Id be more afraid of bible camps.......I sent my son to one, one summer........it was more like send your bad child away......some kid pulled a knife on one other kid in there......

Mass, you're repeating what I've been saying all along. There is no difference.

Kid,

Does that mean you have respect for the validity of part of Philosophers position? And you see how his words have been twisted with references to pedophilia, etc?

Don't get me wrong, I am NOT personally endorsing the banning of gays as 'the' solution - there are so many other factors and possible approaches.

Reread his posts.

Fanta:
“I was involved with the boy scouts in three different States, and not once did I hear the word homosexual … “

At that time, I suspect, the words most popular were homo, fag, faggot , fruit pervert. It doesn’t surprise me that you didn’t hear the word homosexual.

Fanta:
“This fight and defamation of a fine and proud organization is originated by the gay community. Not by the scouts. They have been singled out purposely and for the sole-intent of huge press for the cause, Limelight if you will, and it personally makes me sick …”

They have been going about their business all these years. We knew many years ago that they were not permitting Gays or atheist, and not much was done. It was the city who took action, maybe at the behest of some who were being denied club admittance. But there are so many battles to fight when a people are attempting to gain equality, that this one was not at the top of the list. STILL, as I’ve stated earlier, any tiny bit of ground that is gained in the fight for equality, is still worthy of note. Even if it is the Boy Scouts.

Fanta:
If they are required to give up the benefits their good deeds and production of fine young men and future leaders, then let me know where to send my donation. I will gladly support their valiant cause!!!”

If our future leaders were raised to believe that segregation and discrimination is ok, if the cause is a worthy one, than I don’t want those future leaders. There is no worthy cause for such bigoted action.

Fanta:
“along the French Broad River , Henderson North Carolina 27 gay men in one day

This has not been an isolated incident either. Three other public Parks have had similar problems in the two years since the example above! “

“Events that seem to be ignored by the gay communitee while they speak up for their stance on family values and morals.”

The events you’re referring to are not known to me. But I’m sure if the circumstances are befitting, I would gladly agree with your disgust - but the difference is that I see a picture you don’t seem to be aware of.
For example. When I tried to look up the information about this incident here’s what I found.
Now I don’t live were you do, so I depend on the internet to give me a picture. Your quiet little town with the quaint French Broad River is REALLY a pretty huge deal. That river runs a long way, through several states and along that path is Henderson. With camp grounds and a ton of advertising for visitors, quite the vacation resort, a virtual vacation experience. I also, discovered , scads of advertising for Inns, and hotels, and restaurants a great many specifically advertising “gay friendly”. Several even target the gay community and I didn’t even go beyond page 3. But you get on this forum and mislead us to think your quiet little town is being infiltrated by GLBT advocate groups. Do you know the difference between a visitor and your neighbor?

I was unable to find anything in the library there, most of the library and papers require log-on access. But for your claim that over 20 gays were arrested in 1 day – that, would have been a headline somewhere. I did look crime statistics for Henderson for the last 2 years, I thing there were some 58 arrests for sexual offenses, I doubt that they were all gay related. Of course in an area with such high visitation rate from vacationers, I think that number is rather small.

I also found one reference from a PFLAG legal brief related to stopping plainclothes police from using entrapment to arrest gays, and North Carolina was mentioned along with several other states.

Like anyone I have a distaste for those who can’t control themselves, however, considering that I can walk in any of our parks and see heterosexual couples making out on the grass, or a park bench, I very rarely see that of homosexuals, in any public arena. Unless they feel comfortable enough with their surroundings, like maybe San Francisco, otherwise they are too afraid of what can happen. That’s the big picture. That’s why when you make statement as you have, we look to find the reasons. It’s not that gay can’t be bad, can’t do wrong, or can’t be immoral; it’s that people put a slant on the incidents, making them bigger or worse than they were, or simply not giving all the information and that misrepresentation becomes the reflection of an entire community.

Key word: "part"

Fanta writes:

" I didnt even know you were gay!"

Neither did I.

