Should the BoyScouts continue to ban homosexuals?

[silencertalk]

Should the national Boy Scouts continue to ban any homosexual, even if they pass the background check and are well known and regarded in their community and are wanted as the leader by the other local adults who normally pick leaders?

All scout leaders are background checked.

[ronin111]

My opinion is that a private organization should be able to set their own criteria. I also don't believe the government should support private organizations that are discriminatory.

The Boy Scouts also ban atheists and agnostics.

[silencertalk]

This reflects the poll I created where most people here believe that homosexuality is a choice. If it is a choice, then it makes more sense to want to ban them, as then they are immoral.

So yes, I realize that most people think it is a choice, though I don't yet know why people think that as it is obviously not a choice.

[silencertalk]

My opinion is that a private organization should be able to set their own criteria. I also don't believe the government should support private organizations that are discriminatory.

The Boy Scouts also ban atheists and agnostics.

Yes, I agree that the Boy Scouts should have the choice to ban homosexuals. I even will go a step further and say they should have a choice to ban any group, even based on race, sex, etc. We have freedom of association - but yet the govt makes laws which are unconstitutional by saying that businesses cannot discriminate.

That being said, I am disappointed that the Boy Scouts bans homosexuals. I am pretty sure many or maybe most local Boy Scout groups just ignore that stuff though.

And they probably should not get to use govt buildings.

[pneumagger]

I think local troops should be able to decide.

This is silly. I want to know how they would even know a young boy was 'gay'? Are 12-14 yr olds now having a bunch of gay sex or something? Several people I grew up with and went to school with are now gay... like flaming out of the closet gay and you never would have seen it coming. And a couple of the odd kids you would have expected to grow up and be super queer are completely normal with wives and girlfriends nowadays. I doubt a majority of gay persons are even truly aware of their age at that point in their lives.

And now what do you do with kids that 'identify' with the opposite sex? Just because little Johnny wears a bra, dress, panties, and high heels - does that mean he gets to join the girl scouts?

And the most pressing question: What if that boy scout only likes it if his GF/wife is holding the dildo... does that make them "gay"?
Historical reference: viewtopic.php?f=81&t=17020

[doubloon]

...
And the most pressing question: What if that boy scout only likes it if his GF/wife is holding the dildo... does that make them "gay"?
Historical reference: viewtopic.php?f=81&t=17020

Well done.

[driver6814]

Very well done

[finn]

A useful thought experiment is to just replace "gay" with "deaf". Who cares if it's a choice or not. It's a harmless psychological/neurological deviation from the way we're built, and they are perfectly capable of dealing with it, without us micromanaging. I served with homosexuals, and they caused fewer issues than the bigots, despite outnumbering them.

[silencertalk]

While I don't see homosexuality as a morality issue, many people do. No one sees deafness as a morality issue.

[doubloon]

That implies no choice. I don't believe all homosexuality is without choice.

Better to compare it to alcoholism, scarification ... a voluntary addiction or hobby that poses no immediate threat to others but enables a socially uncomfortable atmosphere for those unwilling to accept it.

And before anyone says it, driving drunk and alcoholism are not the same thing.

[finn]

Scarification is more of a parallel to transgender.

[doubloon]

[Molon labe]

Read this to see how normal their lifestyle really is.

http://www.narth.com/docs/reporton.html

[RWBlue]

My opinion is that a private organization should be able to set their own criteria. I also don't believe the government should support private organizations that are discriminatory.

The Boy Scouts also ban atheists and agnostics.

That pretty much sums up what I was thinking.

[RWBlue]

And they probably should not get to use govt buildings.

1. If someone wants to rent a Gov. space, more power to them.

2. If the space is open to anyone who wants to apply, more power to them.

If the space is only open to X group.......I have an issue.

BTW, If 1 or 2 apply to a religious group, or the KKK or AA, same for them. No one is special, so that is fair.

[ariwhiteboy]

My opinion is that a private organization should be able to set their own criteria. I also don't believe the government should support private organizations that are discriminatory.

The Boy Scouts also ban atheists and agnostics.

That pretty much sums up what I was thinking.

This is pretty much my feelings on it as well. While I hate to see discrimination, I'm for a private organization's right to regulate membership. If you do that though, you don't get to use Govt. resources.

Read this to see how normal their lifestyle really is.

http://www.narth.com/docs/reporton.html

There is plenty of deviance among heterosexual culture as well. Not to mention that report came out in 1979, a time when everyone was being pretty promiscuous.

I have worked with and am friends with several Gay and Lesbian people. The only difference I've noticed about them (other than who they prefer to take to bed) is that they care little whether someone is straight or gay. I would rather be the type of person who judges people based on individual merit rather than categorically excluding someone simply because they are different.

That being said, it is certainly every individual's right to hold such an opinion. There are plenty of organizations who will confirm your beliefs (though that number is shrinking) and the Boy Scouts have historically been one.

