Boy Scouts of America to reconsider national membership policy

By Bryan Wendell January 28, 2013 2,111 Cub Scouting, Scouts BSA, Venturing, What's New

Update (Jan. 31): The BSA has provided this page for leaving feedback about the membership policy. Alternatively, you can email feedback@scouting.org.

Update (Feb. 5): Thanks to everyone for their valuable feedback. After more than 2,100 comments in the past week, I’ve determined that it’s time to close the comment thread on this post.

The Boy Scouts of America is discussing whether to remove the national membership restriction regarding sexual orientation, the organization announced today.

If approved, the move would end any national policy regarding sexual orientation of members and hand the responsibility of accepting members and selecting leaders to chartered organizations. Chartered organizations could then handle this task in accordance with their mission, principles, and/or religious beliefs.

The news was announced in an email sent by Chief Scout Executive Wayne Brock to all National Council employees this afternoon and confirmed through a media statement posted to Scouting.org.

“Let me be clear that the change under discussion would allow chartered organizations to determine how to address this issue,” Brock writes. “The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.”

Discussion on the proposed policy change will continue during the National Executive Board meeting in Texas next week.

If the board takes action related to the membership policy, Brock says, it will be promptly communicated to all professionals and volunteers.

And I’ll post the news here on Bryan on Scouting, as well.


About Bryan Wendell 3280 Articles
Bryan Wendell, an Eagle Scout, is the founder of Bryan on Scouting and a contributing writer.

2,108 Comments

    • Any policy change will irreparably damage the BSA.

      SCOTUS found that (after looking at all of the facts and BSA documents/positions/statements) the “mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). Further, the US Supreme Court also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the Mike Milo, you are correct about the need to protect and defend the timeless values of Scouting. The BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court clearly recognized and upheld the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct.

      The proposed policy change will destroy the legal underpinnings that resulted in the BSA being able to successfully protect and defend its expressive association message, and charter organizations that prohibit practicing homosexuals will be sued. Our BSA program, and our values will be lost.

      The National Board is on notice of the irreparable damage that it will inflict on Scouting and its timeless values if it takes hasty and reckless action nest week. It is advised to govern its actions accordingly!

      Further, we call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts and who are honest of heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! Millions of eligible class members who (are part of US Scouting and have nothing to do with other scouting groups) have donated time and money based on the timeless values of Scouting in the US, will be part of the lawsuits that will be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National. We are aware of the foul play going on, improper influence by outside groups and and the reason behind the rush to change the policy before rational voices from adult member volunteers can be considered (see posts on this site and do your research). We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on, and we WILL NOT be moved! Are you listening National Board!
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

    • not backing down to the media. responding to public opinion. there’s a large difference. this will be a welcome change.

      • In the liberal opinion only. I will not compromise my religious beliefs to accommodate a mental illness!

        New International Version (NIV)
        13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

      • Your religious beliefs are themselves considered to be a mental illness. I assume by the hatred you are spewing that you identify yourself as a christian. Your outdated morality derived from bestselling fiction is little more than institutionalized stupidity.

      • Wow you are an ignorant idiot. You don’t like that someone has differing views and then you mock and put down her religion? I’m guessing that if you are a Scouter and not just a troll that you are probably an atheist and thus got in be lying and deceit.

        It’s intolerant bigoted people like you that are hurting this issue by just angering everyone with your obvious hate of Christians.

      • Yeah. I think that I need to get some much needed sleep tonight so that I can see how many enemies I have made in the past 24 hours.

      • They are not asking you too – if your chartered organization is ok with an open policy then you can always move to a unit that has a restrictive policy.

        This stance satisfies all involved and allows inclusion of boys and young men that might need the program very badly.

        Everyone needs to remember this program is for the boys – not us and our personal belief system

      • Jennifer, you are sick to the head if you things gays should be put to death. Time to grow up. WWJD. Ready a book, or more, on science and biology. Life isn’t so black and white. What ever happened to Jesus, btw? You know, the one who helped those scorned by society?

      • No one is saying you need to change your beliefs.

        So do you take everything the old testament says as literal? Everything?

      • Really!? Put to Death!? And you think that’s a better thing to tell your 7 year old Cub Scout rather than to accept people for who they are? People like you should be banned from Scouts!!!

      • I am faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from being liberal. Very very far. But the current policy punishes teenage boys who are being denied awards they have earned if they are gay, and I’m not ok with that.

        And I’d really like to see an Aramaic version of that with a new translation, not something the Catholic Church has had 1600+ years to mis-translate, alter, and just plain mis-transcribe, when they aren’t totally removing what they don’t like. Because it doesn’t really matter what denomination you are now, they are ALL descended (except the Coptic Church and I believe the Nigerian church) from the Catholic Church and all the doctrinal decisions they made 1600 years ago.

      • i absolutely agree that awards should not be withheld from boys that are gay. i also believe that the strong values taught in boy scouts are something that should not be denied to boys that are gay. these are often boys who are in great need of a place to belong. there is a very high suicide rate among gay teenagers because of this. opening boy scouts to gay teenagers honestly could help save lives.

      • homosexuality is not a mental illness. no one is asking you to compromise your religious beliefs. you may be confused about the proposed policy change. it says that they will remove the nation ban on homosexuals in scouting. it doesn’t say you have to be gay to be in scouts. hope that clears it up for you.

      • it is absolutely not a minority. across the country, public opinion supports equal rights for LGBT individuals.

      • Stehlo you have shown a lot of hatred towards people’s religious beliefs so by your statement you don’t have moral fiber?

      • Straight people produce gay people every day, PapaEagle. Its called biology. I wish Scouting taught you some better character and moral fiber.

      • Being straight isn’t moral fiber. Plenty of terrible straight people.

        YPT is in place for a reason.

      • And just as plenty terrible gay people. Being bad, evil, etc crosses gender orientation boundaries.

      • Change is, in and of itself, neutral–neither necessarily good or necessarily bad. It should not be arbitrarily embraced.

    • Rev. Shaner, the fight is not over and we need you to stand up and speak up now and see the posts regarding petitions to keep the current BSA Policy. We are aware of the foul play going on, improper influence by outside groups and and the reason behind the rush to change the policy before rational voices from adult member volunteers can be considered (see posts on this site and do your research). We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on, and we WILL NOT be moved! Are you listening National Board! See the link showing improper efforts by Glaad to destroy Scouting….
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

  7. This is wonderful news! It truly is time that these outdated and harmful policies become a thing of the past. I hope the BSA makes the right decision and removes the membership policies of discrimination.

    • And how have these policies hurt you? How has it hurt others when there other Scouting organizations that were formed to welcome and support gay youth.

      I’m sure they appreciate all the time and money you’ve been supporting them with.

  8. I agree with Mark! It is about time!! We can concentrate on all of the great benefits of Scouting!!

    • Erin they National Board ‘reaffirmed’ the policy of not allowing gays to serve last summer, however they stated today that in a couple of weeks the Executive Board would vote on this policy shift. Hope that helps.

  10. This is so sad. My boys have enjoyed scouting so much, and if this policy is passed, we would have no choice but to remove them from scouts immediately..

    • I find it sad you would remove them from scouts because national allowed the charters to decide what was best for their unit(s). You can choose to stay with a charter that agrees with your beliefs. This decision does not force change.

      • I see. So, when I take my children to camps with multiple packs, how am I supposed to know which packs allow homosexual leaders and which don’t? They are talking about becoming identical to the Girl Scouts, who repudiated their Christian roots long ago. I will not be party to my children being part of that kind of organization.

      • How do you know what sexual practices anyone does behind closed doors? Maybe we should have all the leaders fill out a survey describing what they enjoy doing with their partners, male or female, and judge what is appropriate for the scouts. We want to keep our sons safe after all.

        None of what anyone does with his/her sexual partner has anything to do with one’s ability to be a good, moral leader.

      • THat is exactly the point. If you keep your bedroom habits to yourself, scouting is a positive influence. Nobody knows the sexual orientation of my son and its not the business of anyone. Unfortunately the gay community wants “special rights”. That includes not just being a scout but shouting to the world that they are “gay scouts”. Sorry do not agree if the decision is yes.

      • Nobody’s looking for special rights here, that’s not what this policy shift is saying. read it again. Instead of a full out ban, it allows chartered partners to make the exclusion or not. simple and easy. Why is it special rights if it’s the same rights that you have?

      • a boy should not have to deny an aspect of who he is in order to belong to any group. boys who are gay are often bullied. they are often ridiculed. they are often depressed and more likely to commit suicide. (whether they are out or not). scouts is an organization that i feel would be a perfect route to give these individuals a safe place to ‘belong’ and feel included, no matter who they are. it could literally help save lives to allow gay boys to be scouts.

        as for adult leaders… i suppose that most people might know you are straight if you have a wife. if you had a husband, though, they might know you are gay. so it isn’t about discussing your bedroom habits. it’s about your family. you don’t have to wear a sign saying you’re gay for people to know that you’re gay.

      • Christian? You mean the kind that try to be like Jesus and reach out to those scorned by society? Or the kind that embrace the Old Testament and want to strike down and kill those that disagree with you?

        Seems to me like you need to get to know some gay people, Rob. Since you imply that being gay makes you want to molest little boys, I can only assume then that since you’re straight that you want to molest little girls?

        I will only take my daughters to gay camp then and I’ll take my sons to a lesbian camp.. I mean, is there another way to protect our kids but keep away adults who attracted to their sex?

        Get a life.

      • How did you know before this announcement? Show me on the application where you have to check a box stating you are homosexual.

      • We have it on our form when they join Boy and Cub scouts, they really know this when they are small kids. Therefore there is no chance that we’d ever have a closeted scout or leader in our council ! But then I guess it might not matter, at least with the leaders, since they are never to be one-on-one with a youth. And as far as closeted youth interacting with any of our clearly straight scouts outside of scouting, they know who the open or closeted gay kids are anyway and beat them up regularly (or is it the other way around?)

      • Last time a checked, Scouting was a multi-religious organization. Just because LBP was a Christian and structured Scouting around those values does not make Scouting a Christian organization. Many would do well to remember this.

      • It absolutely does. We are no longer united under a common set of beliefs. Chartered organizations can make their own rules. What’s next, let Packs and Troops pick their own uniforms?

    • you could always still have your sons involved with a chartered org that continues to discriminate.

      • Actually, the Boy Scouts don’t discriminate. They apply the same policy to everyone. Anyone that is a homosexual can’t be a leader. Given the last 50 years of young men being assaulted in these situations, I think it makes a lot of sense. Penn State? Some Catholic priests? Public Schools? 85% of those cases involve boys 14 and older. That’s not pedophilia, no matter what the media says.

      • Those tragic events of abuse were largely enacted by individuals who were not gay. You are making generalities and blanket assumptions to fit your case. I have read the opened files. These were largely married men with families of their own. Not homosexuals.

      • Rob, I’m going to keep my daughters away from you since you are attracted to girls and might molest them.

      • Actually a homosexual could be a leader. Even an open homosexual as long as no one reported or complained. Do you do a background check on every single male leader you meet to find out if he is homosexual?
        You’d be surprised at that amount of active homosexual in scouting.

      • well Rob actually the BSA does discriminate and won a court case that says that we can discriminate if we want to.

      • Penn State: married man. Catholic priests: confirmed straight bachelors, most of them. Public schools: nearly all straight men. All of these things would have been avoided under two-deep leadership. I am glad for a policy change that truly allows COs to choose their leaders. And I don’t expect any more lawsuits than churches had seen before for discriminating.

      • penn state? really? jerry sandusky is married with kids. his wife adamantly denies his guilt.

        you clearly don’t understand what discrimination is, though.

      • I categorically condemn Jerry Sandusky’s actions. Remember that thing earlier today where we had common ground in agreeing that pedophilia was vile? And you’ve really been accusing ME of trolling? Come on!

      • Why is following one’s religion that forbids a way of life, discrimination? That reasoning is no reason at all if the way I choose to live my life in accordance with religious tenants, I am told that I must change my religion. I do discriminate against many types of behavior according to my religion. I discriminate against sinners but in accordance with my religion, I love the sinner but hate the sin. But you can’t make me a sinner because you feel that I am not treating sinners fairly.

      • The definition of discrimination is “treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit:” from dictionary.com

      • go ahead and follow your religion that forbids a way of life. that is not discrimination. where discrimination comes into play is when you ask someone else to follow your religion. they get to follow their own religion and way of life. see the difference?

      • See you aren’t going to be happy until you force your gay agenda down everyone’s throats. You’ll be the person who tracks down what each units position is on the issue and gets it to the activists. You don’t want units to choose you want it all your way. You’ll be the person that causes problems and fighting at roundtables. You will just keep nipping at every one like a rabid chihuahua insulting and labeling units that choose to stay traditional, undermining them at every shot.

        You are a complete and utter intolerant bigot. I wouldn’t doubt that you push your agenda and ideology everywhere including near youth.

        Very sad.

      • Pot? Kettle? You accuse me of something that you are doing yourself.

        You also continue to misrepresent everything I have said. I do think it is a good solution to allow individual COs and units choose what is best for them. If another unit decided that it did not want to be inclusive, it wouldn’t be any of my business. If the unit I belong to didn’t want to be inclusive, I would be free to find another unit. Do you recall the post where I explicitly stated that I did NOT tell a youth my beliefs because it’s not my place to influence him on what aspects of sexuality are or are not right? I believe that to be up to his mother. His father. His church.

      • Oh. Nice. Ok. I’m not having you criticize my parenting skills, be on the receiving end of your vitriol, and have someone say that my son and I must both be gay for having the audacity to stand up for the rights of others. You have said that you don’t really care about if there are gays in scouting, it’s really just about Youth Protection. You won’t accept what I say at face value. There is no reason to continue to do this. I am done. Have a lovely day. I truly hope your son’s head injury resolves without issue. My best to you.

    • This is so sad. Your boys have enjoyed scouting so much, and if this policy is passed, they will have no choice but to be removed from scouts by your own selfish desire and at great cost to their needs of Scouting.

      • He referred to the parents “selfish desire and great cost to their needs of Scouting”.

        You could have just scrolled up a bit and seen that.

        So it appears that today’s game plan from the supporters of the changes include mocking peoples religions and criticizing parenting?

        I think that would say a lot about your own parenting skills.

      • Funny Jo cause I thought that was Rhett agenda of those who are apposed. After all they keep using inflammatory language, and accusing those who do not share their dogma of following false gods. None of that is very scout like.

  12. What a huge disappointment! The BSA is taking the cowards way out and leaving it to the local charters.

    • You’re calling the organization that took this to the supreme court cowards? So why do you think they made their argument in front of the justices for?

    • It is not a done deal yet. There were almost identical rumblings about six months ago, until an anonymous national BSA council met in secret and put an end to the speculation. I’ll believe it when I see it.

      • I think this is way different. Last time it was speculation on the part of some bloggers and reporters on activities at the National Meeting by some trying to get the National Board to change policy, this time it was a member of the National BSA reporting to the press (AP and NBC) about the upcoming policy revision and vote to make it so. This is the real deal.

      • i agree. i don’t think they would have made a statement about it at all if they didn’t believe there is a real possibility of changing it. they got quite a bit of negative attention over the summer regarding this policy. why stir that up again if the old policy is just to be upheld?

      • Actually, when the National Executive Board made the decision last year it was not unanimous at all. There was some fervent dissent by some.

  15. FANTASTIC!! As a district advancement chair, I don’t ever want to focus on sexual preference EVER during and Eagle board of review!!! these young men work far to hard to earn such a prestigious title, this is a step in the right direction.

    • I just got REALLY angry at some people on FB who kept naddering on about it and ignoring my point that BOYS ARE BEING KEPT FROM GETTING AWARDS THEY EARNED!!!! I understand concerns about adults (I don’t share them – being gay doesn’t make you a pedophile, and it shouldn’t be an issue if YPT is followed faithfully), but I absolutely think it should be made clear that it doesn’t apply to boys.

  16. As someone who has decided to end my official ties to the organization because of the current policy, this could not happen soon enough for me. Should this change happen, I will call my local council that day to re-join.

    • Yes, I think it is incumbent upon all of us who have intentionally left Scouting over this policy, to now support BSA with the same energy if BSA has a change of heart. BSA is responding to the will of Scouts and their families, we should fully support BSA if they follow through with this response.

  17. I am disappointed that this change is being considered. Any God fearing person knows that this goes against God’s word. We are to love and pray for the lost but not to go against the word of God. Scouts have a duty to God and this goes against it.

    • I don’t agree! I am a Christian. My denomination (and many others) do not subscribe to the idea that being gay goes against God’s word. In fact, one of the pastor’s in my congregation is gay. Being gay is not against the word of god, and certainly doesn’t stop one from doing his duty to God.

      • Have you ever read you bible? I am always amazed at the people that say that it does not go against scripture in the Old and New Testament Leviticus 20:13 If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act. Romans 1:26-27 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions ; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural , 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 1 Cor 6:9-11 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God ? Do not be deceived ; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. Maybe if more pastors would preach the whole council of God we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Study God’s word, don’t fall to the council of man.

      • And you aren’t supposed to eat pork, or have sex when the woman has her period, or lots of other things that probably made sense 2,000 years ago but not so much today. And there are TONS of things where the Bible gives conflicting advice.

        More to the point, are you a follower of Christ – who believed in second chances, didn’t condemn others, and never preached anything about homosexuality – or are you an Orthodox Jew following the OLD Testament exclusively?

      • so you don’t think slavery is a problem then? do you wear any clothing that is a cotton/poly blend? are you entirely without sin? should we kick divorced people out of scouts? i’m a single mom… should i be kicked out? so you see homosexuality as a sin. who decides which sins deem you unworthy to be a boy scout?

      • Lol. You are not a Christ Follower!!!!!! How dare you cite Leviticus.

        Leviticus 20:9 – Anyone who dishonors father or mother must be put to death (NLT).

        Leviticus 25:44 – Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you buy slaves. (NIV)

        For fun, how about Exodus 35:2 – The seventh day must be a Sabbath day of complete rest, a holy day dedicated to the Lord. Anyone who works on that day must be put to death. (NLT)

        You are a hypocrite if you’ve never followed the other passages of Leviticus but choose to spew the one about gays. You choose from the Bible what is convenient to you? You’re all fire and brimstone without any love that Christ showed people. You fear what you do not understand, and you do not understand science or biology, I fear. Yes, I fear you then, for Lord knows what hate you teach young people.

      • Wow, you’re a God fearing Christian? I feel bad for you. I would hate to subscribe to a religion based out of fear… I am a Christian and my God is a god of love.

  18. This truly is the beginning of the end for Scouting. Let’s just think about it for a minute. For those units with a Judeo Christian backbone that decide not to allow this to happen, how do they decide to attend District, Council, Area, or National functions. This just is not going to work. Let NAMBLA create their own youth program. I am sure the BSA will not interfere. Discussion of any kind of sexual behavior has no place in Scouting. As a volunteer, if this passes I am out.

    • LGBT is absolutely not synonymous with NAMBLA. the implication you make is rediculous. you’re absolutely correct though that discussion of any kind of sexual behavior doesn’t belong in scouting. LGBT individuals aren’t asking to come in and talk about being gay. they’re just asking to be allowed to exist.

      • Beth, I agree! Implying that gay male adults want to molest little boys is akin to saying that straight male adults want to molest little girls.

    • There are Judeo Christian religious organizations that have homosexual leaders. Even the Catholic church welcomes gays…although it doesn’t condone homosexual acts. Kids are born homosexual, just like some are born heterosexual. Heck, some people are born transgendered…with male and female anatomy, or something inbetween. Learn some science. Religion doesn’t need to close its eyes to science

    • “Discussion of any kind of sexual behavior has no place in Scouting”

      I absolutely agree with this!!! Which is why I think the policy should be open to all. As long as someone (anyone!) passes a background check, understands and upholds youth protection, and follows the Scout way – what difference does it make?!! I can tell you personally, it DOES NOT!!! I do not talk about my personal life in Scouting, and neither do others I work with. It’s a non-issue. As a trained leader, I don’t see this effecting our job to teach this boys about Scouting

    • “Discussion of any kind of sexual behavior has no place in Scouting” well that was said well, and you’re right it has no place. I know for a fact that there’s no place on the application that asks for sexual orientation, or any other questions about sexuality. There’s no discussion in the scout handbook about sexuality other than in the Youth Protection guide in the front, and there’s no section about discussing sexuality in the Scoutmaster’s handbook or other scouting literature. Let’s face it, the sexual orientation of a scout or leader isn’t anyone’s business. It’s not about that. It’s about inclusion and exclusion, period.

  19. About time! Lets open our minds up! We can still protect kids from pedophiles, there is a big difference between that and sexual orientation!

  20. I am getting tired of groups giving in to pressure on things that have always been important to them. As a scout leader and Mom of an Eagle Scout, I have always pushed the boys to stand up against bullies and peer pressure rather than giving in on things they feel strongly about. To have the BSA give in on something they have always felt strongly about makes me very sad and will make it that much harder to teach this to the boys when even the BSA wouldn’t do so. I don’t see this as something that means they are moving into the future, nor something that is about one side versus another in this argument. Rather I see it as the BSA giving in to pressure and moving towards what is now the “accepted norm” no matter what they have always believed and taught. There are many things that BSA stands for that make people unhappy, but this is big news these days so of course all of the pressure is on this point. I am beyond sad to see them give in on anything they have stood for.

    • Sooo, you’re teaching your kids to stand up to gay kids? Ask yourself, when did you choose to be straight? Or did you just find yourself that way when going through puberty? Why do think its different for homosexual teens? Its like you want to deny science…or your own body. I bet you didn’t know that some people are born with both sets of sexual anatomy. Did you? Sooo, are they male or female? Even better, can you guess their sexual orientation? You need to stop being pressued by bigots that being gay is a choice

      • The truth hurts your brain, I guess?
        Here’s some education so that you can resolve some of your stupidity:

        Intersex, in humans (not to be confused with hermaphroditism), is a variation in sex characteristics including chromosomes, gonads, and/or genitals that do not allow an individual to be distinctly identified as female/male sex binary. Such variation may involve genital ambiguity, and combinations of chromosomal genotype and sexual phenotype other than XY-male and XX female. As with all humans, gender identity for intersex individuals may often be complicated. Some individuals may be raised as a certain gender but then identify with another later in life, while others may not identify themselves as either exclusively female or exclusively male. Some may opt for surgical procedures in order to align their physical sex characteristics with their socially prescribed gender, and some will not even become aware that they are intersex—unless they receive genetic testing—because it does not manifest in their phenotype. Research has shown gender identity of intersex individuals to be independent of sexual orientation.

      • He’s really obsessed with his “intersex” and “hermaphrodites” arguments. Such a tiny fraction of the population. How many want to be in Scouts? A fraction of that fraction. Not statistically significant.

      • Beth I must admit you are a determined spokeman and I love your grit. I just wish you were on the side of Timeless Values and the Values the Boy Scout never left. On another of your postings you stated that the LGBT members needed recognition from people. Beth here is how I get recognition I pray to Heavenly Father that I live according to the will of someone who loves me personally Jesus Christ. Beth this is all the recognition I need it gives me great comfort and joy. I do not oppose the homosexual because of hate, bigortry or discrimination I oppose it because God opposes it. I oppose it because most of my fellow man opposes it. I oppose it because most Scouters oppose it. I will not know more now than when I stand at the bar of Jehovah that Homosexuality is a sin. If a person doesn’t believe in God these comments are of no use to them. But if you believe that God exists then you must believe that God is the judge of all living. If a person believes in God he must believe he has prepared a way for his children to return to his presence by obeying his commandments. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • Nathan – please keep this conversation civil. You won’t get anyone to see your point by calling them stupid. Listening to each other, and sharing carefully written, thoughtful comments, goes a long way to helping others broaden their understanding of the details and complexities of the issue, which is the best way to help the BSA stay strong.

    • So what would you say to a teenage boy who is denied the Eagle he has spent years earning but now cannot receive because he has realized he is gay?

  21. This is a wise way to allow units to make their own decisions. Many church affiliated units would have a real issue with a change to the policy, while other units will not. If passed, ALL will potentially have access to the benefits of being a part of the Boy Scouts of America. I am delighted and relieved.

    • The fractured remains of a great organization that gave in to outside pressure, internally divided for years by fights between traditional units and the “inclusive” unit who continues to bash the traditional units.

      The BSA will be around for a long time but it will never be the same.

  22. Keep sex out of Scouts! And so it begins, hopefully the scouting program will maintain it’s position and protect our children’s innocence. If your gay, great why advertise? I’m straight, I do not need a bumper sticker, or parade. How you live your life is your business. Don’t use Scouts and a launch pad to promote your sexual belief, I certainly don’t.

    • This isn’t a matter of promoting sexual beliefs of the connotation that you have to agree with sexual activity. The last time I checked, discussion of any sex outside of biological or health and wellness terms was minimized by the BSA.
      It’s a matter of allowing people, of the same character, to participate on equal level within Scouting REGARDLESS of sexual orientation.

    • no one is asking to bring sex into scouts. the thing is, there are gay families. they just exist, like any other family. as the current policy stands, they are not permitted in scouts. if a gay person would like to join scouts and participate as a leader, it is pretty evident that they are gay just by looking at the composition of his or her family. they may not have a bumper sticker. they just have a same sex partner. all LGBT individuals are asking for is the right to exist within the scouting movement.

    • Problem is, as it stands, it’s hurting teenage boys who come out as gay and then cannot be given the awards they have earned.

  23. The “local choice” idea seems problematic, from a legal point of view. Until now, troops have been able to legally exclude gays because BAS had a national policy opposed to homosexuality. Take away the national policy opposed to homosexuality, and each troop or chartering organization will be left on their own to explain how the presence of gays interferes with their first amendment rights.

    This may not be a problem for a troop chartered by a large church that has clear ant-gay teachings, and the resources to present their position in court. But for almost all other troops, the removal of a national policy anti-gay means that they will have no legal basis to exclude gays.

    The local choice option means that almost all troops will be required to welcome gays.

    • Yeah National is going to duck and let all of the units and chartered organizations take the heat.

      No good is going to come of this. This is going to be a PR nightmare for the BSA. Most people don’t understand the concept of chartered organizations so all these local battles will be looked at as comimg from the BSA itself.

    • Actually, national currently defends 100% of its organizations for its discrimination. Now it will only have to defend like 75% of them. National will fight for the right of the organization to choose. The best part is, scout units are part of the organization, not the boy scouts, so unless someone can sue the LDS for not letting them be a member because they’re gay, they can’t really touch the scouts.

      • Yes, but BSA’s argument in court until now has been that troops can exclude gays because BSA holds, as a core message, nationwide, that homosexuality is immoral, and that having gay members interferes with that message. If BSA now allows gays in 25% of the troops, they are saying that BSA no longer holds a core message that homosexuality is immoral, so the 75% of troops that want to keep gays out will have to rely on the free speech rights of their chartering organization, or of their own troop, to legally exclude gays.

        By allowing gays into some troops, BSA is essentially saying that BSA no longer hold a core message that condemns homosexuality on the national level. This core message will now have to come from the troop or chartering organization for a troop to continue legally excluding gays.

  24. I am so glad! I hope they change their policy. I feel like such a hypocrite saying in one breath how much I love scouts & how wonderful it is for my boys, yet scouting is so discriminatory in this way. We use scouting to help raise our children, but at home we teach tolerance and inclusion. I want to feel we can be inclusive at scouts as well.

      • What about intolerance of immoral beliefs? For example (and please, don’t make this statement what it isn’t–it’s only an extreme example to illustrate a foundational principle), what about the Nazi’s treatment of Jews? There were some who believed that such actions were morally justified. Should that belief be tolerated? Would it be if it were the one being discussed right now?
        Please note, however, that condemnation of an opinion is not the same as condemnation of, or even disrespect towards, the individual holding the opinion.

      • I think I understand what you are trying to say. I will try to explain my position. I believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, beliefs and values. I also believe that those beliefs, opinions and values should never be forced upon someone else. My actions and beliefs should never cross someone else’s line and so on. It does sometimes make it difficult when two people have such differing beliefs, but as long as each is allowed to believe or act the way they want without invading someone else’s mental, physical or emotional space there should be no problem. As soon as someone crosses another persons space/rights without permission, it becomes unacceptable. I hope that came out in a way that makes sense.

      • But don’t you see that either way this case goes some people are going to have a contradictory moral view forced upon them? Either those for homosexuality will be faced with an organization that does not permit their opinions to be acted upon, or those who are against homosexuality will be forced to accept a situation that their moral beliefs do not permit them to accept. I understand where you’re coming from, but I don’t believe it’s something that can be practically applied.

      • I understand what you are saying, but by discriminating against someone for their sexuality is not much different than discriminating against someone of another religion.

      • the difference here is that people who are gay are currently not permitted in scouts. if the new policy is approved, they will be permitted. that’s all. it won’t force all people in scouts to be gay. do you see the difference? between forcing someone to live by your standards and allowing someone to live by their own standards?

      • Not to sound inflammatory here, but tolerance is not a virtue. It is a reaction. An individual can tolerate good things, neutral things or bad things. Simply tolerating does not make one virtuous; what one is tolerating does–or does not.

      • I do agree that “live and let live” is a good policy in personal life. But at the same time, “Blessed is he who does not condemn himself by what he approves.”

    • To further my point: whose beliefs do you teach your children to tolerate? Those who believe that it is good to allow homosexuality in the BSA, or those who believe that it is bad?
      Those are morally exclusive positions and, logically speaking, can not both be true (although they can, logically, both be false). It’s one thing to tolerate other people, and the fact that other people can have their own opinions, but tolerating immoral opinions is in a different league altogether.

  25. This is sad. The BSA is considering turning its back on the people who have supported and defended them all these years? Turning around and leaving small chartered organizations in the wind defenseless?

    This will not be a good thing. This is not a minor change, this is a monumental change in philosophy. There are so many youth and adult protection issues that will come up, so much legal exposure.

    By the way, I’d have the same concerns if the BSA lifted the rule on males & females sleeping & bathing separately.

    • I agree completely. I know from personal experience that there are thousands of girls and young women abandoning the Girl Scouts for the BSA’s Venturing program or for groups like the American Heritage Girls (a noble organization, by the way) because of moral issues similar to this. But if the BSA falls, where is there to turn to?

  26. It really is about time for this to happen!! As an Eagle Scout and a life-long member and volunteer, I am so happy the BSA is finally doing the right thing and removing this stupid policy.

  27. I am shocked that the traditions of the Boy Scouts would cave to the secular minority and the media to go against their longstanding moral and ethical values, that is what separates us from the rest of the population, our morals and faith based values that we try to instill in our youth. It started in the schools with the removal of prayer and has gone downhill from there.

  28. Just because something is old doesn’t mean it’s bad. BSA was founded on being morally straight or for all you PC people…morally CORRECT! Check the Bible…it is wrong! I won’t have my child exposed to this!

    • ‘Straight’ is a term that was developed in the 1950s to refer to people who weren’t homosexuals – by homosexuals. Stop reading into what ‘morally straight’ means using today’s lexicon and review it for what it meant. It meant being able to make sound and moral decisions. Do I or don’t I steal from my friend? Do I or don’t I cheat on a test? It had nothing to do with sexuality then, and it has nothing to do with it now.

    • oh yeah, cuz ‘straight’ has always meant ‘heterosexual? Gimme a break. Seriously. How about morally straight meaning don’t lie, don’t steal, don’t cheat, and don’t be a bigot.

      WWJD? Throw rocks at gay people? Chase them up trees? Shun them? hahahahaha. You haven’t really read the bible, huh?

      • Don’t give me the WWJD line. STRAIGHT from the Bible here it is:

        New International Version (NIV)
        13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads

      • Jennifer

        You really need to stop quoting the NIV, created in 1965 not really a sound refrence and very controversial.

      • The word of God does not change. Leviticus 20:13 – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them. KJV

      • “The Word of God does not change.”

        You are funny. It’s changed quite a bit. A TON of books were deemed heretical and destroyed by the church – they just didn’t like them. That was a big change. The church taught that Mary never had children other than Jesus, until someone notice mention of his brother James in the Bible. The birth stories themselves differ in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

        Have you ever noticed how little of the New Testament is actually Jesus’ words? Not too much. It’s written by other people. And lots of errors have been found and corrected over the years.

      • You can’t pick and choose what you want to be valid from Leviticus Jennifer. I doubt you would enjoy the life as what is literally prescribed there.

      • Trust stehlo he hates and despises Christians and Christianity so that makes him an expert on your doctrine.

      • leviticus bans a lot of things. do you wear fabric that is a blend of cotton and polyester? do you eat shellfish? do you think slavery is permissible? has a man ever touched you while you were on your period?

      • perfect! There are many Jewish laws in the Torah that God abiding Christians ( and Jews ) do not follow.

      • Leviticus 20:9 – Anyone who dishonors father or mother must be put to death (NLT).

        I bet you scream in horror and shed tears when Muslims do ‘honor killings’….but according to you, they’re just following the Bible (albeit better than you!).

      • Ruckad,

        She should quote the NASB which is a more correct translation of the Hebrew and Greek Leviticus 20:13 If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act. Romans 1:26-27 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions ; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural , and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 1 Cor 6:9-11 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God ? Do not be deceived ; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

      • Thank you for that translation. I notice that death and killing are not mentioned.

        At that time, I can see having a big problem with homosexuality from a simple continuing-the-race POV. They needed all the genetic diversity they could get and lots of babies died young until the last century or so, making procreation REALLY important. Those issues are totally not an issue any more. We have enough people procreating!

      • Here you go Jennifer, Straight from the bible:
        1 Timothy 2:12
        New International Version (NIV)
        12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[a] she must be quiet

      • Jesus said he came to uphold the law, to the last letter. He told the adulterous woman that her sins were forgiven and to go and SIN NO MORE.

  29. Do NOT bow down to pressures from “politically correct” leftist media. Please stand strong to the morals on which BSA was founded and stood strong with for over 100 years. Just because some very vocal people loudly express an opinion does not make it right, nor does it represent the majority. If you change the policy, you may please a few, but at the risk of losing most.

  30. This stinks
    Sounds like giving up on scouting beliefs and standards
    Would be a big disapointment

  31. I guess the bsa lost its backbone; We will have to change our oath so why dont we just disband the bsa; If a majority threaten to shut down our troops and packs the bsa will bend; we ALL KNOW that the National BSA is only interested in how much MONEY THEY CAN MAKE

    • Should the worst come of this, it will also show that they’re very interested in avoiding the continuing criticism coming from fringe radical groups and the secular media. A Scout is brave. Don’t back down!

      • a scout is brave. stand up to a discriminatory policy that excludes people because of who they naturally are.

      • A Scout is Obedient.
        If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobeying them.

      • So then leaders and Scouts, according to you, who were gay but yet knowingly took positions and awards should have worked at changing the rules and not disobeyed them with lies and deceit?

  32. This is good. But it’s not enough. Leaving it to Charters is a mistake. We’ll end up with regions where Charters don’t change existing policy – thus forcing LGBT Scouts/Volunteers to drive out of their area to find a tolerant unit. And you’ll have situations where Scouts are treated inhospitably at larger events such as Camporees or Jamborees. How will parent’s know that a unit is tolerant? Will unit flags get a pink triangle on them? Your average teenager doesn’t care – why should we? Open it up across the board. Review GtSS if needed and enforce it and background checks. Let kids enter the program and feel welcome. That’s all I’ll say this time around – I commented a lot last time we discussed this in Bryan’s forums and I really just don’t have the energy to argue with those that are close minded and hateful anymore.

    • Then that makes you just as close minded as the people you are calling it. It’s bad enough that National is considering this but then to force units to have to accept it despite the opinions of the members of that unit is unfair.

    • We have about 25-30 teenage scouts in our troop. I would not describe any of them as average. They are all God minded above average young men that work hard to achieve scouting excellence. Next we will have to soften program requirements for the not so masculine and emotionally unstable individuals. This is only the beginning.

      • duty to god and country. trustworthy, reverent and clean. contrary to what a lot of people here seem to think, LGBT individuals are perfectly capable of adhering to the scout oath and law.

      • I bet one of those boys is a closet gay, and all your rancor is eating away at him, and by 25 he’ll have committed suicide because everyone around him spews nonsense hate about gay people.

        Just goes to show that you can’t cure stupid.

    • Gays won’t have to drive far. They can form their own units right where they live. They could have already done this with the Campfire Boys/Girls organization. The pink triangle sounds good. I agree leaving it to the individual units won’t work. Gay and straight units will have to mix at council and national events.

      • If BSA leaders allow or encourage the kind of conversation that would result in the kind of hate that would make “open” units clash with “closed” ones, then there is something fundamentally wrong — and it is NOT the open units.

  33. I’m sorry, but I find this very disheartening. AS an Eagle Scout and a Scout leader, I would not support this move at all. Scouting always stood on principle that we are a PRIVATE organization. If another group wanted to allow gay youth and men into it, then fine, let them start their own organization. But as a Scouting movement, we have an obligation first and foremost to protect the young boys and men we serve. Sexuality should never be a part of it. Just look at the example that the Girl Scouts are now in with huge declining numbers and a strong agenda that goes against everything they once stood for as well. Is this what Scouting is becoming? I sincerely hope not.

    Granted I have been in Scouting long enough to see many young people that have come out of the closet over the years and have left the Scouting movement because of its stance. I’ve also seen a number of people stay a part of Scouting who should have been removed a lot sooner because of their own sexual preferences and the damage caused to other young boys because of that. Is this going to be the doorway to pedophilia? I urge the National offices to use extreme caution. Think about the boys we serve and the steps we have been taking to protect them in all circumstances. We are not perfect by any means….but we are always trying to improve on the system.

    Again, if a group would like to start up a youth organization dedicated to gay youth and men, so be it, but don’t drag the B.S.A. down with it.

    • you’re right, sexuality shouldn’t be a part of it. which is why there should never have been a ban in the fist place.

      also… fyi. most pedophiles have wives.

  34. Whether you are for or against being gay and gay rights isn’t what’s most important that all the boys get to be a part of the organization? For me those of you opposing this is like telling my son he can’t be a scout because he isn’t LDS. Where is that logic? A child should have the right to be a part of scouts at an early age but then to get told No! Your hard work and determination is irrelevant because you choose (which from what I understand it isn’t a choice) to be gay. I believe this is a step in the right decision.

  35. Amen! It is time for this change. As the Charter Org. Exec. we will welcome this change and the privilege to welcome a group of young men and their parents back into Scouting.
    As to Scouting giving into the media – far from it. They are recognizing that funding agencies no longer support organizations that discriminate. Nor do many charter organizations want to be involved with Scouting as they discriminate against a specific group of people.
    This is welcome news.

  36. So National is relieving itself, and all the local councils from any future litigation expense and passing it on to the Charter orginizations to deal with and absorb. Status Quo, I will pray for the National committee when this actually comes up for a vote, I can tell you I know alot of seasoned scouters that will retire if this comes to pass.

