Teenage Boy Scout Denied Eagle Scout Because He's Gay

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee


That is archaic and untrue in today's world.

However - - there is nothing wrong with a homosexuals reproductive system. They've been producing off-spring since the beginning of man.

But - - its wrong and unnatural for them. How would you like being forced to have gay sex to fulfill some society obligation?
It is not untrue at all. They reproduce, BUT only through heterosexual relations. Thus making a different CHOICE from their original choice. If they had any integrity whatsoever, they would stand by their original choice and have only homosexual relations. The fact that they CAN CHOOSE either action seems to contraindicate a genetic condition.
As for me having homosexual relations, I would and do choose not to do so. Though, I could choose differently if I so desired. Again arguing for choice and against genetics.




posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   


Personally, I don't think a gay person would make a very good leader, but then again I could be wrong, anything is possible.


Exactly how does being gay effect a person's leadership abilities?



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
It is not untrue at all. They reproduce, BUT only through heterosexual relations.


If a Fundamental Christian heterosexual couple has trouble conceiving - - they go to a fertility doctor.

They might even have to use InVitro - - with a donated egg - - or a surrogate.

And that child will be celebrated as a Gift from God.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gays having kids - - has zero to do with the method. You're just anti-gay.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by Annee


That is archaic and untrue in today's world.

However - - there is nothing wrong with a homosexuals reproductive system. They've been producing off-spring since the beginning of man.

But - - its wrong and unnatural for them. How would you like being forced to have gay sex to fulfill some society obligation?
It is not untrue at all. They reproduce, BUT only through heterosexual relations. Thus making a different CHOICE from their original choice. If they had any integrity whatsoever, they would stand by their original choice and have only homosexual relations. The fact that they CAN CHOOSE either action seems to contraindicate a genetic condition.
As for me having homosexual relations, I would and do choose not to do so. Though, I could choose differently if I so desired. Again arguing for choice and against genetics.


You could choose to have homosexual relations, but could you choose to be turned on by homosexual relations? Of course you couldn't. We choose who we have sex with, but we do not choose who we are attracted to. A homosexual could choose to have heterosexual sex, but that doesn't mean he would enjoy it. You could choose to have homosexual sex, but that doesn't mean you would enjoy it.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl



Personally, I don't think a gay person would make a very good leader, but then again I could be wrong, anything is possible.


Exactly how does being gay effect a person's leadership abilities?


Some people just can't get past stereotyping.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Everyone knows a gay kid can't be an eagle scout...duh....



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni
 


Christians are supposed to pattern their lives after Jesus, right? You know, the guy who consorted with tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, and the other dredges of society.

Pretty sure Jesus would have no problem associating with homosexuals and treating them as people.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero
Everyone knows a gay kid can't be an eagle scout...duh....



Why, are eagle scouts all about having sex?



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Can you show me the hetrosexual gene?
No need for that. If you want to call heterosexuality a choice, go for it. That particular choice is required for continuation of the species though, . .


That is archaic and untrue in today's world.

However - - there is nothing wrong with a homosexuals reproductive system. They've been producing off-spring since the beginning of man.

But - - its wrong and unnatural for them. How would you like being forced to have gay sex to fulfill some society obligation?

edit on 6-10-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)


You're bending the subject.

Did he say he wanted to force you to ensure the continuation of our species? No... He just stated a fact - Man + Man = extinction. Woman + Woman = Extinction. What he actually said was "1) put all gay men in a desert island, and put all gay women in another desert island - 2) wait 70 years 3) welcome to two - again - desert islands".

You know... its not that hard.

And stop using semantics "think - know" I mean, you can do better... like saying that the "homosexual gene is somewhere in the JUNK dna".... ok, that doesnt really do much for you when your... preference lies in something beginning with... "junk". I wouldnt even talk about it, let alone be proud of it...

See there? I can bend subjects and twist words also.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Can you show me the hetrosexual gene?
No need for that. If you want to call heterosexuality a choice, go for it. That particular choice is required for continuation of the species though, . .


That is archaic and untrue in today's world.

However - - there is nothing wrong with a homosexuals reproductive system. They've been producing off-spring since the beginning of man.

But - - its wrong and unnatural for them. How would you like being forced to have gay sex to fulfill some society obligation?

edit on 6-10-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)


You're bending the subject.

Did he say he wanted to force you to ensure the continuation of our species? No... He just stated a fact - Man + Man = extinction. Woman + Woman = Extinction. What he actually said was "1) put all gay men in a desert island, and put all gay women in another desert island - 2) wait 70 years 3) welcome to two - again - desert islands".

You know... its not that hard.

And stop using semantics "think - know" I mean, you can do better... like saying that the "homosexual gene is somewhere in the JUNK dna".... ok, that doesnt really do much for you when your... preference lies in something beginning with... "junk". I wouldnt even talk about it, let alone be proud of it...

See there? I can bend subjects and twist words also.


Put a bunch of barren men and women together on a desert island, and in 70 years ... what would you get?



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
edit on 6-10-2012 by kaylaluv because: dp



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni
 


Christians are supposed to pattern their lives after Jesus, right? You know, the guy who consorted with tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, and the other dredges of society.

Pretty sure Jesus would have no problem associating with homosexuals and treating them as people.


Hell I dont care if jesus himself was gay - you know... walking around with 12 men all the time does seem suspicious BUT you have the same problem as Annee there. Lets see this concept:

"You know, the guy who consorted with tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, and the other dredges of society (...) would have no problem associating with homosexuals(...)"

