff about the Boy Scouts of all things in 2013..
My old man is a cub leader. He even has a girl in his pack. You Americans would **** a brick if that happened over their. lol
From what I understand, approximately 25% of scout troops are sponsored on the local level by the Catholic church and the Mormon church. (I'll try to find a source for that...) If the BSA were to mandate full acceptance of gays on a national level, it would leave many of these scout troops without a sponsor and without funding. Because you know the Catholics and Mormons (and many other organizations) would immediately cease funding.
From a pragmatic perspective, they did the right thing and made a good first step.
I just hope the day will come when they're courageous enough to cut ties with those organizations that would oppose allowing gays into the scouts.
My first was sponsored by a Jewish temple. My second by my scout master who had a wildlife refuge and a few other things on his massive swath of sand and scrub pine.
Mine was sponsored by my church. It was pretty blatantly not open to gays. It also had a tendency to weed out the weak.
I attended several being brought up in a military family and moving frequently. I think all mine were ran in part through a Catholic church. Except the one in Utah. Bet you can't guess who sponsored that one!
I don't know that they excluded/included gay members. I'm not sure I knew that gay people existed at that point in my life. Not due to parental shielding or anything... I just had never encountered any. That and I stopped scouts around 14-15 and would probably even care about that sort of thing. I don't think I knew of any gay people until High School and it wasn't a big deal to me.
We may hear something about the Boy Scout's decision this week. Meanwhile the bigots have come out with an ad in USA Today. This is done by the Family Research Council and 40 other "organizations".
Absolutely sickening - especially the part where they blame the the BSA coverup of sexual abuse and abusers on "sexual predators who managed to hide their attraction to boys".
"Close to" is not "Ended"
Nobody implied otherwise.
The Boy Scouts, who were supposed to vote today on allowing gay people, are delaying their vote until May.
The Scouts can do whatever they want. If they do or don't allow homosexuals that's their choice.
However, if they do, they'll lose their largest donors who also have a choice not to support the scouts.
As long as no one is being forced, and engaging in freedom of speech and association, then everything is as it should be. Big boy rules; all decisions have consequences.
I was in scouts for three years when I was a kid. I don't remember this ever coming up. I don't remember thinking about it, I don't remember anybody ever mentioning it or talking about it. It was never an issue. What changed?
they banned gays from being scouts or leaders, that's what changed
I absolutely agree. They can do whatever they want. That said, if they are going to continue their discriminatory practices, they shouln't be allowed to be tax exempt, or have the use of government facilities or resources.
And regarding losing donors, they've already lost a huge amount because of their policies. Look at that list of 41 in the ad. As we get closer to equality those organizations will cease to exist.
If the Boy Scouts want to continue, and be relevant, they should change the policy. The tide is turning in this country and those who fight change will be left behind. Their numbers have been decreasing for more than a decade now and it's only going to continue. Good riddance.
A lot has changed - including the fact that people are coming out of the closet at a much younger age than they did when you and I were kids. Also, we are much more open about our sexuality today than we were 15 or 20 or 30 years ago. You also see more and more gays and lesbians having children - we aren't allowed to be scout leaders either.
A child who comes out as a teenager shouldn't be kicked out of his troop because of it - especially if he has been in since he was a child. Further, as a mother of a son, why shouldn't I be allowed to be a troop leader?
Policies like this are asking us to remain in the closet. To hide who we are. If they cared one iota about children, they would see how damaging that is. Have you seen the suicide rates for LGBT youth lately?
That wasn't my point. My point is that when I was in scouts, we never sat around talking about "boy, I sure am glad we don't have any queers in our troop!" or "hey, I'm straight, are you straight, too?" Those things didn't matter. That has NOT changed.
We were too busy making fake bear skins, learning archery, racing soap box derbys, and building model rockets (and shooting them!) to worry about whether somebody else was gay or straight. There were other things on our minds. That has NOT changed.
Then somewhere along the way (long after I had left scouting), I learned that they don't accept gay people. Now I don't know whether that was a new policy, or one that had been in place all along and I somehow was hearing it for the first time. But one thing that hasn't changed, I'm sure, is the fact that it doesn't matter. Scouting isn't (or at least wasn't) about sex. Sexual orientation didn't matter then, why does it matter now?
Ask the troop leaders and officials who have kicked out boys for being gay. And for the parents who haven't been allowed to be troop leaders.
As I said, the difference is that more people are out of the closet now. And as much as we don't want it to be, sexual orientation does matter. And to say it doesn't is ignoring what is happening in this country.
I just heard something on the political radio show I listen to make the remark that the delay may have been caused by the Mormon church. I'm wondering if there's any credence behind this.
As one of the most active anti gay churches and the largest sponsor of local BS troops, why would you even question it?