    • Not to mention lost units because of leaders and youth (because many youth do have an opinion on the matter)…

    • Good, let the bigots retire. Its time we recognize reality. And science. Homosexuals aren’t devient or immoral. I know plenty of immoral heterosexuals and it has nothing to do with what they do in the bedroom. I bet all the ‘seasoned’ scouters are so clueless that they don’t even know hermaphradites exist…you know, people born with both sets of sexual anatomy. So, what sex are they? What gender are they? What sexual orientation do they have? Wake up, buddy. Biology isn’t black and white. It can be a little gray here and there…and sometimes pink. That doesn’t make a person immoral….unless you judge people without knowing them. Like casting stones, do you? WWJD

      • New International Version (NIV)
        13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads

      • You not tolerating people who have a problem with the proposed change makes you just as big of a bigot.

        Some of us have issues that are more related to all the difficulties and legal exposure we are going to encounter. Same as if the BSA lifted the rule on males and females sleeping and bathing separately.

        This is not a minor change. This is a monumental change in philosophy that looks like it is going to get shoved through.

      • Scientifically speaking, hermaphroditic characteristics are a result of biological corruption, a mistake in the DNA. I would stop likening them to homosexuality if I were you, unless you really think that homosexuality is a condition of a similar nature.

      • Yes, homosexuality is likely a ‘biological corruption’. Does that mean we shouldn’t treat them with dignity and love?

        Oscar Pistorious is an Olympian who was born without the fibula bones in both legs…an obvious ‘biological corruption’ but we treat him equally. Some people are born with cerebral palsay, a biological corruption, yet many have magnificant minds simply trapped in a body that cannot cooperate.

        So, is ‘gay’ what biology sets out for? No. But that doesn’t make them incapable of love, commitment, honor, virtue, honesty, kindness, respect, trust, loyalty…and reverence. I’m not stipulating that homosexuality is a handicap or anything like that, but i admit its not ‘perfect
        biology. But who has that? The woman with a mustache? The Danny Davito men of the world? The guy with ED? The infertile woman?

    • A pretty accurate description of what is happening. The same thing happened in 1974 when BSA National go tired of carrying the water for the various all-white troops that existed across the country, and decided to pass the decision down to the local level. It wasn’t too long after that all-white troops stopped existing. Most think that was ultimately a good thing, although you can still find detractors from time to time.

  37. I absolutely think the ban should be lifted for boys. That should not even be a question. So please, even if it isn’t fully lifted, make sure no more boys are denied their Eagle or other earned awards because they came out as homosexual.

    • Sorry, gay youth who have gone through the program knowing the policy are not being “trustworthy” neither are the leaders who hide the fact that they knew. Its sad that the leaders and their parents taught the youth to lie.

      • Why do you assume they knew? They start as young as SIX. If you are saying they knew at six, then they are clearly born that way and shouldn’t be discriminated against. And I know no one in my Cub Scout Pack is discussing gays in the unit – not appropriate for boys – so they may not even know the policy until sometime in high school.

        They could EASILY not know the policy existed until sometime in high school.

        They could also be in denial even to themselves, and reach the point that they couldn’t deny or hide it and be denied awards they had already completed.

      • They hide it because of people like you! You teach them to lie because they hear the hate from you. They don’t want to disappoint people like you because you will not accept them for how God made them.

  38. There is all of this discussion in society against bullying. BSA is not bullying anyone by clearly stating their policy. Those who don’t agree with it do not have to join. Anyone who would like to have a scouting organization with different policies is free to start one, like American Heritage Girls did when they disagreed with Girl Scouts’ policies. To try to force a private organization to change their long-held beliefs and policies to better align with a small, vocal faction of society who disagrees with them is bullying.

  39. Who will be responsible for any possible homosexual molestation of scouts? The chartered organization or BSA? The vast majority of cases in the past have been homosexual in nature.

    • you say they’ve been homosexual because its typically a boy molested by a man? well, in scouts… sure it is. but many of those men that molest boys don’t identify as homosexual. they are married and have children of their own. many times their own children are among their victims. preventing abuse of boys by homosexual adults will be carried out in the same way preventing abuse of boys by heterosexual adults already is. if something terrible happens, it will be dealt with in the same way that it already is. kicked out of scouts, criminally prosecuted.

  40. When this change goes through, I will end my association with the BSA. The ban came about because of leaders sexually assaulting boys. Now the BSA makes it easier for homosexual pedophiles to prey on young boys? They can’t have it both ways. And please, spare me the “not all gays are pedophiles” speech. I know that – but all pedophiles who have historically preyed on boys were homosexuals. I hope this isn’t true.

    • wait a minute – you really don’t believe that the polcy was a result of the “perversion files”? It is the other way around, BSA hid for years heterosexual leaders molesting boys. I never understood how the BSA could ban gays , but hide molesters.

      • Excuse me but a male leader molesting a boy is not heterosexual molestation it’s homosexual.

      • No, you have it all wrong – is Jerry Sandusky
        a homosexual ? Are Catholic priests who molested young boys homosexuals?

        Really? Homosexuals are not all molesters, just as all heterosexuals are molesters.

        I assume you believe that the over thousand
        male leaders in the perversion files are homosexuals ?

    • Kent, you really should do some homework. There are pedophiles in BSA NOW and the ones that I have been aware of in our council, sadly, are not homosexual, just troubled, unhealthy humans. It is time that we who believe in the wonderful mission of BSA stand up and say, yes, EVERYONE, has a right to be part of this. If standing on a soap box extolling your personal sexual practice, heterosexual or homosexual YOU do not belong in a Youth Organization. Whatever someone does in the privacy of their own home is THEIR business and has NOTHING to do with any organization. Let us understand that humans come in all packages and let’s get to know the heart of the person who believes in the values of Scouting. Let’s all see each person for the good human that they are. Wouldn’t you want someone to understand you and not prejudge you?
      I applaud the BSA for finally embracing the idea, that all of us are created equal and for the good. To be proven wrong by actions not ideology.

  41. What the BLEEP!
    Those with big bucks now OWN the Boy Scouts? So, money is all the matters Now to BSA? Who cares if UPS quit giving them money. This is the END of the Beginning. What is good is now Bad and Bad is Good. No more black and white the line begins to Grey. I’m sure all founders would be rolling over with this decision.
    Parent of 2012 Eagle.

    • Actually, biology isn’t Black and White. Are you to deny even the existence of hermaphradites? You know, or maybe you don’t, the people born with both sets of sexual anatomy? Soo, are they male or female? What’s their gender? What’s their sexual orientation?

      Have you heard of transgendered people? probably not.

      If you want to talk morality, than hold people to that standard. Hold straight and gay to the same standard of sexual conduct. Committed relationships, love, marriage? You keep pushing them under the rug and they’ll keep their relationships under the rug. Don’t give them the option of open committed relationships, and well, you won’t get it.

      Immoral….try telling a teen that he can’t be a Scout because his body doesn’t feel sexual attration to a female. He can pretend. He could pretend to like girls..and hurt those girls when it doesn’t work. I mean, when did you choose to be straight or gay? What was the date that you made a conscious decision to be straight? For me…I just sorta started liking girls in like…7th grade. Started to notice those skirts in Cathloic school. I didn’t choose…it just was.

      • The gay youth could join an organization that is centered around that belief.

        As for gender, that is determined by chromosomes, not surgical mutilation.

      • gay youth that want to be scouts don’t want to join an organization centered around being gay. they want to join an organization centered around being scouts. allowing gay scouts to join (or not be kicked out) doesn’t mean we are all going to sit around the camp fire and encourage boys to have sex with other boys. it means that gay boys will be allowed to belong in units that allow them. that’s all. nothing will change.

      • But what if the members of the unit do not want them despite being forced to be classified as “inclusive”?

      • Wait, Jo…you just agreed that being gay is a biological condition? Did you come to your senses finally? There is a LORD!

        I thought you believe it was a choice and these young boys were shameful sinners. Good to know that you believe people dont’ choose to be gay and they’re born that way…the way God made them.

      • You are so bigoted against people with religious beliefs that you are seeing it everywhere. I have not made a single religious reference supporting any opinion or statement I made.

        But sure being gay could quite obviously be from a genetic defect. I still believe some people choose to be gay as well. That is their right.

  42. Tragic! The bit about leaving things up to individual troops ignores the fact that there are combined events like competition campouts, not to mention summer camp and Jamboree.

    So much for two-deep leadership to protect kids.

      • I don’t know how it should be. But if two gay youth of the same gender that are “just friends” want to tent together, should they be allowed? Can they be buddies for going out of camp? Yes? That’s easy, right. Okay so then in Venturing, could a straight male and female who are “just friends” tent together? Could they be buddies for going out of camp?

        See, its not an easy answer.

        What if a group of gay youth are uncomfortable with tenting with a straight youth of the same gender? Should the straight youth have to camp by themselves if there were no other buddies for them? What about if a group if straight kids were not comfortable with having to tent with a gay kid? Should the gay youth have to camp by themselves if there were no other buddies for them?

        These are real issues that will come up and need to be addressed.

      • Nope! Not this change! I let my 14 yr old read the post and he feels it would be awkward meaning that the scouts asks them to use the buddy system when traversing campsites and tent buddies. He said that if they can’t control there urges where does that leave me? Will we be told if they are gay? If two leaders are gay what happens then if i get put in a situation and we are at camp? He says that while that is their choice, his would be not around them if he always has to wonder.
        A whole new can of worms would be opened! Week long summer camps…what then? Will we as members of a troop be told if a scout has declared his sexual orientation?
        Just as with AIDS – unless you are told, you don’t know! If a scout is asked is he obliged to tell the other scout?
        Same gender partners as leaders on the cub scout kevel – that creates questions and discussions with younger children that some don’t want to have until their child is older – why would we have to be forced into embracing the topic with a 7 yr old? If you don’t think they will notice, think again!
        I’m all for their equality, but with limits! They got the Girl Scouts to cave! Thus American Heritage Girls formed – the United Way pulled backing from BSA and they held their heads high, standing behind what Sir Baden Powell envisioned when he started Boy Scouts of America! He would surely be turning over in his grave if he knew what was currently being discussed! Not happy! I wonder if we as parents of scouts can speak at this meeting????

      • oh my. sure… bring AIDS into it. lets see if we can add a little more scare factor into this. you know what my 14 year old son said today when i told him about this? “good, it’s about time.”

      • She mentions aids and you freak out. You mock and disparage people’s religious views and that’s ok?

  43. This is so sad. There’s no need for BSA to change. SpiralScouts International is very inclusive in their membership. Everyone who needs a different position can join it.

    • There is another group called the Navigators that is also gay friendly.

      The problem is that the gays won’t be happy until they force themselves into every facet of our lives. They claim bigotry because we don’t accept their ways which means they don’t accept ours which is also bigotry.

      • Their (LGBT) agenda is twofold: 1. Infiltration and 2. Indoctrination. The BSA has known this for years.

      • so people who opposed slavery were bigots against those that wished to perpetuate the practice of slavery? you’re using false logic.

      • There is a difference.. they don’t care about you or your life. They care about themselves and having the same as you.. They want to share with their children the same scouting program they grew up in. the same one that taught them that a scout works to change an unjust system from the inside.

    • spiral scouts? right. because there is a chapter of that in every town in america. not a reasonable solution.

      • Please… BSA wasn’t in every town in America either when it started either. Starting your own brand of kid organization is on them. Forcing their way into our existing organization because they don’t want to make their own is not reasonable.

      • The executive board is discussing it. If they adopt the new policy, they apparently disagree with you.

  44. All this means is a “return” to when leadership was only the purview of the chartering group. They will still have the same control, and it should be of little consequence. Surely those chartering orgs that have continued issues with this will simply not allow it. Why that should effect any other group is odd, as the whole subject still remains off limits, just as it was prior to this. If it becomes a negative distraction for some reason, the sponsor can simply dismiss them as their prerogative, just as they did before it became a public distraction due to the activists..

    • Because someone will be dissatisfied that Unit X didn’t capitulate so will sue their small chartered organizations into submission. So we’ll all be forced to accept it. National is ducking and really screwing over their long time supporters.

  45. I am fully supportive of this move, and shows that the new leadership are being sensible in setting direction, you will never please everyone. the organization was in a very discrimatory direction and related press has damaged membership which will take years to repair.

  46. Church based troops will still maintain their ability to discriminate. Public school troops will be free to not be dictated to by faulty doctrine and hatred.

    • See, you continue to show hatred towards churches and units that may choose to stay traditional. Why do you insist on an all or nothing deal?

  47. This is a disappointment. The BSA is bowing into liberal political and media pressure.

    • The most popular TV news channel in the country is Fox News. More popular than all other TV news channels combined. Are you saying Fox News is responsible for this change in BSA policy?

  48. I agree to a point, a Scout that is denied Eagle (or any advancement) because of his orientation is a shame after the work has been done. I don’t agree that just because someone is homosexual means they are going to molest the Scouts, look at all the leaders that have been cast out because they were ‘outed’ – how many of them are on the lists of abusers released last year, probably not as many as one might think.

    I do wonder how the Scout Oath will be changed or will ‘morally straight’ be applied. only to don’t cheat, steal, lie.

    There’s a lot of digest and I don’t think we can do it here on this list although it’s a good place for everyone to vent. Will I turn in the membership card of myself and my four sons, most likely not. BSA will still do background checks and hopefully catch anyone that’s done it before and been charged. Just like now any adult that tries to sign up without a son in the program will get some serious suspicion as to their motivition and VERY closesly watched. The buddy system and the yearly viewing of “A Time to Tell” will be more important than ever to make sure we all stay safe.

    God made us all – some good, some bad but he still made us all – I think we all need to step back from the edge and see what National says before we jump. Look how long it’s taking to get one oath, motto, etc – I think it’s 2014, this won’t happen overnight either.

    • The Scout phrase “morally straight” was written in 1911. The use of “straight” to refer to sexuality did not start until the 1940s. The Scout Oath does not need to change — it has always meant the same thing, and it has never had anything to do with sexual orientation.

      • “I agree to a point, a Scout that is denied Eagle (or any advancement) because of his orientation is a shame after the work has been done. I don’t agree that just because someone is homosexual means they are going to molest the Scouts,…”

        Any Scout who is currently a homosexual who makes it to ANY advancement stage, could be considered not “morally straight” due to the simple fact that he IS aware of the current policy and has continued with the Pack and/or Troop.
        This has nothing to do with the fact of his orientation…but rather that he has dedceived the BSA.

        Whether you agree with that position or not, THAT would be a valid arguement for denying anyone any advancement.

      • “Any Scout who is currently a homosexual who makes it to ANY advancement stage, could be considered not “morally straight” due to the simple fact that he IS aware of the current policy and has continued with the Pack and/or Troop.”

        I would say more because he is not being Honest, he may still be straight to HIS morals.. maybe not yours.. but is he also of your religion?

  49. As an older Scout (almost Scouter), I find this to be rather disturbing. Not the policy one way or the other, but the fact that the policy exists. Sexuality should not be a discussion item for any reason what-so-ever at Scouting events. I have reprimanded most of the younger youth in my troop for making jokes or inappropriate comments about this topic (or any sexual topic for that matter).

    I know a few Scouts (now Scouters/Active Military) that are gay, and I respect them for their accomplishments as Scouts, regardless of sexual orientation, because it was never a topic that any of us approved of at Scouting events (sexual topics in general).

    I hope my Scouting career will go un-phased by this. If it does become an issue, I fear that it may ruin the program for everyone.

  50. so let me get this straight… no pun intended. People who are upset by this are angry about a policy that has only been around for… what, 30 years or so, in a 100 year old organization?? The policy was created to PROTECT the boys from molesters… i.e. to get the media off their back and protect themselves from liability. Now all of a sudden it’s a terrible thing to remove the policy????

    I have not been in Scouting very long, but from what I have learned so far, it’s about the boys learning to be self-sufficient, confident, and strong leaders. Our job is to help them on that path, but it is also to keep them safe! As long as we do that, what is the problem?

  51. No, no and no!!! … How clear can it be when God tells us through his Bible that homosexuality is WRONG… they already wormed their way into the Girl Scouts so that American Heritage Girls had to be formed, which Boy Scouts shows approval of (not the Girl Scouts anymore). If this is allowed, Boy Scouts will fall the same way of the Girls Scouts and a new organization will be formed to replace it. How sad is it that the world is coming to acceptance of this!

    • You are extremely closed minded, Laura. Common sense should tell you excluding homosexuals is wrong. You don’t need the Bible.

      • I SEE YOU ARE GAY.WHY DO YOU CARE HOW BOY SCOUTS ARE ORGINIZED.YOU WILL NEVER HAVE KIDS.AND HAVE NO SAY SO IN THIS.AS FOR JESUS.EVERT KNEE WILL BOW.THAT JESUS CHRIST IS LORD.

      • Calm down. Plenty of gay folks have kids. This isn’t 1965.

        My fiancé and I are exploring adoption, and I personally know of over a dozen gay/lesbian couples who’ve adopted, used in-vitro, or a surrogate to start families. I myself was a scout as a boy. Of course I was in the closet at the time, but nowadays there are courageous kids coming out earlier and earlier. Forcing them out of scouting because of something over which they have no control is mean-spirited. This is a welcome change!

      • I AGREE ERIC.I SEE A LOT OF THIS AND MANY ARE GOOD PARENTS.WELL MINDED AND RESPECTED. THE ISSUE HERE IS MOST IN THIS WORLD ,LOOK AT LEADERS ALREADY LIKE ARE THEY WEIRD AND GOING TO HURT THEIR KIDS.IN THE WRONG WAY.HAVE A GREAT WINTER ERIC,THE ADOPTION IS GREAT. I SEE A LOT OF KIDS THAT WOULD JUST WANT TO BE FED AND A PLACE TO STAY.IN THEIR LIFE.I SAY ADOPT 2 IF YOU CAN.YOU WILL SEE LIFE IN A DIFFERENT WAY.

    • The Girl Scouts are going strong, and the Boy Scouts will continue to do so if this goes through. I know lots of families, ours included, that haven’t wanted to put our sons into an organization that so hatefully bans certain types of people from participating. If the ban is lifted, we will be happy to participate.

      God also tells us in the Bible that divorce is wrong. Are there no divorced scout leaders? Gluttony, greed, covetousness… all wrong. Does the Boy Scouts screen its leaders to make sure they don’t fall prey to any of those sins? What about “love thy neighbor as thyself”? Wouldn’t that include gay people (you can treat them as equals without “condoning” homosexuality. As far as I can tell, every single anti-gay Boy Scout supporter on here is violating that one, and that came straight from Jesus’ lips. So from where I’m sitting, if the Boy Scouts were truly biblical, not a single one of you would be allowed to remain.

      Start loving and stop fearing.

      • Angie, everyone sins, the Bible tells us that. It’s in our nature due to the Fall of man. However, homosexuals choose to live a life of sin and can have a negative influence on families. (This article backs that statement: http://creation.com/arguments-against-homosexuality)

        Yes, Angie, the Bible tells us to love our neighbors. Thus, we should treat homosexuals with respect because they are children of God just like the rest of us. However, that does not mean that we have agree with their behavior or change our morals because of them.

        If you don’t want to put your kids in an organization that exercises its right to restrict membership, that is just fine. Both you and the BSA should be able to act freely in that regard.

      • no one is asking you to change your morals. you don’t have to become gay if this change is implemented. you simply can’t say that someone else can’t belong if they are gay.

      • No, it does not have a negative impact on families, and, no, they are not “choosing” it any more than you chose heterosexuality (or did you?). At any rate, I wasn’t saying we needed to “agree with their behavior or change our morals because of them.” I was saying they have a right to be part of BSA.

        What concerns me about what you wrote is that you are singling out homosexuality as somehow worthy of more concern than other sins. Homosexuality is only mentioned about 5 times in the Bible but has received disproportionate attention and condemnation. The rest of it is dedicated to the sins that ALL of us commit on a daily basis. My point was, if you are going to single out homosexuality, you have to rule out those other sins as well.

    • Laura, please understand that there are more people out there that are not you. In fact, the majority of scouting does not believe in the Christian God. What I wonder, is how you managed to pick up the part in the bible where God says (by the way, the bible was edited by man) that homosexuality is a sin but seemed to miss the parts where it is okay for me to sell my daughter into slavery. Or stone my children to death if they misbehave. Or the part where an Angel told a runaway slave to go back to her mistress and accept the punishment (genisis 16:8). My point here is that saying that the BSA should ban gays because of the Christian Bible is ludicrous. The Boy Scouts aim to promote good moral behaviour and not the morals of any one religion. Therefore, the BSA must promote their own set of morals and beliefs. I could be wrong, of course, but then again, if your charter feels that homosexuality is a sin, then they simply will not be allowed in your troop. Also, if your troop is against homosexuality, then there will be no need to worry about “what will happen at camp when there are other troops I dont know there?” Well your troop will just stay to itself and will not deal with them. The staff will mind their own business like they have always had. Also, most councils, if they believe homosexuality is wrong, will not hire a gay scout for a staff.

      On a more personal note, you Laura, yes you directly, are the reason I got into so many fights at camp and in school. I was one of those people defending gay scouts and my gay friends. I am straight and have nothing to lose with standing up to you and your kind of ignorance. Please just keep in mind that you are ruining another person’s life with your current ways of thinking.

      • The mjority believe in God,there are more than just Christians in Scouting – Jews, – we believe in God as well.

      • First of all, that “Christian God” is the same God that Muslims and Jews follow; it’s called the “Abrahamic Religions” for a reason. Second, the Holocaust was started by a christian man; the fact someone is christian does not make then “better” than anyone else.

        People need to get off their high horse about it. Gays are people too, and they will be part of society, so better get with the program and be a little gay about it yourself (to those closed minded idiots; gay also means happy. Will you look at that, you learn something new every day.).

      • there is no one religious point of view in BSA – there are Christian scouts, Buddhist scouts, Jewish scouts, Muslim scouts, etc

      • Nick, It’s not just a Biblical problem. Homosexuality is damaging to family life. Suicide is a problem with homosexuals. Children raised in a homosexual family get denied having a Male and Female parent, which sociologists agree is detrimental.(source: http://www.citizenlink.com/2010/06/17/30-years-of-research-that-tells-us-a-child-deserves-a-mother-and-a-father/) Lastly, many former homosexuals have admitted that it ruined their lives and left them feeling helpless.

      • um. suicide is a problem with homosexuals because of stigma and fear. so perhaps being more inclusive and accepting of others that are different from oneself will help prevent suicide?

        not all kids have a mother and a father. not all kids have two parent households even. MANY MANY MANY kids are raised by same sex couples and turn out juuuuuust fine. heard of Zach Wahls? Eagle scout raised by a lesbian couple. very thoughtful, intelligent, well adjusted young man. founder of scouts for equality.

    • I am a Christian. Find me a verse in the NEW TESTAMENT that explicitly condemns homosexuality. What’s that? There aren’t any? What’s that? Most of Christianity’s rules have been made up by jerks in power that were simply trying to crush things they didn’t like?

      Read your bible. Don’t you dare use my religion to fuel your blind crusade against things you’ve been tricked into hating. I can’t decide if I’m more angry or depressed that Christianity has been turned into an ignorant crusade against things people are uncomfortable with.

      How sad is it that Christians know nothing of their own religion?

      • Romans 1:26-27
        26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

    • oh. right. God tells you through his bible? is there anything that he tells you in his bible that you don’t actually pay attention to? how do you feel about slavery? shellfish? cotton/poly blends?

      thing is, BSA is NOT a christian organization. yes, a scout is reverent, but not necessarily christian. that said, there are even christian organizations that accept openly gay members, and even perform same sex marriages. so. the thing is. if you want to be in a unit that doesn’t allow gay individuals, so be it. but if gay individuals are interested in reaping the benefits that scouting has to offer, then who are you to tell them they can’t?

    • Laura -read the Bible please. The Bible also tells you to kill children who disobey their parents. Honest, its Leviticus 20:9. Now, do you follow that part of the Bible?
      Or the part that says to kill people who work on the Sabbath? That’s in Exodus 35:2.

      But you seem to ‘know’ the Bible, so I assume that you just choose to ignore parts that are inconvenient to you. Some Christian you are.

  52. For those wishing to quote the bible:

    The bible is one religious text of many. The BSA, in its infinite wisdom, supports spirituality in nearly all its forms and religious beliefs. It may surprise you, but there are some religions that: don’t use the bible, support or consider LGBT rights inconsequential to their doctrine, and/or don’t see the bible even if that use it as an absolute. I’m not going to go toe-to-toe with anyone when it comes to quoting the good book. But I do know that if you wish to do so, there is A LOT in Revelations and elsewhere that I’m sure you’d fail to do, perform and live up to in today’s world.

    Psst…that’s one translation – and it’s not even a good one.

  53. This makes me soooo happy!!! I think it is about time to allow LGBT be considered for leadership. Character is not determined by sexual orientation!

  54. That would be the worst mistake the BSA would ever make. It would show the money is more important than principal and standards and morality.

    • really? and here i’ve always thought they will avoid ending this policy because of the money they would lose from the LDS and catholic churches.

  55. The BSA, a once renowned bastion of wholesome American values is simply dumped into the trash bin of history…there is now no difference in this organization accepting today’s lack of moral direction and planned parenthood. The BSA caves to the liberal minority and simply gives way to the left-wing agenda. If this becomes reality…then so much for the Scout Oath and being morally straight! Also, myself or my family will no longer support the BSA, no longer donate to the BSA and no longer volunteer to the BSA. I will immediately remove my boys from an organization that now teaches them that being good, clean, morally straight Americans is no longer cool or publicly acceptable! Don’t forget, I also have a vote in the future of scouting and I won’t be the only one to say good-bye…this is the end of scouting because the lowly minority will never replace the lost conservative scouter and most scout volunteers are not liberal in their ideology. I am sure that Sir Lord Baden-Powell would agree with me. What a complete travesty from a gutless BSA leadership.

    • You are extremely closed minded, Laura and Donald. Common sense should tell you excluding homosexuals is wrong. You don’t need the Bible.

      • There are no official substantive references or sources you could point to that would give your statement any weight. Even the latest biography by Tim Jeal is unclear as to the historical certainty of his orientation. Jeal himself concedes this.

    • Tom I think scouting is for all it teaches people about being a moral citizen and should not dictate about peoples sexuality it is fundamently about being honest about yourself and those around and how you would expected to be treated.
      ps you cannot add a sir to a lord BP’s correct title is Lord Baden Powell of Gilwell and if you ever get the chance you should go to Gilwell Park his home its a Scout activty centre for all to use wether you are Straight or not

  56. As an Eagle Scout myself, I applaud Scouts for taking this first step towards a more inclusive policy. My troop was sponsored by a secular group. I can appreciate that troops with religious sponsors might have different opinions. There are religions to welcome and accept homosexuals, so a policy that would allow secular sponsors or more inclusive religious sponsors to adopt policies that are right for them seems like a good idea.

    • Yeah. Who’s allowed to tent with who? How is the buddy system going to work now (in Venturing boys and girls can not be each others buddy). How is 2 deep leadership going to work? Again, in Venturing, if I have girls I have to have a female leader and the same with boys needing a male leader. How does this work if you introduce gay youth, or a “transgendered” youth? Are we going to lift the rule on males and females sharing tents and shower areas? This will be a nightmare.

      • Yes, Vivienne, they are the same gender. However, many, if not most of hetero boys would not feel comfortable tenting with a homosexual boy.

      • Then they can be in a unit that does not allow homosexuals that is chartered by your church.. where the others that are not going to care, can now be chartered by the UU church that does allow homosexuals..

        Simple.. no real problems..

      • So two gay youth of the same gender that are “just friends” can tent together because somehow they are more responsible and have more self control than a straight young male and female who are “just friends” but are not allowed to tent together? How is this equal or fair?

  59. This will spawn the Heritage Boys equivalent of the Heritage Girls and take the numbers in the BSA down dramatically. I do not see the LDS Church falling in line with this move. The BSA will dry up in 5 years.

    • I hope not, but if this membership change does come to pass I can’t say the BSA didn’t ask for it.

    • This has not been finalized yet. And I think it will only happen if the LDS Church agrees to it.

    • units chartered to LDS wards will not have to make any changes – this will be a unit by unit decision, from what I understand

      • Until the lawsuits start flying. What National is proposing is shifting the legal battle down to the CO’s.

    • I think it will be the LDS Church that will be marginalized. It will be every unit’s choice whether to accept leaders and youth based on their character and abilities, not their sexual orientation or preferences. If their behavior suggests that they pose a danger to youth, they will be removed from the program. If the LDS decides they cannot abide a 21st Century BSA policy of inclusion, perhaps it’s time they develop a new program for their youth.

  60. As a Scout Master this change in position may be the death of scouting as we know it. Homosexual acts are sin ! You can say they are not but they still are. The Boy Scouts have always called their members to walk through life at a higher standard to follow the scout oath and law. This change in position will undermine that standard.

    • Well, fortunately, homosexual acts will not be happening in Boy Scouts, so you don’t have to worry about that. At any rate, isn’t divorce a sin? Gluttony? Greed? A prideful heart? Does the Boy Scouts exclude leaders who have those qualities? Stop focusing only on one sin.

      • Trenton, Please quote me book, chapter, and verse of where Jesus condemned homosexuals. You won’t find a single one.

        Now if you do want to follow the WWJD principles, why not do some good instead of condemning others.

        Now please pull the plank out of your eye before trying to remove the sty in mine.

      • Rob I can tell you that the Old Testament testifys that homosexuality is a sin along with the New Testament and you can’t separate the two Testaments from each other. Rob please read the whole Bible I would not want to deprive you of finding out for yourself if the Bible is true or not. I am not condemning anyone as no man can take on this mantle save Jesus Christ. All men will have to stand before the bar of Jehovah and be judged there is no way around it. Trenton

      • so you want to exclude all sinners from scouts equally? ok then. i suppose we are all out according to christian doctrine?

    • so we should exlude all sinners from scouts? ok. noted. so how did you or i or anyone else for that matter get in? i recall something the bible said about judging not… can you finish that for me? i don’t recall how it ends…

  61. I understand that the Scouting movement in Great Britain caved recently. That is no consolation whatsoever. We must pray and pray hard.

  62. What a bunch of GUTLESS INDIVIDUALS we have in Texas. For the past five years the executive committee has been looking for a way to incorporate the homosexual/pedifile lifestyle into scouting. No longer will a normal lifestyle be safe from those who’s desire is to pervert our youth. The fact that one organization can prohibit an individual from joining does not protect their scouts from the adults or youths of another troop. Imagine the sexual attacks that WILL take place in the woods at summer camp or jamboree’s. When this happens who will be at fault? Who will be accountable and charged for such act? Why should they? You know that type of lifestyle we will be forced to accept. Wayne Brock,the new scout chief has stated that he will bring scouting in America more into the mainstream of scouting around the world. Canada already has moved to allow homosexuals. In England, psychiatrists have stated that pedifilia is a normal lifestyle and is looking to have it accepted into the mainstream. WAYNE BROCK, you need to resign. Your agenda is in no way a positive step in helping our scouts grow to be responsible individuals. Any lazy person can turn a blind eye to what anyone does and accept anything. At least until those new standards affect them. Then it is too late. To take a stand and combat evil standards is difficult. The Integrity necessary to do so comes over a long period of time through much diligence and hard work. What message are you, WAYNE BROCK, sending about ME because I will not accept your pervsive attitude? Does that, WAYNE BROCK, make you better than Me? Recreational Pot is legal in some states. Is that for okay with you WAYNE BROCK? Prostitution is legal. Is that okay with you WAYNE BROCK? All the finances spent to defend The Boy Scouts of America against those who demanded “THE FILES”. What a fraud, a rouse to cover up WAYNE BROCK”S actions. There may be many members on the EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, but WAYNE BROCK is the chief and is solely responsible to enact on their behalf. I stated in a Woodbadge Course that if Texas changes any standard, such as this, that The Boy Scouts of America will no longer be The Boy Scouts of America. Bryan, I may have wrongly stated that in 2012 there was a forum on accepting HOMOSEXUALS into scouting. Perhaps It was in a different forum, but I wish I wasn’t right when I stated that this would happen and was ridiculed but many whose said it wouldn’t happen or that it is time. The GOD that will be taken out of scouting will hold you, WAYNE BROCK, and the committee accountable. Don’t accept my words and standards? How intollerant of you.

    • You need to separate sexual orientation from pediphelia. No one has ever claimed that pediphelia is acceptable and your believe that they are on in the same reveals that you are not giving this any real thought. You may disagree with the lifestyles of the LGBT community but don’t put them in the same camp as pediphiles. A pediphile selects individuals based on their age and their ability to dominate.
      Also, in my experience, many of those who so strongly and vocally vilify gays are secretly that way themselves but are conflicted in dealing with it, so they lash out at those who are open.

      • If your so ignorant that you think your cute comment is credible, laugh when your child, if you are privelidged to have them, or a child of an aquaintence comes and tells that they were assaulted. Tell them that it is okay since they are married. I make no apologies for my statement. Should have said more.

      • The BSA is NOT letting pediphiles in. No one has ever said that, well, except you. You need to understand the terms. It is ignorance of this type that is killing our nation. I would not want my child being mentored by someone who is so poorly informed as you. What are you teaching the youth in your unit? Maybe you should reconsider if you are fit as a leader if you cannot separate such concepts.
        If Mike Jr were gay or his kids, would you have kicked them out of scouting? or out of your house?

      • Sonny boy, as my sons baseball coach, and the best on base player I had, I sat him, and two of his team mates, for not doing their school work. I pulled my oldest daughter off the field during a game when she yelled at me from the field and told me to shut up after she struck out. I have not, nor I do today tolerate anyone of my scouts who, in any way, violates the Scout Law, Oath, Promise and Slogan. Pedifiles will have to be allowed. BSA wouldn’t want to discriminate against them. As for your question, you bet I would have dismissed him from scouts. If any of my grandkids, of which there are 8, decides to follow that perverted lifestyle, I will do all I can to protect my other grandkids from them. Too bad you don’t have the same desire to protect others.

      • the difference here, Mike, is that pedophiles are excluding for committing crimes. homosexuality is not a crime. if a homosexual commits pedophilia then of course, he would be excluded, yes, and rightfully so. homosexuality DOES NOT equal pedophilia. I am certainly glad that my son has not had a mentor like you to teach him how to hate.

      • First, I probably could be your father. Do you have now or ever had any gay scouts in your unit? My guess is that you have had many and many of your best scouts who dropped out of the program did so because of the discrimination policy. Since a scout is honest, he must leave if he thinks he is gay. Human sexuality is not simply fully gay or fully straight, it is a continuum. In adolescence, youth are trying to figure these things out. And by your argument, you would throw out all of the scouts who ever think they are gay. This would be (and is) a tragedy.
        You should realize that there is a very real possibility that a soon-to-be gay scout (but not out of the closet) will be spending the night alone in a tent with your son. The ony way to protect yourself against them is to never go out of the house, but then if you have two sons, the other might be gay too.

        The other point, is why would the BSA have to allow pediphiles? I have been involved in scouting for almost 50 years and at the council level have had to deal with issues with pediphiles and child pornographers. I have also known many a scout who has eventually come out. Believe me, these are all very different things. I do not know of any gay (ex-)scout to whom I would not want trust with my son or grandson. But there is a large number of ‘heterosexual’ scouters who even I feel uncomfortable around (and several of them, over the years, have crossed the line into pediphelia or child pornography).
        If you have access to the BSA ‘secret’ file list, many of the individuals who were rejected due to molestation were ‘happily married’ men.

      • i certainly do not condone pedophilia and do not find it amusing that children are abused. my point is that it is false to say that pedophiles are all gay. it is just as wrong if the pedophile in question is married to a woman. most male pedophiles are married. and their victims are their own children.

  64. It is Too Bad that National is pushing the Front Lines of this battle to our back yards, as if we don’t have to stand strong on this subject, now we stand Alone! Thanks National !
    I STILL believe “GOD SAID IT, I BELEVE IT, THAT SETTLES IT”
    R.I.P. BSA Values.

    • Nice right? We’ve supported them and their policies for years now they duck and abandon those supporters. Of course they will want our support when they come begging for FOS donations.

  65. In a matter of time this will go down hill! Slippery slope! It happens all the time! DO NOT do this! There will be a split in the BSA! The issue will then be more about the money being lost because of the mass exodus (See how the GSA is all up in arms due to so many leaving for AHG). This decision HAS to be tied to money!The AT&T CEO and E&Y guys obviously have a lot of pull related to their wallets. In this world it is the Golden Rule! The ones with the Gold make the rules. So , if BSA decided to go this way, and BSA becomes fractured due to this decision, they will hurt for money. That will then open them up further to moral decline to get more members. And do you think the people wanting this to happen will stop at this give in? NOPE – expect it to get worse with more and more pressure! DO NOT MAKE THIS VERY VERY BAD DECISION! Please kick the AT&T and E&Y guys out! Stand up for the morals that started and has kept the BSA strong!

    • MIKE,IF THEIR IS ANY ONE STATMNET I DON T SEE ON THESE POST,IS THEIR ARE VERY FEW IN THIS WORLD THAT WANT TO TAKE THE TIME TO VOLINTEER AND TAKE TIME TO BE PART OF SCOUTS.I WAS A VOLINTEER FOR 6 YEARS.IT TAKES MONEY ALONG WITH TIME AND A PERSON THAT WANTS TO HELP OUT.I WORKED WITH KIDS FOR 20 YEARS.AND IN THE LAST 3 I HAVE FOUND THEIR IS A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD THAT HATE KIDS,DON T WANT KIDS.AND DON T WANT TO BE AROUND THEM.I THINK THIS IS WHY SCOUTS ARE WANTING TO CHANGE SO THEIR WILL BE MORE HELP AND VOLINTEERS .TO MAKE THINGS WORK.

  68. Oh, and frowny faces and cries of despair and rounds of applause and gasps or surprise and quotes from the bible/koran/talmud/constitution and of course, thanking god (or God) on both sides of the issue.

  69. Do it, and I’m gone. Along with everyone in my family.

  70. It will be the beginning of the end of scouts as we know. I pray that they don’t change it. Can’t ANY organization withstand the progressive, liberal agenda(s)? Stand with God, stand strong.

    Sent from my iPhone

    • No because the gay community insists to force themselves into every facet of our lives and will bully and sue anyone who doesn’t capitulate. They are a tiny minority of our country but thanks to the liberal media have tons of voice.

      So while they can say they despise those who don’t agree with their lifestyle, if we say the same about theirs we are accused of being hate filled bigots.

      • Rather than teaching our youth catch-all tolerance, we need to start teaching them moral principal, critical reasoning and sound judgment. They can take it from there.

        Tolerance isn’t even a virtue, although it’s as close as “progressive” secularists have to a virtue. It’s merely a reaction, and can be either good or bad depending on what is being tolerated.

      • I AGREE JO,MTV AND OTHER NETWORKS PUT THE TRASH ON CABLE LIKE ITS MAKEING ICE CREAM ONA SUMMER DAY.I LOVE YOUR COMMENTS WELL WRITTEN.

      • Because the intolerant gay community will not be happy until they force themselves into every aspect of our lives. They obviously don’t have the resources or interest in starting their own organization, they want to force their way into one. For a group that is trying to push tolerance for anything they are sure intolerant of anyone that doesn’t agree with them.