" Dont care, but shouldnt you, if you are police your own community? It might help in your quest for support."

As a smaller statured male with a baby face and long hair, I've taken this kind of crap all my life. Even been called a dyke to my back a time or two by some rednecks who were clearly embarrassed when I turned around and gave them the WTF look. Even had drunken hetero guys in bar rooms during band nights try to feel me up from behind until they recognized their mistakes. Some of them then got pissed off at _me_ because of it, like it was _my_ fault they made an unwelcomed sexual advance on someone.

Am I to demand that you take charge of the WASP male community and teach them some manners? Of course not, but I think you're smart enough to get the gist of what I'm saying without my having to spell it out.


-Kerry O.

That sounds like my experience having long hair in rural western virginia.

Mass, if you mean protecting your children from potential harm from predators, then yes I agree.
If you mean teaching your children to be afraid or hate people that are different, then no.
Again, I ask you to reread his posts and see who was inferring that being gay was akin to being a threat! His own words, not mine.

In a co-ed environment, the 'threat' could unfold several ways.

In an all male environment, a sexual encounter can only unfold in a same-sex manner.

( I'm deliberately sidestepping the semantic issue of 'what it really means to be gay')

So it makes sense in boy scouts some might have concern about same-sex encounters but not be concerned with opposite sex encounters.

Merely expressing that thought can set people off - they will see prejudice where there may not be, and make assumptions. I think it was even assumed P's view was bible based! Talk about making assumptions without taking the time to inquire.

The real enemy here is cognitive dissonance - and over simplification.

Kidatheard:
“When you take a group such as the Boy Scouts and apply the same set of tactics, you're creating generation after generation of people that do a lot of good in their prospective communities but believe the same old propaganda that has been regurgitated for several millenium, "They're different, don't trust them".
It's a very effective way of perpetuating myths and instilling fear of things unknown”

THANK-YOU for having some insight.


Karma:
“The only other time I'd heard of kids being denied access to Scouting was again in the States, that time because the youths were Atheists and therefore unable to do their duty to God by the reckoning of the local Council.”

You’ve supplies a good deal of information. Your time is appreciated. I’ve been saddened for many years at the discriminatory policies of the Boy Scouts. They have accomplished some good things, but what are all the good deeds in the world if they are specifically meant for only a portion of the people.
I was an atheist long before I was out of the closet. So long before I ever dreamed that there could discrimination against gays, I was opposed to what the Scouts represented – or maybe it was the way in which so many important people held it up to the world as the picture of propriety. In a country that proclaims religious freedom for all, it just seemed pretty controversial for this country to be marketing a group whose doctrine required a belief in God.

Here is some of the code you wrote – Question for Fanta, Phil and those who are in agreement with the “gay danger” theory. If a kid had worked hard enough to earn the honors that any scout tries for, and if they’ve grown by the same dictates, and encompassed these same morals, why would they be any more likely than any other kid to upset the apple cart? Homosexuality is not a disease, and the kids who live as homosexuals are subject to the same rights of passage as any other kid.

As a Scout, you do your duty to God by following the wisdom of those teaching in your daily life, and by respecting the rights of others to have their own religious beliefs."

The Handbook for Boys, 2nd edition discusses a Scout's duty to his country: "...he will stand for the equal opportunity and justice which the Declaration of Independence and the constitution guarantee."
bullet The Scout Handbook discusses:
bullet The "morally straight" clause in the Scout Oath. It implies that the Scout should: "Respect and defend the rights of all people. Your relationships with others should be honest and open. Be clean in your speech and actions, and faithful in your religious beliefs."

TheCaptain
“Why is it that anyone that speaks out against homosexuals is automaticly a homophobe? Can't people have the right to say they do not agree with peoples choices? What about my rights?
I have several friends that are gay, and they all know how I feel about it. But because I do not let that choice define who they are, we can remain friends. We have agreed to disagree and move on.”