[doubloon]

And they probably should not get to use govt buildings.

1. If someone wants to rent a Gov. space, more power to them.

2. If the space is open to anyone who wants to apply, more power to them.

If the space is only open to X group.......I have an issue.

BTW, If 1 or 2 apply to a religious group, or the KKK or AA, same for them. No one is special, so that is fair.

This.

[silencertalk]

That implies no choice. I don't believe all homosexuality is without choice.

Better to compare it to alcoholism, scarification ... a voluntary addiction or hobby that poses no immediate threat to others but enables a socially uncomfortable atmosphere for those unwilling to accept it.

And before anyone says it, driving drunk and alcoholism are not the same thing.

I suppose you can choose if you have sex or not, but you certainly cannot choose who you are attracted to, which is what defines if you are homosexual or not. This is easy to prove by asking you if you choose to be attracted to women. Could you, if you wanted to, choose to be attracted to men?

[doubloon]

That's an interesting definition of homosexual. The phrase "attracted to" is pretty vague, I know a lot of men I would characterize as "attracted to" several major league quarterbacks but perhaps not in a sexual way.

Webster defines homosexual as a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex or sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex.

Of course in some places the definition isn't always limited to "persons".

http://whnt.com/2013/02/01/gay-dog-save ... l-shelter/

[silencertalk]

By "attracted to" I meant "to desire sexually."

It is not my choice to desire women sexually. I just do. No one can convince me to desire men. So why should I think a homosexual man chooses to desire men? They just do.

[ariwhiteboy]

By "attracted to" I meant "to desire sexually."

It is not my choice to desire women sexually. I just do. No one can convince me to desire men. So why should I think a homosexual man chooses to desire men? They just do.

^This


I don't understand why people still insist that there is some sort of choice going on when it comes to someone's sexual orientation.

I (and other straight men) am attracted to women on a deep, profound, biological level. I don't think there is anyone who would argue that. I don't think even if I tried to "choose to be attracted to" a man I could overcome this ingrained orientation. I'd know it was a lie and probably be pretty grossed out. I would imagine most other straight people would feel the same if forced to adhere to homosexuality.


Why then it is so unbelievable that those of homosexual orientation are also acting upon their own natural and biological impulses? To take it even further, how do they overcome the supposedly natural and universal "straight attraction"?



I suppose their is some degree of choice involved in the LGBT lifestyle, but sadly it has nothing to do with choosing who you are sexually attracted to. It often involves choosing to either A) live closeted in fear of discovery or B) Live openly and choose to quite possibly be disowned by family and friends, shunned by your religion, feared and tormented by those who are ignorant and intolerant, barred from social and civic organizations, denied rights by a Government based upon legal codes designed by politicians plying for the votes of the aforementioned religious groups.

[doubloon]

I can only suppose you are .gay and thus an authority on the topic but you might find this site interesting anyway.

http://www.queerbychoice.com/

It appears to be run by .gays who think they have a choice.

[continuity]

I'm as non judgmental on this subject as one can imagine. If the BSA code defines such an adult live style as a non typical lifestyle?behavior, then they need to keep that as one of their identifying basis. Sure there are other things the BSA stands for and trains participants for life management skills, but if the first block is removed, surely others will follow.

Such a sad state of affairs, that it even becomes an issue.

[Molon labe]

By "attracted to" I meant "to desire sexually."

It is not my choice to desire women sexually. I just do. No one can convince me to desire men. So why should I think a homosexual man chooses to desire men? They just do.

It would be easier to describe desire as you say by the perversion associated with pornography. This probably won't mean much to many of you but it's true just the same.

Have you ever noticed how people lose control of their decision making with things like pornography? It can become an almost uncontrollable desire if you keep messing with it. When you start doing things you really don't want to do, yet there's a part of you can't control it. Turning a normal healthy thing like sex into something perverted by viewing acts that aren't healthy for your personal monogamous relationship. Pushing the limits further and further until perverted becomes normal.

There are lines that can be crossed that after you go over them there's no returning (not a one size fits all but it applies to most) Think about child molesters, they didn't start out wanting to be a child molester, they kept dabbling in various perverted activities until at some point they no longer have control over their actions.

It's the same with pornography, if you don't cut it off and deny whatever it is that draws you in, you'll lose control. I said all that to say it's a spiritual addiction (laugh line) homosexuality has many of these same characteristics. People that are exposed to it, especially kids can be influenced into a lifestyle they normally wouldn't have ever taken an interest in.

Thats exactly why obamas safe school czar was put into the position he was in and pushing the type curriculum he does. He has written books aimed at introducing elementary age kids to homosexuality. He's written books on men having sex with young boys and passes this off as sex ed. His books can be found here:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2009/12 ... ding-list/

[finn]

So you want to ban some books because people can't be trusted with them...
Pass.