      • Jo, I have been reading your comments all over here, and one theme is clear: you somehow feel like you are the aggrieved minority. I can appreciate, although I don’t share, your feeling that something that used to be condemned is now more openly tolerated, but you need to look past your feelings and do some good critical thinking here. Gay people are simply asking to be treated like anyone else. That is hardly “forcing themselves into every area of our lives.” They are not forcing you to be gay, they aren’t asking for special favors, just not to be discriminated against. Your comments about tolerance don’t make sense: people asking for tolerance are usually not going to be “tolerant” of the intolerant. That would be intellectual suicide. It seems you have a deep desire to get away from gay people… but they are around you everywhere. Many have spent years in the closet but are tired of that. They shouldn’t have to live in the shadows because people like you don’t feel comfortable around them. They are US citizens just like us, and human beings worthy of respect and dignity. You’ve made some other comments on here that show you are capable of looking at things from more than just one angle; I hope that you will carefully consider what I have said and also consider that this might be a great chance for you to experience how being around gay people ISN’T so awful.

      • How about an organization just for white people? Or just for brunette people? How about for people who are *just exactly like us* ? That way, we don’t ever have to be challenged to grow and accept people who are different, and we don’t ever have to have our prejudices challenged. Exclusion: yay!!!

  71. I have been involved with scouting since 1968, Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts and Adult scout leader. if this passes I and my family will be finished and so will scouting. If I want to belong to a group of LGBT, I would join them. And if the national policy changes, the rest will have to follow, watch and see if you do not think so.

    • from what I understand, your unit would NOT be forced to change its policy and could keep gays out. other units could make different decisions.

      • But without the help and support of the BSA, smaller chartered organizations will be helpless to the onslaught and attacks they will receive for daring to have an opinion and standard supported by them and their units members.

    • I am so glad I was never a part of your Pack/Troop – a group that teaches narrow mindedness and bigotry. Either it lacked quality leadership, or you wasted your time in Scouts, because you failed to learn the real values of Scouting.

      Scouting is about raising future leaders, leaders who will be fair and open minded in their professional dealings. It is not about teaching them to be bigots, homosexuals, etc. So to label the future of Scouting as being a “group of LGBT” is far from the purpose of this great organization.

      In my 45+ years of Scouting, I have never heard of a discussion about sex or a fellow Scout or leader’s sexual orientation. It simply has no place in a Scout function. In fact, Scouting does not teach anything about sexuality, dating, or anything of this sort. If you and your fellow leaders have had such a conversation with your youth within a Scouting event, I forsee your name appearing on the banned leader list. Leave the preachings of sexual morality to the church, as it has no purpose in a Troop meeting.

  72. Its a slippery slope you tread on when an organization based on moral foundation, begins to waiver in its beliefs, especially when it is to a minority that will not be satisfied until its ideals are imposed upon everyone. The Boy Scouts of America should not waiver. Its not about sexual orientation. Its about the ideals of Scouting. It sounds like the Boy Scouts of America (National) are looking to absolve themselves of the responsibility of upholding those ideals. With that being said.

    Why change the Boy Scouts of America? Make your own Gay Scouts, Rainbow Scouts, Happy Scouts, BSGay, or whatever. Theres nothing stopping anyone from getting together and forming another organization especially if the beliefs of the current organization are not in line with your beliefs. For a group of people who are so secure in who they are and in what they believe it sure sounds like they rely on infringing their beliefs on others to make them feel better about themselves. This is America! do your own thing, go your own way, exercise your freedom! Many people paid good blood for it!

  73. I’ve served as a volunteer leader for over thirty years and I wholeheartedly support the change of policy. I have worked with gay Scouters and gay Scouts (with a number of Eagle Scouts among them) through the years. I can tell you, in one word, the difference between them and heterosexual Scouts and Scouters – nothing.

      • There are a lot of gay Eagle Scouts. But we have no idea how many, nor should we care. They satisfied the requirements for Eagle. They simply kept quiet about their sexuality while in scouting.

      • They are not true Eagle Scouts. They kept quiet going against being morally stright and trustworthy!

      • the policy is only 30 years old. what about those that earned the rank prior to that? what about boys that started scouts when they were 6 years old in the first grade, and earned their eagle prior to realizing that they were gay? i know of several boys in my district that recently earned their eagle at the age of 14. many men don’t realize that they are gay until much later in life. well into adulthood even. this is not black and white.

      • So they earned their Eagle by deception. That’s a great quality to promote. Hey Scouts, if you don’t like the rules feel free to lie and deceive your way around them. Its okay. Seriously?

      • no… the idea that an eagle earned by a gay scout was done so dishonestly is disingenuous. boys earn their eagle as early as age 14. it is very common for people to not realize that they are gay until they are much older. late teens, early twenties, even later.

        also… this official policy is only 30 years old. how many eagles were earned prior to that?

      • Do you really think that a 14-15 year old boy knows what he really is? He may not come to realize this until he’s an adult. So do you think he is lying and deceiving if he has not yet reached full adolescence?
        Sexuality has no place in scouting. I would not tolerate it in my troop between any combination of genders. We should not be asking a scout to decide now what his orientation is. But then you’ve already indicated that I am “intolerant and gay loving”. I’m glad you were never one of my son’s or grandson’s leaders.

    • Anyone who joined Scouting and lied about their sexual orientation that the BSA has previously made quite clear is not living up to the standards of the oath and law and practiced lying and deception, not qualities our Scouters should have. If they lied or deceived on any other issue people would be up in arms…

  74. Its a slippery slope you tread on when an organization based on moral foundation, begins to waiver in its beliefs, especially when it is to a minority that will not be satisfied until its ideals are imposed upon everyone. The Boy Scouts of America should not waiver. Sadly It sounds like the Boy Scouts of America are looking to absolve themselves of the responsibility of upholding those ideals. With that being said.

    Why change the Boy Scouts of America? Make your own Scouts, theres nothing stopping anyone from getting together and forming another organization especially if the beliefs of the current organization are not in line with your beliefs. This is America! do your own thing, go your own way, exercise your freedom! Many people paid good blood for it!

  75. Royal Rangers does not and will not accept homosexuals. Just call any Assemblies of God Church and tell them you want to be a commander. They will gladly accept you and your boys. Homosexuality is wrong and always will be wrong. Homosexuals can start their own Gas Scouts of America and make Obama their honorary president.

  76. Congratulations and Kudos to the Executive Board of the BSA. Giving the Chartered Organizations the option to determine certain membership standards in their units makes perfect sense. Let’s face it, there are gay scout leaders in every district in every council in the BSA, and they are great leaders, teaching and emulating great values, and they are Gay!. The ignorant rant that homosexuals are also pedophiles is nothing more than uneducated tripe.

    The BSA needs to remain relevant in TODAY’s society, not languish in the 50’s. This is the best way they can do that. By allowing chartered partners to hold onto their own exclusionary practices the church (LDS or others) don’t have to allow gays to serve as leaders, but it allows those that want to serve our youth, and be out, to do so in more tolerant units. It allows them to be trustworthy. There are units now that allow gay leaders, they just don’t point them out to the council leadership for expulsion as some would like.

    This is a huge step in the absolute right direction.

  77. I suspect that many of the folks who are lamenting this possible change of policy, are the same folks who are complaining about mandates from big government in Washington. They would tell you that people on the local level know what’s best for them and how dare our leaders in Washington tell them what to do. In this case, I happen to agree with them. I think in scouting, people on the local level know what’s best for their own children and should have the right to select their own membership.
    Do people really think they were going to do something to hurt our own children? If God loves children and fools, I’m in good company!

  78. I suppose we’ll see who really cares about youth and who cares about rhetoric. I’m hoping that most chartered organizations will basically continue with business as usual regardless of the outcome, so scouts can go to camp, work on advancement, and develop their leadership skills.

    If National does change their policy, I encourage all chartered organizations to simply move on as before. Don’t make the gay policy an issue one way or another until it becomes an issue. Wait till you have a parent leader or a youth member whose orientation makes it an issue, and then decide if you want to throw the person out.

    • Once national changes the ACLU will be able to force all units to allow gay. Don’t think it won’t happen!

      • Sadly you are right. With National wiping its hands of it and not helping support and defend their chartered “partners” they will be forced to capitulate. I’ve already talked to one COR who is recommending that his units find a new chartered organization because though he and the officers of his organization disagree with the proposed change there is no way they can defend it or make an official stance against it due to political correctness stupidity. They are willing to donate money and resources to help and continue supporting the unit financially but will not charter any more umits.

  80. Doesn’t the BSA allow boys with other birth defects into scouting? If so, why not homosexuality? The real tragedy is that no one seems to be searching for a cure for this defect. It’s simple biology, sexual intercourse is for procreation, not simply for pleasure. As humans we’ve taken it to some extremely perverse levels, but sex between humans is for reproducing our species. Men cannot have a child together, and neither can two women, period. If so, we would be asexual creatures.

    Back to scouting, it’s almost dead anyway because they have watered down the programs to a point that they are no longer effective. All in the name of “safety”. (which really only means National absolving themselves of all liability)

    • TM, There is no cure for terminal stupidity either.
      G/L couples do not necessarily get or stay together because of sex any more than heterosexual couples do. If that were the case, most married couples would be separated.

    • Oh my goodness, the ignorance. Sex is not just for procreation. If it were, then I guess seniors should divorce, since they can’t produce children anymore? And people who can’t physically have children (or don’t want any) should also divorce?

      And if homosexuality is a choice…. well, why don’t you tell me the story of when you chose heterosexuality.

  81. Morally straight. I say it every week at the scout meeting with the scouts and the other leaders. Those two words have no other meanings. Morals are based on religious tenants, not humanistic tenants. Our charter organization pulled out of the national denominational church conference because of their stance towards homosexuality. Leaving this up to each individual chartered scout troop would open this up to multiple lawsuits because of the national organizations’ stance towards allowing those of “varying sexual orientation” entry to the Boy Scouts of America. I, along with my family, would never accept this policy change in scouting.

    • Error, nice having you and don’t let the screen door hit you on the way out. We don’t need to teach the youth in our charge bigotry and hatred. But what will you do if your son comes to you and tells you he’s gay? Kick him out of the house? Nice family values.

      • Oh yeah look at your own intolerance. Someone disagrees with you and you tell them to leave. Typical intolerant pro gay agenda tactics.

        I’ll bet you support the gay leaders and “Eagle Scouts” who got their positions and ranks by lying and deception. Are these the “nice family values” you have in your home, lie and deceive others if you don’t like the rules?

      • You seem to be a sad, sad person. It is unfortunate that we have people such as you in positions of authority. First, Error claimed he would not accept this policy and if he would not accept it, then he’d be leaving right? I thanked him for his service and offered him the door. I don’t belive that the BSA movement has any place for bigots or the ignorant. I am old enough to remember when my troop would not allow blacks to join. Would you reject a scout because he’d black? This is no different.
        And as far as family values, you seem to be short of them yourself. As you accuse me of encouraging lying and deceit. With Error, I simply asked him the question of what he’d do.
        If my son came to me and announced he was gay, I would accept it, maybe I’d not be happy, but I’d accept it.

      • If my son came out to me I would love him just the same. However I would not let him stay in Scouts because teaching my son to lie and deceive people is wrong. There would be plenty of other organizations that would welcome him.

    • Morals are not just about sexuality. They are about honestly, loyalty, integrity, etc. As well as things like not lying, not stealing, etc. And humanistic tenants usually contain those as well.

    • If this happens, I as a Scoutmaster will resign. I am glad my 2 son made Eagle Scout before the BSA falls apart.

  82. The policy of letting each chartered organization decide makes so much sense. Especially given that the BSA is open to all religions, and religions have differing views.

    My only thought on this is – why didn’t the BSA do this ten years ago?

  83. Wow, I can hardly believe the comments here. One would think we were in the 18th century full of religious elitists. No one cares who you hate. Boy Scouts has never been about how to date girls. It’s about teaching young men to be leaders in the free world. And personally, this is the best route for the BSA to take. Leave it up to the chartered organizations. If you want a group full of haters, fine, have your group. If you want a group full of boys who show all the merits of the scout law, have that group too, good. There was a time when African-Americans couldn’t be in the same troop as whites. But people realized it was wrong and fixed it. This isn’t the end of boy scouting, it’s a new chapter to something larger and better.

  84. What a monumental cave-in on the national level, coupled with a nightmare on the local level. Now one of the things prospective Scouts and families will have to consider, among all the others, when considering Troops is whether the chartering organization allows gays to join. Can’t wait to see how this will affect facilities and accommodations at Jamborees.

  85. I joined BSA because they don’t allow Gays and Lesbians join! Where can I go that the “Gay Agenda” isn’t shoved down my throat and I can teach my children my values and beliefs without being beaten up!

    • I AGREE,HIREING LAWS AND OTHER THINGS ALLWAYS PLAY INTO THESE ISSUES.THE NUMBER OF PE TEACHERS THIS WAY IS WAY TO MANY .THEY WANT TO BE GAY.BUT THEY WANT TO TAKE A JOB.WITH KIDS AND KIDS HAFT TO KNOW WHAT WAY THEY ARE.THIS IS SICK IN ITSELF.THE MAIN THING IN THE ISSUE IS .ABOUT THE SAME TIME NEXT YEAR WHAT WILL THEY NEED TO CHANGE.

      • That was an ignorant and typical intolerant pro gay comment. If anyone doesn’t agree with your point of view you’ll label them and insult them which makes you just as intolerant and bigoted.

        On a related note, how do you know that the poster wasn’t from an African American family before suggesting that they join the KKK. You really owe them an apology, that was a disgusting thing to say and only shows how truly intolerant you are. You should be ashamed.

      • Yeah I figured you would shrug it off and not worry about it. The fact that you can’t apologize for suggesting that someone you don’t agree with join the KKK says a lot about your lack of character.

      • Well you missed the comment where I stated that I’m sorry if my comment was offensive. I also find it offensive that people would seek to exclude gay kids from scouts.

      • for the record:
        beth
        January 29, 2013 @ 8:53 am
        i’ve dished out filth because i am in favor of allowing LGBT individuals into scouting? my KKK comment was extreme, yes, but it is a hate group. i simply said if someone wants to be part of a hate group, that is a valid option. honestly, though, if that offended someone, i’m sorry for that.

  86. Actually, this simply follows the model we already use for religious standards imposed by units. Scouting is a program that is chartered to community or religious organization to provide to their youth, and, IF THEY WISH, the youth of their community.

    Thus, a units chartered organization already has the right to impose its own membership requirements on and leaders, as well as BSA’s. Some units already restrict membership to only youth belonging to the sponsoring church. When that occurs, it’s the district’s obligation to make sure there is another unit nearby for youth that don’t fit that unit’s criteria.

    Since some churches already accept that homosexual members meet the tenets of their faith, and some do not, it makes sense that they will now each get to establish membership requirements for their own particular units. It’s also not a big deal as sex education is NOT a mission of BSA and the YPP already protects kids from predators of all orientations.

    And, once again, your own personal religious views have no universal place in Scouting, just as your personal political ones do not either.

  87. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion & to make their own choices regarding membership. I am Christian yet the church denomination I belong do does not discriminate against the LGBT community. BSA is tolerant of other religions, but not of differences within the Christian community? From what I read no charter organization would be forced to accept member, so belong to a troop in a charter organization that aligns itself with your beliefs. Be true to your principles & allow me to be true to mine.

  88. I think we can handle this with maturity, and find a way to make it work for us all. Remember. We are looking at the concept of Charter Organization Choice, not forcing inclusion on all. So, if, for religious reasons, your charter Org. sees it as immoral behavior to include folks who are gay, then you will be able to do so. And if, your charter organization sees it as immoral to exclude, then you will have the freedom to be inclusive. It would be great, if as Americans, we could recognize that we have people from many different religions in scouting, not just those who see homosexuality as immoral. Fortunately, we live in a country where no one religious group is allowed to force its particular take on morality on the rest of the country. We know what happens when that is legally possible. Not good.
    I know that for some of you reading what I have written, your religious belief system teaches you to see what I have written as immoral. This makes me incredibly sad. I’m involved in scouting because I believe in helping develop great citizens who are effective and involved leaders in a pluralistic society. I want that for as many youth as is possible. Charter organization choice is the most elegant (albeit imperfect) solution to this issue. I’m 100% behind it. There will be difficulties to work out, but we’re scouts. We know how to solve difficult challenges, especially if we live the scout oath and law, keeping in mind that no single religion gets to tell us all what Duty to God, Morally Straight and Reverent means. Our country was founded, in part, by people who wanted to be able to practice their religion in a way that worked for them, and not have the religious believes of others imposed upon them. The solution of charter organization choice seems to be about as American as could be.

  89. Let’s see We begin by saying “To do my best to do my duty to God…..” and we finish with “keep myself morally straight”. I don’t hear anything about hate in that. As adults we are to provide as safe an environment as we can to provide young boys the opportunity to build that relationship with God and others. Mistakes have been made, but the process works, the principle is clear, and the system is as good as we can make it based on what have learned over time. This is not the time to cave. Scouting works as long as we adhere to Scouting principles. Look at what happened when the Girl Scouts caved.

    • That part of the scout oath is referring to having good morals, and as an adult you of all people should be accepting and understanding, What if you son/daughter went right up to you and said “Dad I’m Gay” what would you do?

      • I’d give him a big hug and let him know that I love him. That statement wouldn’t change my feelings about my son.

      • I would obviously support him but he would have to pull out h our of Scouts because doing anything else would be teaching him that lying and deception are perfectly okay.

  90. Hello All

    I am a youth Life Scout, Brotherhood OA member, and someone who finds this current policy on sexual orientation pretty down right stupid. For those who brought up the bible earlier, You might want to realize that the scout law say “Reverent” not christian. Rev·er·ent [rev-er-uhnt, rev-ruhnt]
    feeling, exhibiting, or characterized by reverence; deeply respectful: a reverent greeting,Webster Dictionary.

    The whole idea of scouting is to make the youth of the world learn valuable life skills and have fun.

    AND 90% of the molestation cases around youth are done by STRAIGHT Married men in there mid 30-40, who just aren’t getting it from there wife anymore.

    Yours Truly

    A Youth Scout That Cares

    • Please quote/cite sources when you throw out statistics. Additionally I would question sources that have little grasp on English. Their, not “there mid 30-40”

      • So now we have taken to correcting grammar and spelling of a youth who is brave enough to say what he feels. I, for one, am very happy that he felt strongly enough about his convictions to post knowing he was going against the grain. I think it says a lot about what the program has done for him already. Keep on standing up for your beliefs, Youth!

  91. The biggest concern I have is the National office hanging their CO’s out to dry. What resources will they provide for the stream of lawsuits that will be filled against their member organizations. How will National protect against endangerment and libility lawsuits? How will they aim to keep their membership if the LDS Church, Evangelicals, Protestants, and Catholics which comprise well over 60 percent of Charter Organizations and over 75% of youth and adult membership decide to leave? We all know this is not the end. The LGBT Community will not stop until they get their way in every organization public and private in the U.S. . Lord Baden Powell founded the Boy Scouts on the tenants of the Scout Oath and Scout Law. Duty to God and Country. Trustworthy, reverent, and clean. These are the fundamentals of what makes Scouting great. They have remained unchanged until 2013 when all of that is out the window. Now the National Board wants to turn over the organizations standards and values to those who lie to God, are not clean, and have different morals. This is not about civil rights it is about the minority placing in jeopardy the majority. National and two board members have allowed the entire BSA to be hijacked. The SCOTUS affirmed the BSA’s ability to make its own rules. There is no inalienable right to belong to a private organization. The LGBT Community is more than free to start their own organization. This is a Pandora’s Box the BSA should leave closed.

  93. For the last 34 years, I have been Scoutmaster of a community troop chartered to a Reform Synagogue. None of our Scouts or leaders are members of the synagogue. The synagogue charters the troop as a community service.

    If you look at the Union for Reform Judaism statement of “What is Reform Judaism?” at http://urj.org/about/reform/whatisreform/ it states:
    •Reform Jews are committed to the principle of inclusion, not exclusion. Since 1978 the Reform Movement has been reaching out to Jews-by-choice and interfaith families, encouraging them to embrace Judaism. Reform Jews consider children to be Jewish if they are the child of a Jewish father or mother, so long as the child is raised as a Jew.
    •Reform Jews are committed to the absolute equality of women in all areas of Jewish life. We were the first movement to ordain women rabbis, invest women cantors and elect women presidents of our synagogues.
    •Reform Jews are also committed to the full participation of gays and lesbians in synagogue life as well as society at large.

    Different religions definitely have different positions on the sexual orientation issue. Reform Judaism believes in inclusiveness.

    The Union for Reform Judaism has told synagogues they should not charter Boy Scout troops because of BSA’s sexual orientation policy. However, our chartered partner has stuck with our troop and crew while working within BSA to try to get BSA’s sexual orientation policy changed so they can adopt rules for our troop and crew consistent with their religion. They are not asking other chartered partners to do the same. However, they definitely would endorse a policy in which “the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.”

    • this is a perfect example of why this current policy is actually antithetical the the values that are supposedly upheld in scouting.

      also a perfect illustration of why the proposed new policy makes absolute sense.

      • Because you are obviously a model of tolerance, right? Oh wait, no you are not you suggest that people who disagree with you go join hate groups…

      • yes, i suggested that a person that was looking for a group that can continue to practice bigotry join a group that practices bigotry. do you have anything else to say? move on already…

      • was it you that also continued to state that intolerance of intolerance is intolerant? i’m getting dizzy trying to sort that out. i’m actually a pretty tolerant individual.

      • Unless someone mentions their religious beliefs or has an opinion that differs from yours then you ridicule and mock them.

  94. A scout is … Trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent … The law applies to us all, adults and youth members. I would respectfully suggest that all those who have made comments here today ask themselves if their comment meets these standards. There is a little too much vitriol here.

  95. If this hapoens the nembership will tumble and boy scouts will not longer be Boy Scouts anymore because they will lose their identity. Kindly we need to protect our children’s inosense. God loves all children no matter what, but it makes Him sad when we behave in an inappropriate manner. It is sad because it affects all the children involved in scouts. Very sad indeed. Let the children be children and do not steal their inosense with agendas of few people.

    “O holy protector of the holy family, protect us children of the Lord Jesus Christ; keep far from us the errors and evils which corrupt the world; assist us from Heaven in our struggles against the powers of darkness. And as you once protected the Divine Child from the cruel edict of Herod, now defend the Church and and keep it safe from all dangers and threats. Spread over all of us your holy patronage so that by following your example and aided by your spiritual guidance, we may all aspire to a virtuous life, look to a holy death, and secure for ourselves the blessing of eternal happiness in Heaven. “

  96. I have no problem with people being gay, it’s their choice…their sin. I have sins of my own to deal with. What I do have is a problem with is what opening this door in GSA did to that program. It brought in many gay women trying to push their agenda on the program at hand and brought about a huge change. It also became a hotbed of controversy that affected the girls that the program served. It also brought in gender-confused boys and exposed young children to issues and ideas that the majority of parents bringing their girls to scouting did not sign up for.
    I have 3 young boys in BSA. They have been a part of the program since my oldest was 7 years old (my youngest were 4). We have been a part of the program for the past 7 years as parents, as leaders and as supporters. Yes, we are Christian, we believe that homosexuality is a sin, so is divorce, gluttony, greed, etc…. We have same-sex parents in our group. They are good parents, they have good kids. I cannot judge one sin as worse than another. Herein lies my problem. At ages when I a beginning discussions with my sons about sexuality I will be forced to have discussion about homosexuality?! In my opinion (my values, beliefs) I cannot teach my child to be upright if I must constantly be surrounded by those who ‘wallow’ in sinfulness and try to discredit my vow of HOLY matrimony by forcing upon me a PC version of marriage? I am sorry, but I am disappointed by the BSA’s possible choice. If this comes to pass, we will have to leave. Not for fear of somebody doing something to my children (homosexuals are not pedophiles), but rather because I strive daily to lead my children to live in the world seeking a holy living, pleasing to God…not of this world. My bible is my standard, sorry if that offends anyone. I will continue to have guarded relationships with those who live blatant sinful lives, but my children do not need to live immersed in it or a part of an organization that has no boundaries which I have held in high esteem. I am sorry if this offends anyone, but I pay taxes, pay dues to BSA and have a God-given right to voice my opinion and have it counted too.

    • your issue is that you may have to discuss the existence of same sex couples with your children? if you don’t want to discuss it, don’t. if they ask, do you need to talk about sex? if my son were to ask, at age 7, why so and so has 2 dads i would tell him that all families are different. this is ours, that is theirs and it’s their business. (that’s basically what i said when my son asked why he doesn’t have a dad). and doesn’t the fact that kids with same sex parents existing in their school mean that they don’t have to be in the scout pack or troop to cause your kids to wonder about their existence? gay people exist. they are in society. if you don’t want to talk to your kids about it, then don’t i guess. why should your insecurities exclude others from a group that you belong to? they have the right to belong as well.

      • Beth do you have respect for anyone’s views but your own. Your complete intolerance to the people who oppose the change is the same or actually worse as the opinions of those you seem to enjoy attacking. I thought the gay agenda was all about complete inclusion. Oh your agenda doesn’t? No surprise there.

      • i believe that all people have the right to their own personal beliefs. all people don’t however, have the right to take action to limit another’s rights based on their own personal beliefs. my right to swing my fist stops at the end of any other person’s nose. as does everyone else’s. i absolutely believe in inclusion.

    • and. i also pay taxes and BSA dues. i’m pleased that there may be real progress in reversing this discriminatory policy.

      • Beth,
        I have not taken action to limit another’s rights based on my personal beliefs. I have joined a group that upheld the same values and morals that I believe in. Other’s have taken the action to limit my rights based on their belief. They can start their own organization, just leave the one I chose alone. I am being discriminated upon. The rules were in place long before any of us here joined. Join or don’t join…
        It’s not discrimination…it’s a choice in a private organization. I don’t feel discriminated because I can’t join the VFW or ask money from the African American College Fund. I just know what my limits are and respect the way those organization serve their members. Sorry, if you don’t like the restrictions, move on…find/make a new organization.
        The implications of this type of caving in from our National Organization really has nothing to do with the individual boys, but rather with the funding it will lose if it doesn’t change its’ ways.
        Right now, in America, there is a push to legalize Marijuana. Some states have done so. The argument is that it harms no one, is natural and is a personal choice. My question is this; when someone, with their own agenda decides to push this issue and make it policy that we have to accept openly admitted pot smokers as leaders, how will you feel then? Really…what is the difference? How will you feel about placing your 7 year old with that person as a role model? Isn’t our current anti-smoking or anti-drinking policies discriminatory? Don’t I have a right to do what is constitutionally legal? As you can see….without boundaries anything goes. We, the BSA, are a private organization and have a Constitutional right to make our own set of rules, based on our beliefs. Up to this point I have thought the BSA and my household to believe in the same thing. IF this goes through, our belief system will no longer line up. I will be forced to make a decision about what I want to be involved in. As I said before…I have joined a group that upheld the same values and morals that I believe in. Other’s are taking action to limit my rights based on their belief. I am being discriminated against. BSA is my organization, with it’s requirements clearly stated, I understood them…I joined….

  97. I hope they do. Boy Scouts are reverent but not to a specific religion. The scouts I have been asked about this view have a hard time with the bane running up against the Boy Scout Law. Some of parents in the Pack I am in have already voted by pulling their kids out.

  98. Has anyone noticed the Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down, rating system on here is a bit segued , and it seems to align with Liberal, Pro-Gay/Lesbian view point.

  99. I joined the Boy Scouts of America in 1949 and the great things I learned as a12 yr old has lasted me all theses years I have been a Boy scout Leader for 30 yrs. and have been a loyal supporter of the BSA. I am very sad that the things I taught to my young scouts according to the policies of the BSA have suddenly become wrong in the eyes of some of the members of the BSA. I always believed that the National BSA would stand for the principles of BSA teachings that laid the foundations of morality in our youth. I am not writing about wether homosexuality is right or wrong that should be left to the choice of that individual and his concience. Everyone should have the right to chose their own path to follow however sometimes those chosen paths have obstacles and once in a while new choices require taking the choices away from established principles. How much time and money has the BSA spent to defend the policy of not allowing open homosexuals in the BSA over the years I would like to add that some of that money came from me and thousands of others. The U.S Supreme Court ruled that the BSA policy on Homosexual exclusion is constitutional because the BSA is a private organization. I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and our scouting program has a deep commitment to obey the laws of God. The Church teachings are not compatible to any changes by men if they conflict with Gods laws. Does this mean homosexuality in the BSA is in and long established Church teaching’s for our youth are out? Time will tell. The pending policy of allowing homosexuality Scout’s in the BSA program will be the most devisive issue to ever happen in the BSA. I fear a lot of Church sponsered Boy Scout units will withdraw their charters and chose a new program for their youth. How many lawsuits will be brought against the organizations that will not chose the BSA policy of allowing homosexuals in their units there will be plenty make no mistake about it. With National BSA’s indorsement of homosexual’s the groundwork for law suits are unavoidable. Sincerely,
    Trenton Spears

    • I too am a member of the LDS Church and a scout leader. I’m afraid that the views you expressed are not in-line with the Church’s teachings. Please visit the Church’s website on the matter: http://www.mormonsandgays.org/ It makes clear that you can be gay, or have same-sex attraction, and be a member in good standing (enter the temple, pass the sacrement, etc.) as long as they do not act on those attractions. In otherwords not break the law of chastity. Why then could a boy who is gay pass the sacrement but not particpate in scouting? Seem controdictory to me. If the BSA changes their policy it would bring it more in-line with the LDS Church’s current policy. I hope and pray that the BSA changes its policy on gay membership

      • Thanks for that contribution. It is an aspect of mormonism that is not often brought up in discussions such as these.

      • Exactly. This whole “gay mormon” thing is relatively new (you can probably tell me the date) but the fact that the LDS church is now trying to appear more friendly toward gays is probably the main reason BSA is considering this change now.

        It looks like the LDS church sent some of their PR people over to BSA to show them how to deal with this whole “gay thing”, and this policy change is the likely result.

      • Scouting Dave you are right about the point that you can be homosexual and still be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- Day saints. What is confusing is how can someone can be homosexual and not act upon those beliefs. Contact with individuals is very personal and hard to maintain in a same sex relationship if they are Christians. There is no way a person can be homosexuals and not act upon those chosen lifestyles. If homosexuals were that religous they would not choose that lifestyle knowing it would confict with the teachings of the Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day. Dave I believe you are trying to say that it is okay that you are gay and lie about your choice of sames sex activity it is simply not obtainable if you are a Christian. It is like a members who are gay don’t pay any attention to the King James Bible or Book of Mormon their teachings are wrong and the Church supports the act of homosexuality. I believe the Church is trying to be a mediator between the person who is gay and Jesus Christ and if you choose the homosexual lifestyle please don’t participate in the sinful act just hang in there till you someday you will be completely converted to the covenants you made with Jesus Christ at your Baptism. If you attend Church, pass the Sacrament and have a current Temple recommend to attend the House of the Lord you are required by God himself to maintain your faith in all of the teachings of of the Church Dave I believe that my comments are certainly in line with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and will do my best to maintain a relationship with God the Father and his son Jesus Christ the Savior of the World. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • Beth if the teaching’s of any Church conflict with God the Father and his son Jesus Christ teachings I will most certainly disagree with that Church and will run not walk out the front door and leave Satan behind. Your comments lack any sustance and certainly misguided. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does not now or ever will promote homosexualty as exceptable doctrine in any form. The LDS Church teach’s the principles of conversion and repentance for all the teachings of Jesus Christ. Just because the LDS Church except’s homosexuals as members does not mean that they except the act of homosexuality they certainly do not. Please take the time to research the LDS Church’s teachings on the matter of homosexuality. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • So. Like I said, if your church teaches that homosexuals are ok with god as long as they do not commit homosexual acts, why can’t they get that same deal with the scouts? If they are right with god, how is it any of your business?

      • Beth you have made a statement that is certainly not true the LDS Church does not teach that homosexuality is okay with God. It teaches that same sex relationships are a sin and must be not be acted upon if they are to remain members of the LDS Church. There will be a time and place that homosexual members will have to completely repent and renew their covenants with God and to ask Gods forgiveness for their belief in homosexuality and that it is a sin and not part of Gods plan. Beth are you saying that homosexuals members should have a pass on the sin of homosexuality just because they are not practicing the act. What is the point of being homosexual if you don’t act upon the choice of having sex with another homosexual if you don’t act upon it you are not homosexual. Lies against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are my business and I will stand as a witness of the truths of the Gospel at all times and in all places that includes my membership in the BSA.

      • Dave unlike you I am posting the position of the Mormon Church on Homosexuality that you refered to in your comments. Here they are straight the from the Mormon website. Please read it. Where the Mormon Church stands on homosexuality, Quote:
        The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions, they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.
        The Church’s approach to this issue stands apart from society in many ways. And that’s alright. Reasonable people can and do differ. From a public relations perspective it would be easier for the Church to simply accept homosexual behavior. That we cannot do, for God’s law is not ours to change. There is no change in the Church’s position of what is morally right. But what is changing — and what needs to change — is to help Church members respond sensitively and thoughtfully when they encounter same-sex attraction in their own families, among other Church members, or elsewhere. Jesus Christ commanded us to love our neighbors. Whether sinner or saint, rich or poor, stranger or friend, everyone in God’s small world is our neighbor, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. Latter-day Saints believe that our true commitment to Christian teachings is revealed by how we respond to this commandment. This love is tested every day of our lives. We may know individuals with same-sex attraction in our workplaces, congregations and town halls. As people with hopes, fears and aspirations like everyone else, these neighbors deserve our love. But we can’t truly love the neighbors next door if we don’t love the neighbors under our own roof. Family members with same-sex attraction need our love and understanding. God loves all his children alike, much more than any of us can comprehend, and expects us to follow.Unquote:
        I hope this clears up any misconceptions about the Mormon Church’s position on the homosexuality issue and that it is against God laws which are unchangeable as the Mormon Church believes.

    • Step 1: Get companies to have “inclusive” charitable giving guidelines. – DONE
      Step 2: Pressure companies to restrict donating, because longstanding support no longer meets new guidelines. – DONE
      Step 3: Pressure organizations to have “inclusive” membership guidelines so they can get donations back. – DONE
      Step 4: Let Chartering organizations “decide” – EXPECTED NEXT WEEK
      Step 5: Insist that the Board appoint new LGBT members to show support for new policy. EXPECTED SEPT 2013
      Step 6: Repeat steps at regional and council level.

      Zach Wahls, whose group (Scouting for Equality) has been working for more inclusive rules under the motto, “A scout is equal,” said he applauded the change.
      “It’s a step in the right direction, and good to see that B.S.A. is softening its position,” he said. “But under the policy change, it will still be possible for some units to discriminate.”

      –Yep – there is your path forward – Local units can decide, and then we will attack them.

      Your PTA can set up a Troop or Den, but your school can’t support religion, so can you just take out that whole God thing?

      Learning about sexuality is an important health consideration – something Scouts need to learn about in order to protect themselves – Prepared.ForLife right? Chap 25 in your Bear Handbook – Human Sexuality –

      Why does it seem like I have seen this all before?

  100. “Scouting for Boys” used to be just the name of Lord Baden-Powell’s book. It seems that now it will also be the avocation of some of our leaders.

      • A Scout is Reverent.
        A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.

        any my beliefs don’t say that Homosexuality is a sin..

      • Legally 16 year olds are over the age of consent. As much as youthfulnes is prized in feminine beauty, it’s even more prized by homosexuals. Open that gate and there will be a flood.

    • I hate to tell you this, but pedophiles involved in Scouting were already “Scouting for Boys”.

    • There is zero data to back up your assertion linking pedophilia and homosexuality. In fact, the BSA has long had trouble with sexual abuse, despite its ban on gays. Let’s please be respectful, rely on real data, and avoid crud humor in our discussions.

  101. from what I am reading, each unit (pack, troop, team) would be able to make their own decisions – so if a unit was chartered to a group that did not want to include gays, then they would not be forced to. OTOH, if a unit was chartered to a group that did want to include gays, they could. It would be a unit by unit decision. So you could find a unit that matched your views on the subject.

    • Yes, Martha, but allowing homosexuals in any Boy Scout troop may open the door for furthur moral degeneration.

      • No, Lisa, we should not hate homosexuals, but many families do not want their sons to grow up around them. They (and I) would rather have our sons be around people who believe in traditional marriage: thus, between a man and woman.

    • The problem is a legal one. What happens when Units cancel camp plans or Pow Wow plans because they will not put their youth in a potentially compromising position of dealing with homosexuality in a place where it has NEVER been an issue before? The LGBT Community has lawyers on standby to file discrimination lawsuits. Who protects the Chartered Organization? Used to be National. Now the Chartering Organizations would be cut loose. Some of the CO’s are community churches with limited funds. They will be forced to simply shut down their programs.

      • After reading many of the comments I have to say that most commentors have missed the main reason for the pending change in allowing Homosexuals into the BSA Program. Has anyone heard of United Way? They were huge supporters of the BSA organizations all over the United States and over the last ten years their contributions to the BSA have dried up. Many Councils relied on their support to be able to keep the Council a float including my local Council. The reason was the BSA excluded Homosexuals from the program. Money has become more important than morals and this is the reason for change by the National BSA. Many business organizations have followed the United Way in their dropping all funding for the BSA. I believe that the National has made a gamble that they will increase more members and funding if they would make the change to its program. When I look at the way our Nation is losing its moral compass it is not surprising to me that this pending change would make its way into the last stand for morality in our Nation, the Boy Scouts of America. It has been a great run for 103 years and I have been honored to be a volunteer for such a honorable and moral organization for our youth for the last 30 years. I pray that wiser heads will prevail and find a way to support the traditional BSA without giving up its principles. God Bless the BSA

      • Has anyone heard of Mormon Church and the Catholic Church? They are huge supporters of the BSA organizations, primarily in the Southern and Western parts of the country, where BSA moved their headquarters in 1979.

        BSA feared that if they admitted gays, Mormon and Catholic contributions to the BSA would dry up. Many Councils rely on Mormon and Catholic support to be able to keep the Council a float.

        The Mormon and Catholic churches are the reasons that the BSA has excluded Homosexuals from the program for so long. Money had become more important than morals and this is the reason National BSA has refused to change until now. I believe that the National has made the calculation that they will increase more members and funding if they would make the change to its program.

        When I look at the way our Nation is becoming more aware of, and welcoming of the diversity among us, it is not surprising to me that this pending change would make its way into one of the most prominent advocates for morality for the children of all families in America, not just for a few churches, the Boy Scouts of America.

      • I am a member of the LDS Church and a scout leader. I’m afraid that the views you expressed are not in-line with the Church’s teachings. Please visit the Church’s website on the matter: http://www.mormonsandgays.org/ It makes clear that you can be gay, or have same-sex attraction, and be a member in good standing (enter the temple, pass the sacrament, etc.) as long as they do not act on those attractions. In other words not break the law of chastity. Why then could a boy who is gay pass the sacrament but not participate in scouting? Seem contradictory to me. If the BSA changes their policy it would bring it more in-line with the LDS Church’s current policy. I hope and pray that the BSA changes its policy on gay membership

      • I am aware that “you can be gay, or have same-sex attraction, and be a member in good standing” in the LDS church. But that has not always been the case. Do you know the date that this statement was first published by the LDS church?