What the hell...? What are you calling homosexuals? Wow... I'll just watch you two dig your own holes. This is getting great!

One says homosexuality is part of Junk and the other comes in defense saying that jesus would like gays since he liked pretty much every "dredge of society".

Wow...



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv


Put a bunch of barren men and women together on a desert island, and in 70 years ... what would you get?


Not only thats stupid you had to say it twice!



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni

Originally posted by kaylaluv


Put a bunch of barren men and women together on a desert island, and in 70 years ... what would you get?


Not only thats stupid you had to say it twice!


Just pointing out the stupidity of your argument. Who cares about desert islands? We have all kinds of people in this world. Most of them are heterosexual, thus there is lots and lots of breeding going on. The fact that a smaller percentage of people are born attracted to the same gender makes no difference in the universal picture. Why do some object to it so much? I've never understood that.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni

Originally posted by smyleegrl
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni
 


Christians are supposed to pattern their lives after Jesus, right? You know, the guy who consorted with tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, and the other dredges of society.

Pretty sure Jesus would have no problem associating with homosexuals and treating them as people.


Hell I dont care if jesus himself was gay - you know... walking around with 12 men all the time does seem suspicious BUT you have the same problem as Annee there. Lets see this concept:

"You know, the guy who consorted with tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, and the other dredges of society (...) would have no problem associating with homosexuals(...)"

What the hell...? What are you calling homosexuals? Wow... I'll just watch you two dig your own holes. This is getting great!

One says homosexuality is part of Junk and the other comes in defense saying that jesus would like gays since he liked pretty much every "dredge of society".

Wow...


Now who's twisting meaning?

My comment simply meant that Jesus was often in the company of people deemed "unworthy" by society. Well, I'm guessing a fair number of homosexuals might feel ostracized in today's society.

Although I think it's archaic and deplorable, I actually don't have a problem with the BSA not accepting atheists or homosexuals. As has been pointed out, they are a private organization and can control their membership as they see fit.

What bothers me is that this young man spent a major portion of his life in the BSA, dedicated himself to achieving Eagle Scout, all with the reassurance of his troop leader that they could get around the gay thing. Blame the troop leader? Maybe....but this young man sounds like an upstanding citizen and deserves the reward he worked for.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni


You're bending the subject.


I am not bending anything.

The human race is not going to die out because a couple uses modern methods to procreate.

Also - - gays can and have procreated by having intercourse with the opposite sex - - - which is unnatural for their orientation.

These repeated excuses are nothing but excuses - - - old and tired excuses.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
I mean, you can do better... like saying that the "homosexual gene is somewhere in the JUNK dna"....


Show me where I said that.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
I don't know if a gene is responsible but in fruit flys the gay traits can be turned on and off and in lab rats they can reverse homosexual traits making the rats heterosexual. They chalk these traits up to genetic mutations, so if a gene is involved it would have to be a gene that is defective.

I don't believe for a second God made anyone gay at birth. Birth defects simply happen without Gods direct involvement. We know how and why from a scientific biological standpoint how birth defects and mutations happen. God has nothing to do with it except that perhaps he set life in motion long ago. This is the same science that allows males to have nipples why some males have multiple sets of nipples, why some people and animals have two heads or are hermaphrodites etc.

From a God standpoint, God would not purposelessly make gay people. In the Bible there are many times God called for the destruction of these evil gay people who had chosen to be gay, as in the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah. These stories are the most popular but the issue of God against gays is found in many places in the Christian Bible as well as in Jewish and Muslim sacred books that tell of Gods policies for Man. In fact, there is not one religious tome on God that suggests the opposite.

The BSA holds that if one is to be a Scout he must believe Gods Word and follow Gods teachings according to His Word. This means no gays or atheists. This has been a core tenet of the Boy Scouts since 1908. If the Boy Scouts caved to political pressure on this, it would undermine the very foundation of the Boy scouts - they aren't about to do that.

en.wikipedia.org... Boy Scouts of America membership controversies

It is very clear that to say God made people Gay at birth is very silly. This absolves people of the responsibility of choice so they can try to get away with going against Gods will. They are cowardly and are afraid to admit they did make a conscious choice. They are too afraid of the backlash, so they hide under the "God made me this way" notion.

The Boy Scouts of America does have another program called Learning for Life that is open to all including gays and atheists. Only the Scouting programs have these restrictions because they were set up that way on purpose at it's inception.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
I don't know if a gene is responsible but in fruit flys the gay traits can be turned on and off and in lab rats they can reverse homosexual traits making the rats heterosexual. They chalk these traits up to genetic mutations, so if a gene is involved it would have to be a gene that is defective.



I think it was brain chemical manipulation used in the Fruit Fly experiment.

Defective?

We are ALL mutations from the original "whatever".

You could throw a whole pile into the "defective" category. Red Hair - Freckles - Green Eyes - Modern Teeth - Left Handed - boobs (human female only species boobs are not flat) Research Monkey Butt on that one



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
I mean, you can do better... like saying that the "homosexual gene is somewhere in the JUNK dna"....


Show me where I said that.


You didnt. You just put both in the same context which I find amusing. The associations our minds do are involuntary and work silently in our subconscious. Yours just simply associated one thing with another - homosexuality - genes - discoveries in junk dna.

This is pretty simple as far as psychology goes.

I'm having fun!





top topics
 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join