I never consider one homophobic right off the bat. Sometimes people are just following ‘social norms’ that they raised with. Sometimes they’re just ignorant of certain things. And sometimes they have no reason to act as they do, except that they have been taught the rules of bigotry so well, that they can’t shake it loose.

In your case, I would ask – so you’re disgusted by the love live of particular individuals. Now, with a full understanding that these people are being oppressed by the way of discrimination and bigotry, would you vote to have the Federal Code adjusted so they could be covered under every law in this country?

If you say no, then I will call you a homophobe.

PHIL
“A boy 17 years old in this position if he were gay would be in an unsupervised position of authority of young boys. So a question comes up in my mind, how do you keep the 17 year olds with their greater sex drive and more well developed sexual interests from becoming interested in the younger boys who are entrusted to their care? Even if it would not fall into the classic definition of rape, there would still be the opportunity and the motive for something to happen. An 11 year old boy, or for that matter a 12 or 13 year old, is not in a position to know what to do in such circumstances. Certainly he would not be able to defend himself in case of an assault.”

Phil – is this your same theory for why gays shouldn’t be in military. Are you afraid the big bad gay guys will overpower the little guys in the barracks and have their way with them?

A sociopathic killer is the age of 17 (and 11 & 15). I’ve seen some pretty bad offences from heterosexual bullies too. Now if the Scouts is so good, they should be making their kids aware of what to do if threatened. How reclusive are any two scouts for any length of time. Because If I was sending an 11 or 12 year old out to camp, I certainly wouldn’t want them out of shouting distance from help. Get real.

Red wrote:

" those who are in agreement with the gay danger theory."

Is there only one such theory?

This is the problem I see in this thread - categorically lumping beliefs together.

So all people who expresses anything which can be construed as support for the named Gay Danger Theory are presumed to share a common implictly defined belief?

Red, I agree with you that there are better ways to address these concerns than banning gays.

Red, I agree with you that there are better ways to address these concerns than banning gays.

The Boy Scouts of America have a lot to offer,at least to those kids who fit their parameters. As a private club, let them stand on their own, I really don't care. As a not-for-profit organization, they are entitled to raise funds through benefits, that's all well and good.

However, it's time that this country, beginning with the local, city and state governing agents and including the elected federal officials, stop, publicly, praising an organization for being a bigoted club. Along with that, it's high time that our tax dollars, from any level, be managed with better ethics.

For now, don't worry, the scouts don't accept gays, or anyone who doesn't share a belief in God.

Funny, I don't believe in god and I was a member here in Canada. I wonder if we're more "accepting" or "tolerant" than the US is.
Not saying that Americans have a monopoly on bigotry or hate but there seems to be more opposition to equality in the US than in Canada.

Hi Massage - wasn't trying to ignore you, was just busy catching up.

My issue with this thread was never that the Boy Scouts should be forced to allow gays or atheists. My issue was that becase they don't they should not receive any kind of government support or tax dollars or entitlements.

Among their requirements is a belief in God. That makes them at least in some part a religious organization. Then let them file as one,and get the tax breaks.

One of their prohibitions, no gays, also makes them an exclusive club and for this exclusivity, we need to stop heralding them as a this great American organization. Since when is approving of bigotry and enforcing a belief in God, the American way?

Red, I never said I oppose gays in the military. That was quite a leap there. Personally I don't care one way or another about gays in the military.

As to your comment "Because If I was sending an 11 or 12 year old out to camp, I certainly wouldn’t want them out of shouting distance from help. Get real."

Get real yourself. As a scout kids are exploring countryside, camping and hiking and a number of other activities. Any possibility that they would be within shouting distance of help would be pretty remote. Specifically it would be small parts of the day, and during meals.

I guarantee you that those kids are out of shouting distance huge portions of the day. With luck they may have one or several other kids with them. But its a wonder that large numbers of them aren't lost wandering remote areas by themselves.

The issue is not gay danger, the issue is unsupervised access to children, particularly by older children.

Watching for the welfare of the children in their care makes them an even better organization.

Since when is denying access to young boys by gays bigotry.