      • Where the Mormon Church stands on homosexuality:
        The experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions, they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.
        The Church’s approach to this issue stands apart from society in many ways. And that’s alright. Reasonable people can and do differ. From a public relations perspective it would be easier for the Church to simply accept homosexual behavior. That we cannot do, for God’s law is not ours to change. There is no change in the Church’s position of what is morally right. But what is changing — and what needs to change — is to help Church members respond sensitively and thoughtfully when they encounter same-sex attraction in their own families, among other Church members, or elsewhere.
        Jesus Christ commanded us to love our neighbors. Whether sinner or saint, rich or poor, stranger or friend, everyone in God’s small world is our neighbor, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. Latter-day Saints believe that our true commitment to Christian teachings is revealed by how we respond to this commandment. This love is tested every day of our lives. We may know individuals with same-sex attraction in our workplaces, congregations and town halls. As people with hopes, fears and aspirations like everyone else, these neighbors deserve our love. But we can’t truly love the neighbors next door if we don’t love the neighbors under our own roof. Family members with same-sex attraction need our love and understanding. God loves all his children alike, much more than any of us can comprehend, and expects us to follow.

      • Let’s be clear, money has always been more important to BSA than actually bringing young men up properly, and providing good programming. My local council is notorious for preferring the money of safety, as was clear when a local scouter was awarded the Heroism award for saving the life of a Webelo, who he nearly got killed in the first place.

      • Disregard that comment. Stepped away from my computer in public. Some other student tried to be funny, but was not.

      • The United Way pulled back roughly 50% in the 90s already. There are other places to come up with money.

      • Our units have not done council run Scout camps in years and have not missed it so this is not an issue for us. In our council camp staff there are some very openly gay staffers (the two I know are great young men but nonetheless should not be Scouters because of the policy) but our Council Executives and quite a few Scouters ignore the policy and just turn a blind eye towards it. Though people complain privately no one wants to get in a conflict with council.

      • See, and here’s the problem. I’m pretty sure Jo Pop that you just invalidated the argument of one side. ‘They’re great young men’. I know the young men of whom you speak (I’m not sure if you’re right about them either way, but I know who you refer to). And I’ll agree with you, they are outstanding. So who are we to dictate whether or not they should contribute? They obviously have skills that camp needs and/or benefits from. The other Scouts look up to them – and not because of their lifestyle (or not). They don’t openly declare it so they fall under the current ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy of National which means there is nothing Council should do as far as I know. I know our Council would be poorer without those individuals. And if anything was done to drive them out, we’d all have lost something of ourselves in the process. This is the pain that I feel – we have these young men that start as Tigers, Wolves, and Bears who may not know their sexuality who develop into stellar Scouts. But we’re saying YOU can’t participate anymore because you don’t like girls? There’s no justice in that. These young men (or not, because I’m not fully convinced they’re both gay) deserve recognition for their time, energy and achievements. Why can’t we judge them based on that?

      • It’s definitely not an easy situation. With the youth we are referring to, I enjoy them both and have had a lot of time with both before they made any declarations. It actually is because of my respect for the younger of the two (who I agree is not sure what he is right now) that I am torn on the issue.

        It does bother me that the policies are being ignored and things are being overlooked because I wonder what are we teaching the Scouts who are watching this from the sidelines. But then go back to what I said about the younger one in particular.

        The people that actively support the gay agenda are not helping by being so closed minded themselves. All sides need to be respected here and if this comes to pass, the gay youth and leaders and their supporters need to be sensitive to those of us who have to accept this. But they as a group are not patient at all which will just aggravate the situation and prolong the division and carnage.

        The changes seem to be inevitable but it’s going to take time to get people on board.

        National also has a lot of work to do if they pass this before they should implement it, training, policies, youth protection rules updates, etc. If it is going to happen then let’s make sure it happens the right way.

        So did I just change my opinion? I don’t think so. But depending on how this goes and how the activists react and carry on if it does happen will decide a lot for me.

      • Sorry, lost track of this conversation – the blog doesn’t show everything active unfortunately. Jo, that’s all anyone can ask for. Thank you.

      • Jo, you seem like a wise person and an asset to scouting. If everyone, from either side, approaches the potential change as you suggest – with respect for each other, with the effort to really listen to others and to reflect on things from their point of view, and with an eye towards any change happening with full support – training, etc – done in the right way, then all should be well.
        I hope that on all levels the conversation can be as thoughtful and respectful as it has generally been here, and that folks on both sides can gently rein in anyone on their side of things who steps over the line of civility.

      • Has anyone heard of Mormon Church and the Catholic Church? They are huge supporters of the BSA organizations, primarily in the Southern and Western parts of the country, where BSA moved their headquarters in 1979.

        BSA feared that if they admitted gays, Mormon and Catholic contributions to the BSA would dry up. Many Councils rely on Mormon and Catholic support to be able to keep the Council a float including my local Council.

        The Mormon and Catholic churches are the reasons that the BSA has excluded Homosexuals from the program for so long. Money had become more important than morals and this is the reason National BSA has refused to change until now. I believe that the National has made the calculation that they will increase more members and funding if they would make the change to its program.

        When I look at the way our Nation is becoming more aware of, and welcoming of the diversity among us, it is not surprising to me that this pending change would make its way into one of the most prominent advocates for morality for the children of all families in America, not just for a few churches, the Boy Scouts of America.

      • I am a member of the LDS Church and a scout leader. I’m afraid that the views you expressed are not in-line with the Church’s teachings. Please visit the Church’s website on the matter: http://www.mormonsandgays.org/ It makes clear that you can be gay, or have same-sex attraction, and be a member in good standing (enter the temple, pass the sacrament, etc.) as long as they do not act on those attractions. In other words not break the law of chastity. Why then could a boy who is gay pass the sacrament but not participate in scouting? Seem contradictory to me. If the BSA changes their policy it would bring it more in-line with the LDS Church’s current policy. I hope and pray that the BSA changes its policy on gay membership

      • We’d probably gain a hell of a lot more money and members if we let girls join in at the Cub and Troop levels. But that’s probably an argument for a different day.

        (Yes I know there is some agreement with the Girl Scouts but their numbers are dropping and their program is lacking
        They deserve a great Christmas Scouting program as well.)

      • I am neither surprised nor sympathetic to the plight of Girl Scouts. There is something to be said for anyone (individual or group) that removes God and the morals of the bible from their lives & programs (and align themselves with Planned Parenthood) – His blessings are only for those that stay true to Him. They had a Christian program they chose to throw it away and cave to the pressures of those who felt they needed so called ‘equality’. So there’s a glimpse of what BSA will become.

        (Makes you wonder then – why did BSA go through the trouble of aligning ourselves with American Heritage Girls if we’re just going to turn around and be like Girl Scouts after all?!)

  102. My concern is the practical application. How will tenting arrangements be made? Will we need to ask an 11 year old boy if he’s gay? If we do, it opens us up to discrimination and harrassment charges. Do we allow a gay youth to tent with a hetero youth? We don’t allow hetero boys and girls to tent together in Venturing, for obvious reasons. Are we open to trouble if a hetero youth encourages a gay youth to change? What about the other way around? I’m not too worried about the adults. Adults, gay or hetero, are expected to be, well, adult. So long as they act like adults we won’t have a problem.

    • A problem I’m sure we can overcome. There are already likely boys questioning their sexuality in troops right now. What not to do? Shun them, make them feel like outcasts, treat them like dirt and immoral, for something their body chemistry is doing, and not a choice. There are one-man tents if it comes to it. We can be adults and think of ways to deal with our children, no matter their size, shape, gender, or orientation.

    • Tenting arrangements will be the same. And 11-year-old-boys will have the same conversations they’ve always had. Conversations about masturbation, conversations about making out, conversations about who looks hot. The same conversations that have gone on between 11-year-olds when no adults are around for about, I don’t know, several thousand years, probably.

      The fact that 11 (or 12 or 13 or whatever) year olds have these conversations, and always have, does not mean they will become gay. If it did, then all boys would be gay!

      At early adolescent years, these conversations don’t determine a boy’s sexual orientation, but they do help a boy, slowly, discover what sexuality is and become comfortable with his own sexuality.

      Tenting arrangements don’t need to change. Boys will have the same conversations as always. Teaching boys how to respect everyone, and how to understand themselves, in an atmosphere of mutual respect and responsibility, is the best lesson we can teach them.

      • yes, the conversations have always gone on, and will continue. The conversation is not the concern of this post. The concern is when it becomes more than a conversation.
        I’m not sure there is a good solution to address those concerns. Maybe BSA will require everyone at camp to wear a chastity belt, and leave the key at home with mom. (I know that is unlikely, and probably not the best solution, but I can’t come up with a better one right now.)

      • What if I told you that your son has already likely tented with homosexuals? I’m pretty sure just because you’re homosexual, and you’re tenting with someone who’s not, you’re not automatically inclined to force your gayness on your tent mate. That’s not how it works.

      • So then let’s lift the rule prohibiting straight male and female youth from tenting together. Why are we assuming that gay youth are more responsible or in control of their hormones than straight youth?

      • A change in policy won’t facilitate the transition of the conversation to action. If this is going to happen, then it will happen. New policy or old.

      • Tenting arrangements absolutely have to change to keep the intent of the youth protection rules in place. But this is NOT an anti gay thing. If you are going to allow same gender gay youth to tent together then we have to allow straight males and females together. Teens are teens. Hormones rage if you are gay or straight when you are a teen. It’s unfair to say that two gay youth are more responsible to keep themselves under control than the straight mixed gender pair. The rules need to be updated to make sure that all the combinations of genders and orientation are treated equally and offered the same protections. No gender or sexual orientation is any more or less capable than the others of breaking the rules or being inappropriate.

        There has got to be a solution that will make all sides feel comfortable at the least.

    • So…uh, I hate to break it to you, but hetero boys and gay boys have been tenting together in the BSA since the beginning of time.

    • It’s a valid concern. But it’s one that should be addressed regardless of any policy changes. There are now gay scouts, and there will be in the future regardless. Assuming that there aren’t is not wise.

    • Why, lots of us, actually. Many families I know have boycotted Boy Scouts because of this unfair discrimination. My son will meet gay people in the world anyway, what’s the harm in meeting them in his troop? And, maybe, there won’t be any in his troop. Stop being paranoid.

      • They have every right to boycott, and it is not hurting the BSA by them doing so. The BSA is a private organization and it has every right to restrict membership. The people who say that it is unfair can go camping on their own or even start their own private organization.
        Also, many families do not want their sons to grow up around and be influenced by homosexuals, regardless of the fact that they will meet them in the real world.

      • the BSA is a private organization. they have every right to decide to reverse a policy that they decide is discriminatory and allow LGBT individuals to join.

      • Not influenced by homosexuals? um, have you never met an interior designer? A men’s clothes designer (or women’s)? Or seen a broadway show? We’re influence by gay folks allllllllll the time, lol. Open your eyes, hears, and heart, and maybe you’ll find enough love for Jesus, cuz apparently you think your in his shoes to judge people without knowing a like about them.

      • I agree, Nathan, many of the people in those professions are homosexual. However, having openly gay leaders in your son’s troop is much more influential than seeing them on TV.
        And no, I don’t hate homosexuals. I simply do not agree with the way they chosen to live their lives. And, since you brought up Jesus, you should know that the Bible says that spiritual judgement is ok.

      • Angie, I’m concerned that my son may find himself camping with people who are sexually attracted to him. How can I know if that will happen? How can I prevent that from happening? If a unit decides to not allow gays in their ranks, will the BSA defend that unit in court if needed? It sounds like the answer will be no. So in the end, I think it won’t really be up to the individual units to decide on this issue, it’ll be up to those who choose which units to legally attack over the issue.

      • ummm, the BSA already defends 100% of its units to not allow gays, so only having to defend 75% would be relief for national!! Think about it.

        Ummm, your son may already have camped with a boy who might be gay. Just cuz a kid’s parent signed him up for Scouts doesn’t mean year’s later, when the boy hits puberty, doesn’t mean he won’t be or isn’t gay. I mean, when did you ‘choose’ to be straight? You didnt. You’re hormones chose for you. You think its different for gays? There’s hormones choose but they know society tells them otherwise. That’s why they struggle with it and don’t come out. They think if they wait, it might change. But you don’t change those things. Just like you won’t change from being attracted to women…you just are. The more open and honest, and accepting (see hermaphrodite, transgender, etc), the less scared you’ll be and maybe confronting these issues won’t be as hard.

      • There are other Scouting organizations out there that welcome gays. Why does the gay movement have to insist on forcing themselves into every aspect of our lives? My opinion is that they are the most closed minded intolerant minority group there is. If you don’t agree with them they can bully harrass threaten and label you. Then they will use their protected class status as a shield.

        If they succeed here they will walk through the carnage they created and move on to their next target.

      • You have accidentally hit on a part of the problem. The gay world has invented themselves minority status, and many have bought it. Who or what I like doesn’t make me a minority. Will you treat me special if I claim to like whips and chains? How about if I like women with big noses? How about if we leave sexual preference out of the question and I like to eat sauerkraut?
        I happen to like sauerkraut. I’m going to declare myself a minority. I’m going to get my friends to join me in an annual sauerkraut parade. Then I’m going to insist that all public gatherings where food is served MUST offer sauerkraut, because if they don’t offer sauerkraut they are discriminating against me.

      • You’re perfectly welcome to have a sauerkraut parade, and to eat sauerkraut when and where you want, as far as I’m concerned. Not offering sauerkraut is not in line with disallowing homosexuals from existing. LGBT individuals asking for equality are not asking to make YOU gay. They are just asking for the same rights as everyone else.

      • Your use of the term carnage is truly hyperbolic. You stated elsewhere that you don’t want to exclude gays from scouts. I guess if that’s true, that’s true, but you can perhaps see why people would infer that perhaps you do want to keep gays out of scouts because of your statements such as this?

      • The carnage is going to be all the lawsuits, hatred etc. Traditional units being targeted as discriminating bigots, “inclusive” units getting similar insults. With no unifying voice from National the general non Scouting public will not understand what is going on. There will be divides between units, other units refusing to go to an event because it is including “those” units. Chartered organizations dropping units just to prevent exposure to lawsuits. It will take many many years for the BSA to recover. It will but it will never have the stature it once had.

        I have not been shy to say that I personally disagree with the gay lifestyle and I don’t see good things happening with this being shoved at us.

        My primary concern when this happens, and it will because National will bend, is to make sure that all the policies and rules are rewritten to make sure that the strictness and intent of the youth protection rules are applied equally and fairly across the new gender and orientation combinations of youth and adults. That there is proper training not the typical cheesy BSA flick to help leaders understand the changes as well as help those of us with no experience with openly gay youth understand them because each are their own group with unique issues and worries. I can relate to the straight youth but not necessarily to a gay youth.

        This all has to be done with some sensitivity to those who though don’t necessarily agree with it are willing to do their best to try to make it work. All the mocking of their religions, parenting, etc isn’t helping the cause.

        People will naturally rebel toa major fundamental change. Those forcing it should try to help people who are not necessarily for it understand why they think that it is a good thing and perhaps help come up with transition plans and ideas for training and coming up with support resources for people willing to try.

        Instead I see vicious attacks on people who have expressed disagreement with the lifestyle and proposed changes.

        By the way, the gay agenda would find much less resistance if it defended and supported the rights of units to stay traditional without all of the negative labels. Then they could be in the BSA and the traditional units could be there. If we eliminated the innuendo and labeling of traditional units you might find more support for inclusive units. It does not necessarily have to be an all or nothing policy for either side.

        Sadly I think it will continue to get ugly.

      • It’s close-minded to want the same rights as other people? Not to be discriminated against? That’s a pretty weird definition of close-minded, lady.

    • They are already exposed to this. They go to school don’t they.
      They are active in their community aren’t they.

      The gay population has been and will continue to be part of our society.

      • Neither of my kids has any openly gay youth in their social circles and they are quite active with a large group of friends.

        I’ve heard them talk about a couple of the in-your-face flamboyant gay youth in school but that’s it.

    • what are you worried about? you’re not going to get gay cooties by sitting next to a gay person at a campfire. it doesn’t expose our children to anything.

      • That’s a stupid statement. No one is talking about “cooties”. People want to be part of an organization that is in line with their values. Despite what you liberal gay supporters believe, we all don’t have to agree with the gay lifestyle. That doesn’t make us hate filled or anything, it means that we don’t find ourselves in alignment with them. I’m not the least bit Italian, should I bully and sue my way into the local Italian American club or find a club I am more in align with?

        But not with the gay agenda. They insist on invading every aspect of our lives forcing themselves into places they don’t need to be because there are other organizations more in alignment with them.

        Interesting that people have spent time and money to create inclusive Scouting organizations but rather than you being a part of that and supporting their efforts you just want to force change here and let those groups fail.

      • Jo that is Exactly what we are arguing for.. I like and scout in the NE. An area that is more progressive they where ever it is you are from. In the NE Parents want their kids to be exposed to the same scouting values they where when they where kids.. before people like you marched in and declared BSA a Christian only organization, and not just christian, but a specific sect that views it is their job to impose their beliefs on others.

        People are tired of rolling over to your dogma, and they want change, so they are following the scout law to change it from the inside. They want the Scout Law and Oath to stand up for what BP intended, not as a sheltered youth program of the dogmatic few. There is nothing wrong with BSA, it has just been lead astray from the founders and people are working to bring it back. you may not like it because you want to see it remain exclusive and eventually die. But others who have GENERATIONS in Scouting, want to see their family traditions continue, so they are on a mission to remove the imposed dogma and bring scouting back to the wholesome program it once was.. on that was about raising good citizens, not about creating people who are bound by fear and exclusion..

        This change is going to bring back scouting stronger in the NE, where it has been struggling against an issue that should not have been here in the first place. But it is an issue brought on by fear of change, a fear that is owned by people like you, Jo.

        People who want to invoke hate and fear, instead of Loyalty, kindness, reverence..

        Please Jo, reflect on the scout law and oath, and understand it as the rest of the world does. BSA will return to it’s core values. I have faith in that. There are more Good people out there who want to see their children raised according to their values, and not your values.

      • Why are you attributing religious dogma to me? I’ve not made one religious statement to support anything that I have said.

        I am in the Northeast as well in a rural community. Scouting is quite active. 7 active Troops within 7 miles of me. Two of the Packs with 7 miles of me are at about 100 members each. Our Venturing Crew has 24 youth between the ages of 13 and 19.

        So raising kids by your values is better than raising them by my values? If you say so. You don’t know my values. You know my opinions based on short bursts of posts in a heated forum. But that gives you enough to judge my parenting? Interesting.

      • I believe the whole “separate but equal” argument went out of style fifty years ago. But don’t let facts or science impact your opinion. It’s definitely much better to close your mind and judge –

      • Nobody is telling you you have to “agree with the gay lifestyle” (whatever that is. It’s not like it’s something you choose, like the color of your curtains). They’re telling you that your personal preference for what sexuality someone else is shouldn’t matter when it comes to scouts. Scouts isn’t about sexual orientation. Now, if you wanted to exclude homosexuals from your swingin’ hetero sex club, well, then I think you’d be on more solid ground.

  104. Seems like passing the buck and it doesn’t even seem practical. Now instead of the Scouts as a whole being called bigots they’ll be calling specific troops/packs bigots and targeting them directly? Way to stick up for the little guy National. Glad to be paying those dues and selling that popcorn.

    Consider the logistics of events/camping trips alone. Before tent assignments, restrooms, showers, etc etc where divided by simple categories of Youth/Adult and Male/Female. How many new categories does this create? Youth,Straight / Youth,Gay / Adult, Straight / Adult,Gay / Female,Straight / Female,Gay etc etc.. You thought “Youth Protection” was complicated before. Think of the fun new lawsuits on the way.

    Now I’m not saying not to consider something because of only logistics. I’m just saying that National/Local Councils are fooling themselves if they can simply pass the buck on this and it not affect them.

    I get that other groups including the US Military have integrated. However, its apples to oranges right? Last time I checked the US Military didn’t enlist minors which is what scouting is all about.

    Why not a moderated approach? Perhaps a “venture” like program that allows gays. Give it a test run, see how it fairs in safety and practicality before those policies are every pushed on the core of scouting.

    Just my 2 coppers.

    • I see your concerns and unlike many of them on here that I have read, they are well thought and practical. Shall I attempt to tackle each of your points?
      Tenting I will admit may be a bit challenging for the troops however it is an issue that can be dealt with by the troops and their leaders. All I feel is needed on their part is to stress no sex of any kind. Any caught are left up to the judgement of the troop (possible kicking out, but that is left up to the troops and their committees). Restrooms and showers is an easy thing to fix and relatively simple. Private showers and restrooms. Im sure most restrooms are already private so what does it matter if a gay scout uses the same toilet as a straight scout? Private stalls for showering would be an almost must at this point. I have camped with scouts for nearly my entire life, thanks to my older brother, and I have noticed that even in group showers, scouts do not get naked. They shower in their swimming trunks. What difference does it make if tommy tenderfoot is gay in the shower if he will be exposed to the exact same thing in a public swimming pool?
      Why should adult leaders be categorized? Yes we need female leaders and male leaders if there are both sexes but what difference does it make if a leader is gay? With the youth categorization, do we categorize them now? Do we say, “oh youre the little straight blue eyed blonde german boy and you are the little jewish kid” and base them on that? If so, then your scouting unit is not one that I would ever want to be associated with.
      I am actually very supportive of this movement but I must admit that your idea of a trial venture crew is actually a good one. One that I would like to see. But perhaps National will do something like that. We do not actually know what the will do and nor will we until next week.

      • So are you then supporting that straight Venturing males and females can also tent together or is that only open to pairs of same gendered gay youth because somehow magically they have more control over their teenage hormones than the straight pair.

        If you say you don’t I’d really like to hear how and why that would be considered fair or equal.

    • Sadly it’s because the gay agenda insists on having it their way without compromise.

      • Jo, where do you get your crazy Ideas from? in all seriousness, it seems to me that you have an issue with anyone who does not practice your religion. That is not very reverent, kind, or friendly..

        The only one here who does not want compromise is you, and those you represent, which for too long (30 years) has distracted BSA from following the scout law, because to do so would mean that you can’t claim your self appointed position as the voice of morality..

      • If you read my posts I have never quoted anything from religion.

        I’ve offered ideas on how this could be made to work and I addressed valid youth protection concerns that would need to be worked out. I’ve also suggested that serious training be developed to help people like myself understand the gay youth issues so that I can better help them because ever different group of youth have their own issues and such. Having no experience with gay youth I would need resources to help me help the youth in my units.

        Apparently your complete all or nothing right now attitude with no tolerance of anyone who doesn’t immediately jump up and down and embrace the gay agenda has blinded you from seeing things. You don’t want to compromise or work together for a solution you want it to be your dogma or none.

      • Hi Jo, You probably have gay youth in your troop already or in the past. Your troop leaders have been dealing with their gay youth issues just fine.

      • Yeah, the NERVE of them, not wanting to be discriminated against! Why, the next thing you know, they’re going to claim they have a right not to get beaten up all the time.

  105. It’s probably been said, but I really get a kick out of all those who are saying they’ll leave or start getting upset about integration issues. Yup, I remember back when the US Military made this same change and the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard all spontaneously combusted….

    • It didn’t implode obviously but it is not all happy yellow brick road with the integration in the military.

      • With change comes turmoil. It’s only been a couple of years and let’s face it – the military doesn’t exactly react or move with the speed of a cheetah to change. The real evaluation the adoption of this policy can’t happen for a few more years at least. But, my point as sarcastic as it was (apologies, I get tired and I get snarky) still stands. They didn’t implode and they’re working through difficulties created by the new rules. They’re adapting to it and finding a way to still complete their mission and serve our national interests.

      • I don’t doubt that at all. We have the best military men and women in the world.

        No need to apologize about snarkiness, I’m sure that I have made a few enemies overnight with how I have phrased things. I’ve been told often that I should relax more before getting into debates or arguments about Scouting.

        When this is all said and done I hope it doesn’t leave us completely divided.

      • “When this is all said and done I hope it doesn’t leave us completely divided.”

        Jo this is unavoidable. You can not have it both ways this will surely change BSA forever if it goes through. I know we will no longer be members.

      • I think there will be complete harmony in the Scouting for Boys movement if this passes because I believe the disenfranchised half of the participants will vote with their feet. I agree with you ScoutMommaX3.

      • Jo, I have no reason to believe we’ll be divided in the end. I think the organization we both care about though is going to have some growing pains.

    • Charles, you obviously never served in a combat unit. The fact that most of you “patriots” keep holding up the military as the example shows your complete ignorance on the subject. A) The US Military is a government organization. B) The BSA is a private organization that is free to set it’s own membership standards.

      That being said, being a former infantry sergeant I would not want to have homosexuals for subordinates. I wouldn’t want to have women as subordinates either. You see, when you have women/homosexuals integrated into combat arms units that often have direct enemy contact and come under fire it can complicate things.

      If I have a platoon that has two heterosexual couples and a homosexual couple then it is a worse case scenario. The Israelis tried it and it went horribly wrong. I have seen men shut down after seeing their teammates killed and I have seen them rise above it. It’s an emotional thing to see your best friend killed. Imagine that is your significant other. Some people will not be able to handle it. Some will ignore the mission and focus on their spouse. The support units try to manage it, but it still results in adultry, unplanned pregnancies and in some unfortunate instances rape.

      Soldiers on the front lines do not care about race, religion and gender, but at the end of the day no infantryman wants to be caught in the crossfire of some girlfriend/boyfriend or homosexual drama between two squadmates. It’s my experience that people should stick to what they know and it’s obvious you don’t know a thing about our military.

      • and some of us believe that they are actually going to follow the scout law, and not just pay it lip service. This is not about political correctness, it’s about allowing people to be honest, and uphold their morals. If you want to run a unit that is exclusive to only people from your church, that is something you can do. If my PTA wants to run a unit that includes all students in the school regardless of theirs or their parents orientation, and does not want to demonize the parents in the eyes of their children. Then they can do that.. Heck they can have a unit that includes ALL religious beliefs.

      • There are still many religions and religious denomiations that consider homosexuality a sin, leaving it highly unlikely that a unit will be able to include gays and still welcome all religious beliefs. When the unit picks one, it will tend to exclude the other.

      • My pack already does.. You see a scout is reverent, this means that he allows for all religions, this also means that the scout does not preach or dictate the dogma of any one, but encourages a scout to talk with their parent or religious leader about reconciling the world with their beliefs.

        My pack and troop handle it simply.. we leave religion, along with sex as a family matter.

      • and those religions and religious denominations will still be free to exclude gay members if they wish, according to what national has said on the issue today. if a unit isn’t dedicated to a certain religion and wishes to be inclusive, good for them. win-win.

      • In a private organization that you join by choice it is the members responsibility to follow the tenants of the organization not the other way. Do not like the requirement? Do not join. There is no right to join a private organization.

      • yes.. and the private organization is being redefined as the Unit, which is where it should be, after all does the BSA OWN the unit? no.. the chartered Org does. The BSA don’t own the unit’s Gear.. the Chartered org does. The Unit is not under the BSA 5013c, it is under the the Chartered Org’s 5013c.

        So why shouldn’t the Chartered Org decide who to let me leaders and who not to? After all IT owns the unit. Not the BSA.

      • There is still the unanswered question of legal liability. You are kidding yourself if you think the LGBT Community will sit quietly while one Unit “discriminates” against another when they will not interact willingly or in good faith. Funding is competitive and many CO’s do not have the funds to fight the endless streams of litigation.

      • Well honestly the Legal Liability was always on the Chartered Org. which is why so many backed out when the discrimination policy came to the for front..

      • I totally agree with you, Andrew. It seems that people would rather attack private organizations instead of leaving them be.

      • EXACTLY then why are they try to JOIN AND CHANGE it!!?? DON’T JOIN GO START THE GAY SCOUTS OF AMERICA!

      • This may seem obvious but let us all be really clear on this one point, there is no right being violated here i.e. the BSA is a private organization and no one has an inherent civil right to belong. I see many comments that use segregation, and exclusion. Again there is no inherent civil right that says you have a right to join the BSA. The “civil rights” argument does not apply as per the SCOTUS ruling.

      • No they are hoping for a gain of money, pure and simple. They are probably trying to see if the cost of the backlash will be outweighed by all the money at end of the rainbow. But once they force the carnage upon the BSA that pot of gold is going to move on with the movement to their next target while we figure out how to repair all of the damage and bad feelings.

        Chartered organizations that thought that National and Council was their “partner” are going to wonder exactly what the unit charter fee pays for and when they will actually receive council support that is mentioned in the annual charter agreement.

        Already cash strapped councils are going to get deluged in legal battles if National ducks and hides leaving local councils, chartered organizations and units to fend for themselves.

  107. I have been involved with the Boy Scouts since 1966. This potential change in policy has no place in the Boy Scout program. Our organization is fundemental to the well-being of young men and is instrumental in the common belief that as adult leaders our responsibility is to teach and demonstrate moral behavior in our actions and our policies. I am shocked and beyond ashamed of the “new” leadership (Wayne Brock)in our program to even consider this change. Lord Baden Powell must be rolling over in his grave right now! I’m certain if it had been known that his agenda was to change the character and history of the Boy Scouts, he would have never been selected to this position. Perhaps the decision to put him in this job needs to be reconsidered!

      • There are no official substantive references or sources you could point to that would give your statement any weight. Even the latest biography by Tim Jeal is unclear as to the historical certainty of his orientation. Jeal himself concedes this.

      • Yeah he married Olave Soames when he was 50 and they had a nice family. He met her on a cruise.

    • The Brits allow lgbt and girls in.. and that was many years ago.. and they seem to be doing just fine.. maybe we could learn something else from the people on the other side of the pond.

    • Unless someone can prove to the contrary, I don’t believe Lord Baden-Powell ever suggested the exclusion of gay members.

      • Being “gay” wasn’t quite the “in” thing back then like it is now. So it was not an issue that he had to tackle.

    • Perhaps, Mr. Turner, you might want to direct your attention to the head of our national board, who has said he wants to see this policy overturned. I confess, though, that I don’t understand why, in these days of declining membership and opportunities, we would seek to further isolate ourselves. If your chartering organization doesn’t want to allow gay members, then don’t. It’s as simple as that.

      • It’s not “as simple as that”. Without the unified voice of the organization as a whole and the support of National, most units and chartered organizations are going to eventually be forced to capitulate. Because the gay agenda is not going to be satisfied with some units being traditional.

        Hell look how this is breaking down on all the message boards. There’s likely to be a divide of traditional units and “inclusive” units (because its not actually inclusive if we still discriminate against girls being in all levels of the program). Look at how the pro gay people are labeling the traditionalists as intolerable hate mongers who should join the KKK. How are these very two opposing sides going to plan district events together or have roundtables together and so on.

      • We don’t think you should join the KKK, we think you should take a lesson from some of the people you are trying to exclude. Have you ever met a “gay” person? I personally have many homosexual friends and most of them are nicer than my heterosexual friends.

    • what about the well being of young gay men? Who’s to teach them about character, leadership, and morals? The non-scouts? Dont we wish all young mean would follow the Scout Law…even gay ones?

      Have you looked at your own actions? The one who doesn’t know or understand biology isn’t black/white? Have you never read about hermaphrodites? You know (or don’t), those people, those humans, born with both sets of genitalia? Are they male or female? straight or gay? Your God made them in his image, right? A straight couple procreated them?

      • There are Scouting organizations that have been founded with hard work and money and caring that are inclusive and supporting of gay youth. But none of the gay supporters are helping, joining or supporting them. No they insist on creating carnage in the BSA. They could care less about those other organizations because they already accept the gay agenda so there is no reason to get involved with them. So the people who actively tried to create a program that welcomed gay youth get ignored and will eventually go away having wasted a lot of time and money.

        Could you imagine the level of program those other organizations would have now if all of the resources wasted attacking the BSA were used to build up and support the organizations that were trying to support the gay youth?

      • Hey Nathan. Again you attribute religion to what I’ve been saying. Is English your second language? I have not made a single religious or god reference supporting anything I have said.

  108. I appreciate people being concerned about the logistics of homo boys in tents with hetro.. however, this is not a new issue, it’s just going to now be ok to talk about it. Maybe we can turn to the Brits to see how they resolved this many years go..

    It will also allow may PTA, and non-Church organizations feel good about stepping up and chartering unit’s again. If the christian based pack/troop does not want to allow LGBT in.. well they CAN start their own pack/troop/crew.. it’s a win win.. no more money wasted on law suits and no more units needing to deal with angry parents because some people in a different part of the country don’t feel comfortable.

    • The only way it would be fair is that if gay youth are allowed to tent with other youth of their gender that youth males and females have the same option. Two gay youth of the same gender who are just friends have the same raging hormones as the straight male and female who are just friends. So both situations have a chance of hanky panky. But with the proposed plan, one pairing will be ok but not the other?

      • Is that what your afraid of? Have you ever been camping with scouts? are you even really involved in the system? all 14 year old boys and girls I know are not really interested in hanky panky.. Secondly You seem to be the one with a problem here.. No one said sex was ok.. sex has no place in scouting.. and any one caught doing hanky panky.. regardless of gender/orientation would be dealt with accordingly..

        Are you just afraid that people will say it’s OK for gay boys to have sex when camping? If so, then you are sadly mistaken.. Also, a Tent, in the winter, with other people right around you? yeah that is about the dumbest Idea of when to have hanky panky..

        Seriously Jo, do you have any scouting experience?

      • Hey John.

        Thanks for letting me know about this reply.

        First I guess you should understand that I am mostly now on the Venturing side of things so I have mixed genders between 13 and 19 years old.

        I agree that sex has no place in Scouting. Our Crew has very strict rules (that the youth came up with) regarding relationships between Crew members in regards to Crew meetings and activities.

        However we have very strict rules in place to protect the youth. If we introduce gay youth into the equation, then the rules need to be modified to reflect this apply the same standards and protections across all combinations of genders and orientations.

        So if we do not allow straight youth males and females to tent together to avoid any even appearance of impropriety, then we have to apply that standard equally to same gender gay youth pairings or remove it.

        This is not an anti gay issue. This is wanting to make sure that all the youth are treated equally and fairly, and more importantly, that they are protected equally.

      • Forgive me, Jo, I honestly do not understand what you are arguing for, if you say you want all to be treated equally and fairly. Yes! Protect them all! If things need to be modified to accommodate openly gay individuals, so be it. I know that venturing youth protection is different, and may be difficult to integrate this but are you saying that if something will be hard, then we should just throw up our hands and say to forget it? If we believe it to be right, then we must work to find the solution. There are so many intricacies involved in this, but a reasonable solution is attainable if we work together to find it. If you don’t want to deal with it, there is still the option of keeping your unit closed. But why deny the opportunity for individuals to join another unit that will deal with it?

        The simple fact is, that many people who are gay, and even those that are straight, have struggles with finding their identities. They may not know who they are at the age we are dealing with them in scouts. That doesn’t make them dishonest. “Coming out” as gay is a complex process full of emotions and impulses that often leaves kids feeling isolated, abandoned, sometimes from their own families that shun them. They NEED a place to belong. I would LOVE to have scouting be the place that we can give them the acceptance they so fundamentally need. I’m sure we can work this out! I feel that it’s so very important to do so!

      • Not at all I have said repeatedly that we need to work out those issues, preferably in a way that meets the worries on all sides of the issues.

  109. If homosexuality is a sin, like, dosent god forgive you for those? and diddent jesus DIE for our sins? i mean, he diddent just die for the heterosexual sinners. everyone sins. some sins are not more sinful than others…useing the lords name in vein, and killing someone is basically the same in gods eyes, and if you ask, he will forgive you!
    so everyone, just think of the scout law. Also, bible teachings shouldent matter, because scouting caters too all religions! And really, if a scout was gay in my troop, it would have VERY little impact what so ever. Start loveing, stop hateing, and stop fearing the things you dont understand.

    • Yes, Jesus did die for our sins, but that is no reason to sin freely! God does not want us to sin. Romans 6:12 tells us: “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions” (ESV).

      Asking for forgiveness and then continuing to sin is to be hypocrite.

      • Andrew, when did you choose to be straight? And i don’t mean when was your first kiss. When did you make a conscious choose to be straight over gay? When did you sit down and make a list of pros and cons? Or, did it just happen? In puberty. And your hormones kicked in, and you just sorta started to take notice of girls. You never chose. So, why do you think gay people choose if you didn’t? Or do you just not understand biology? You can take classes on biology and biochemistry. Heck, you can look in the dictionary for free on issues like hermaphrodites, transgender, transexual, and open up your eyes that the world of biology is not black and white. You might find in your heart that it is you that are sinning. You cast stones. You read the Old Testament and do not read the Gospel. You haven’t learned a thing about Jesus. You’re fire and brimstone and no compassion. You’re not the follower of Jesus, the Jesus who helped those shunned by society. You fear what you do not understand, and that will hold you back in your faith.

    • You noted “if you ask, he will forgive you!”
      With that statement, I have to presume you are expecting the homosexuals to ask for forgiveness, would that be correct?
      I doubt that was your intended thought, but it does seem odd to say if you do not believe homosexuality is wrong.
      Also, why are so many referring to the Scout Law???
      Yes, as a Scouter, we respect all religions…however, I don’t know of any religion which encourages being a homosexual. And the religions which take no position on the subject are saying neither is it OK or not.
      MY religion clearly states in Leviticus 18.22, “No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that.”
      [The Good News Bible, Today’s English Version, Broadman Press, 1976.]
      So then, would you think it Ok to not respect my regilious beliefs and tell me that I should accept what the bible clearly states is “hated” by God?
      This is a none issue for me as the 2 Troops I am a party too are Chartered by Veterans groups, and their position is clear on the subject of homosexuals.
      My concern is with Nation tossing this on the COs to handle… this is the cowards way out.
      They should either stick to their long-held traditions, or tell everyone they must tow the National line; which they will not do becuase they KNOW they will lose COs [e.g., Many churches, Veteran’s Groups, etc.]
      Lawsuits will be brought by this, of that you can be certain and of that I have no doubts.
      My doubts is where National will stand on defending the rights of the COs to support their own choices; which I believe they will “throw under the bus” at the first sign of cost to them.
      And…as for homosexuals just “starting another unit”, I am a Founder of a Unit and it is NOT all that easy when you are in a small community so PLEASE do not make it sound like it is simply the matter of dropping a piece of paper in the mail.
      In a small town, you will be hard-pressed to find enough to start a second Unit; and it will most likely be discouraged by Council as they will have 2 Units trying to sustain membership with a limited available amount of boys.
      My oponion is quite simply that the Traditions have held for over 100 years, the methods of Scouting has changed, but the Traditions have not………………….. KEEP the Traditional stance.
      .
      I do not kid myself into believeing there are no homosexuals in Scouting, but IF there are, they are keeping their lifestyle to themselves and are causing no issues.
      As an Eagle, I would never cause any harm to befall anyone just because they are homosexual…BUT, I do NOT have to accept their lifestyle.
      And, for the record… It has been well-documented that the vast majority of pedophiles are straight men…NOT homosexuals.

