Dang you rm95 on your quicker posted wit! Also, dang the rebuild I have to do on this damn Thinkpad. ------------------ If he dies, he dies: Utah's Andre HarryBinko, after knocking down the Cavaliers Trajan Langdon.
Tell that to Mr Gootan! ------------------ I figure the odds be 50/50, I just might have something to say. [This message has been edited by mc mark (edited July 31, 2001).]
I did. Whether it is right wing Christians or social Liberals, somebody always want to force me to live my life as they see fit. I don't want somebody to preach to me about morals, but I also don't need some jackass social Liberal telling me that I can't form a club with like minded individuals that share a specific value system. That is all the Boy Scouts of America is- a private organization that does not want homosexuals working in their midst. Go form your own damn club if you don't like the Boy Scouts! ------------------
Rodney: The key is equal opportunity. If a club holds an exclusive on something, don't they have a responsibility to conform, at least to a degree, to the concerns of most of America? In reality, more people seem to feel that homosexuality is ok than those who do not. That means, those who do not are running a club that is supposed to be open to everyone. As for RM95's comments, I don't see why that is so out of line. The only reason to be worried over gay men being alone with your son or straight men with your daughter is the assumption that they are likely to molest them. If you are involved in your children's scout troop, I would assume you could eliminate that concern by discussing it with the troop leader. The assumption that all gay men want to sleep with young boys or all grown men want to sleep with young girls is and attitude fostered more by fear and lack of understanding. By that logic, you shouldn't be Catholic because of all the priests that molest altar boys. ------------------ Who's your buddy? Who's your pal? I am, aren't I?
Sure they're private... other than the fact that they meet on military bases, in school district buildings, etc. But who really cares if they're private or public? Those are sparklers that take away from the real meat of the discussion. If the private KKK begins funding the BSA, that doesn't mean that I relinquish my right to condemn both homophobia and racism. ------------------ If he dies, he dies: Utah's Andre HarryBinko, after knocking down the Cavaliers Trajan Langdon.
In my opinion, you have taken a poll, and twisted it's meaning to suit your purposes. I would like to see the following question asked to parents- Do you feel comfortable allowing your male child to go camping with a homosexual scout leader? I don't think you will like the poll response. Therefore, using your logic that the Boy Scouts should yield to public pressure, homosexual scout leaders should not be allowed, right? No, he was out of line because he did not address the poster's concern that I find perfectly rational. I wouldn't want my young daughters to go camping with solely male leaders because of the matters that need female attention. I also don't want my daughter to be undressed in front of adult males because there may be a chance that the male is not trustworthy. Even the smallest chance concerns me. For these same reasons, I would not want young male children to go camping with homosexual males. This is my wish as a parent, and my responsibility to protect my children supercedes your political correctness. Nobody made that assumption. ------------------
Those are sparklers that take away from the real meat of the discussion. Now, let me take an illogical and irrelevant tangent. That'll get us back on track. Why don't you stop trying to establish the parameters under which other people are allowed to approach issues? McCray's position that the Boy Scouts should be allowed to establish leadership guidelines that preclude homosexuals is entirely legitimate, your hysterical insistances to the contrary notwithstanding. I can't believe I have to repeat this again, Achebe, but regardless of what you in your extremely narrow position have come to believe, there is a genuine difference of opinion in this country as to whether or not homosexuality is something our children should be exposed to. That is NOT THE CASE for racism; the vast majority of America has absolutely no use for bigotry . You are comparing an issue over which America is genuinely divided with one that brooks no similar argument among the majority of Americans. Aside from attempting to undermine the position of people you disagree with by insinuating that their beliefs are as equally odious as racism, do you have anything whatsoever of substance to add to the debate? Or are you just here to sneer? [This message has been edited by BrianKagy (edited July 31, 2001).]
Rodney, than I assume you think it is OK for clubs to exclude those of different race, ages, religions, etc, if they are "private"? Further, when a private club uses public resources and public funds, they have to abide by the rules of the land. Many such rules are in place to protect the minority and the powerless from the tryranny of the majority. This is a basic American constitutional theme, along with ensuring American is not a theocracy. (Oh how we love to look at Afganistan, Iran and others in as examples where religion in politics is "scary" but do not look inward) To all parents of boys, which would be a greater concern. To have a homosexual scout leader who 1) has to be secretive and who is possibly repressed about his homosexuality lead a boy scout troop, or 2) one who is open and can publically acknowledge his partnership/ commitment to another adult person to lead such a troop. I would think #1 is more worrisome, and that is all the boy scouts policy in practice encourages. Same deal with don't ask don't tell, it doesn't change the presense of homosexuals or whether homnosexual behaviors occur--if this was true homosexuality would have been stamped out a long time ago. All this policy does is push it further underground, and I fail to see how that benifits anybody-- homosexual or heterosexual. Finally, the bible was used to justify slavery. You can justify anything with the bible if you look hard enough. Fundamental principals of the bible include to protect those who can't protect themseleves and to unconditionally love others. (These last two sentences can be credited to Sister Helen Pregene (sp?).)
