It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Boy Scouts of America, one of the nation’s largest private youth organizations, is actively considering an end to its decades-long policy of banning gay scouts or scout leaders, according to scouting officials and outsiders familiar with internal discussions. If adopted by the organization’s board of directors, it would represent a profound change on an issue that has been highly controversial -- one that even went to the US Supreme Court. The new policy, now under discussion, would eliminate the ban from the national organization’s rules, leaving local sponsoring organizations free to decide for themselves whether to admit gay scouts.
Does anyone know how they determine whether or not a scout is gay? Is it a don't ask don't tell kind of policy or does every kid with an easy bake oven get the boot?
It's about an organization that held beliefs worth fighting for within just the last few years suddenly deciding it's all not so important anymore, after all. Well... Losing money does that I guess. Everything is about the almighty dollar.
When I was in scouts, there were kids I figured were gay as well. It was never talked about, either way. Back then, it was possible for someone's romantic and sexual life or predispositions to NOT be a part of the common public knowledge, especially among children. What a change it's been and so quickly too.
May as well invite girls in too. Why not? It's unfair to hold them out, right?
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well, this will insure my Son never has a part in the Scouts if they carry this. It's not about gays. He's around gay kids in public school now. Now biggy and it's not like it's contagious or something silly like that.
It's about an organization that held beliefs worth fighting for within just the last few years suddenly deciding it's all not so important anymore, after all. Well... Losing money does that I guess. Everything is about the almighty dollar. May as well invite girls in too. Why not? It's unfair to hold them out, right?
* When I was in scouts, there were kids I figured were gay as well. It was never talked about, either way. Back then, it was possible for someone's romantic and sexual life or predispositions to NOT be a part of the common public knowledge, especially among children. What a change it's been and so quickly too.
Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
I'm really surprised by your response. You wouldn't let your son join the scouts if they admitted gay kids? You said it yourself, your son is around gay kids already. He will grow up and have to deal with gay people. In what way do you think accepting gay participants would ruin the experience of scouts? Is it really just about sticking to your guns?
All this does, under these circumstances, is teach their membership that values are great until they cost too much money and then EVERYTHING is a trade off in the end and noting is worth THAT much.
Originally posted by Openeye
Wow, you don't understand why it is morally questionable to condemn someone for expressing their feelings, I feel sorry for you.
May as well invite girls in too. Why not? It's unfair to hold them out, right?
They already have a scouting group, are you trying to be intellectually dishonest on purpose?edit on 28-1-2013 by Openeye because: (no reason given)
However, I'm sick and tired of every single PRIVATE organization in this nation having to bend to the breaking point or BE outright broken to accommodate them.
I have no problem at all with gays being accepted but it's not something to FORCE BY LAW or by pressure of threat and financial damage. That's extortion under any OTHER circumstances and I don't see the real big difference here anymore. It's not just the Scouts...they're just one of the last to cave to the extreme pressure brought to bear on them.
I am anti-homosexual and that is just my right.
I don't want them near my children nor my grandchildren. Yeah, I know, I know..they aren't all pedophiles
they have the inclination to enjoy the same sex so why don't the lesbians vollunteer for the Boy Scouts and the gay guys vollunteer for the Girls?
since they have chosen not to breed
or even better...why can't they NOT even bother with children and stay home ..
and what they have to offer is and can be offered by those more qualified?
Where are the real men? Where are the real women?
Where are the role models for the homosexuals that are in need of guidance because they were molested and didn't get help???
(Or...of course..we could respect the freedom of private groups to operate as they see fit, so long as they aren't directly violating the law or rights of others)
You might notice I said "but it's not something to FORCE BY LAW or by pressure of threat and financial damage." In the Boy Scouts case, it's that second part that came to land on them and land like a 300lb Gorilla.
It's one thing to work to bring change within a private group or organization. It;s quite another to hammer them relentlessly for however long it takes to force change whether those being hammered agree with it or not. I've heard and read nothing documented about systemic bigotry against anyone by the Boy Scouts. In fact, if you've been a Scout, you know well that is contrary to the core of what is taught.
Also, I'd note here that while the BSOA has received some support from Government, mostly in the form of state and local, and generally in the way of places to meet and hold events, it doesn't make them any less a private organization.
^^^ By that logic anyone who receives any benefit derived by Government can no longer be termed a private organization. Now I might like that concept if you'd apply it equally and across the board. Lets see here.... How much aid, general help and support in various ways do National Unions get for instance? I've never considered them a Public/Government entity, although they carry much for public policy influence. If you'd like to redefine the terms of what makes public vs. private though, that could be very interesting in the changes which could be forced all over, eh?
(Or...of course..we could respect the freedom of private groups to operate as they see fit, so long as they aren't directly violating the law or rights of others).
Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
(Or...of course..we could respect the freedom of private groups to operate as they see fit, so long as they aren't directly violating the law or rights of others)
I agree!
Although there might be instances, where we might disagree on the rights of the gay community being violated concerning those private organizations. Maybe? I can't recall enough conversation with you to know. I am speaking generally, not targeting BSOA.