  110. I must say that I welcome this with great relief. It means that many Christian denominations who do not believe in bigotry in any form will be able to form Packs, Troops and/or Crews without worrying about who is LGBT, or anything else. It becomes a who cares position. I only demand 2 things from any would be leaders that is they take and follow the Youth Protection Training required by BSA and that they are willing to submit themselves to a Criminal Background check also required by BSA. I will encourage them to take the training specific to their position. For the youth I will not discuss issues of sexual orientation or anything else regarding that topic. Again the BSA has rules against that for our own and the youth’s protection. I will help him/her with anything that I can otherwise, including protecting them from bullying.

      • You can’t mock God and win. It really makes no difference how we “feel”. There is fundamental wisdom in protecting our children to the extent possible until they become adults.

      • morals are a very personal thing. as far as i’m concerned, good moral behavior means not lying, cheating and stealing. what i or anyone else does in the privacy of my own home doesn’t make me or anyone else a bad person. if an individual is gay, how does that effect some other person completely uninvolved in that person’s life? it simply does not. morality is basically being a good person and treating others well. gay people are still good people. they just love people of the same gender. period.

      • The problem is that gay people want to require all people to except and honor their choice of lifestyle without regard for anyone else’s freedom to choose their beliefs or lifestyle.

      • NO! that is not true! LGBT individuals aren’t asking for more than anyone else has. they don’t want to change anyone else’s beliefs. if you think that it’s wrong to be homosexual because of your religious beliefs, then fine, have those religious beliefs. what you CANT do is to tell someone who is gay that they don’t have the right to be gay because of YOUR religious beliefs. do you see the difference? they aren’t trying to tell you that you have to be gay. they just want you to let them be gay. live and let live.

      • I’ve never had a gay person try to force me to be gay. But plenty of straight people try to force gay people to be straight.

      • And they have their options and Scouting organizations that were formed to welcome and support them. But rather than support them back you and the rest of the gay movement want to force carnage on the BSA.

  111. I have to agree that the organization, BSA, is an umbrella organization, but its structure is rock solid if it is to remain true to the principles that B-P founded the organization upon. Homosexuality is NOT a part of the BSA principles: never has been but that is changing so it appears. Let the lawyers argue (and get paid by whom?) but the national leaders decide this based on the oath. The Scout oath does ask us to be “help other people at all times.” But helping how? That dove tails into the Scout Law. Within the twleve laws of Scouting as in the Old Testament,
    the Hummardi Code and the other philosophical and reglious laws, law speaks of relationships: man to God and God to man. We are to honor life but we are to protect it’s principle. God is creator. Homosexuality was NOT created by God for man’s pleasure because it defiles the individual. God created both male and female
    and made that relationship what is it. Homosexuality is not a derivate creation of God but of man. Scouting principles doe not reflect homosexuality. If another organization wan’t to aspire to the same level with Scouting but “gender and sexual preference free” then let it do that. Leave Scouting a homosexual-free organization. Life is confusing enough for a young boy but to expose that age to the a decision that he cannot truely make at that age thru some “instructions written in a charter” is ridiculous. Boys are to be lead, leaders are to lead, parented in a path straight for good, not evil. Therefore, we must remain structurally and organizationally, top to bottom, bound by same principles. The national organization cannot negate its leadership role by the choise which seems to have been made or directed by lawyers. The Supreme Court has already stated its position on the matter. The Scouting principles are there for a purpose. They must be practiced and carried out by the same leaders who are chosen for their moral integreity, not by their sexuality orientation. Boys, as pointed out by others, are not military aged individuals. They must be lead by men/women of moral integreity, religious forthrightness and principled character. Homosexual behavior and orientation must remain outside the membership privileges of the BSA organization. Confusing situations on the local level will only develop if National leadership does not take up its own mantel and lead according to what Scouting is all about: developing boys into men, doing the right thing, living honestly and forthrightly, and developing life skills which will help produce a good citizen, a rounded and trustworthy invididual who honors God, family and country.
    R/Y,
    John W. Owen, Sr
    Eagle ’62
    BS for Life

    • Um, John, sorry to break it to you, but God created gay people. He creates people who are born with two sets of genitalia (hermaphrodites). God creates people who’s gender does not match their sex, and their sexual orientation that doesn’t match either. God creates people born without limbs. God creates people born with unspeakable abnormalities. God creates babies that die before being born. God creates mentally unstable people who kill others. God creates diseases. God creates horrible death and destruction.

      How? Because it happens every day. How we cope with it is how God judges us. Yet, you cast stones. Straight people create gay people every day through reproduction. You fear what you do not understand. You must fear God, because you do not understand Him.

      I know gay people who have far greater love and respect for God than you ever will. They, too, are God’s children, and they know full well the depths of hatred and ill well that consumes men like you.

      • Gender is determined by chromosomes not someone’s feelings of what they wish to be or what surgical modifications or mutilations are done.

      • Nathan judge not less you be judged. My God created the Bible that teaches that homosexuality is a sin and there is no living proof that people are born that way. Homosexuality is a creation of man not God while we are all children of God we are also children of our own choices. Trenton

      • Actually, if you believe in the Christian dogma God sent the message. Man wrote it down. Man is fallible…

  112. It is unfortunate that a minority can rule the majority. What happens now with Youth Protection and a Scout is Morely Straight???

    • nothing happens with them.. this has been just fine in the UK for many years.. Also, this isn’t a minority that is ruling a majority… it is a majority that is taking it’s voice back from a minority..

      A Scout is Obedient.
      A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobeying them.

      A Scout is Reverent.
      A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.

      • The UK scout oath and law does not and has never mentioned anything about being morally straight or morally anything at all. If we go the UK route, I think we’ll need to remove the morally straight portion of the scout oath. The UK scouts have also been considering an alternate oath for atheists, so I’m sure that’s on the horizon for the Boy Scouts as well.

    • Morally straight. Learn how to spell before you cast stones. How about people who don’t lie, don’t cheat, don’t abuse others, don’t treat others with disrespect, don’t steal, etc. That’s pretty moral. Loving in a mutual relationship isn’t something I’d immediately call immoral, just because i don’t understand it and have a hard time putting myself in their shoes. Isn’t it immoral for a 95 year old man to marry a 25 year old, but our society celebrates Hugh Hefner, a pornographer. Oh, that’s ok because he’s straight. So, a gay person, who’s in a committed relationship, wants to wait to get married before having sex (oh yeah, cuz straight people do that alllllll the time, hahaha), doesn’t lie, doesn’t cheat, is a leader, gives back to the community, and its just awesome, is immoral because God gave them a set of hormones that made them attracted to the same sex?

      By the way, if everyone follows Youth Protection, there will never be an issue. Keep pedophiles away from kids!

      I mean, am I to assume that because you’re a straight male than you might molest and abuse little girls? I’ll be sure to never let my daughters around straight men.

    • When the Scout Oath and Law were written, “straight” did not have the same connotation it does today. According to usscouts.org:

      . . . and morally straight.

      To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs. The values you practice as a Scout will help you shape a life of virtue and self-reliance.

      (http://usscouts.org/advance/boyscout/bsoath.asp)

      Respect and defend the rights of all people? Sounds like an admirable thing to do.

    • If you don’t have an umbrella policy covering you for lawsuits, get one now. If you already have one up the coverage, this is going to be a legal nightmare.

      • I am referring to National passing the buck. I believe lawsuits will happen if this policy is pushed through to appease the activists without implementing a transition time, proper changes and updates to youth protection to equally and fairly protect all of the youth and training for leaders without much experience with gay youth to understand their unique issues and so on.

        Plus there will be lots of residual lawsuits against units and chartered organizations that choose to stay traditional and so forth.

      • Hi Jo- I was wondering how you felt about the quality of BSA training on how to deal with heterosexual youth and their issues? What? There isn’t any? That’s right. Your whole argument about needing training on how to deal with gay youth is very disingenuous. Youth are youth. Gay or straight. Cool or nerdy. You have encountered youth who are gay. You just don’t know it because they’re not proclaiming to the world that they are gay. Sexuality is just one aspect of what makes up their personality. Very little would change in scouting if this policy were adopted, except that I’m hoping we might get more access to facilities and resources that have been closed to us because we discriminate. And I won’t be ashamed of the BSA’s membership stance the way that I am today.

    • *Morally Straight.
      That is referring to a scout having good morals and has nothing to do with sexually orientation.

  113. Major cave-in by national, passing the buck to the local units. Good luck with the facilities and accomodations at Jamborees and the like. I look forward to the guidelines on how a unit is supposed to advertise its membership stance and screen on the issue. The lawsuits we were seeing at the national level will now be targeted to the local units and chartering organizations.

    • Brad, do you currently let your straight boys shower with other boys? Most kids I know are pretty private. I know I was when I was in scouting or in sports. Heck, most men in a 24hr fitness try to cover up modestly. If everyone follows YPT, there shouldn’t be problems. As if boys who don’t join a troop pre-puberty don’t find out they’re gay while in a troop at 13 or 14, lol.
      It’s already happening every day across this country.

      • There is a whole host of youth protection issues that open up. We don’t allow straight youth males and females to tent together or be “buddies”. Are we going to impose this same standard on gay youth? Do I now need to ask each their sexual orientation so that I know who can tent with who or who can be a buddy with who? We have the strict standards between youth males and females to try to avoid putting them in a situation where something could happen. We were all “horny” teenagers at one point in our lives. Two gay youth are just as likely to engage in hanky panky as the straight male and female youth are.

        That’s really my core issue here. This is going to be a nightmare. If I there is a pairing between youth and because they were not honest about their sexual orientation (gay or straight) and something happens, what is the legal exposure? It looks like National may just make this happen then see how lawsuits and such sort out before changing the rules. I think if the rules are going to be changed due to money that they really need to think out all of these issues and scenarios and come up with clear and concise guidelines.

      • One really needs to be aware of youth-on-youth issues regardless of the BSA membership policies. Bullying and other inappropriate adolescent behavior occur in today’s troops. We deal with it now. It won’t be any different if the membership policy changes.

      • Nathan I was a Scoutmaster at the National Jamboree in 2010 and the boys showered in a certain location in the Western District and they certainly showered together like they do in their home school gyms. The men showered together at different time schedule’s than the boys YPT was certainly in force at all times. Trenton

  114. As for the question of WWJD, the Bible tells us in John 8:11 when addressing the prostitute He said “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.” Now prostitution is spoken of in the same context as homosexuality in almost all verses of the Bible, hence making it a sin too. So WWJD to the gay Scout or Scouter? He would tell him to sin no more.

    • So…you’re assuming that a gay person is a prostitute? That’s a pretty far reach there, buddy.

      When you can tell me when and how you chose to be straight, i might listen to you.

      • Is that your only argument? In the wild, animals that deviate from the norm are killed and eaten. That’s biology. Yeah I’m sure the gay supporters will pull out a few very rare examples that are exceptions to the rule.

        We’re humans so we don’t kill and eat those that deviate but it’s not a normal thing for humans to be gay. Organisms exist to reproduce. Those that can’t reproduce go extinct. That’s how you can tell that it is not a normal trait.

      • Actually science is demonstrating that homosexuality is more common than previously thought.

        Homosexuality has been Observed in most vertebrate groups, and also among insects, spiders, crustaceans, octopi and parasitic worms. The phenomenon has been reported in more than 1500 animal species, and is well documented for 500 of them, but the real extent is probably much higher. http://www.nhm.uio.no/besok-oss/utstillinger/skiftende/againstnature/gayanimals.html

  115. This is a HORRIBLE idea. Homosexuality is damaging to families and morality. My basis for that claim is here: http://creation.com/arguments-against-homosexuality

    The BSA is a private organization and should uphold the values that it was founded upon. I DO think gays and lesbians should be able to live the way they choose, but corrupting the morals of a private organization is preventing others from living the way that they choose. If homosexuals want to go camping, there is nothing preventing them from doing so. In fact, they can create their own camping organization if they want to.

    God Bless

    • let me remind you of the values the BSA was founded upon..

      A Scout is Trustworthy.
      A Scout tells the truth. He is honest, and he keeps his promises. People can depend on him.
      A Scout is Loyal.
      A Scout is true to his family, friends, Scout leaders, school, and nation.
      A Scout is Helpful.
      A Scout cares about other people. He willingly volunteers to help others without expecting payment or reward.
      A Scout is Friendly.
      A Scout is a friend to all. He is a brother to other Scouts. He offers his friendship to people of all races and nations, and respects them even if their beliefs and customs are different from his own.
      A Scout is Courteous.
      A Scout is polite to everyone regardless of age or position. He knows that using good manners makes it easier for people to get along.
      A Scout is Kind.
      A Scout knows there is strength in being gentle. He treats others as he wants to be treated. Without good reason, he does not harm or kill any living thing.
      A Scout is Obedient.
      A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobeying them.
      A Scout is Cheerful.
      A Scout looks for the bright side of life. He cheerfully does tasks that come his way. He tries to make others happy.
      A Scout is Thrifty.
      A Scout works to pay his own way and to help others. He saves for the future. He protects and conserves natural resources. He carefully uses time and property.
      A Scout is Brave.
      A Scout can face danger although he is afraid. He has the courage to stand for what he thinks is right even if others laugh at him or threaten him.
      A Scout is Clean.
      A Scout keeps his body and mind fit and clean. He chooses the company of those who live by high standards. He helps keep his home and community clean.
      A Scout is Reverent.
      A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.

      No where does it say a scout is not gay

      • You are correct, John. However, you cannot ignore the Scout Oath, in which every scout pledges, on their honor, that they will “keep themselves…morally straight.”

      • ok lets be clear..
        On my honor I will do my best
        To do my duty to God and my country
        and to obey the Scout Law;
        To help other people at all times;
        To keep myself physically strong,
        mentally awake, and morally straight.

        So you are also making an oath to follow the scout law..

        morals plural of mor·al (Noun)
        Noun
        1 A lesson, esp. one concerning what is right or prudent, that can be derived from a story, a piece of information, or an experience.
        2 A person’s standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.

        So being morally straight means that you are sticking to your standards of behavior or beliefs of what is right or wrong..

        your morals may be dictated by your religious beliefs.. and they may say that you should not practice homosexuality.. and be being Reverent.. I’m ok with you following your religious beliefs and not being Gay..

        But my religious beliefs may say that God does not care if your Gay.. and you being a reverent scouter should also be ok with that..

        We are BOTH being morally straight to our beliefs.. and because we are scouters, and reverent, we can allow for this to happen.

        That was BP’s dream.. that was his vision..

      • Andrew – That’s not correct.

        ‘Straight’ as a term to describe sexual orientation was created in the 1950’s by homosexuals (go ahead, look it up, I’ll wait). Boy Scouts was founded…when? Morally straight references how a Scout shall always do the right thing as per his moral upbringing. Hopefully, that means he won’t lie, cheat, steal or commit acts that society has a law against.

        Can we PLEASE stop using the ‘morally straight’ argument? Please? It’s a timeline thing – Lord BP did not craft this phrase to be abused in such a way every time this argument arises. Of course, if Lord BP were a timelord and had a Tardis, than my argument would be moot. But he wasn’t and he didn’t.

      • Respecting others beliefs doesn’t mean that a reverent scout lays aside God’s laws. A scout is kind, but kindness can be in saying truth.

      • So because it is your God it is the truth? But when it is a different person’s God it is a lie?

        That is not very Reverent, or kind.. and it really isn’t Friendly either..

        “There may be many difficulties relating to the definition of the
        religious training in our Movement where so many different
        denominations exist, and the details of the expression of duty to God
        have, therefore, to be left largely in the hands of the
        local authority.” (Aids to Scoutmastership, 1919) from the later day BP

      • Just because Andrew has a religious outlook that doesn’t support your desires, you label him as irreverent and unkind. And earlier you said you respected all religions…

      • I have no problem with him having his beliefs, but he needs to allow me to have mine also with out feeling the need to justify invalidating them. It is not kind to tell some one else that their beliefs are wrong. Would you like it if I told you that your belief in a singular God was wrong? I would not think so..

        Reverence is having your faith, being active in your faith, and allowing others the same in their faith.

        But telling me I’m wrong in “God’s Law” is not reverence..

    • Your ignorance damages your poor children that have to grow up in such a close-minded household. I shudder to think what you teach your kids….cuz it ain’t biology or chemistry.

      • You make assumptions on children are raised at home and if they are not indoctrinated to accept your gay agenda you say the kids are being damaged?

        For the record before this afternoon my 15 year old did not know my views on these issues. They weren’t relevant and there was no need to address it.

    • In fact several gay friendly Scouting organizations have been created to welcome and support gay youth. But they aren’t getting any help or support because the gay movement wants to force their way into the BSA.

  116. I had to go all the way to the end of the second page of comments to find one that touched on what should REALLY be concerning any adult leader of a Scouting unti that has a religious chartered organization (Protestant church, Catholic church, LDS church/ward, etc.). If this plays out like it seems it will, National will leave it up to each UNIT (i.e. the unit committee, which in turn MUST follow the wishes of its chartering organization) to decide if it will allow gay members, leaders, etc. Beyond the argument about sexual orientation relative to religious values, there is a very real chance of a unit NOT allowing gay members and then being sued by someone for not “letting them in…”. As a great number of churches that charter units are from denominations that do not condone homosexuality, this could end up being a rather nasty result. Will National pledge its support to these chartering organizations and the associated units? If the national umbrella of “no, we don’t allow that…” is removed, will we see individual units be threatened by legal action? Will those religious chartering organizations decide to drop Scouting as they want to minimize the risk of such court action and the associated costs they cannot affort? Something to think about if you take a step back from the religious hyperness and less-than-mature name-calling I’ve seen on this thread thus far. And for the record, I’m a unit leader for a Troop sponsored by an LCMS Lutheran church and school. You can probably guess where I might stand on the issue based on that, but as you can see there are other important aspects to this debate that need to be discussed in a rational manner.

    • Much like many PTOs, United ways, Boys and girls clubs, Christian churches and many many others dropped their unit’s when they national forced the discrimination policy on them. I think your going to find more support for it then agents it. Right now you have people attempting to gain access to the program. If there are people in your area who feel that your chartered org is being exclusive, then they have a choice.. they can start a unit. Now all they have is the options to whole cloth start their own scouting like organization.

      In the end I don’t see law suits against the chartered Org, because their will be the option to start their own unit. Where the BSA currently stands there is no choice.. This is going to solve a lot of bad press and wasted money on legal bills..

      • ” If there are people in your area who feel that your chartered org is being exclusive, then they have a choice.. they can start a unit. Now all they have is the options to whole cloth start their own scouting like organization. ”

        If this is true then why has the Gay community not simply made their own camping/outdoor group rather than cause so much of a problem. Would it not be easier, and cheaper. You could have rainbow colored tents and everything!!!

      • Good point John. Given all the rhetoric, the gay alternative to Scouting has been conspicuously absent in reality.

      • There are several gay friendly Scouting organizations that were formed to welcome and support the gay youth. But the gay movement ignores them and chooses to spend tons of money and resources forcing their way into the BSA and ignoring the people who spent time and money coming up with a solution.

        Typical intolerant liberal activists.

    • Um, can a person sure the LCMS church because the church doesn’t allow gays? If the answer is no, then, no, a gay person cannot sue the LCMS for not allowing them into the LCMS boy scout unit.

      • So if they don’t sue they will bring on the gay agenda hate machine to bully and harass, talk about, etc. Then they will go after the local Councils for allowing such an evil Scout unit to exist.

    • This is going to be a lawsuit jungle. Only the activists, lawyers and National will profit from it.

      • I agree on this point. And I think National will be named in many of the suits to come. So I think they’ll actually lose out in this.

      • I worry about the cash strapped councils that will be named and affected once National says that they have changed their policy at the National level so people need to contact the local councils and chartered organizations.

    • The exact same thing with blacks in BSA happened in 1974. You can look at that history to see what the results were.

      If a church is willing to stand up and state, clearly and publicly, that gays are not welcome in their youth programs, then a troop chartered by that church will have no legal problems. They will only have the same PR problem that the church already has.

      However, if the church and the troop want to avoid the embarrassment, and expense, of being labeled “anti-gay”, the church may have to consider revising their policy toward gays. This is the exact same thing that happened with the LDS church, with regard to blacks, in 1974.

      • cwgmpls Blacks both male and female were always allowed to be members of the LDS Church and males were allowed to hold the priesthood in 1978 after a revelation to the Church Prophet President Spencer Kimble at that time to change its doctrine. Sorry the LDS Church will never change its position that homosexuality is exceptable in Church doctrine The LDS Church has already considered its position on Homosexuality and has made the decision to help homosexuals to repent of the sin of homosexuality and to renew their covenets when they were baptized . Trenton Spears

      • Obviously because National, their supposed chartered “partner”, is abandoning them.

      • “If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, a Scout tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobeying them.”

        BSA is trying to change the rules in an orderly manner. Sounds EXACTLY like what being obedient is all about.

      • Yes, I totally agree. My reply was intended for the poster who claimed “many units will not abide” the proposed changes. Sorry for the confusion 🙂

  118. When does the majority stop caving to the minority? We need strong leadership NOW. And don’t look across the pond for anything, there already gone.

    • The minority gets special legal protections that it uses as a weapon and a shield. If the majority used their tactics we’d be accused of being haters, etc.

  119. From the 1914 Scoutmaster’s Handbook:

    “The Scout Movement is not antagonistic to any civic enterprise, but rather seeks to cooperate with all other good movements in the interest of the boy. The Movement is wholly non-sectarian and plans to work with every sect and creed alike; it is non-military, and seeks to promote Peace Scouting and to develop educational character-building for good citizenship. It is wholly non-partisan. It cannot favor one interest against another and cannot countenance interference on any debatable questions, whether social, religious or political.”

    Thank you

    • You forgot the rest of the meaning. That same manual also specifically lays out a Scouts Duty to God, and the tenants of the Scout Law. Ultimately those are the things that matter. There is no ambiguity in the Scout Law or Scout Oath. It means what it means. Baden Powell made that abundantly clear in his writings and in the way he ran his Troops.

      • yes andrew he did.. you should read this..
        “There may be many difficulties relating to the definition of the religious training in our Movement where so many different denominations exist, and the details of the expression of duty to God have, therefore, to be left largely in the hands of the local authority. But there is no difficulty at all in suggesting the line to take on the human side, since direct duty to one’s neighbour is implied in almost every form of belief.”
        (Aids to Scoutmastership, 1919)

      • Oh, so gay people cannot worship the God that created them? You silly, boy. When you grow up to be a man and truly understand the nature of Scouting, God, and morality, check back in. Until then, don’t cast stones. Jesus comforted those shunned by society. You are like the crowd shouting for Barabas – quick to condemn and light on thoughtfulness.

  120. There are plenty of opinions here, and plenty of reasons to pick from to support those opinions. I must say that I’m disappointed that an organization I saw as having a moral compass, and a firm idea of what that means, seems to be considering caving in to the current spirit of the age.
    I make a prediction. This will not help the Scouting movement in America. It will cause great dissension among units, districts and councils; not to mention the sudden uncertainty units from more conservative areas will now get to experience at say, national jamborees. I also predict a future splinter movement, such as a possible boys’ counterpart to the American Heritage Girls program.
    I hope that there is still time for the BSA to prevent this failure of leadership.

    • S, gay people cannot have a moral compass? They were created by God and a heterosexual couple, after all.

      Or do you mean that straight people, who write Bible passages about gay people needing to be put to death, are the only ones that can have a moral compass?

    • We only need to look at the GSA as an example. They became “inclusive” years ago. Did their numbers jump up? Did the money at the end of the rainbow appear? Nope. Their numbers continue to drop, Councils closing up, etc. Girls Scouts used to be so prominent in the communities, now, at least around here they are basically non existent except the occasional brownie selling cookies.

      Do you know what is still prominent around here, especially in comparison to the Girl Scouts? The BSA.

      Canada became all inclusive and saw a significant drop in membership and money.

      National is hoping for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. I guess they need it to support the National Executive’s salary of what, $1.6 million dollars a year?

      • I heard this past weekend from a GSA recruiter that there are 3.2 million girls in GSA, how many are in BSA

      • Probably a bit lower though as I have been told that they play some numbers games in regards to Scoutreach.

      • What have our numbers done over the past 10 years under the current policy? Locally, I’ve seen things drying up as well. I think this has more to do with competition for a youth’s attention than it does this one issue. In fact, Boys Life/Scouting Magazines have touched on this numerous times in recent years – “How does a unit compete effectively for a Scout’s time?” is a common theme.

      • I believe you are correct in that the numbers are more affected by kids being in so many activities. Scouting has also lost some of its cool factor too. Both of those are significant. Add in the current issue as well and that could add up to some significant membership losses.

  121. This is the most reasonable compromise imaginable. It allows those chartering organizations that don’t believe that homosexuality is right to form their unit around that principle, and those COs that understand that homosexuality is not a “lifestyle choice” or a moral failing can allow homosexuals to be part of their units. BSA, please do the right thing and stop discriminating against homosexuals. Approve this policy and the BSA will be a stronger organization.

  122. We are arguing whether we should include gays, yet my straight black son had to fight an uphill battle to be allowed to become an Eagle Scout. For 2 years the leadership for the troop he belonged to tried to keep him from completing his project and then from getting his paperwork done and then again to get his board of review set up. Also even though our cub scouts have many hispanic kids or by scouts have none. If they bridge over it does not take long for them to quit.

    We need to address discrimination of all types within scouting and make sure that any boy who wants to belong is allowed and feels welcome.

  123. I proposed to my church leadership to charter a Cub Scout pack. There final question to me: is there any downside? There wasn’t any yesterday, but there is today if BSA goes ahead with this policy change. They have just transferred all the risk in lawsuits from National to the local chartering organizations. Churches, synagogues and mosques, may be able to survive as chartering organizations which do not allow homosexual leaders. However, non-religious organizations like VFW, American Legion, schools, which do not have a religous objection will be targeted by homosexual activists to serve as leaders and then the lawsuits will begin. BSA National Board needs to think long and hard. The radical homosexual movement will view this as a victory. They have no interest in our movement, only its destruction.

    • A scout is honest.. and I TRUST that you honestly believe that. But I can tell you for a fact.. that you are wrong. there is not radical homosexual movement out to destroy the BSA and America. There are just regular people, who don’t want to have their children be called bigots for something that they don’t believe in. That was decided by people in a different part of the country..

    • Wait! You mean you church can currently ban homosexuals and not face lawsuits??

      Sooo, therefore, a youth group within that church can suddenly face a lawsuit when the parent group cannot? You make my head spin, lol.

      • Non religous groups who do not already have their own membership guidelines for homosexuals will not be able to legally impose a no gal leader requirement. They will not have a leg to stand on in a court battle.

        Religous organizations which do not allow gay membership will be able to continue.
        National, however, has handed over all the risk of lawsuits to the chartering organizations when previous it was handled by National. Most chartering organizations do not have the resources to fund this type of lawsuit. Therefore, they will either capitulate to the gay rights movement or drop Scouting altogether.
        I put before you hte case of the GSUSA. If you think BSA numbers are bad, take a look at GSUSA. They jettisoned both God and prohibition on lesbian leaders a long time ago. Hasn’t helped them grow one bit.

      • This was already the case. The Chartered Org has always been on the hook legally. There will be no more law suits because those who feel disenfranchised by one chartered org’s way of doing things can go start their own unit now.. so are you really afraid that you will loose members?

        And GSUSA has lost members well because their program, not because of their stance on sexual orientation.

  124. Simply said, the approval of a new policy will cast a dark gray cloud over the future of Scouting and will result in many religious chartered organizations reconsidering their affiliation with the BSA.

  125. I wholeheartedly support National’s consideration of allowing membership for gay youth. It would have been better to have considered this long before now, rather than having to stand accused of bowing to media and social pressures. All boys can benefit from the scouting experience, and gay youth have been present in the BSA, probably since its very origins; the only change is that they may now be able to admit it.

    I believe that National’s proposal to allow units to set their own policies provides a great compromise, not an example of “passing the buck”.

    I’m proud to be the scoutmaster of a great group of scouts who collectively show respect and tolerance for those with views and beliefs other than their own. With proper leadership and guidance this is, and should be, a non-issue.

    Boy Scouts is a great youth organization of which I will always be proud to be associated with.

    • National is only doing this because of the social pressure, the media attacks, to get out of lawsuits and pass them on to local councils, chartered organizations and units and the hope for a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

  126. Public schools cannot discriminate, so a decision to allow gays in scouts seems to indicate that every unit whose chartered organization is a public school (or any other government entity) will automatically accept gays.

  127. What a huge disappointment. We are supposed to be teaching boys to be men, to stand firm and keep high moral values. I pray that National does not go down this road.

    • Hey Nathan. Gender is determined by chromosomes, not what some wishes they were.

      You like to keep bringing up hermaphrodites, a very rare condition where a person has both sets if genitalia. This is defect in biology and not a normal condition. Many hermaphrodites have surgery at a young age to correct this.

  128. There is a lot of association of “Morally Straight” with the principles of specific christian sects. but I believe that they are not properly interpreting BP.
    “Development of outlook naturally begins with a respect for God, which
    we may best term “Reverence.
    Reverence to God and reverence for one’s neighbour and reverence for
    oneself as a servant of God, is the basis of every form of religion. The method of expression of reverence to God varies with every sect and denomination. What sect or denomination a boy belongs to depends, as a rule, on his parents’
    wishes. It is they who decide. It is our business to respect
    their wishes and to second their efforts to inculcate reverence,
    whatever form of religion the boy professes.
    There may be many difficulties relating to the definition of the
    religious training in our Movement where so many different
    denominations exist, and the details of the expression of duty to God
    have, therefore, to be left largely in the hands of the
    local authority. But there is no difficulty at all in
    suggesting the line to take on the human side, since direct duty to
    one’s neighbour is implied in almost every form of belief.”
    (Aids to Scoutmastership, 1919)

  129. While this may appear as a step forward for the BSA the reality is just the opposite. Many Scouters and Scouts have passionate feelings on this issue. I am certainly no different. I have spent my valuable time involved in an organization that until today has always upheld the highest of standards. Lord Baden Powell set forth those standards more than 100 years ago. They mean the same today as they did then. Baden Powell understood that when society turns on one another the only thing that can save it is adherence to a strict moral and ethical code. When the world changes in directions that are antithetical to that code it takes courage to stand against the tide.

    Today we live in a world that says the Boy Scout Oath and Law are antiquated. The world says the organization must change to meet the needs of the individual. Baden Powell understood the opposite was true. The first Troops were highly selective. Only the best and the brightest were allowed in. Each boy was placed on his honor to do all he could to uphold the values of Scouting. The BSA Executive Board is populated with some men who believe that the entire organization must change to legitimize unacceptable behavior that runs contrary to 100-year-old beliefs. They are concerned with their own personal legacy as opposed to standing firm against the tide.

    As a Scouter I do my best to do my duty. I teach my Scouts to respect their fellow citizens. I encourage them to do good works wherever they can. Treating people with respect does not mean I have to sacrifice my standards and values to make someone more comfortable. Contrary to the world view I can love my fellow man and still shun the sin. What National is asking all of us that believe in the Scout Oath and Law to do is select which parts to follow. There is more to living a morally straight life than sexual preference. There is more to cleanliness than personal hygiene. Being trustworthy means more than completing some checklist and Baden Powell understood this truth.

    The BSA is a private organization with the full protection of the Supreme Court and the Constitution. Despite those valuable protections, National has decided that the fight for Scouting will be transferred on the hundreds of Chartering Organizations around the nation. They are turning their backs for a disgruntled few that never intended to follow the tenants set forth 100 years ago. Many of the stories we read in the media today are littered with Scouts who believe because they completed some list they are “entitled” to Eagle. They tell of how they lied or hid the truth about themselves to gain through false pretenses and malicious intent an award they did not earn ethically or morally. National is now rewarding their lies and deceit while slapping the CO’s and members that have stood steadfast with Baden Powell and the Scout Oath and Law.

    What does it say about an organization willing to throw away 100 years of good works, tradition, and honor. Baden Powell did not allow those who followed him to observe only the fashionable or applicable tenants while ignoring the unpopular hard ones. My son and tens of thousands like him earned Eagle Rank the way Powell and the founding fathers of Scouting intended. They helped to build the boy led tradition the old-fashioned way. Now we are faced with a new generation of Eagle Scouts. The “entitled” generation filled with Scouts who deny and besmirch the history, tradition, and honor they claim to know. This is the Wayne Brock version of Eagle Scout that rewards lying and distortion. A version that says it is okay to ignore the Scout Oath and Scout Law. A version for sale on the altar of a world that says lower the standards while elevating the unworthy. A version that runs contrary to all that Scouting was founded upon.

    None of us who believe that Scouting should stand strong support hatred or bigotry. We are passionate and kind. We have genuine heart felt disagreements. We are cursed and labeled in vicious and shameless ways. We have been demonized and slandered with the full faith and blessing of Mr. Brock. We believe that if you do not like the tenants of the traditional Boy Scout vision please do not join. You have that right. Please go and form your own group. Put in the sweat, blood, and tears to make it all you can. Please have the courtesy and decency to leave my organization alone. We understand your need for acceptance and respect. Please remember that respect is earned not taken through litigation or force. Destroying my organization is an anathema to the American way. You are free to form your own path. We are not villains. You will find millions of Scouts willing to serve and make a difference in the world regardless of your politics. That is the Scout way. Just leave us in peace as we follow the full faith and credit of the Scout Oath and Scout Law.

    • I am sorry but disagree on one simple point, and I will state it again.. “Morally straight” you are basing this on morals that are dictated from your religious beliefs.. and where that is ok for you.. it is not alright for others, who’s religious teachings are different.

      When it comes to religion BP in his own words said.. “There may be many difficulties relating to the definition of the religious training in our Movement where so many different denominations exist, and the details of the expression of duty to God have, therefore, to be left largely in the hands of the local authority. But there is no difficulty at all in suggesting the line to take on the human side, since direct duty to one’s neighbour is implied in almost every form of belief.”
      (Aids to Scoutmastership, 1919)

      His definition of Morally straight was based upon the individuals religious beliefs as they are taught to him by his family and local community.

      his solution to this problem is the same solution that national is proposing.. that it should be a local issue, and we should trust that the principals of what makes a decent human being are taught by all religions. Not dictated by one.

      Nothing is being thrown away, but the dogma dictated by one group.

    • Very well said. Sadly the intolerant closed minded gay movement won’t accept a word of it.

  130. Beth you have been on here for hours. Is your gay lifestyle so unfulfilling that you have nothing better to do than troll around and harass Boy Scouts? While you were doing that, I attended a Boy Scout meeting and a committee meeting. We discussed ways we could help the youth be successful scouts. Not one word was mentioned about gays in scouts because there just isn’t a place for it. You shouldn’t have twisted my statement. The Bible is the truth . It states homosexuality is wrong.

    • i didn’t twist any statement. i have been reading this blog for a while, because this is an issue that i feel passionately about. i am not gay. i am a straight ally. i believe in equal rights for all.

      do you need to see my scouting resume? i am an assistant scoutmaster and committee chair for my son’s troop, a committee member for two cub packs, on my district committee with two offices. on the board of my council’s university of scouting. my son is a den chief. i am a woodbadger. i have been awarded my district’s award of merit. i believe in this program. i believe that all boys have the right to be included in it.

      i had no scout events today. i’ve been kind of sick, actually, so i have not done much today other than laundry and make dinner. i had a little time to kill. yesterday i went to a cub scout meeting and a cub scout day camp planning session. today i did work on both a troop and pack charter. it’s complete aside from three people that i have been after to complete YPT.

      you believe that the bible is truth. not all believe that. the BSA does not advocate for any one religion. there are many variations, even within christianity. not all exclude gay individuals. it is not up to you or any individual to decide who is on the moral high ground and are therefore worthy of inclusion in the BSA. why can we not leave other people alone and not worry about what they do behind closed doors in their own homes and bedrooms?

      • No, your assumptions are way out there. I think they want everyone to know they are gay. By making their sexual preference known it creates influence.

        In my opinion, it is a mental illness. People are not born that way, regardless of what the song says.

      • my assumptions are not way out there. i was making a rhetorical point. most gay people don’t walk around telling everyone that they are gay. people that are going to want to participate in a gay pride parade are probably not the same gay people that want to join a boy scout troop. sexuality will continue to NOT be a topic of conversation for boy scouts. people simply exist. there will be no discussion of homosexuality in scouts, just as there should be no discussion of heterosexuality in scouts.

        your opinion is wrong. the medical and psychiatric communities do not classify homosexuality as a mental illness. people are born that way. not because of a song. because of science.

      • I’m aware of what the science and psych communities say. I still disagree. I also don’t agree that alcoholism is a disease. Its easier to let someone believe that are how they are because of someone or something else instead of them having to face they are wrong. Then the psychiatrist doesn’t have to deal with a defensive/combative person….easy money.

      • Look up Intersex, or hermaphrodite. It’ll blow your small mind. People are born many different ways, not just male or female and straight, lol. Look up transgender and transsexual.

        By the way, when did you choose to be straight? Like seriously choose between that or gay? Or did your hormones kick-in, without your choice?

      • Nathan. You like to ask the same question over and over. I was born straight. That is the normal condition. If someone is born gay then that would be a genetic defect because a “mating” pair of same sex humans can’t reproduce, which means they wouldn’t survive.

      • I think that normal teenagers want to have sex quite often. Male or female, gay or straight.

      • Oh you are such a wonderful person Beth. Have you suggested any other hate groups for people to join that disagree with your all or nothing stance?

        How much time and money have you spent helping those other Scouting organizations tha were formed to help gay youth? Or is your only goal to force change on the BSA and not support those organizations?

      • Unlike your all or nothing stance Jo? your only goal is to protect your right to exclude gay youths and leaders.. which under the new policy it is protected.. so I’m still not sure how this hurts you..

      • John you have obviously not read all of my posts. Though I don’t like how this is being forced upon us and the tactics being used by the gay movement, my concerns are based on how this will work logistically to preserve the intent of youth protection.

        For example straight youth males and females are not allowed to tent together to prevent any potential hanky panky. They are also not allowed to be buddies. So now we introduce gay youth. Can two gay youth of the same gender tent together if they are only friends? Sounds easy, right, sure they can. Okay so can a straight male and female who are just friends tent together? Really? Why not.

        Can two gay youth of the same gender be buddies to leave the site together? They can? Then can the straight male and female be buddies for the same reason?

        We don’t allow male leaders to be the only leaders when girls are present and vice versa with boys. For obvious reasons. So can a pair of gay male leaders be the only leaders for a group of boys only? Or girls only?

        I am not, and have not implied that being gay makes someone more prone to be a predator or to do anything inappropriate. Being sick and evil is what makes predators.

        There are so many issues that need to be worked out, guidelines and policies made with input from all sides of the issue, not just Beth’s side before any change should realistically be implemented.

        That being said, I am personally opposed to the changes. I don’t agree with nor do I understand that lifestyle.

        But if National puts this through and gives good guidelines and training that address these issues with the same level of strictness on all the combinations of genders and orientation then I would try my best to give it a shot.