BK, I think it is perfectly reasonable to equate racism, or discrimination based on religion, or discrimination based on gender, with discrimination based on sexual orientation. If the Boy Scouts said no scout leader can talk about sexual behavior to his scout troop (homosexual or heterosexual) or no scout leader shall be a publicly avowed unmarried sexually active person they would have had a small leg to stand on. But that wasn't what there policy said-they went after persons with homosexual feelings and beliefs--or more specific persons who admit they do, not someone who engages in unmarried sexual acts. Plenty of priests are homosexual too, but most that are either homosexual or heterosexual don't act on such feelings. In my mind both sets of priests living within their doctrine. If the policy isn't based in actions, it is discriminatory, and should not be tolerated in an open society any more than any other “ism” designed to debase others should. The fact many in the population haven’t grasped this yet doesn’t change its truth (though the 1st post does suggest societal progress) any more than slavery was OK in 1850 because 40% of the population supported it then.
I'm not talking about public pressure. I'm talking about choices. The parents have a choice to send a child or not based on their feelings. They are not being eliminated from the equation if homosexuals are allowed to be troop leaders. However, gay men ARE being excluded based solely on the assumption that they could possibly take advantage of a child at some point. It is absolutely your right to feel the way you do and to make those decisions. But, it is YOUR CHOICE. No one is forcing you to do anything. The other way around would be the difference. And while we are dealing with choices, who's to say that a straight adult male isn't the molester. Studies of male child molesters who molested young boys found that the majority of them claimed to be straight. Many of them lived a straight life with wives or girlfriends. It is also common for male molesters of boys to be homophobic in the true sense of the word, many of them with abuse (sexual or otherwise) in their past. That is just a fact. The comment that nobody is making the assumption that gay men are pedophiles can't possibly be accurate if, as you said, you really believe "there may be a chance that the male is not trustworthy." That is making the assumption that something COULD happen. If you don't think that is in the realm of possibility, you wouldn't mention it. That, in and of itself, is an assumption based on your personal feelings. I understand why you feel this way and I respect your decision as a parent. But, what is removing the choice from gay men and women is giving more choices to you. You could always simply choose to not allow your children into the scouts, but gay men and lesbians cannot choose to participate. That is the bottom line. ------------------ Who's your buddy? Who's your pal? I am, aren't I?
Other than the fact that I asserted that the BSA are not private... and noone has disputed that point... I made the bridge to cover what I consider a more important point... the fact that private/public differences are irrelevant. Homophobia is immoral. Racism is immoral. I forgot that I have to take a poll to determine this revelation Brian. You seem particularly infatuated with my opinions on this matter Brian. I find that rather hysterical. Are there any other points of view in this thread that you'd rather address? Repeat this again, Brian? WTF are you talking about you condescending ****? Am I supposed to bow down to your previous fallacious beliefs? You posted bull**** before, that doesn't make me all of a sudden concede the validity of bull****. I can't believe that I have to write this again Brian, but what does some poll about the state of American beliefs have to do with morality? A few hundred years ago the US was racist. Was racism correct at that time? Of course not, that's completely absurd. I expect more out of you. Again, when we begin to conclude objectively valid arguments off the whims of the masses, feel me in on it, okay? There are rules to logical arguments. If you'd care for me to give you a class on subjective vs. objective arguments, email me... or I'd be happy to provide you with plenty of sources. Ever heard of an analogy? Ever heard of a counterexample or a counterargument? It's perfectly fine for people to disagree on issues Brian. It's the nature of life. Man is a political animal, and he incorporates reason into his life. When man differentiates himself from others, be they non-human animals, former species in Homo, or from one another based on sexual preference or race... that individual needs to draw specific empirical reasons for doing so. When someone does it based on their particular religious reasons, sure... fine. That's inherently a subjective argument though... subjectivism is obviously inherently weaker than an objective argument. Subjective arguments (I'd spend more time on this but the mrs. is saying "okay okay okay time to workout") are tastes. Pepsi vs. Coke arguments, and there's no rational reason to hold bias against someone b/c of a subjective argument. If you can create an objective argument (i.e. no premises that beg questions) about why homosexuality then post it. I asked for it before Brian, I'm asking for it again now. Please, let me know why homosexuality is wrong. I'm begging you. I'm pleading with you. I had to cease referring to things as gay b/c it was homophobic. Let me off. Teach me to hate gays. Teach me to walk in a way other than what Christ has taught us. ------------------ If he dies, he dies: Utah's Andre HarryBinko, after knocking down the Cavaliers Trajan Langdon.