        This is going to be a legal jungle and we are treading new ground. It can’t be rushed through.

      • Jo, I have actually read all of yours.. you have not read all of mine, like when I addressed the last time you brought up hanky panky.. Infact, did you get ANY sleep last night? I know Beth got a little.. cause there was a break in her posts..

      • Hi John. I actually have been getting very little sleep. My son Doug returned home from a week in the hospital after suffering violent seizures and cardiac issues related to post concussion syndrome after his 3rd concussion in a month. So he is under cocoon therapy for the next several weeks to months until he recovers. So while he sleeps I sit in the darkened room and use my tablet to keep me busy. Probably more than you cared to know, but you asked. 🙂

        By the way lesson learned to pass on. Take ANY head hit seriously. He wants to take on concussion awareness as part of his Eagle project.

      • Well. Since I am a volunteer in the BSA, and there is no chapter of any of the other organizations that you have referred to locally, I have not supported them. I have never heard of several of them. My son is friends with others in his boy scout troop, and other troops in our district and council. This is the organization that we belong to. I would simply like to see it live up the the values that it states it espouses through the scout oath and law. I truly don’t understand why inclusiveness is seen as a problem.

      • You joined the organization knowing the policies and values it publicly stated and thought they would magically change?

      • Actually, when I joined it was because my first grade son came home and said he wanted to be a cub scout. To go camping, shoot bb buns, fish, and tie knots. The thought of any controversy of whether or not gay kids or adults were allowed to participate never crossed my mind. Now that I have been involved for years, I am aware of the policy and feel that it should be changed. The new proposed policy seems like a good solution. Those that want to remain in units that exclude gay members, they can do so. Those that want to be in scouts and not deny who they fundamentally are in the process can find a unit that allows them to participate.

    • another thing. i have never in any circumstance discussed any aspect of sexuality with any youth in this program or outside of it, aside from my own son. since it is my job, as his mother, to teach him what sex is all about and what is right, and what is wrong. i don’t want him having sex with a boy or a girl at the age of 14. that’s what i teach him. a boy in my unit that is very religious once tried to engage me in a discussion or why he believed homosexuality was wrong. my reply to him was that this was not the place to discuss that and i was not the person to discuss it with. there are two other adult leaders, both trusted friends that i have discussed the gay ban with, simply to tell them that i have been very conflicted about being involved, so heavily, with an organization that very openly discriminates against people that i love, both friends and family members that are gay. (and in loving committed relationships, even). in short, i completely agree that there should be no mention of gays in scouts or in fact of any sexual activity in scouts. there is simply no place for it. there is also simply no place for excluding anyone from this program because of who he (or she) was born to be

      • Feedback is a gift….

        Beth – I agree wholeheartedly with everything you’ve written. But… could you please us capital letters when you begin a sentence? It just makes it so much easier to read!

        Not being snarky.. just a polite request.

        thanks!

      • LOL. Feedback is a gift, indeed. I tend to not capitalize beginnings of sentences in my writing. I consider if poetic license. I know the rules, and I can break them if I see fit. But sure, why not. I will make an effort to capitalize the first word of a sentence. However, I’m not sure I have anything left to say that I haven’t already said, so I certainly hope I am not going to remain on this topic. I should really stop looking at it and do something more protective than try to win the internet this morning. 🙂

        Have a good day, Fred.

        YIS

      • So a youth comes to you to explain his feelings on a matter that you are broadcasting your opinion if all over the internet and you just shut him down? And you are a leader? Obviously if a youth is talking to you about it to tell you his feelings on the matter you are either doing as you are doing here, showing hatred and intolerance for anyone who doesn’t agree with your pro gay agenda overtly trying to convert youth to your point of view.

        I’m glad my sons don’t have you as a leader. I’d like to think that my sons leaders wouldn’t just shut him down when he tried to express himself.

      • So if your son were to attempt to speak to one of their scout leaders about sex, you would want them to discuss it? OK… My feeling was that this was a topic that he should discuss with his family. Not me. The boy brought it up because he knew that I am a democrat, and he said that he disagreed with Obama on LGBT equality. I said a scout meeting wasn’t the place to discuss that. Are you now saying, after railing on this blog post over and over about keeping the idea of homosexuality entirely separate from scouts, that we SHOULD talk about it? Yes, I’ve been talking about it on a forum for adult scout leaders. That is VERY different from discussing the issue with my scouts. I’m really confused. It seems that you are arguing with me for the sake of arguing. I have never tried to overtly convert a youth member or scouts (or an adult member, for that matter) to my point of view. If that had been my intent, would I not have actually discussed it with him? You’re truly making no sense.

      • I never said that we should keep gays entirely out of Scouts. I personally don’t want to see the change but I know that it is inevitable because the BSA is going to bow to the pressure. What I have asked repeatedly, in detail, is how are we going to work out all of the logistical, youth protection and legal issues to ensure that the intent and strictness of the G2SS is applied equally across all combinations of genders and orientations. What additional training and protection is going to be offered to the volunteers to limit their exposure?

      • That is in all honesty going to take a little time.. from the start I don’t see it as being any different then it already it.. we don’t have a problem with is currently.. I don’t see that changing.. peer pressure is still going to keep that in check..

        We will need to see what the real issues are that come out of this change, and not just the hypothetical ones being thrown around on here..

    • Jennifer – the Bible also states many things which you chose to ignore. Or should we just ignore certain parts of the Bible like these? Oh wait…you said the Bible, not just parts of it, is the TRUTH!

      A woman should learn quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. 1 Timothy 2:11-12

      I have two virgin daughters. Let me bring them out to you and you can do what you like with them. But do nothing to these men because they have come under the shelter of my roof. Genesis 19:8

      Anyone who dishonors father or mother must be put to death. Leviticus 20:9

      Anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death. Exodus 35:2

      If evidences are not found of virginity for young women, they shall be stoned to death. Deuteronomy 22:13-14, 20-21

      If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. ~ Levitics 20:10

    • Sexuality is not a choice. Come into the 21st century please. Open your mind and possibly your heart. Ignorance is not pretty.

      • It is a choice. Its wrong. I don’t buy into the out with the old mentality gays promote. Wrong is still wrong, no matter what century it is.

      • Ok. Fine. It’s wrong for you. And your family. It’s not wrong for others. And their families. But you believing that it is wrong does not give you the right to not allow others the same rights that you have because of who they are. Honestly, it doesn’t even matter if it’s a choice or not! It would still be ok for others, even if it IS a choice!

      • You’re right, ignorance isn’t pretty. Please find the medical journal and cite where it states that homosexuality is a genetic condition. I am one of those people that values facts over opinion.

  131. By opening up membership, Chartered Organizations will no longer be protected by a national policy upheld by the highest court in the land. Chartered organizations will be open for lawsuits for refusing to admit homosexuals.

  132. The “slippery slope” of this decision is that it one that brings forward the pitfalls of moral relativism. That is, what does “morally straight” mean if there are hundreds or thousands of groups defining morality for themselves – or becoming amoral. What does it mean to be “obedient” if there are a wide variety of conflicting standards to obey? Most importantly, what does it mean to be “reverent”? It seems to me that if the BSA caves to the vocal minority of those pressing the homosexual agenda on Scouting, that the next step will be to cave to those who are offended by recognizing God in any way and remove the requirement of faith in Scouting. “A Scout is Wishy Washy?”

    The practical concerns, of a variety of parents and families, is what happens to the larger community of Scouting? If each unit declares their position on homosexuality and morality, do they then strive towards compatibility of belief concerning sexuality in group events: summer camps, jamborees, klondikes, etc. Does the BSA add a person’s sexuality to registration forms so there can be a designation next to names on a merit badge councilor list so Scouts can work with leaders who are compatible with their faith? It seems like such a decision will either drive groups with firmly held beliefs out of scouting, or worse would keep all the groups together with a divisive split, rather than unite the ranks of scouts with a core set of common beliefs.

    • You have interesting versions of various points of the scout law.

      I’m Catholic, and while we do believe it is a grave sin to practice homosexual acts and we do not support gay marriage, we do accept that people are homosexual and are tasked to accept and pray for them.

      I wonder why this sin is so important to some but other sins are ignored? I know I’m not without sin so I won’t be the one to cast the first stone. I am amazed at the number of stones being cast though.

      • Absolutely. If sinful people were not allowed in churches and temples then they would be empty. We’re called to love and serve people no matter who they are. But the same is not true for putting people in leadership and teaching positions.

      • This is not about casting stones. This is not about hate as is the charge against those who would exclude the gay community are pommeled with. It’s about protecting children. When we swim at the beach in the surf we get out of water when we see fins. It’s fundamental threat minimization whether it’s from “non-gay” pedophiles or gays. Not all sharks bite either.

      • It is not about protecting children. A straight man is just as likely to be a pedophile as a gay man.

      • That is exactly what I just said Beth. A threat is a threat, regardless of sexual orientation and Scouting has kept a blacklist of pedophiles, hence the background check. That is a specific threat that usually can only be identified after a violation has occurred. With the gay community it is a matter of probability. Sure you can swim with sharks, but the risk goes up.

      • No, the risk doesn’t go up. You apparently read my first sentence and not the second. I’ll repeat it… A straight man is just as likely to be a pedophile as a gay man.

    • A scout is hateful? A scout is prejudiced? A scout is intolerant? A scout is ignorant? Oops, must’ve missed that training.

      • So starts the name calling? Why do those who preach “tolerance” end up being “tolerant” of only those they agree with? Why do those who disagree with others jump to accusing others of “hate” or “ignorance” while themselves becoming “prejudiced” in the process? I guess if you can’t attack or defend the actual ideas, you can only hope to attack the people representing the ideas? And yes,your training should have included something about not name calling and trying to be a “bully” – actually the updated Youth Protection training covers it quite well.

      • The BSA has a lot of other things that are considered discriminatory.

        1. Girls are not allowed to join Packs or Troops.
        2. Female assistant Scoutmasters under the age of 21 can not be elected into the OA though male assistant Scoutmasters of the same age can. (Females can get elected after the age of 21)
        3. Unmarried couples are not allowed to tent together.

        I don’t see any giant movement forming to force those changes.

    • It would be awful for the wife to discover that she’s been married to a gay man? Perhaps so. It does happen, though. My point being that you can’t just look at someone and know that they are gay. On the other hand, there are women who are married to gay men, know their husbands are gay, and are just fine with it. To each his own. Live and let live, and all that.

  134. The goal of the LGBT community is not to gain membership, but to destroy an institution that represents everything that they despise. If homosexuals are admitted and people stay they win. If they are admitted and there’s a max exodus BSA will fold and they still win. It’s no different than the military. It’s all about “fairness.” We “owe” it to them. Last time I checked scientists still have not find the “gay” gene. So it’s either a conscious choice or a psychological condition. Either way, it’s unnatural and something I’d rather discuss with my children when I’m ready, not when some other parent’s kid brings it up. My family will leave Scouting if this ban is lifted. It is a matter of principle to me.

      • There’s a good Scouting attitude… You say you support “tolerance” but actually you only support people you agree with.

      • Not so. He must act according to his beliefs but I must not be forced to act according to HIS beliefs.

        “I may not agree with what you say but I’d defend to my death your RIGHT to say it.”

        We are ALL equally right to have and express our own opinions.

        I merely stated that if he were unwilling to stay and demonstrate tolerance for others, then I was content to let him go. I’m equally content to let him stay and differ in our opinions. He, on the other hand, will not stay because he chooses to be intolerant of differing opinions.

        Viva la differences!

      • The rules were already set in place. Who is in violation of the Scout Oath. The Scouts and Scouters that joined or remained knowing they joined under false pretense or those that understand and follow the rules. I don’t see why Scouting needs to bend to the will of such a small percent of the population. I disagree with homosexuality because I believe it is a conscience choice by individuals, not nature. I still have to interact with homosexuals and when I do I am respectful and polite. I don’t see why left wing, radical atheists and homosexuals feel that they need to force their beliefs on every person and organization that disagrees with them. I don’t want to be put in the position to explain why a Scout has two dads/moms to my seven year old. It is a discussion to have, but not at that age. Furthermore, if two Scouts are dating, one is 17 and the other just turned 18 and is now an adult leader, then we do have to make it our business for liablity reasons. Yes, it is a matter of principle, but I wouldn’t understand liberals to understand what that means.

    • The LGBT community does not despise the values represented by scouting. You’re welcome to discuss sexuality with your children on your own terms. If you think that your children won’t know homosexuality is a thing if the BSA continues to discriminate, you’re wrong. It is a matter of principle to me, and many others within the ranks of the BSA that this current policy is wrongheaded. When this policy is changed, discussion of homosexuality in scouts will not change. It will still not happen. Just as discussion of heterosexuality in scouts is not to happen.

      It’s been asked here before… when exactly did you choose to be straight?

  135. This proposal has sparked an outpouring of comments, and appropriately so.

    I consider it incredible that this proposal is under consideration, so soon after it was so soundly defeated recently. A new sheriff in town?

    Despite what the accountants at Ernst & Young might be urging, Scoutmasters like me actively involved in the program on a weekly basis see this proposal as very ill-advised from the perspective of the Scout Law and totally unworkable from a practical perspective.

    Despite the impression one may get from the average Twitter participant, homosexual behavior is far from being embraced by our religions and our culture. The vast majority of people in our American culture still profess Christianity: to cite just one example from Scripture, the first chapter of St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans is crystal clear on the matter. Nature itself excludes this type of behavior as perverted and contrary to our God-given nature. We have always considered homosexual behavior, in fact, any sexual activity outside of a monogamous marriage, as a violation of the Scout Law–a Scout is Clean. Even socially speaking, the overwhelming majority of states in our country have roundly rejected the notion of “gay marriage” through the democratic process. Those afflicted with these urgings have our sympathy, our friendship, but the behavior does not have our approval.

    The proposal is unworkable practically from a youth protection standpoint. Homosexual adults going on backcountry hiking trips or overnight campouts pose a direct danger to 15-, 16-, and 17-year-old boys, even if one holds the belief that homosexuals are not predisposed to child sexual abuse. Physically speaking, a 15-year-old is no longer a child. To believe that homosexual men are not attracted to boys of that age group (say 15-17 year olds) is to put one’s head in the sand. The proposal endangers Scouts!

    Finally, simply giving local units the authority to continue the current stipulations on membership criteria will strike a very heavy blow to National and Council camps, where almost every staff member will now come under suspicion by those of us whose overwhelmingly top priority is child protection. Consequently, many of the country’s best units will simply stop attending Council camps and resort to holding their own “clean” summer camps where they are sure the lads will not face such insidious dangers.

    My best regards to all those involved in the decisionmaking process.

    Kirby Smith
    (Just a run-of-the-mill Scoutmaster)

    • There seems to a thread through many of these e- mails that some how homosexual men are all sexual predators. While I am sure, unfortunately, some homosexual men are predators, I think statistics bear out the heterosexual men are as likely, if not more likely to be sexual predators.

      All sexual predators must be banned , whatever their orientation. Sexual predators must be reported to the police immediately, not hidden away in secret preservation files for decades.

      Asserting that all homosexual men are sexual predators is plain wrong and you are hiding the truth.

      Open the preset ion files, how many of those predators are homosexual?

      • Though I have been very vocal that I have issues with the proposed change, I want to make it clear that I do not believe or support the idea that if someone is gay that they are more likely to be inappropriate or a predator. It takes being evil and sick to be a predator.

    • Well I’m nothing more than another run of the mill Scoutmaster too. I wonder if you are teaching your troop your version of the 11th point?

      So let me ask you what you think is going to happen if this passes. How are you going to be able to tell if someone is homosexual? How will their presence affect the program?

      Are you naive enough to think there are no homosexuals in the program now?

      Which side of the fence did you stand on not so many years ago when the BSA allowed female leaders in Boy Scouts?

    • Scoutmaster’s like me? You don’t represent me, so please don’t make it sound as if you do.

  136. So if the comments here are any indication of the thoughts and feelings of the Boy Scout Units at large, why would BSA make a change of this magnitude, that would upset the vast majority of its existing members, only to placate a vocal group of people outside of the BSA? If they are after new members? Would the increased interest from the homosexual community be greater than the people of faith that would leave?

    • because Bruce, the comments here are only from those who feel strongly enough to voice them. There are many more parents and scouters who feel that the BSA is not holding true to it’s Oath and Law. this group is working from the inside to raise the morals of the BSA back up to what it should be, and maybe get us off this Sexual orientation hangup that is currently killing scouts…

  137. I would prefer to pay more for my sons to stay in the troop than see a change in the mission statement. My fear is that once this door is opened, we will see court cases involving young boys/men claiming they were bullied. This is merely passing the buck to the local units that now have to stand their ground in what they believe. If someone chooses to be homosexual, that’s their choice and if they don’t agree with the principles of a “private” group than they should find their own group to join. The United Way may help bring in monies for the organization, but, in my opinion they have too much overreach (do as we say or we don’t support you.) At what point do we say “enough is enough” and quit giving up our beliefs for others who don’t support us? I’m disappointed in this decision. I have been involved with scouts my entire life with 3 boys earning their Eagles. CD

  138. Prudish? Not at all, you’ve shown your intolerance and hatred towards people who disagree with you by suggesting that they join the Klan.

      • That is no where near appropriate? are you that afraid of change that you are now going to attack a Decent scouter by making things up? Need I remind you the OATH AND LAW that you are supposed to be following?

      • Have you read the content of her comments? She has brought things into the discussion that are not appropriate. Things I would not even repeat. Don’t talk to me about appropriate. I simply made an observation from all the info and filth she has dished out.

      • i’ve dished out filth because i am in favor of allowing LGBT individuals into scouting? my KKK comment was extreme, yes, but it is a hate group. i simply said if someone wants to be part of a hate group, that is a valid option. honestly, though, if that offended someone, i’m sorry for that.

      • I will talk to you about appropriate, I have read her comments and I have not seen as personal or appalling attack as you just committed on her innocent child. you madam should be ashamed and should apologize your actions are out of line.

      • They are the terms you learn in 6th grade biology. I don’t see anything wrong with them.

      • wow. my son isn’t gay. how nice of you to throw an attack at a 14 year old boy that you’ve never met. (to clarify… i call it an attack because that’s how you see it. name calling. i personally don’t care what others think of me). my only goal is to promote equality. period.

  139. If recent memory serves, it was the so-called religious-minded units that covered up sexual abuse of their scouts for quite a long period of time. Pedophiles, who by the way, were heterosexual male adults, supported and continually sponsored by their chartered organization long after allegations were made. Being gay does not make one a pedophile. Being gay does not make one promiscuous and being gay doesn’t mean lying in wait to pounce on your precious son on a camping trip. Being religious should mean accepting all tenets of that religion, no? Judge not lest ye be judged. Love thy neighbor. Show compassion. Hatefulness and ignorance are the real sins. I’d rather have gay leaders and scouts that exemplify scouting ideals around my kids than any of the close-minded hateful people involved in scouting who have posted on this thread. Choose love and acceptance, people. Hate and prejudice weren’t taught by Jesus, right? Or do you only practice your religion when it suits you? Shame on you.

    • You may have to educate me on gayness, but doesn’t being gay mean being attracted to the opposite sex? If the pedophiles were men and sexually abused boys, wouldn’t that make them gay, or at least bisexual? It seems to me that you are changing the definitions around here to support your views.

      • Men who identify as heterosexual, and are married with children are just as likely to be sexual predators as men who identify as homosexual. There is no changing of definitions going on. Typically, sexual abuse isn’t about sex. It’s about power.

      • Yes. But pedophiles who identify themselves as heterosexual and have adult relationships with the opposite sex can still prey on children of either sex. It’s about being inappropriately attracted to their youth, not their gender.

  140. The FAQ section of the Scouts Canada web site states:

    “Do You Have to Believe in God to Join Scouts Canada? Is Scouting a Christian Organization?

    No, but you must have a basic spiritual belief. Spirituality has been one of the three main principles of Scouting around the world since its inception more than 100 years ago. Scouts Canada is proud of its commitment to diversity and welcomes members of many different faiths and denominations.
    You need not belong to an organized religion, but all members must take the Scout Promise in good faith and leaders may include some form of spirituality in their program for the youth. “God” represents spirituality and for some may represent an actual deity, but it may also mean an expression of your personal spirituality.
    “Duty to God” as defined by the World Organization of the Scouting Movement, means “a person’s relationship with the spiritual values of life, the fundamental belief in a force above mankind.”

    Are Homosexuals Allowed to Join Scouts Canada?

    Scouts Canada does not discriminate for reasons of gender, culture, religious belief or sexual orientation.”

    Scouts Canada does not have a chartered partner system like BSA does, so their national association sets the policy. That policy is not the BSA proposal. The BSA proposal is that each chartered partner be allowed to set the policy for the units they charter. It is, however, interesting that Scouts Canada seems to have survived all the problems that people are predicting here.

  141. I am very disappointed in how many people here claim to be scouts, but lack the basic understanding of the scout oath and law. instead of taking it as written they twist it to their fit their own religious needs. Not very scouterly.. and very disappointing..

  142. Baden Powell is often quoted as saying that Scouting at its core is that “We aim for the practice of Christianity in their everyday life and dealings, and not merely the profession of its theology on Sundays.”. The main argument here doesn’t seem to be saying that Scouts should remove “God” from Scouting, but that the BSA should not identify with a particular God/faith that defines a particular sexual morality. It is true that Scouting has stated that any belief in a concept of “God” is sufficient, and the only requirement is that a Scout declares a belief in something beyond themselves. Scouting has not, yet, become a secular organization – separating faith and practice – but this decision will be a large step towards such a decision.

    Many faiths are different, but one thing that devout Christians, Jews, Muslims, Mormons, Catholics, etc. agree on is God’s creation of the world, design and creation of man, and intentions for sexual activity. This is often summarized as “one-man and one-woman for life”. Would a Scouting leader, mentoring boys on building character, be a good example if they were sexually immoral? and further if the news and example of this is being revealed to the boys? There are certainly a wide range of immoral sexual behavior beyond homosexuality – and I’d argue that leaders engaging in any ongoing immoral behavior should be restricted – but living an openly homosexual lifestyle is clearly considered immoral to the vast majority of religious faiths, and has historically been recognized as such by the BSA for the physical and moral safety of Scouts.

    • you should keep reading that Bruce.. cause later he says..

      “There may be many difficulties relating to the definition of the
      religious training in our Movement where so many different
      denominations exist, and the details of the expression of duty to God have, therefore, to be left largely in the hands of the
      local authority.” (Aids to Scoutmastership, 1919)

      • Right – leave the religious training out of Scouts – leave that to the churches. But the core of Scouting is morals which means that the leaders in Scouts should be of good moral character.

      • And what about those volunteer couples who cheat on spouses, divorce, flirt? I see this constantly during roundtables, campouts etc. I have seen scout “volunteering” destroy a marriage and family. Kick them out?

      • I, personally, believe that leaders should be held to a high standard – if they are exhibiting behavior that is immoral then they should not be in leadership. This is really the issue. If we have 100 definitions of “God” in Scouts then we’ll have just as many definitions of what is “moral”.

      • and we do Bruce.. and that is not a bad thing.. it’s very good.. the more we are introduced to differences in a positive way, the more peace we can create here on earth.. that was BP’s plan after all..

        On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Bryan on Scouting wrote:

        > ** > Bruce commented: “I, personally, believe that leaders should be held to > a high standard – if they are exhibiting behavior that is immoral then they > should not be in leadership. This is really the issue. If we have 100 > definitions of “God” in Scouts then we’ll have just a” >

      • If it’s done where the youth were well aware of what was happening and during unit meetings and events absolutely.

      • yes they should be.. and it is the parents responsibility to watch over that.. don’t think for a second that I would not move my son to a different troop or pack, if my son’s adult scout leadership was going against my morals. It is my responsibility to teach my son morals.. not yours..

      • See we can see eye to eye.. so this new policy is allowing me to have a unit that I agree with morally and that you agree with morally.. and they don’t have to be the exact same thing..

        On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Bryan on Scouting wrote:

        > ** > Bruce commented: “Agree, 100%.” >

  143. I strongly agree with Trent Jones. Scouting has been a huge moral compass for many youth and even adults through the 103 years of existence. I am an Eagle Scout of 50 years and this announcement disturbs me greatly. We have fought for many years to keep the principles of Scouting intact and moving forward. Lord Baden-Powell is probably rolling over in his grave as he sees his vision being torn apart due to need for money and to escape legal liability. Next, they will want to remove “Duty to God” from the Promise. The Girls Scouts did this many years ago due to pressure and I have not bought their cookies since.
    Another thing to consider is this, your unit might not allow homosexuals to register with them, but other units might. So are you putting the youth at risk when you go to a Camporee. Summer Camp, Jamboree, Philmont or another Scouting event. Is BSA National going to guarantee that nothing will happen? They do not want any liability at all in this mess. It is almost laughable now that they promote “Youth Protection”. This weekend I just renewed my certification online. I suppose, as long as the adults have that training, everything will be ok. NOT!
    BSA is stepping into dangerous territory with this decision and potentially putting youth and even adults in harms way. I have worked with abused children over the years and the children have a very difficult journey overcoming the trauma.
    So if BSA wants to go down that road, many will not follow.

  144. Finally, BSA will follow the Scout Law. I am a firm believer in scouting, and have participated all my life, but I am glad we are treating everyone with respect and kindness.

  145. I wonder if people who are responsible for this decision read and participate in this debate in these same forums. Whether it’s Bryan on Scouting or Facebook or elsewhere. Or do they sit in an ivory tower? I’d love to know that at least some of this conversation is worthwhile from a standpoint that it is viewed by those that have to bear the burden of reviewing this policy.

    • Well, as I understand there is a lot of discussion between the local Council Exec, their boss, the Council committee chair, and the National Board.. so if this is coming up in national it is because there are enough local council’s that feel it is time to have an honest discussion. Either way this comes out have have a LOT of respect for them addressing this topic. It is obviously emotionally charged, and when ever emotions enter thinking tends to stop.

    • I would highly doubt that those in charge are listening to these forums. If they wanted to listen to our opinions they would have asked us before announcing to the media what thier intentions were.

    • That’s a good question. I guess we won’t know unless someone from National reveals themselves.

  146. Unfortunately this is about the golden rule: Those that have the gold make the rules. This is about money not about the boys. Plain and simple.

    • It’s absolutely about money. Seven months or so ago they shut down the issue, now after losing a couple of higher profile donors this comes up?

  147. It pains me that BSA must defend its policy of honoring God as part of its core principles. At the heart of it, that is what is being debated here. Do we accept the fact that there are standards that can and should be applied to determine whether a person is of good character? Or, for fear of offending someone, do we accept whatever behavior someone else thinks is right? Is there a right and wrong? Is there a godly standard to be applied?

    Is it appropriate to apply Biblical principles to make these determinations? You can push it down to the unit level (and the chartered organization level), but is it appropriate for the BSA organization to implicitly condone an activity (homosexual relations; sodomy) that is clearly against Biblical principles? Without a standard, how can you say anyone has good or bad character? If a unit wanted to permit avowed (openly displayed or openly discussed) unfaithful husbands to be leaders, would this be condoned? If a unit wanted to permit the use of occult ceremonies at campouts, would this be condoned? Of course not. Just because our society has allowed the issue of homosexual relationships to become mainstream, must an organization, which has built its foundation on maintaining that there IS a standard for good character, condone behavior that is clearly against God’s standard? It is no longer possible to be vague or unclear about that standard. BSA has always honored God (a core principle), and now we must clarify what that means. Honoring God means to follow God’s principles, and those principles are clearly stated in His Word. We need to be clear on that.

    • What we also need to be clear on is this. Your god is not my god. My god is loving, caring and supports all. He doesn’t judge. And thankfully, there is room under the big tent that is Scouting for all people who believe in a higher power. It’s encouraged and a founding principle. So what happens when my god and your’s…don’t agree on this issue? That is a principle argument in this discussion. Until you can rationalize that conundrum, please stop thumping.

      • Though he and I have some obvious disagreement Charles is a good Scouter so I have no doubt that you’d enjoy chatting him up. I had the privilege of working with his son briefly at summer camp, and he is a fantastic young man.

      • Thank you Jo, I’ve enjoyed working with your boys as well. I think very highly of you and of them. Disagreements, well they come and they go. Tomorrow, we’ll still wear the tan (or green or blue) uniform and we’ll still be teaching kids how to tie square knots.

      • Ah, one more thing. For what it’s worth, I think you’re on target with many of your points in terms of discussion. I agree that there are going to be legal issues. I agree that integration issues can and will be complicated. And I feel, I think as you do, that the number one goal in the end is to serve the Scouts. I think (I’m restating here but it was a while ago and I no longer see it) that this won’t go through this time because of legal concerns – whether that is what National publicizes or not. I’m personally encouraged that this is a topic of debate again. And I think – again, I’m trying to predict the future a bit – that this will eventually come to pass. I know too many Scouts, both in the program, active and outside of the program currently who give and have given too much for this to become an issue that we ignore. And if we can figure out ways to take boys and girls camping (as in Venturing) I’m sure we can find ways to make an openly LGBT person welcome if that’s how we as adults wish to approach it.

        It will be challenging – no doubt. From my side of the argument, I consider the value of the person to be worth these difficulties of implementation.

        Of course, in my mind we have to get past the problems of ‘limited integration’ that is the current proposal being discussed. That’s a path doomed for failure.

      • On a lighter note, I’m picturing a parody skit in my head of a bunch of BSA big wigs trying to come up with the official BSA publication “Guide to Who’s Right – When God’s Disagree”

        Sorry I couldn’t resist.

      • That’s just it! There is no need for a Guide to Who’s Right! Everyone is right! The BSA already has a way to deal with this. They don’t endorse or advocate for any particular religion. There is no need to! You have yours, I have mine. You don’t have to believe mine, and I don’t have to believe yours. Problem solved.

    • “It pains me that BSA must defend its policy of honoring God as part of its core principles”

      To which god do you refer? What religion is endorsed by the BSA as the one true religion?

    • I am sure you know there are now, and have always been, unfaithful leaders, gay members, and those who do not follow the 10 commandments in BSA. This is not news. I have participated in scouting my entire life, yes, with gay members. I was not “turned gay” nor did I participate in a “sodomy” activity. We were a group of friends, loved the outdoors and had fun together. These are lifelong friends. You should please review the word of God and the scout law before passing judgement.

      Consider an OA ceremony some time. Is this “occult”?

      • Not anymore. From what I have been told parents are allowed to attend all OA ceremonies involving their son.

      • Sorry, I meant the ceremony as one where another God is worshiped. Nothing to do with parents attending.

    • As a Scout Commisisoner from another country it is interesting to see all the comments on the forum, with fellow Scouters arguing their case/expressing their fears over the potential change in your National policy.

      Just a few thoughts:

      1) There are many people on the forum quoting texts from their holy book to boltser their arguement and for some reason stating the holy books contents as fact. In Scouting in the area of Faith and Belief ,there are no “facts”. You can believe what you want, but no matter how fervently you believe something, it does not make it a fact or the truth. Thats is why at the World Scout Jamboree you have a “Faith and Belief Zone” – you won’t find a “Truth and Fact Zone”! Scouting is multi-faith and as Scouts I would hope that we all tolerant of other Faiths.

      2) The proposals (if accepted) would have no affect on the troops/sponsors that disagree with them, as they would not be forced to adopt them. If a prosepective Scout/Prospective Scout’s parents want their child to join a troop that allows gay members, then they would logically choose a troop that chose that guideline – as opposed to taking legal action against a troop that didn’t agree with the policy. They may choose to do so, but as there are troops available that cater for that view I would be suprised if the litigation succeeded.

      3) It would be sad state of affairs if the BSA ended up being split into Councils/Districts/Troops with 2 different sets of views that did not mingle co-operate – a Scout is a brother to all Scouts – regardless of their sexual orientation! A persons sexuality is a private matter and has nothing to do with their activities as a Scout. The only reason it seems to be an issue is people have been forced to declare something that has little relevence to what being a Scout means. I have many friends in Scouting who I admire who are gay – the fact that they are gay is not relevent, as there is no relevence. They are Scouts, nothing more.
      That is all.

  148. So our unit may say ‘no, not acceptable’ to this policy but others will say ‘yes’ and then what we start separate scouting camps, two different Jamborees, etc. to accommodate these different views? Seems to me like BSA is suddenly ‘running scared’ because they’ve lost some big financial backing. (God will provide to those who stay true to his word.) God loves the sinner, but hates the sin – as do we – so if they feel there needs to be a ‘gay’ scouting organization, let them go start one! LEAVE OURS ALONE!

    • I think you are going a bit overboard. BSA lost that financial backing a long time ago when they decided to break with United Way. There have been gay scouts since the beginning, no news here. What has happened is BSA has decided to follow the scout law. As we all should.

  149. SO If I can sum this entire thing up.. here are the key points that are being brought up.

    #1 Religion in Scouting. My God V. Your God. BP said it should be a local issue.. aka Family and Unit.. not national..

    #2 Fear of kids having hanky panky. This has not changed because of this change in policy. there is no sex in scouting.

    #3 Fear of pedophiles. We have the YPT, and two deep leadership.. this has cut back on incidents.. changing the rules will not change this either..

    #4 Fear of legal repercussions against Local units. If a child was abused then the chartered Org was on the hook, along with Council and national.. nothing changes here..

    #5 Fear of being forced to allow gay members into units, via law suit.. Why would people waist money to sue the church over membership when they have the option to form their own unit?

    #6 Fear of having to explain why Person X is Gay to your son.. Well they probably have already had that discussion with their friends.. so your too late for that..

    Have I missed anything?

    • Well since we are no longer a “Christian nation” as declared by our president, your logic is consistent and may win the day. And a sad day that will be.

      • Right. Our country is made up of members of many different religions and many different denominations within these religions. As it always has been.

      • Steve, this is not about the USA being a Christian nation.. this is about the scout oath and law, which was never meant to be exclusively Christian..

        So you can read this as what it is.. I’m not biting that bait, as much as I would love to have that discussion at length.. I say again this is about the scout oath and law.. a scout is reverent (does not say a scout is christian.. )

    • Well said. I have a really hard time understanding the fear. Open your hearts, live by the scout law, and enjoy scouting and what the program has to offer.

    • Boils down to – Is “sexual orientation” a moral choice or an inborn attribute like hair color, gender and skin color. If it is a moral choice, then it makes sense to use it as a criteria for leadership. If BSA National decides that the Scouting position is that it is not a moral choice, then they will remove it from their membership policy. By leaving the definition of morality up to the local charter organizations and units, they will enable the locals the opportunity to develop moral criteria for their leadership and membership.

      • not really, it boils down to, “is it in line with the scout law and oath to exclude people because their beliefs don’t agree with mine”

        On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Bryan on Scouting wrote:

        > ** > Bruce commented: “Boils down to – Is “sexual orientation” a moral > choice or an inborn attribute like hair color, gender and skin color. If it > is a moral choice, then it makes sense to use it as a criteria for > leadership. If BSA National decides that the Scouting position” >

      • I understand, but then you end up with “A Scout is …. [refer to local Unit for what they believe]”

      • Nope. There is nothing in the scout law that says a scout is not gay. It will survive just fine if this policy changes.

  150. I’m not a Bible thumper so I won’t go there. However, my idea of morality and what I teach my sons does not include homosexuality. I just don’t want my kids knowingly exposed to that behavior or life style. I brought my kids to Scouting because the BSA espouses the same views and ethos that I was raised with and those that I wish to pass on to my sons.

    Scouting has always been a bastion of the defense of moral behavior. I am firmly against the BSA changing it’s century old standard of moral values.

      • Why is it reasonable to let 1-3% of the Population dictate the values and policies of a private organization. Why should we have to look for a troop that agrees?

      • Ash, it’s not just 3% who want this change. Those of us who have friends, family members, and respected fellow scouts who are gay would like to see them welcomed. Many religious organizations, such as the Catholic church, urge us to love and respect our gay family members, and feel that a gay person can lead a moral and honorable life through chastity. The BSA is responding to those *inside* the organization, who feel that it is time to change the policy.

      • Quite right. Remember that in the last election, three states voted to legalize same-sex marriage. In some parts of the country, there is widespread, majority support for including gay folks in community life, including church and scouting. This policy will allow the BSA to reflect the moral values of each CO, and of each region of the country, without forcing a policy one way or another on any particular troop.

      • Mike and ASH, you do a nice job of pointing out the intolerance of some vocal bully types who have no respect and reverence for our right to live and promote the timeless values of Scouting.
        It is examine offensive for Scouters to learn that outside (agenda driven) and well funded groups are targeting the BSA and seeking to take it over and destroy our timeless values?

        What is happening to the BSA can be compared to efforts to turn a vegetarian group into a group that eats meat. If you want to eat meat, join the meat eater’s group. Don’t seek to come in to the vegetarian group and take their name and program and money and tell vegetarians who now want to leave the organization to be more tolerant. This called theft. It is not friendly, courteous or kind to seek to do this.

        Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? EagleMom and cwgmpls, are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization?? Please specifically answer this question. For your own good, you really need to openly and honestly answer the question that you keep avoiding, and I ask it with the hope and prayer that you will open you heart and examine the soundness and correctness of the current BSA position even though you disagree with it. The current proposal does not work, it is extreme and offensive to the timeless values of Scouting.

      • BSALS – I still cant figure out what you mean by “join the LGBT” – see my earlier post asking you about this. LGBT is not an organization. It’s an abbreviation for “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender”.

      • Yes, but LGBT consider themselves a ‘community’ just like BSA scouters consider themselves a ‘community’ he is not incorrect in how he is referring to it.

      • EagleMom, regarding you question and the point made by ScoutMammaX3, you can start with the below links….let us know if you need more help with this….
        http://www.amsa.org/lgbt/ntldir.cfm
        http://internationalspectrum.umich.edu/global/worldwideorgs

        More directly, can you answer the following…can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? EagleMom and cwgmpls, are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization? Please specifically answer this question so we can better understand how you define tolerance.

      • SMX3 – If BSALS is referring to the LGBT community when he says LGBT, then he should say LGBT community, or LGBT people, yes? Because it sounds like he is under the impression that LGBT is an organization, like GLAAD. At least, that’s the only way I can make sense of what he’s saying – though I might (or probably!) have it wrong.

        LGBT people don’t all belong to an organization, like BSA Scouters belong to the BSA. You can’t “join the LGBT” the way you can join the BSA. LGBT is just an abbreviation of “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender” – usually you would say “LGBT people”, but that doesn’t make sense when you say “join the LGBT” as if it’s a club. Some LGBT people are members of GLADD and other gay political organizations, but some of them just want to live quietly in suburbia. Some are liberals, some are conservatives. They are not a monolithic group of people who think and act the same way as each other. I don’t understand how you would go about “joining” them.

      • Well interesting comment EagleMom, now I’m confused. Cause if you’re as heterosexual as you claim to be, then you’re against them (LGBT people) completely. So you’re not for them at all, UNLESS (stay with me here) you’ve ‘JOINED’ with them – which is it? please clarify, cause there are a lot of folks on this forum claiming to not be gay but demanding that we let the gays in BSA, are they not ‘JOINING’ with the LGBT’s? (and their agenda to destroy BSA)

      • SMX3 –
        I am heterosexual. I’ve been married for 25 years to my wonderful husband, who is also heterosexual. I was a Girl Scout as a child, and my husband was a Boy Scout. My mother was in scouts – she likes to tell my kids they had it easy as she had no latrines at camp! All three of my heterosexual children have been scouts – one Girl Scout, two BSA. My sister is currently Cookie Mom for her daughter’s troop. One of my sons is an Eagle scout and has worked at summer camp for several years.

        I do not know why you would assume that because I am heterosexual, I am “against” LGBT people “completely”. I know LGBT people sprinkled among my friends, my extended relatives, my husband’s co-workers, my neighbors, my children’s friends and classmates. I am not “against” them. They are like all the other people I know – I agree with them on some things, and not on others. Many heterosexual people in this country are OK with LGBT people being welcomed into various community organizations. As an example, more than 50% of Maine voters were for gay marriage in the last election; the same was true in Maryland and in Washington state. Most of these voters are not LGBT themselves.

        I think the BSA is on the whole an excellent organization, and I think that any boy who is willing to put in the work can benefit from being a Scout, and should have the opportunity to do so. I’d like to see my (straight or gay) friends who do not believe that homosexuality is a sin be able to put their (straight or gay) sons in a scout troop, without compromising their family’s moral beliefs. The proposed policy will allow them to do that, while still allowing you to belong to a troop that doesn’t conflict with your own family’s values.

        I don’t think anyone wants to destroy the BSA. Change it? Yes, clearly some in the BSA want to see change, at least for some troops. But I think the proposed policy makes it clear that the BSA wants to continue to allow troops to exclude gay members if they so choose. Will that change in the future? Perhaps, but I think the proposed two-policy system will, if passed, be in place for many years to come, to give scouts and their families the choice of either option.

      • Then why are you trying to say people can’t ‘join’ LGBT in their agenda? Clearly YOU have. And I wouldn’t touch GSA and their sick partnership with Planned Parenthood even if it meant saving my life! I’d rather die – but knowing you’re involvement with them and their liberal views/agenda it makes sense you would try to help tear down BSA traditions to teach ONLY traditional family values. That said, leaving you with this thought…..

        “Wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it, and right is right even if
        nobody is doing it.” – St. Augustine (354-430)

      • The difference Angie is that they will be exposed to it on the PARENTS terms NOT yours or BSA’s or anyone else!

      • SMX3, I’m really interested in knowing… how exactly do you shield your children from everything that you don’t want them to know about? And at what age do you think it might be appropriate for a boy to be aware of the existence of homosexuality.

      • Excellent and involved parenting. I know my children are a gift from God, not my ‘right’ to have them but blessed to have them. I have viewed them as seeds that were planted and needed love and nurturing to grow strong. I think we all know what would happen of a seedling was put out in harsh whether (either to hot or to cold) before it was strong enough to survive on it’s own..it would die. Our children are guided and nurtured and taught what they need to know by us when it’s appropriate. My children where taught about healthy traditional marriages and the relationship between a man and a woman when they were ready. With that did come the issue of homosexual behaviors that some (including some in our own family) choose. They do not understand why but they know there are people that choose to live this way (or not since they too are Catholic and are not ‘active’ gays). So Beth that is how my boys have strong and healthy views of the world they will be dealing with. It is for EACH family to decide when to teach their children these realities and no one else’s. BSA is and has been a safe place for my family to enjoy the scouting activities without homosexual issues around to cause distress. We pray it will remain that way.

      • And you never take them out in public where they may see two people of the same sex holding hands?

      • On the contrary Beth, our lifestyle allows our children to be more socialized then the average american child. However, like all other important decisions in parenting comes the question ‘where is the best place we feel we can raise our children?’ For us it was NOT a liberal progressive area that would spit in the face of the traditional family values. We choose somewhere that allows for their healthy emotional growth, along with good stimulus and educational opportunities, and like minded families. We enjoy educational trips to places like Chicago and our nations capital and other large cities, but always go under the blessings of the Lord. And we have truly NEVER witnessed homosexual behaviors in the cities you would most likely encounter them. We are blessed! We strive to keep our children pure (we’re not perfect by far and make no claims to be) and we are grateful and humble to our creator that he has granted us this prayer. That is why when we were led to join BSA we were so pleased that it aligned with traditional family values. I see no reason to take away one of the last safe havens for families that want to instill this in their children. The LGBT community are (sadly) gaining so much ground in other areas that this just makes them hateful and greedy. They will not stop until they feel they’ve destroyed anything/anyone that does not accept them and their lifestyles, and wants to maintain a wholesome, pure, traditional family environment.

      • LGBT individuals are not trying to destroy anything. They merely seek the same recognition under the law that everyone else has. They want to have families. Ironic, since those that argue against them often speak to their deviance and promiscuity in misguided attempts to delegitimize their hopes to settle down in stable environments. Have you ever heard Zach Wahls speak? He lives in Iowa. He is the son of two lesbians. He is a remarkable young man, and expresses himself very well. He is an Eagle Scout.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ

      • Yes,we have heard of him before. As an example, Hitler also was good ‘speaker’ and expressed his agenda in a convincing way, he convinced many to join with his ideals and we all know how that ended. Again, why do we have to lose our rights for them to have theirs? Our right as a private organization to stay as we are.

      • SMX3 –
        I really don’t think an Eagle Scout who speaks his mind on a controversial issue can be compared to Hitler, who led a government who killed millions of people. Let’s remember that the reason this issue is so controversial, is that there are good people on both sides.

      • So the proverbial death/murder of an entire organization that stands for traditional family values is not also devastating?!? Evil is evil regardless of it’s source and t is easy to fall to the deceptive words of evil if you’re not spiritually strong. (It’s called ‘temptation’ for a reason.)

        An excellent speaker is simply someone who can easily persuade others to their own side of a debate by playing on one’s emotions, weaknesses and ignorance.That does not make what they are doing right, moral or factual.

        “Wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it, and right is right even if nobody is doing it.” – St. Augustine (354-430)

      • Keep going SMX3. I have used up my arguments, but I will cheer those in the cause of good vs evil. It amazes me how persistent evil is. We know how this comes out in the end. But we still have to fight the good fight while we can.

      • SMX3 – I don’t believe that allowing those troops who wish to do so admit gay scouts will result in the “death/murder of an entire organization”.

        My experience with gay teens has been that it’s just not a big issue to have them around. My experience with scouts has been that those who choose scouting are on the whole good people. I can’t imagine that a few gay scouts will bring down the whole organization.

        If people leave scouting over the idea that a few troops – not even their own troops! – may admit a boy or two who is gay, well, it seems like an extreme over-reaction to me. We don’t kick gay kids out of our public schools, or our Catholic schools. We don’t kick them out of sports, or drama clubs, or school bands. We don’t kick them out of scouts, unless we find out that they’re gay. Even the Catholic church welcomes them, and encourages their families and communities to do the same.

        Scouting can survive this change, and come out of it stronger than ever.

      • First – thanks Steve! I know I feel like a broken record, but I will try not to tire of defending traditional family values.

        Second, EagleMom are you familiar with multi level dam systems? (gonna try a new analogy to ‘shake things up’ a bit) Anyhow, they can be found all over the world, they can be very effective but very dangerous when not properly maintained. On the chance that this actually passes, and national is cowering in the corner counting their money and placing the responsibility of the CO’s to decide which units allow gays and which doesn’t, we will risk the same catastrophic reaction of a dam breaking once our upstream dam (aka national) breaks. Let me illustrate…

        The greatest risk with multi-dam management is not simply that these large rivers have dams. It is the fact that they have MULTIPLE dams (that would be us the ‘multiple’ CO’s/troops), most numbering in the dozens (okay for BSA that number of CO’s/troops is much larger of course). But there is great risk of a catastrophic cascade failure initiated by the collapse of a SINGLE upstream dam (aka national). Like a chain, a multi-dam water management system is only as strong as its weakest link. And when that weakest dam is far upstream – which it usually is, generally in a remote and sparsely populated area, far from critical eyes – the downstream risk is magnified.

        While you (and those who want to share your argument) can continue to try to minimalize the ‘downstream’ effect this change will have, it will in fact be devastating! It will, forever destroy scouting for the families that one do not share your point of view. And two, it will have steamrolled the rights of those who do not agree with the change to favor those who do favor it.

        I’ve said it before but here goes again…How is taking away the rights of one group of people to get your own rights not wrong? If these gay individuals had the true spirit of scouting in their hearts (and damaged souls) they would abandon this hurtful mission – they would respect the traditions of BSA and exercise their right to scout somewhere else outside BSA. So that EVERYONE gets their to keep their rights. So NO ONE will convince me that this is nothing more then hateful reverse bullying!

        Also I AM an active Catholic, so I am well versed in our church’s stance on homosexuality. Like the LDS church a person cannot be living an ‘actively’ gay life. (Hate the sin but love the sinner) As for the other activities/groups you listed, they are NOT private organizations and BSA is. And if a gay member knowingly joins BSA then they are choosing to practice deception and thus are NOT living the Oath and Law, which states a scout is HONEST and TRUSTWORTHY.

      • SMX3 – I love your multiple dam analogy!

        I think the difference between us is that you see this policy as breaking the most upstream dam (the BSA national) and I see it as, in practice, only affecting a few downstream dams (the troops). If you’re not living on a river with one of those affected dams, it won’t affect you. And if it turns out you are, there will be enough notice to move (which fortunately won’t be as arduous as changing houses!)

        I do understand that you feel that the most upstream dam will be damaged, maybe severely. I don’t expect to convince you to change your mind. I can only hope that you can understand that there are good people on both sides of this debate. You and I are both scout moms, who want the best for our boys.

        I’m glad that you understand the Catholic church’s stance on homosexuality. As you know, Catholics are encouraged to welcome celibate gays into their families, their communities, and the church. The BSA is not currently doing this. I think that is morally wrong, and against the teachings of the Catholic church and many other Christian and non-Christian denominations. It’s a difficult issue. I believe the BSA is doing the best they can to serve families from a variety of faith traditions, and a variety of beliefs on this issue. It’s not a perfect solution.

      • EagleMom, while I appreciate that you like my analogy I fear you don’t understand dams and what they do. They hold back at times millions of cubic feet of water. Think tsunami wave when a dam breaks. The immense pressure of the water wipes out anything down river of it causing severe devastation. Any member of BSA is currently on this ‘river’ anyone affiliated with BSA is on the river. There will be no sparing anyone. If you’re a member this will effect you – period. There is no way to not be affected by the change. Which again I address your comment that, we’d ‘have enough notice to move’, with why do the people in BSA that joined under a clear understanding of the policy and accepting it need to ‘move’? Why don’t we just get the ‘dam breakers’ out and so we can continue to maintain our dams that are just fine?

        As for the church policies vs. BSA proposed change, are you telling me that you seriously think BSA is going to ask/enforce a ‘non actively gay’ policy? Even if they did this to put the new policy into place it would only be a matter of time before the LGBT member would argue how THAT was violating their rights. And if it’s a gay adult couple then they are obviously living actively gay. I have watched this so called ‘community’ seek and destroy anything and everything ‘traditional’. Once they got their foot in the door it would not stop there and eventually if any CO that is opposed to the change actually hung around (doubt they will) they would find a way to force them out or to get on board. I will not be deceived or romanced into believing this policy is a simple ‘rainbows and unicorns’ policy that will make the world a better place and we’ll all magically get along. Evil is evil and it usually presents itself as something good and positive, thus deceiving the weak and ignorant. The difference is many of us know better and it is our job to fight the evil from getting in the door.

      • –>>”As for the church policies vs. BSA proposed change, are you telling me that you seriously think BSA is going to ask/enforce a ‘non actively gay’ policy?”

        No.

        The Catholic church, like many churches, believes that sex outside of marriage is immoral. Despite this, the BSA does not deny membership based on whether or not scouts are having sex outside of marriage.

        The issue is left between a scout and his God. This, I feel, is as it should be.

        And just as the BSA does not inquire into the sexual activities of its heterosexual members, so I believe it should not inquire into the sexual activities of members who are attracted to those of the same sex. The BSA should leave that area of morality between the scout and his God.

        0 0 Rate This

      • Actually I am comparing the whole LGBT agenda to Hitler he just happened to be the ‘pawn’ mentioned here. Tonight’s thought I am ending with to help those so blinded by evil…

        “Wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it, and right is right even if
        nobody is doing it.”- St. Augustine (354-430)

        May God have mercy on your soul.

      • Angie, I say this respectfully, but we don’t follow your point. Mikes point is that BSA’s policy should not change and that the BSA has the right to protect, defend and teach the timeless values of Scouting. Mike is 100% spot on in this regard!

        The BSA policy is (and correctly so) that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. The BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). SCOTUS clearly recognized and upheld the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct.

        We are witnessing a complete lack of transparency from BSA National board members. The Board is advised not to take any action (which certain extremist Board members seek to do in a hurried manner and before opposition can be mounted, with little thought, no input from Scouting professionals and no input from volunteer Scouters) on this next week and thereafter, and yes we can and will stop radical members of our Board from irreparably damaging our Scouting program. The posts on this site are clear about legal action that is being prepared to put a stop to this hostile take over and theft of our Scouting program.

    • SCOTUS found that (after looking at all of the facts and BSA documents/positions/statements) the “mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). Further, the US Supreme Court also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the Mike Milo, you are correct about the need to protect and defend the timeless values of Scouting. The BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court clearly recognized and upheld the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct.

      The proposed policy change will destroy the legal underpinnings that resulted in the BSA being able to successfully protect and defend its expressive association message, and charter organizations that prohibit practicing homosexuals will be sued. Our BSA program, and our values will be lost.

      The National Board is on notice of the irreparable damage that it will inflict on Scouting and its timeless values if it takes hasty and reckless action nest week. It is advised to govern its actions accordingly!

      Further, we call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts and who are honest of heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! Millions of eligible class members who (are part of US Scouting and have nothing to do with other scouting groups) have donated time and money based on the timeless values of Scouting in the US, will be part of the lawsuits that will be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National. We are aware of the foul play going on, improper influence by outside groups and and the reason behind the rush to change the policy before rational voices from adult member volunteers can be considered (see posts on this site and do your research). We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on, and we WILL NOT be moved! Are you listening National Board!
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

    • You say you don’t want your kids “exposed to that behavior or life style.” So what are you going to do if they have a gay teacher at school? Or if they need help and go to a gay police officer? What if one day they have a gay congressman representing them? What about all the gay actors, athletes and musician on TV? Are you just going to shun all these people and pretend they don’t exist? Gay people exist – you shouldn’t try to hide this fact from your kids or else they’ll be in for a rude awakening when they eventually do enter the “real world.”

      Now of course I would be upset if a gay leader was sharing the details of their homosexual sex life with the Scouts… but I would also be upset if a straight leader was sharing the details of their heterosexual sex life with the Scouts.

      You may feel homosexuality is immoral (I, and many others, don’t). Why shouldn’t gay people have the opportunities of Scouting as well?

  151. I’m sad to see this in an organization which I have been a part of for 25 years + . I’m not sure l can be a part of BSA if they go through with action. It is going against the Scout Oath “Duty To God”.

    What more can l say!

    • I am a straight Eagle Scout. My God loves gays, and accepts them as they are. How can I fulfill my Duty to God in Scouting? Or is Scouting only for your God, and not for mine?

      • Beth earn your own group & respect instead of trying to take over the BSA. The BSA was never a personal agenda.
        Very Sad that this is a forced issue. This was not the founding agenda. Love of nature, camping and having skills not to be forgotten were written into the scouts cread.

      • 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 (NIV), 1 Corinthians 6:11 and Romans 1:24-27, 32 ARE New Testament. Be clear that God loves the sinner but HATES the sin, he ministered to the prostitutes and sinners to convert them NOT join them. He loves them indeed, so much so, that he gave His only Son to teach them and guide them to change their ways, and ultimately give his life for us to follow Him, not become one of them.

      • cwgmpls, the BSA policy is (and correctly so) that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. The BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). SCOTUS clearly recognized and upheld the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. If you don’t agree with BSA policy, then with all due respect leave BSA.

        You demand that all of us to abandon our timeless Scouting values and recognize homosexual conduct as being “morally straight” and “clean”. This is offensive and intolerant of our views and our BSA policy.

        Think about it this way….if the shoe were on the other foot, what reaction would Scouters get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and “clean” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight?

      • If you took a vote it would be either the LDS or Catholic one since those are the largest voting blocks.

      • Good point. Is BSA run by LDS and Catholic church, or is it run by the families of the United States? I’m sure that is the argument going on right now in Irving, Texas.

      • OK. Are you a member of the LDS church? or the opposite…. the catholic church? If we ‘take a vote’ and the LDS church wins, then, well, the LDS church wins. Catholics are out.

      • I don’t talk about my religion with anyone outside of my family.With the amount of youth I lead and oversee I do not want to influence them one way or another.

      • By the way, the LDS church has allowed open gays to be members in good standing, and even hold adult leadership positions, in the LDS church since at least 2010. So if BSA continues to ban gays, it is probably the Catholics holding things up, not the Mormons.

      • cwgmpls Sorry you have the wrong opinion on the position of the LDS Church. You state open gays not active gays of which the LDS Church has complete opposition to the sexual active Gay and consider it a sin and something that the active gay member must repent of before the Resurrection comes. If you are a sexually inactive Gay member in the LDS Church then you are in good standing with the LDS Church. As a member of both the LDS Church and the BSA I believe that there are many obstacles facing the pending change to allow Homosexuals into the BSA program. I would like to address the position of the LDS Church on Homosexuals as members of the Church. The truth is that as a homosexual member they cannot be active in their lifestyle the Church is quite clear on this. The LDS Church accepts the homosexual member but not the sin of an active homosexual. As a Scoutmaster I believe that The Nation BSA should not be making changes in its present position of not allowing homosexual members because they cannot exclude active Homosexuals from its program. This is the difference between the LDS Church and the BSA. I am quite confident that the LDS Church will reject any promotion of active homosexuality in its Scouting programs and I hope that next week when the National BSA Board meets and votes on this issue they will keep the present position of protecting the values of 103 years of scouting and stay the course of honesty and integrity in supporting moral and decency in all of its programs. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • I agree with you. LDS allows open, sexually inactive gays to be members in good standing to the LDS church. Under BSA’s current rules, BSA does not allow open, sexually inactive gays to be members of BSA.

        The current BSA policy is more restrictive than LDS policy with regard to membership of open gays. BSA allowing each CO to set its own rules regarding membership of gays would allow Mormon troops to have a membership rule that matches the teaching of their church.

      • Do you concern yourself with whether or not a scout or leader is having premarital or extramarital heterosexual sex?

      • If it could potentially harm my child and disgrace the program that we’ve brought our youth into then yes! We have dealt with that within our organization and they are no longer with us or BSA. It’s not just about the ‘gay’ adults, my boys have the right to be comfortable when they are at scouts and scouting events. Who will be able to guarantee a boys comfort level anymore? Even if they are not the target they may witness something they do not need to know or be exposed to. That has been the beauty of BSA for us up till this moment.

      • BSA does not recognize any religion. The 11th and 12th points of the Scout Law make these “alternate lifestyles” conflict with mine. I am sure that is where they will conflict with others as well. I have never asked any person to tell me their sexual preference to be my friend or fellow scout. That’s theiir personal business. I just don’t want MY BSA trashed with it or my nose rubbed into it.

      • Actually it was the United States Supreme Court that said the BSA can exclude gays. This is a money deal not a gay rights deal. Big money donors want this ban to be lifted. So now Nationals is going to get it off their desk and have the pressure applied at the local level

      • The thing is, it isn’t just YOUR BSA. It belongs to all of us. That’s good that you don’t ask others their personal business. Changing this policy will make that official. Gay people don’t conflict with MY interpretation of the 11th and 12th points of the Scout Law. The best part of the proposed policy change is that the BSA will still allow individual units to decide what is best for them. You are still able to be a part of a unit that is in line with what you deem to be appropriate.

    • God says that eating pork is wrong (it is in the Bible). That’s why I subscribe to a Kosher diet. By your logic we should kick all bacon-eaters out of the BSA because eating it is going against the Scout Oath “duty to God.”

      • That is part of the old covenenant, not the new. Please dont cite Scriptures unless you use them in context, not just to male a poorly conceived point. Besides, there is no we in bacon, you may not have any of my bacon, bring your own.

      • No Leviticus is Old Testament, however 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 (NIV), 1 Corinthians 6:11 and Romans 1:24-27, 32 ARE New Testament. Be clear that God loves the sinner but HATES the sin, he ministered to the prostitutes and sinners to convert them NOT join them. He loves them indeed, so much so, that he gave His only Son to teach them and guide them to change their ways, and ultimately give his life for us to follow Him, not become one of them.

      • Ok. And what if my religion doesn’t adhere to that bible you quote? Where in the BSA policies, or in the Scout Oath and Law does it say that I have to follow your bible?

      • “Scouting is nothing less than applied Chrisitianity” – Lord Baden Powell Founder of Scoutiong for Boys

      • Is that one quote a part of the current policies of the BSA? No. I have the right to my religion, even if it isn’t the same as yours.

      • You do realize that the United States is pretty much the only country that has “boy” only scouts. If you have ever attended an International Jamboree you would have seen that all of the other countries have both boys AND girls in their units — and not waiting until the girls are 14 and putting them into a Crew only! They are not BOY scouts, they are SCOUTS!

      • Well then what bible do you adhere to? What bible can I go read that promotes homosexuality as acceptable? Cause no one has been able to show me one yet….

      • There are several Christian denominations that are accepting of LGBT individuals. The Episcopal church, for example. Another poster here has pointed out an aspect of mormonism, where if a person identifies as homosexual but does not act on this, he is down with his religion, right with his god. If he is right with his god, I don’t really see how it is of any one else’s concern.

      • Which one did god write, by his own hand? Do you have it? I bet that would be worth a lot of money!

      • I really cannot go into the intricate details of the various covenants made bewtween God and his people(s), the transcendence from saved by acts to saved by Grace, what applied to Jew, Gentile, pre/post Christ, etc. with someone who doesn’t know Leviticus being Old or New Testament. The time factor alon is unsurmountable, much less the ability to grasp from such an unknowledged position. Besides, your point was a straw man arguement at best, a non-sequiter most likely. I would fully expect to not eat bacon at a troop that is from a synegouge or mosque and would not offer a Jew or Muslim Scout the same.

      • You really shouldn’t make assumptions about the knowledge of people with whom you are discussing a topic on the internets.

        If you would not expect to eat bacon at a troop from a synagogue or mosque, why would you deny scouting altogether to a boy that belongs to a religion that doesn’t have a problem with homosexuality?

      • Beth, I am Catholic and we too ‘accept’ LGBT people on the same terms – if they are not actively living a ‘gay/homosexual’ lifestyle – but the WORD of God in the Bible does not change. Where in SCRIPTURE does God change his position on this? “Jesus is the same YESTERDAY, TODAY AND FOREVER” Hebrews 13:8, you choose the edition, (NIV, KJV, NASB, MSG, NLT) they’re all basically worded the same.

      • I don’t understand. If you accept LGBT individuals on those terms in your church, why would you seek to exclude them from scouts on the same terms?

      • Beth, for some reason I cannot reply to you directly so I am hoping you see this response to your last comment…

        Because we live and teach according to the Bible and these individuals are there (our church) because they too are seeking the Lord and to ‘straighten’ (no pun intended) out their lives – not continue to live as a homosexual. WE are ministering to them and changing their lives because they sought us out. That is NOT going to be the case with BSA and this movement.

        These people are not looking to live Godly lives according to scripture. They are looking to bully their way/lifestyles into a place that is not an option to them right now. Why could they not just start their own organization? Because it is truly about forcing their beliefs onto us (while hypocritically accusing us of the same) There would be NO roadblocks for them to start their own ‘Gay’ scouting organization in today’s society, maybe you’d even get some ‘straight’ supporters to leave BSA and scout with them. But probably not and they know it. A GAY scout organization would just that and they know it. It’s about forcing us to make them welcome and ruin our organization and nothing more.

      • ScoutMommax3… it is NOT about ruining anyone’s organization. Gay people can want to be involved in scouts just as anyone else might. If there are religious organizations that accept gay members, then it is absolutely not a stretch to think that they could then have gay members in scout units that they partner with. More so, Units that aren’t chartered by religious organizations at all may be fine with gay members as well!

      • And how do you propose the interaction of those ‘accepting’ versus ‘non accepting’ units will happen? Who will be ‘staffing’ day camps/ summer camps, philmont, jamborees? Will we have the ‘accepting groups camp’ and ‘non accepting groups camp’? You can not have it both ways Beth. This is a wedge that is so large BSA can not gap it. It would forever change Boy Scouts of America and take away from those who founded the program and supported it all these years. Again, let them go start their own scouting program.

      • Gee, all these years I thought God wanted us to love everybody. For some reason, I also thought that we were not supposed to judge one another. All along I thought God was going to make that final judgement. So, please explain again, who does God want us to hate and when do I get to make the final judgement on whether YOU go to heaven?

      • ScoutMommaX3 – It might help to understand that there are *already* gay scouts – working at summer camp, going to Philmont, serving the BSA in all kinds of ways. This policy change would allow them to be open about it. This might be uncomfortable, but the experience of our military has been
        that it’s better for all when the information is out in the open.
        That said, the policy does not change the fact that there is no place for sexual *activity* within scouting.

      • I’m Jewish. I don’t follow the “New Testament.”.I live Kosher lifestyle. But I go to a BSA summer camp where they serve ham and bacon and pork; yet I don’t complain. It’s about tolerance. As the BSA handbooks say: “Scout is reverent… he respects the beliefs of others.”

      • Does BSA say that it adheres to the New Testament of the Bible? So does that mean all the Jewish Scouts and Muslim Scouts, etc. are out?

    • I thing most people are missing the point. The same reason why we don’t allow homosexuals is along the same reason why we don’t allow females. Scouting is about teaching young boys and young men, skills that will last a lifetime in an outdoor setting. Our mission has never been of a sexual nature. The amount of time and energy that would be given to manage boys who bring their relationships to camp (as they would with girls) is too much and is outside the scope of the program. If a boy comes home and reveals that he is gay as a result of an encounter, that could generate a lawsuit. If a scout leader falls in love with a tanned and strong boy scout and crosses that line, that is a lawsuit. For one, I don’t wish to spend the night conducting tent checks or to see if Bobby and Johnny creeped away for an interlude; the same as if Bobby and Sally did the same thing. Keep Sex out of the BSA.

      • Ray, you do have some valid concerns, that wise leaders need to consider. But two things haven’t changed. The first is that there are *already* gay scouts – the situations you describe could happen *now* and savvy leaders should be keeping an eye out. The second is that there will still be no place for sexual activity within scouting. That hasn’t changed. Just as the BSA can manage girls working at summer camp, they can manage this policy change.

      • There ARE females in Scouts – Venturing. And we have specific YPT regulations. My co-ed Crew gets along just fine – we don’t do tent checks to see if someone has crept off – and yes there are relationships but there is a time and place for everything and Scouts is not the place and they know that. Someone breaks the rules they are removed – simple as that. YPT is YPT – doesn’t change because of sexual orientation or gender.

      • You say “Scouting is about teaching young boys and young men, skills that will last a lifetime in an outdoor setting.” Why shouldn’t young gay boys be able to learn those same skills that will last a lifetime in an outdoor setting?

      • Absolutely, Mark. I don’t know if EagleMom has replied to you, but she has been commenting on this forum in advocacy of that position as well.

    • I am a Christian and I don’t believe being gay is against the Scout Oath’s “Duty To God.”.There are many religions (including my Christian denomination) that believe being gay is not immoral.

      However I do think the current policy of excluding gays is in odds with the value of Scout Oath and Law.

  152. The Boy Scouts of America should stick to the standards that have worked for them for over 100 years. If one doesn’t like those standards then let them form their own organization. I’m sure that there are others that may support them. I would call this organization the Scouting Movement of the United States.

    Next, don’t let money break our standards. If we can not run the program because of expenses or lack of supporters then let us go into the history books as a good program.

    • Standards that have worked for over 100 years? Ok, I agree. The scout oath and law. Which say nothing about excluding gay individuals. The anti-gay policy is about 30 years old.

      • Ma’am-
        There are organizations throughout the country that I will never be able to participate in because of their membership requirements. One example is the Sons of the American Revolution. If you’re not a veteran of the military you can not join the VFW or American Legion. Is that discriminating? How about Freemasons? They do not allow women, but have Eastern Star. I haven’t sued PETA because they discriminate against carnivores. It’s silly to say that anyone in BSA discriminates against homosexuals. They are simply not allowed to join & neither are atheists. They are both free to start their own organization. Perhaps they will have greater success than BSA. That’s what’s great about a free society. We don’t have to agree & you are free to vote with your pocket book or your feet. It’s not your place to push your views on a group that has been consistent on this issue for 100 years. It only became an issue 30 years ago because homosexuals became more open 30 years ago & the organization was forced to deal with it.

      • The BSA is also free to choose to reverse their policy if they deem it to no longer fit their needs. This is what they are doing now. We shall see where they come down soon enough.

      • Wow you are trolling. You have some serious issues with people who have religious convictions and show no respect to them. You keep wanting to know what god and bible and so on. Well why not tell everyone the name of your bible and your god that is supporting your views?

      • I’m absolutely not trolling. I am simply making the point that the BSA does not endorse any one religion. It would be perilous for them to do so. My personal belief is that each individual person has the right to their own religious beliefs and tenets. your religion can’t tell me what to believe, just as my religion can’t tell you what to believe. That’s all there is to it. You are perfectly welcome to believe whatever you want!

      • Ma’am- You seem to get very upset that others in Scouting that observe & respect past practices & policies won’t accept your point of view as their own. You also seem to be very intolerate of their point view. It’s pretty funny to me considering that you’re accusing these same people of being intolerant & close minded.

      • You are not correct Beth. The BSA cannot choose to reverse 100 plus years of history without legal consequence. If the BSA reverses its policy, it will face lots of litigation, not the least of which will be class action lawsuits from donors who will ask for past donation money to be returned. It will get ugly.

      • How did any of you get “trolling” from this well-written and well-thought-out reply? I think it’s clear here who the real people are who can’t “tolerate” dissent!

      • The problem with that argument is that young boys who join cub scouts really have no idea about their sexual orientation. They just know that cub scouts sounds fun and they want to be a part. By the time they have an inkling that they might be “different,” they have been involved in scouts for years. So then they get kicked out of an organization they love because of a policy that they didn’t even know they were violating when they first joined? Something is just not right about that. The other organizations you listed target adult membership, adults who know from the start if they meet the membership requirements.

      • Brad Great Comment yes there are requirements and some we have to just live with. Lately we have had a rush to make changes to some organization’s to fit the needs of a few. How is it that discrimination can only be solved by discrimination of others should not Devil worshipers be allowed to be Scout leaders they might be good leaders but just have a different belief than others. Should we include athiest they certainly have an argument to become a part of the BSA. How about nudist they might be good scout leaders they just have different lifestyle’s. How about pediphiles they might be good scout leaders they just want to satisfy their sexual desires where would it end. Does the BSA have to include anyone and everyone? I believe if the BSA continues its path down this trail it will soon find itself overwhelmed in legal problems that will sky rocket and even bankrupt the organization. Sorry I believe that the BSA is throwing the baby out with the bath water on this pending change. BSA National Board of Directors when you meet next week I hope you won’t gamble with the morals of our Scouts and continue with the Values that the Boy Scout of America never left, these are your own words.
        Brad on another subject I am a member of the Sons of the American Revolution and the only requirement is that you be a blood relative of someone that served in the Revolutionary War or those blood relative’s who have helped in the war efforts. Check your geneolagy and you might find a link to your eligibility. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • I’ve looked into it and I don’t have family. It’s an organization that I have a great deal of respect for and wish I could join. However, my family didn’t immigrate to the US until the 19th century. Thanks.

      • Brad, My family is of similar beginnings, in the US, or so I thought. My immigrant ancestors married into families who, in fact, had ancestors from the American Revolution. Check it out, if you want. There is more to your heritage than you may realize.

      • Beth you could not be more wrong. The Scout Oath and Law does not represent the homosexual lifestyle. Its values have already been established over 103 years ago and is the standard of the BSA. Beth if you were to place your hand on a Bible and swear to uphold its values would you not be making a covenant to God that you would be obediant to that covenant. So it is with the Scout when he raises his right hand to the square in the Scout sign he is making a covenant to uphold the these’s Oath’s and Laws. The Scout Oath and Law in no way supports the homosexual lifestyle and clearly is in opposition to it. In reality the National Board BSA will have to make changes in these’s pledges to accommodate the any change in allowing Homosexuals in the BSA. Beside Church’s the BSA is the last strong hold for morality in this Nation. Beth I would like pass on a article by the New York Times on January 30th you will see that the change will always be a problem for the BSA and it would be in the best interest of the BSA to leave things as they are. I hope that all scouts on this website reads this.
        Even the New York Times does not like this proposal
        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/opinion/the-boy-scouts-fall-short-in-policy-on-gays.html?_r=0 ” Quote”
        This article states clearly that even if the current proposal is approved, the battles are far from over… “Sadly, though, the change the organization is contemplating falls far short of the clear and strong renunciation of antigay bigotry that is called for. It said it would no longer “dictate” an antigay policy to local scouting groups, but would let them decide whether to permit participation by openly gay people. In other words, whether to persist in barring gay youngsters and their families would become a local option: an unprincipled position that would continue to send a message that discrimination is perfectly acceptable even if it is no longer mandatory under national Boy Scouts rules.” “Board members should reject the idea of allowing local chapters to continue to exclude gay scouts and troop leaders. Instead, the board should establish a firm anti-discrimination policy and make clear its determination to see that the principle is followed at the local level. If the Boy Scouts of America is serious about repairing its bigoted image and serving all boys and their families, further discrimination cannot be an option.” Unquote”. Beth so we just won’t win on this change proposed by the National BSA Board. Sincerely, Trenton

    • I agree. The policy that sexuality was a topic left to one’s family and clergy worked fine for about 70 years, until BSA national started to push their own sex teaching about 30 years ago. Let’s go back to the traditional teaching of leaving sex up to the family and move on together!

      • The problem with that is that 1-3% of the populatin (gays) are responsible for 33% of the sexual abuse victims. A huge disparity. So even if it is OK to let openly gay men be leaders, it statistically increases the potential for sexual abuse.

        I just read that the gay communityis far less dangerous than the hetrosexual community as evidenced by the recent release of the ‘perversion files’. Is the absurd assumption of this statement that women were responsible for more of these instances of abuse than gay men?

      • Your numbers are wrong. Most homosexual (male against male) rape, is conducted by men who present themselves as heterosexuals. The instance of homosexual rape committed by people who are openly gay and present themselves as homosexual is quite small, similar to the instance of heterosexual rape.

        Openly gay men do not account for 1/3 of all rapes in the country. Almost all rapes are conducted by men who call themselves straight, and who admitted to BSA, the church, and other places as straights. Banning people who are openly gay does nothing to stop the rapes caused by straight men, which is almost all rapes.

    • Scott – Those standards are what we’re here discussing, among other items. Standards can be wonderful things – but my understanding and application of the Scout Oath and Law likely has slight differences over yours. That is no different then having a difference of opinion over a portion of the US Constitution.

      Councils are filing for bankruptcy or near enough. Is this potential policy shift only driven by money? I don’t know. Will changing the policy help cash strapped Councils? Again, I don’t know.

      But I think that if that is a primary consideration, it’s being done for the wrong reason. Then again, it won’t be the first time that money was the root of a bad decision.

    • National is doing this for money. I will no longer contribute to FOS or sell popcorn for National. I think others should do the same. If a few big business are trying to change to include gays then those opposed should cut off our funds. Seperatly may not be much but together it could be alot.

  153. Heaven forbid your son has a gay scout leader. That must mean your son will have to earn a badge by writing an essay about his scout leader’s sexual history. It’s 2013. Either change or get out of the way. And if you think for even one second there aren’t a bunch of gay scout leaders and members…you’re dead wrong.

    • You are probably right. They are there by lying and deceit. Great traits in leaders.

      By the way if you want people to respect your opinions then you need to respect theirs. Your are coming off as close minded as those you are calling close minded.

      I have yet to see anyone who is pushing this change try to show sensitivity towards the other side for which this proposal came out of the blue. No one pushing the agenda offering suggestions on how to implement the changes to make it easy on everyone should it be passed.

      Instead those pushing this agenda have mocked people’s religions, gods, upbringing, told them to move out of the way, suggested they go join the KKK. And you claim to be “all inclusive” and telling everyone else that they should be compassionate? No you all want it to be an immediate global change and you expect everyone to suddenly be for it?

    • Progressivism is the real problem in this country. You progressives think the Constitution is outdated, Republicans are racists, polar bears are drowning and Scouters that want to keep with traditional family values are homophobes. Why don’t you go start your own scouting organization?

  154. If a parent is concerned about their sons going on camping trips with gay leaders then there is a simple solution, GET INVOLVED AS A VOLUNTEER!!! Don’t use the Scouts as a babysitting service. Become an Assistant Scoutmaster or Troop Committee Member.
    Some Troops have problems finding enough adults to go on trips. Become a volunteer with your sons Troop and get out there with them. Who knows, by sharing in the experience of camping with your son you might actually form a bond with your son. God forbid you become close. If you don’t know how to camp then that’s ok, your son can teach you.

    After years of working alongside of gay people in the military and civilian life I have never had a problem.

    • Now you are mocking people’s parenting skills suggesting that they might get to bond with son if they go camping as to imply they might not already have a wonderful and healthy bond with them?

      What’s next, mocking their grandparents?

  155. While the situation you describe is tragic, it likely has nothing to do with homosexuality. That was bullying of a boy that a group of boys deemed to be weaker than themselves. The boys who perpetrated that act may or may not be/have been gay. The boy that was the victim was surely that, a victim. Sounds like the scoutmaster was as well. Gay boys are actually much more likely to be victimized than straight boys. Any boy perceived to be different can be targeted and victimized. This is a problem we have in society as a whole, not just in BSA. It should be addressed on a widespread level. Opening our doors to those who are different, and sometimes perceived to be different will actually help prevent acts such as the one you describe.

  156. “Education for sexuality belongs in the home… Scouters should reinforce rather than contradict what is being taught in the family and by the youth’s religious leaders” BSA Statement on Human Sexuality, 1984

    That was BSA’s position on sexuality for the first 70 years of its existence. Teaching about sex should happen at home, and nothing BSA teaches should contradict what the family teaches.

    BSA abandoned this policy in 1991, when they adopted the statement “We believe that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirement in the Scout Oath that a Scout be morally straight”. That set BSA up as a teacher of sexuality, and set up BSA to be in increasing conflict with family and church teachings as time went on.

    It is time for BSA to get back to Scouting, and leave sex up to a boy’s family and clergy to deal with.

    • I can honestly say I haven’t had the birds and the bees talk with any of my Scouts (with the exception of my own children in my own home and on our own time). So, pray tell, explain to me how it is that we suddenly turned into sex ed teachers and I missed the memo?

      This is a poor argument and has no place here. We are not educators of sexual choices or behavior. It’s not our role now, and it won’t be if this comes to pass.