Yes, I do. The existence of the Black Panthers, AARP, PGA Senior Tour, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and LULAC doesn't bother me at all. The Boy Scouts of America is a private institution. If those who donate to the Scouts don't like their policies, then the money and support should be withdrawn. The above paragraph represents an attitude that is very troubling to me. Why do people in this country think government has any role in how parents raise their children, outside of preventing child abuse? Even though the majority of Boy Scout parents don't want homosexual Scout leaders, you would have government force your solution to this issue. By the way, this cannot be compared to racism. Very few parents care about the color or religion a Scout leader. I am not religious, so you must not be directing the last paragraph to me. ------------------
Jeff, You can't completely disregard my argument, and then direct a different argument toward me framed under new terms. I don't think this, and I don't think most parents feel this way. I believe most parents don't want their male children dressing or bathing in the presence of females or homosexuals. It is just not proper. Are you arguing that parents should have the choice to have a homosexual scout leader? Are you starting a new movement demanding homosexuality in summer camps? I have read that most child molesters are neither exclusively homosexual nor heterosexual. They instead are fixated on pedophilia, and lost in some prepubescant sickness. This goes back to my original contention, that on a camping trip I wouldn't trust a daughter with males, or my son with homosexuals. I am very protective, and alway plan for worst case scenario for the protection of children. I don't see how anybody could disagree with my feelings on this matter. If they did, I would have to respectfully say, "these are my children, so please mind your own business." I don't think your argument is solid here, because the Scouts don't have a monopoly on summer camping or Scout-like activities. There are other choices. ------------------
Wow, what an offensive, weak argument. Nobody has said anything about hating gays. This is about recognizing different sexual orientations and their confusing dynamics for children, and respecting the rights of parents. ------------------
i don't have that much of a problem with the Boy Scouts firing gay troop leaders. But I do have a huge problem with them kicking out gay kids. no one seems to want to discuss that aspect though. ------------------
The way I see it is this: As a parent, you try to provide the best possible atmosphere for the growth of your children. The Boy Scouts oganization is a positive group that helps in the development of a child. So, parents are going to want their sons to become involved in it. Many life lessons are learned in Boy Scouts. Scout Leaders are mentors that can help mold your children into future successful adults. Most parents do not want their children to become homosexual. They feel as if having a homosexual mentor might influence their child to become a homosexual. While this is 99% not the case at all in this matter, the fact is that parents have the right to choose how their children are influenced. The perception of there being a 1% chance of perceived harm to their children, is justification to them for keeping homosexual leaders out of the Scouts. I know that I would not want my son to be mentored by a homosexual. That is my choice. I however, would want my son to be a Boy Scout. Boy Scouts also teach christian principles. Is wouldnt be fair for me to be forced to either keep my son out of a beneficial organization, or be worried about his influences. Its the same parental protectiveness that would make me keep a 16 year old daughter from going to a nearby beach house for the weekend being the only girl, traveling and staying with the football team. ------------------ We used to laugh at Grandpa when he'd head off and go fishing. But we wouldn't be laughing that evening when he'd come back with some w**** he picked up in town. Ambition is like a frog sitting on a Venus Flytrap. The flytrap can bite and bite, but it won't bother the frog because it only has little tiny plant teeth. But some other stuff could happen and it could be like ambition.
Outlaw brings up a good point. As a parent, I wouldnt feel uncomfortable having gay kids in the same troup with my kids. The gay kids wouldnt be in a mentor position, therefore, no problem. ------------------ We used to laugh at Grandpa when he'd head off and go fishing. But we wouldn't be laughing that evening when he'd come back with some w**** he picked up in town. Ambition is like a frog sitting on a Venus Flytrap. The flytrap can bite and bite, but it won't bother the frog because it only has little tiny plant teeth. But some other stuff could happen and it could be like ambition.
I don't think your argument is solid here, because the Scouts don't have a monopoly on summer camping or Scout-like activities. There are other choices. What other choices are there to the Boy Scouts of America that will allow gay men as scout troop leaders? ------------------ Who's your buddy? Who's your pal? I am, aren't I?
Wow, read Brian and my posts again. We are in a separate discussion, from a previous thread from months ago. Brian and I are talking about the morality of homophobia. Phobia is fear and intolerance of a specific group. None of my points were directed towards your assumption that everyone on the planet is a pedophile... or that gay men constantly tell children their sexuality. Do you do this? I don't remember the last time I ever approached a child and declared the quantity, quality, and/or style of my sex life. There were those 6 year olds that outlaw and I chatted w/ at the elementary school, but I'm pretty sure they didn't get the tossed salad joke. Regarding this last point that you made: I'm left wondering what your concerns are again. Why worry w/ the sexuality or gender of the camp leader if there's no specific gender/sexuality association w/ child molestation? BTW, I see the campfire 'all homosexuals are pedophiles' arguments constantly when discussing BSA homophobia. You guys must have been very lucky, b/c I rarely had the chance to camp in the cub scouts or boy scouts. I think that I camped twice in 6 years with the webelos/cub scouts/boy scouts(however the lineage went... I think there was some wolf pack in there too). ------------------ If he dies, he dies: Utah's Andre HarryBinko, after knocking down the Cavaliers Trajan Langdon.