      • Are you accusing BSA of lying when they told the Supreme Court that BSA “teaches that homosexual conduct is not morally straight”?

      • Let’s flip that question. When was the last time you opened a training manual or took an ITOLS course when the book or instructors said, “It is your job to teach youth that homosexuality is bad and dirty and not allowed in Scouts?” It’s a general policy, but not one that we as leaders need to execute to the point that we are teaching sexual values. Our current responsibility is if a Scout or a Leader steps forward and says, “I lead a different lifestyle,” than it is our job to report said person to Council and watch as they are removed from Scouting. And to be honest, I can’t ever recall being taught that at a training session either – but perhaps I missed that change.

      • That is not the question the court asked. The court asked if BSA teaches about sex. BSA said they do. The court based its ruling on BSA’s answer to that question. If BSA does not teach about sex, BSA has no legal basis to exclude gays.

        If you are right, if BSA does not teach about sex, then the court reached a false conclusion, based on false testimony from BSA, and BSA has no legal basis to ban gays. But I don’t think you really believe that.

    • This did not set BSA up to be in increasing conflict with families and church teachings, it set the BSA up to be in conflict with a small population of gays that want their way, and got it by forcing a few church denominations to split.

      • And in conflict with the families of gays. And in conflict with the friends of gays. And in conflict with the churches of gays. And in conflict with the employer of gays. And so on. BSA’s earliest policies on sexuality were clear that BSA should never “contradict what is being taught in the family and by the youth’s religious leaders”. Why did they change this and decide to enter into conflict with others over sexuality in 1991?

        Just return to BSA’s founding values of not contradicting families and clergy about sex, and BSA will be fine.

  157. I never read the policy as no gays allowed. I also think that the majority of most boys scouting age do not know if they are gay. Those that come out with that declaration at an extremely early age have obviously had some sort of help coming to this conclusion. We should be less interested in putting labels on people and more interested in helping them become responsible members of societly.

    • National, Regional and Local scouting offices read it as excluding gays, though. I agree with your sentiments. very well said.

    • Here is BSA’s latest policy that says “no gays allowed”

      “we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals” BSA Press release, 2012

      Sure, the majority of 11-year-olds don’t know if they are gay or not. But a lot of boys do know it by the time they are 17, when they are still in Scouts.

      I agree that we should not be putting labels on people. That is why BSA would be wise to dump this whole “avowed homosexuals” thing, whatever that is supposed to mean, and get on with Scouting

  158. Will this lead to quotas? Each council being required to have a certain number of gay people in leadership positions, or employed within the council.

      • But they do try to count them. I don’t know what they do with the numbers but they are being recorded somewhere.

      • Blacks and women scout masters as a group are not attempting to exert moral relativism on the BSA in order to force the BSA to accept them. There’s no need for that since they typically accept the conventional and Christian view of good morals.

        In order to be accepted into the BSA, the gays must reinterpret the meaning of the scout oath and law to align with their own views, discount the value of conventional morals, or say that anybody’s idea of morals is as good as anyone else, and no one should condemn anyone else based upon moral values. Hence, the morals of a prostitute are as good as those of the most devout Christian, or so they would seem to believe.

      • There was a time when some chartering organizations of BSA troops taught that blacks are morally inferior to whites. BSA allowing blacks into Scouting was viewed as moral relativism for them. But we all seem to get along just fine now.

      • It’s a common tactic to compare discrimination against homosexuals to discrimination against black people during the civil rights era. It’s an insult to compare the two.
        Your argument is also an example of an association fallacy… Because one thing is true, the other must be as well.

      • Bruce, the BSA is not a Christian organization. There are many scouts who have different faith traditions, which teach different moral values. Some of these religions have to problem with homosexuality. In addition, many mainstream religions, including the LDS and Catholic churches, believe that gay people can lead a moral life, though choosing chastity. We do not ask heterosexual scouts whether they are chaste, or base their eligibility for the BSA on it.
        This policy allows those churches which feel homosexuality is morally wrong to exclude gay scouts from their chartered troops. Similarly, it allows those churches which feel that gay scouts should be included to do so. I think it’s a good compromise, which will allow each church to choose their policy in accordance with their beliefs. It won’t be easy to blend these at the council and higher levels, but it respects the religious beliefs of all, and allows each troop to follow God as they see fit, which is appropriate.

      • This may seem obvious but let us all be really clear on this one point, there is no right being violated here i.e. the BSA is a private organization and no one has an inherent civil right to belong. I see many comments that use segregation, and exclusion. Again there is no inherent civil right that says you have a right to join the BSA. The “civil rights” argument does not apply as per the SCOTUS ruling.

    • Yes. The quota for the number of required gay leaders will be the same number as the number of stupid leaders we are required to have.

      • You seem to have nothing positive to offer the conversation. Why not troll somewhere else. Out of curiousity, what does the “db” stand for? I would guess, but I’d probably be way off.

    • Bruce you point out a flaw in the thinking at BSA National. We do not know what the litigation burden will be from this. I work closely with those who are trying to figure this out as we all debate. Essentially what National has done is pass the burden onto the CO’s and walked away. I know lawyers who work closely with the LGBT Community and they tell me their next round of discrimination lawsuits will be aimed at CO’s that continue to exclude ANY male member for any reason. National used to provide assistance for the CO’s however under the proposed policy they will no longer have an obligation to assist they will simply walk away. Anyone who thinks this solve sthe LGBT issue is naive and has no grasp of what is happening on the ground in local Districts and Units.

      • But it is only some COs that are complaining about gay in Scouting. Why should all of BSA carry the burden for the COs that don’t want gays? If the COs have a clear, stated position against homosexuality, they will have no problem maintaining their right to exclude gays in court. The precedent set by BSA on this matter is solid: if you hold an expressed message regarding homosexuality, you do not have to admit homosexuals as members to your group. Nothing will change that precedent, and COs that hold this position will have no problem in court. In fact, I doubt there will be a court case in these instances.

        The only COs that have to worry are those that don’t have a public message opposed to homosexuality. But if they don’t have a public message opposed to gays, why would they not want gays in their troop?

        There will be no legal problem for COs that have a clear message opposed to homosexuality. Since they are the only ones complaining about gays in BSA, why should the entire BSA carry the burden for these few COs, when it is only these COs that will really care about the issue?

      • I understand your position however you are advocating a have versus have not scenario. Traditionally National protected every CO under their umbrella because all CO’s were untied. Those that weren’t were and are in no danger. You have conceded that CO’s will be able to prevail in court if they are consistent. The problem is some CO’s will not have the funds to mount their own defense. Their alternative will be capitulate or close their doors. Most will simply withdraw rather than face oblivion. You may find no problem with this but outside of the LDS Church Catholics, and Southern Evangelicals most of the remaining CO’s are very small. Essentially what National is saying is LGBT or bust because we will not support you. any longer. I do disagree with you about the court cases. There will be additional lawsuits over access, exclusion, discrimination, funds, and using public facilities. Should National appease the very small minority it will not end there but that comes from my experiences with the LGBT attorneys.

      • Yes, organizations that express a message opposed to homosexuality have a first amendment right to exclude gays form membership.

        At the same time, organizations that want to have a right to enter into association with homosexuals when it does not restrict the rights of others.

        The current situation, where gays can not join any Scout troop, even when the troop and COs want gays to join, is out of balance. COs are having their right to associate with others trampled upon, in order to preserve the rights of other COs. Allowing each CO to form their own position with respect to gays is much more respectful of everyone’s rights.

        For those whose rights are being denied, and who can’t afford their own legal representation, the ACLU can provide resources needed to restore your rights. http://www.aclu.org/affiliates

      • This may seem obvious but let us all be really clear on this one point, there is no right being violated here i.e. the BSA is a private organization and no one has an inherent civil right to belong. I see many comments that use segregation, and exclusion. Again there is no inherent civil right that says you have a right to join the BSA. The “civil rights” argument does not apply as per the SCOTUS ruling.

      • You’re wrong about it not being a problem for those CO’s that do not want to accept gays. They may win a court case, but many of them could not afford to take it to court. If sued, they would simply have to shut their scouting program down or sacrifice their ideals.

    • Absolutely it will! As soon as gay rights advocacy groups decide there are no other big fish to fry and circle back around to Scouting.

  159. While the situation you describe is tragic, it likely has nothing to do with homosexuality. That was bullying of a boy that a group of boys deemed to be weaker than themselves. The boys who perpetrated that act may or may not be/have been gay. The boy that was the victim was surely that, a victim. Sounds like the scoutmaster was as well. Gay boys are actually much more likely to be victimized than straight boys. Any boy perceived to be different can be targeted and victimized. This is a problem we have in society as a whole, not just in BSA. It should be addressed on a widespread level. Opening our doors to those who are different, and sometimes perceived to be different will actually help prevent acts such as the one you describe.

  160. The bottom line is what is guiding this potential chnage in policy. National wil cause the Charter Organization to defend their position with very limited resources. If a Chater Organization refuses to admit a gay adult leader the ACLU will step in and force the C.O.’s to accept the individual in question. Since the he C. O. will not be in a position the defend their ideology that may result in the unit folding their tent.

    If the base is lost Scouting will not see the next hundred years.

      • The C.O. CAN defend their ideology. What they CAN’T is to be able to afford to carry the fight through the court to uphold their ideology. Not everyone has deep enough pockets to fight long, drawn-out legal conflicts.

      • Because it’s the current position of the BSA! And changing that position and leaving it to the individual COs will leave them on the financial hook to defend a position they were founded on.

      • If a C.O. was founded on a position, they already defending that position in other the other programs that it operates. I don’t know of any C.O. that only operates a Scout troop and does nothing else. They are already defending their ideology in its other programs. Unless its position is indefensible. If so, that is not BSA’s problem.

      • It is not the CO’s founding position, it is the BSA’s position that was adhered to and accepted when the CO chartered the Troop or Pack. It was the CO that decided the BSA’s principals and position was worth adhering to. If the BSA changes it’s position and the CO does not then the defense of that position falls on the CO. If the CO cannot afford a legal battle then the CO has limited choices; it can fold the Troop/Pack and be done with scouting or it can submit.

      • Actually Mike, many CO have been chartering units for decades prior to the current controversy. The BSA was open to everyone, until it wasn’t. When the BSA moved its corporate HQ to Texas, it began to reflect the conservative values of Irving TX and the LDS church rather than reflect the makeup of this diverse country. The BSA has spent the past 30 years actively alienating large portions of Americans. This is one small step in accepting that there are opinions and belief beyond the boundaries of their insular headquarters.

      • If the CO can’t afford a legal defense regarding its free speech rights, I’m sure the ACLU will help them out. Seriously. ACLU has even lead free-speech defense efforts an behalf of the KKK. (and no, I am not making any comparison between KKK and BSA, I’m just saying ACLU will stand up for anyone’s free speech rights, including COs who needs some help.)

      • National and Council are “partners” with their chartered organizations. One of the things chartered organizations are supposed to get is Council and National support.

      • Of course the ACLU has helped the KKK. The KKK was created by white democrats to scare blacks after the Civil War. The ACLU is the pro bono law wing of the Democratic Party. Both organizations have an interest in shaping the US in the image that contradictory to the founding principles.

      • You don’t seem to know your history very well, Brad. The Democrats were the conservative party during the civil war. Around the turn of the last century, that changed. When Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act in the 60s, he commented that he knew he’d lost the South for the Democrats for a generation. And so it is true. The Republicans even devised a “Southern Strategy” to play on white fears to push through Republican initiatives and win voters to being Republicans. It’s all right there in the history books.

        At any rate, the ACLU is exactly what it claims to be: dedicated to civil rights. Even the civil rights of racists and other repulsive types. As for the KKK… doubt you’d find too many Democrats among them these days, but, since I can’t claim to know any, can’t say for sure.

      • Angie- I found this on PBS’s website. I knew if I went to another source you would accuse it of some conservative bias. If I know anything, I know my history. I read both sides since progressives like yourself have spent the last 100 years perverting it.

        At the time of Ulysses S. Grant’s election to the presidency, white supremacists were conducting a reign of terror throughout the South. In outright defiance of the Republican-led federal government, Southern Democrats formed organizations that violently intimidated blacks and Republicans who tried to win political power.

        The most prominent of these, the Ku Klux Klan, was formed in Pulaski, Tennessee, in 1865. Originally founded as a social club for former Confederate soldiers, the Klan evolved into a terrorist organization. It would be responsible for thousands of deaths, and would help to weaken the political power of Southern blacks and Republicans.

        Racist activity in the South often took the form of riots that targeted blacks and Republicans. In 1866, a quarrel between whites and black ex-soldiers erupted into a full-fledged riot in Memphis, Tennessee. White policemen assisted the mobs in their violent rampage through the black sections of town. By the time the violence ended, 46 people were dead, 70 more were wounded, and numerous churches and schools had been burned. Just two months later, on July 30, a similar outbreak of violence erupted in New Orleans. This time, a white mob attacked the attendees of a black suffrage convention, killing 37 blacks and three whites who allied with them.

        In this violent atmosphere, the Ku Klux Klan grew in size and strength. By 1868, the Klan had evolved into a hooded terrorist organization that its members called “The Invisible Empire of the South.” The reorganized Klan’s first leader, or “Grand Wizard,” was Nathan Bedford Forrest, who had been a Confederate general during the Civil War.

        White Southerners from all classes of society joined the Klan’s ranks. In the name of preserving law and order in a white-dominated society, Klansmen punished newly freed blacks for a variety of reasons, including behaving in an “impudent” manner toward whites. They whipped the teachers of freedmen’s schools and burnt their schoolhouses. But first and foremost, the Klan sought to do away with Republican influence in the South by terrorizing and murdering its party leaders and all those who voted for it.

        In the time leading up to the 1868 presidential election, the Klan’s activities picked up in speed and brutality. The election, which pitted Republican Ulysses S. Grant against Democrat Horatio Seymour, was crucial. Republicans would continue programs that prevented Southern whites from gaining political control in their states. Klan members knew that given the chance, the blacks in their communities would vote Republican.

        Across the South, the Klan and other terrorist groups used brutal violence to intimidate Republican voters. In Kansas, over 2,000 murders were committed in connection with the election. In Georgia, the number of threats and beatings was even higher. And in Louisiana, 1000 blacks were killed as the election neared. In those three states, Democrats won decisive victories at the polls.

        Nevertheless, the Klan’s violent actions proved to many Northerners that the South had not learned its lesson in the recent war. In this way, the Klan’s activities actually backfired. People realized that harsher laws would have to be passed in order to stop the violence and protect Southern blacks. And those laws were soon in coming.

        In the 1868 presidential election, Republican Ulysses S. Grant won the office with the slogan, “Let Us Have Peace.” Republicans also won a majority in Congress. Many Northerners, disgusted by Klan violence, lent their support to the Fifteenth Amendment, which gave the vote to black men in every state, and the First Reconstruction Act of 1867, which placed harsher restrictions on the South and closely regulated the formation of their new governments.

        Other legislation attacked the Klan more directly. Between 1870 and 1871, Congress passed the Enforcement Acts, which made it a crime to interfere with registration, voting, officeholding, or jury service of blacks. More than 5,000 people were indicted under these laws; a little more than 1,000 were convicted.

        In 1871 Congress also passed the Ku Klux Klan Act, which allowed the government to act against terrorist organizations. Grant did not rigorously enforce these laws, although he did order the arrest of hundreds of Klan members. But with the overwhelming support of the Klan in the South, convictions proved difficult to obtain, and the financial panic of 1873 would distract the North from the problems of Southern racism. In 1882 the United States Supreme Court declared Ku Klux Klan Act unconstitutional.

      • I could provide you with several sources that prove that Nixon was not a racist and the Southern Strategy was not to attract conservative democrats, but I believe that you would balk at my sources. The lie has been told for so long it would take me a long time to find a source you would trust. However, by your own admission you believe that White, Conservative, Racist Democrats had already jumped ship in 1964. If that is true then why would Nixon have needed a Southern Strategy in order to gain the votes of people that had already supposedly joined the Republican party?

      • As far as Johnson goes I can find quotes with him dropping the N-word and one of the most famous is regarding the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

        Here’s an example of a more tame quote after “taking the teeth” out of the 1960 Civil Rights Bill. “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson.

        There were two CR Acts brought forward during Eisenhower’s administration. Johnson fought it multiple times while serving as Senate Majority leader. Johnson saw the writing on the wall by the time he signed legislation on Civil Rights that was written by Republicans. The membership of the Democratic party had been shrinking since the 1930s.

        It would be hard to argue that there were no racists in either party. However, it was young, middle class Southern Democrats that began jumping ship long before the civil rights act was signed and long after.

        I’m still scratching my head about the Conservatives being Dems during the Civil War. The position of Republicans has not changed until the last 10-20 years. The perception is what has been changed. There is not a lot of difference between either of the two parties’ establishment. We could argue this all day, but the bottom line is that both parties are lost and that’s why years ago I became a registered Libertarian. Small government, fiscal responsibility, total freedom with as little government interferance.

  161. Fine…now what?…what do we do in an outing? separate tents for gays and non gays? Lets take bigger steps…BSA should change to SA and lets do what everyone else in the world is doing…girls allowed…I don’t think so…

      • Yes, we do enforce respect…that is not the problem. To have open gays as members will now require to have the same setting as for Venturing Crew with an added gender…it will then inply that BSA will no longer be BSA…it will be SA…good bye only boys allowed…good bye boyhood and all the crazy things olny boys do…it will became a girlly thing

      • No…they are not. But you didnot get my point…if we have to open for gays we have to open to every gender…in every level.

      • Hmm. I notice someone rated this a thumbs down. Apparently, that person doesn’t like Venturing. Oh well…

    • I’m on the Venturing side of Scouting so I am fully in support of more female youth joining Venturing at all levels.

      • I’ll agree and add a small comment. Helping to run a station at a Klondike that is open to GSA and Venture crews, I have to say that some of the best Scouts I know are female. They tend to work better as a team than many of the Boy Scout patrols and overall seem to be more willing to ask important questions of the Mayors. Venturing is an outstanding program.

  162. I don’t care if someone is homosexual or straight or a eunuch…. They do not have the right to pressure any organization by telling them that they can not practice their faith/beliefs as a group if it doesn’t include the things or people that they don’t believe in… Period!!!! As a American…. I have the right, as does every citizen of this great nation, to dictate who I want to be around and who I don’t…This is a big ole country…with lots of land…full of straight people…gay people… freaks… and everyone of them have the right to go out and start their own organization if they want… and they should instead of always trying to invade someone elses party…..To be honest… Parents of gay kids…should do that instead of forcing their children to be surround by nothing but heterosexuals…. Forcing them to not feel normal while silently hoping that they change minds even though they “except them”…. I mean seriously… it should be considered a form of mental child abuse…. no wonder this poor kids are killing themselves left and right… How demeaning is it to constantly be surrounded by people that even you yourself mistakenly deem as “normal”… and for all of you adults pushing for these boys to be an open gay person in an all Christian enviroment, is not only sadistic but friggin cruel…. Good things happen in good time and eventually everyone will be excepted by everyone(probably only after we drink the koolaid but still…) either way…. get your own path and leave everyone elses alone…… Gay people are being excepted more and more everyday… but forcing people to except things that inherently go against the beliefs of their God is just plan wrong and it violates their 1st Amendment rights regardless of whether it is socially exceptable or not….

    • Carrie, the BSA is not an “all Christian environment”. My son works at summer camp, where last year they hosted, among others, a Jewish troop and a Hindu troop.

      However, this proposal does allow individual troops to decide for themselves whether to allow gay members or not. So if you prefer a “no gays” troop, you are free to have one. It will require some adjustment on the higher levels, but I think the organization can handle it. Scouts are resourceful, and can figure out the details of respecting troops who allow gays and those who do not, just as they respect and allow troops and scouts from a wide range of religious traditions.

    • So, then it was cool for black people to have to start their own restaurants, clubs, and…. water fountains, because they shouldn’t demand that white share theirs?

      The problem with your argument is that civil rights are usually an issue when an organization has exceptional power, influence, etc. Starting your own thing is never going to bring you what that other group has. So people are right to ask that discrimination against them be ended.

      In the case of Scouts, the discrimination isn’t based on any anything that actually has to do with Scouting… scouting activities or behaviors. It only has to do with one area of a person’s life — their sexuality — and the feelings of *some* of the people in Scouts. The proposed solution… to allow some units to discriminate (‘adhere to their beliefs’) while Scouts as an organization doesn’t actually respects both views.

  163. This will kill the BSA. I’m not sure who they think will be joining Scouts in the future. Do they understand who their core membership is?

    They are throwing a core moral issue back in the faces of the significant majority of their membership. No one involved in Scouting is ignorant of the BSA’s stance on homosexuality. But they still enrolled their boys.

    This effectively turns Scouting into a camping organization. It will really help church youth groups though.

    • BSA has been appeasing its “core membership” for the last 30 years, and the membership numbers over that time speak for themselves. It is time for BSA to re-visit their charter of being a club for all American families, not just a club for the religious core. That is never what BSA was intended to be.

      • BSA has been appeasing its core membership since it was founded. Every organization appeases its core membership. That’s why its core membership are members. That’s why an organization exists. It is self defeating for an organization to offend its core membership. That organization will cease to exist.

        If the BSA wants to change its core membership, this is one way to do it. I think they will find that they won’t have a core anymore. Actually, I’m positive they will find that they don’t have a core anymore.

        Maybe they will gain traction again. But they will do so at the expense of their historical values and the values of the overwhelming majority of their members. That seems like an exceedingly stupid path.

      • I put “core membership” in quotes for a reason. Religious conservatives are not BSA’s “core memnbership”, and never have been. BSA’s core membership is the families of the United States, and always have been.

      • BSA’s core membership are those who are actually members of the BSA. “Families of the United States” are not members unless they are registered members. The BSA is a voluntary association. It exists for its actual members. Not those whom you would like to be members.

      • I’m sure they are. Just like we are here. That’s really all this is, deciding who the BSA really represents.

      • Doc- This stance and argument is pedantic and fails to take into consideration a similar model. Might I ask, how does your stance match against the change adopted by the US Military?

      • Charles,

        The US military is free to adjust its membership requirements however it sees fit. Although, as it is an official government institution I suppose that it has less legal freedom than the BSA to set those requirements.

        The military is also a voluntary organization (at least right now). Those who choose to associate in such an organization are free to do so, or not. If the military felt that its core membership would disappear as a result of their membership requirements (assuming they weren’t contractually obligated to stay) they would most likely not change those requirements (again, assuming they weren’t legally required to).

        I am not entirely sure, but I think you might be trying to equate the membership of the military with that of the BSA. They aren’t the same. I’m sure there’s overlap. And I’m sure that there is more overlap between the military and the BSA than the military and Code Pink. But that really doesn’t matter much.

        The motivations for joining Boy Scouts and for joining the military are vastly different. Parents enroll their children in Scouting for the purpose of character development and maturation. Young men and women join the military as a profession. I’ve never been in the military, so I’m not really qualified to talk about why people join. But I think that equating the two programs is a mistake.

      • I took for granted what I thought was a simple question. Let me rephrase and respond. Did the US Military cease to function as the world’s greatest fighting force on the planet as a result of the change accepting openly gay/lesbian members to enlist? And the answer is…no.

        I make the parallel because you and others here voice a concern ranging from, “I’ll leave Scouting” to “I’ll sue the BSA” to “The Boys Scouts will fold or fail or cease to be a great organization…” or my personal favorite, “I’ve been involved in Scouting for a lifetime and this will kill the organization, mark my words”. I am asking if, in a reasonably parallel situation – a similar change in policy and an organization that is similar in size that despite your protest DOES work with a largely volunteer force – is it not worth considering that these arguments are largely invalid?

        I’m not trying to actually equate the membership or the motivation for joining. I’m equating that there is a similar precedent of success for a like decision. I’ll agree, they aren’t exactly the same. For one, we don’t get to drive tanks (much to my chagrin). But the parallels are pretty similar from where I’m sitting.

  164. I welcome this change, and hope it happens. The youth of our country need good role models, and safe organizations to help them grow as young people. There is nothing about being gay, lesbian, bisexual, etc., that would make a person not fit to be a good role model for my sons. If you disagree, you can make sure to volunteer with a pack, troop, or crew that is sponsored by an organization that has chosen to exclude the LBGT community.

    Just think of the youth who have invested years in Scouting, only to figure out they are gay. Let’s welcome them, and show them that it’s ok to be who they are. They have a lot to give the world, and Scouting is poorer for trying to exclude them.

    • The idea that Scouting will be segregated into units that allow and disallow homosexuals is untenable. Who exactly is going to be working at Philmont? Who will be manning the stations at the Klondike? Who will be on staff at the council summer camp? What kind of changes will we see in Family Life merit badge? These are significant issues. Scouting can not exist in this type of fractured environment.

      At this point, those of us who disagree with your premise that there is nothing that would disqualify a homosexual from being a good role model have had the BSA to turn to. The BSA has been that organization. You are proposing eliminating an organization that has been a haven for those of us who maintain the moral values that the BSA has historically espoused.

      Many of us find homosexuals to be unsuitable role models because we understand homosexuality to be morally wrong. It’s not that homosexuals can’t be trustworthy, or thrifty, or patriotic role models. It’s that homosexual leaders represent acceptance and normalization of a moral position which most members of the BSA consider wrong. It is similar to a leader who was openly cheating on his wife. I don’t want that guy as a scout leader either because he represents values which are inconsistent with my own.

      • Then people who believe homosexuals are inappropriate role models will probably always be uncomfortable signing up for a scout troop that openly admits gays. You will always be able to find a troop that agrees with your values. You don’t have to personally agree with every CO that has a Scout troop, you just have to find a CO that aligns with who you are, and sign up there. That is the beauty of BSA.

      • That’s the problem, you won’t be able to find a CO that doesn’t admit gays because they’ll all be run out of town with lawsuits. If there are gay scouting organization options now and they’re not willing to look at those, why should we think they’d behave any differently when looking for a unit within the BSA? Rather than select a unit that admits gays, wouldn’t they select a unit that doesn’t, and go after them instead? The rationale might be…. “there are no units in my area that accept gays, so I’ll sue the nearest one until they either let me in or shut their doors.”

      • The Catholic church will still have troops. Southern Baptists too. They seem to have plenty of money for lawsuits. And nobody doubts that Catholic church or Southern Baptists reject gays anyway, so lawsuits about that would be pretty unlikely.

      • The Southern Baptists have already said they will not support this change. Prior to the announcement Wayne Brock asked Frank Page, the head of the Southern Baptist Convention, to not oppose the change and Frank refused. The Southern Baptists will shut down their scouting programs. I expect the Catholic church will do the same.

        They’re shutting down their scouting programs because the BSA is in their view no longer an organization that respects traditional morals.

      • Why would there be lawsuits? The BSA has already confirmed the right of a private organization to exclude whoever it wants – that won’t change. It will just be on the local level instead of the national level. Any lawyer worth his salt would avoid such a suit, knowing that there is no chance of winning.

      • There have been lawsuits against the BSA in the past for their stance against accepting gays. There will be lawsuits against individual units now for not accepting them. Many (perhaps most) CO’s will not have the cash and perhaps not have the will to take this to court to defend themselves. Instead, they will simply shut down their program. Eventually, you’ll end up with only units that accept gays, which I think will be very pleasing to the gay population.

        My point stands, if they are willing to sue the BSA why wouldn’t they be willing to sue an individual unit? The BSA had the cash to go to court and defend themselves, many and perhaps most of the individual CO’s are defenseless and easy pickings.

      • I am not LDS and I would be comfortable joining a mormon troop. I would expect and give respect for our differences. But my real question is this,”What the sam hill are you talking about, CWGMPLS”

      • Hi Doc- this happens today. There are troop leaders who are chauvinists and misogynists and I don’t want my son exposed to them, either. Yet every year at camporee we see these guys, even though they are lousy role models. And as you say – there are scout leaders who cheat on their spouses and their are scout leaders who are alcoholics. Yet every year we go to summer camp and they’re in attendance, too, proudly wearing their scout shirts.

      • This happens in every organization, pretty much. The difference is that BSA does not condone misogyny, cheating, or alcoholism. I’m pretty sure that the BSA actually teaches that these things are wrong.

        You can’t escape bad role models. But you don’t have to endorse their behavior either.

      • But these scout leaders described by db are not kicked out for their bad behavior. Why not? Is there a double standard?

      • Charles,

        Do you have children? Even if you don’t, imagine you did. Who do/would you trust to instill them with those morals you practice? Would you chose someone who actually practices those same morals?

        You could say yourself, of course. And I would wholeheartedly agree with you on that. But who would you choose outside of yourself? Would you choose someone who taught that homosexuality was morally wrong? I’m guessing not.

        Boy Scouts has offered an organization where I have felt comfortable sending my children. They have stood up for a traditional moral stance which I happen to agree with. It’s not like they invented some crazy new religion. Homosexuality has been pretty universally viewed as morally wrong for millennia.

        You may disagree. And you are free to associate with whomever you want who shares (or doesn’t) your point of view. You may also choose to attempt to transform the BSA into an organization that fits your moral viewpoint. But “Wow. Just… wow.” isn’t very convincing. It really doesn’t make much of a point. Why don’t you tell us what you think so that we can discuss your view?

      • Fair enough, Doc. I’ll reply. On my way to a Troop meeting tonight, so I’ll have to get back to you in a few hours.

      • Doc-

        Sure, I have two boys. One aged out recently. Worked camp staff, went to Jambo, and climbed 2 peaks at Philmont. The other has only been in Troop for a year, but expects to follow his brother’s footsteps.

        Morals. That’s a good series of questions in your first paragraph. Yes, I’d expect that I would hope someone with the same moral judgment would teach them. But I don’t think that should be exclusive. I raised my boys to make decisions for themselves. I expect they’ll make mistakes. I expect they’ll receive tutelage at some point that goes against my or their moral beliefs. I also expect them to still be able to make informed, correct decisions. And when they don’t – they’ll learn. That is what life is about, learning from our missteps.

        But here is the problem. I don’t define morality the same way you do. Morality to me is the difference between right and wrong. It’s not a sexual preference. It’s the ability to ‘know’ that stealing is wrong. Lying is wrong. Deceit is wrong. Sexuality, on the other hand, has to do with personal choices regarding love and personal fulfillment. So to answer your question in full, I don’t have a problem if my sons learn how to tie a knot from someone who believes in homosexuality – so long as they can teach them how to tie the knot. We’re going to differ on this point, and that, in my mind is alright. I have relatives and friends who are homosexual. Should I preclude them from my life, from my kid’s life, because they choose a different lifestyle? By your definition I probably should. But the funny thing is – I’ve witnessed their generosity, their willingness to teach and I admire them all. I have no concerns about leaving my children in their care. I know that their morals, as I define them are similar to mine. Who they choose to spend their life with has no bearing on their ability to teach the differences between right and wrong.

        And blanket statements irk me. Homosexuality has been viewed as many things, but there are times in history where it has been more accepted than others. The less the church has to do with doctrine, the more it becomes less of a social stigma. As we learn more about the human condition, as we spend more time understanding our humanity and the world around us, we spend less time worrying about homosexuality. I think what really blew my mind earlier was the statement, “Many of us find homosexuals to be unsuitable role models because we understand homosexuality to be morally wrong.” I can provide you with a list of well known and strong role models – all of whom are homosexual. Football players, senators, industry leaders. Should all of them be shunned? (Very tongue in cheek comment – perhaps the politicians…).

        I’d thank you not to push your values as the status quo. What we value as a nation has changed over the past 50-100 years. What we think of as moral is different than what we thought when Scouting was founded. I ask, rather I beg, you to consider that the values of the Scout law include not only Reverent (which has a place in this discussion overall) but also: Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Cheerful – all of these qualities should be remembered before we cast stones or deem a person morally wrong because of their preferred partner on date night.

      • Charles,

        I think you hit the nail on the head, you don’t define morality the way I do. Although maybe we define it the same way, but what constitutes morality differs. I wholeheartedly agree with your statement that morality is the difference between right and wrong. You and I don’t agree on what is right and what is wrong. You are willing to concede that stealing and lying are wrong. I concur. But you go on to suggest that sexuality is not a moral question. I disagree. I think we agree to disagree on that. But that’s really the crux of the issue, and I don’t think we really agree to disagree about it.

        I’m glad you know and trust a number of homosexuals. I do not distrust homosexuals. I know there are lots of decent human beings out there who are also homosexuals. I also do not exclude them from my life or the life of my children, nor did I ever suggest such a thing. I fully expect my boys to come into contact with decent people who don’t share their morality. That’s not a big deal. But I will not send them to be taught morality by someone who doesn’t share mine.

        I have worked with homosexual Scout leaders who were great at teaching knots and swimming. They were also good at teaching boys to be cheerful and kind. But, since I define sexuality as a moral issue, who they choose to spend their life with does have a bearing on their ability to teach the differences between right and wrong.

        I would be willing to bet that you don’t even really believe that statement. I think you would like to, but I’m sure there are limits to what you’ll consider acceptable sexual behavior. I’ll give you a true story, and you tell me if you think it has any bearing on right and wrong. My brother in law (wife’s sister’s husband) was married to my sister in law for about 15 years. They had two children, 12, 9. He decided to have an affair, publicly. He brought his girlfriend to his house, with his wife and kids. He brought her to church, with his wife and kids. I’m sure if he had been a Scout leader he would have brought her there too. Tell me about his fitfulness for teaching ethics. He was totally honest about his relationship. Let’s assume he was really good with knots, compass, pioneering, whatever. Does who he chooses to spend his date night with affect his suitability to teach children right from wrong? Do you want him to teach your boys how to fulfill the Scout Oath? Feel free to extend this to any type of sexual behavior you may find morally deviant. I’m sure there’s something out there that you would find objectionable. We just draw the line in different places.

        We are at a point now where people in a troop would probably say something to my brother in law. It is morally objectionable to behave in such a fashion. We have no issue teaching that this kind of behavior is wrong. Let’s pretend that the BSA decides that adultery is an ok position for them and mandates that adulterers be accepted. This means that my brother in law’s behavior has been granted moral acceptance within the organization. He can now teach my boys not only knot tying, but also the joys and fulfillment of adultery. This is what BSA is discussing right now, from my point of view.

        It is really irrelevant that blanket statements irk you. You don’t have the ability to modify history even if you wish it were different. I’m not arguing you on whether history was good or bad. I’m just telling you the way it was. And frankly, my values have been the status quo in the BSA. That may change, and soon. But it hasn’t exactly been a secret where the BSA has historically stood on this issue. On the contrary, it is you who are seeking to push your values as the status quo. Our society, and you included, may be redefining what is socially right and wrong. But I’m not on that train. And Boy Scouts hasn’t been either.

        I’m not really sure where you’re going with the casting stones bit. I haven’t been unfriendly, unkind, or discourteous in any of my posts. Just because I disagree with you does not make me unkind. While we’re at it, why do you take friendliness, kindness, and cheerfulness to be positive qualities? Essentially, justify your morality.

      • Well argued.

        I still don’t agree with a number of your points – as you don’t agree with mine. But I think I’ll move on from this conversation as I don’t see benefit in continuing. You are an intelligent person, Doc, and I do appreciate the discussion. As we have both stated though, there is a difference in how we define morality and I don’t see either of us convincing the other today.

        I will state before I go that I’m saddened by the experience you related. I don’t have a similar situation to draw from so I can’t pretend to know what the answer is. I think I’d feel upset by some of the actions of this person. Adultery is painful and does hurt the the family unit and those around it.

      • I can tell you it was horrible. I have never been so mad at a person. It ruined a family. And their church didn’t address it at all. Terrible.

        I know you haven’t suggested this, but I feel like a lot of people who want to allow homosexuals into Scouting assume that those of us who are opposed are hateful or bigots. And that’s really not the case. Well, it’s not the case with anyone I’ve talked to.

        I’m an Eagle. I worked at my council summer camp for 9 years. I made lots of good friends with lots of young men and women. I have a group of friends from that time who still gets together. All 8 of us are Eagles. We all worked for Scouts for at least 8 or 9 years. One of the guys is a Council Field Director. We don’t all agree on this, or on (a)theism. I know that several of the guys were really disappointed in the Supreme Court ruling. And I know that several of them are avowed atheists and have been as long as I’ve known them (pretty much the same group).

        Scouting has been able to accommodate people like me and people like them. None of them or their parents were ignorant about what Scouting was, or where it stood on homosexuality and atheism. But that didn’t stop them from participating. I guess their parents didn’t look to Scouts as an organization to support their morality.

        On the other hand, if Scouting had a different stance on those two issues I know that my parents would not have involved me. And I won’t involve my boys either. And I don’t think I’m alone. Our pack is the largest in the district. If the BSA switches on this I’m pretty sure our pack will lose at least 2 den leaders, the Cubmaster, the Committee chair, the treasurer, and about half of the boys. That is a recipe for disaster for the BSA. And it has nothing to do with our CO, a Baptist church. They might pull the charter. I have no idea.

        People can’t just leave the military if they change a policy. But people can walk out on the BSA in a second. I really think this will kill the BSA. But maybe not. I don’t know. It won’t be my concern anymore. But it will be very sad for me.

      • Obviously these are issues that would have to be discussed, and you would have to make your own decisions. If you cannot deal with a gay person working at Philmont, and that is the situation, then don’t go there.

        Your view that this would eliminate BSA as an organization as a haven for people with your views may be correct. In the last several years the organization has certainly lost many families due to the emphasis on excluding the LBGT community. It also has (and is losing) many youth who grow up in scouting, and then realize that they cannot agree with the exclusion. Is our mission one of supporting our youth in growing into fine young members of the community? Of course it is. Our mission is not to support any one religion over others. Frankly, I don’t think many gay and lesbian adults will want their children to join, but the population this will really benefit will be the boys who have been in Scouting since they were 6 years old, and now realize they are gay.

        Assuming this passes, your church or other religious organization may choose to start (or strengthen) a youth organization to fill this void for you. The option to remain with your unit, sponsored by an organization with values in line with yours, remains.

      • Carla, please tell me WHY on earth do we (those who want scouting to remain the same, who joined it because of it’s VERY clear principles/morals) need to leave and ‘choose to start (or strengthen) a youth organization…’ That’s WHAT BSA IS FOR US – are you dense? Take the LGBT and YOU go ‘start or strengthen’ a group for them. It just baffles me that the somehow you people think WE need to leave OUR organization. Go start the LGBT Scouts of America. That’s all this is about forcing us to change. While you’re at it go tell the Free Masons to change and allow women, and then tell VFW halls to let everyone in not just Vets (cause I support our troops too ya know) oh and when you’ve gotten them changed go tell the African American College fund to stop discriminating against Whites, Asians, & Latinos.

      • Hmm, you’ve insulted me without meeting me, and tried to bring in several unrelated arguments, which I will ignore.

        Tell me, why do you think BSA is more your organization than mine? BSA policy did not address sexual orientation explicitly until 1991, and even then, the policy was ignored in many circles.

        Several friends and I are, and have been, members of BSA for many years, and we would welcome this change. It is not YOUR organization. “Morally straight” may mean different things to different people. Many people within BSA are not of the religious ilk you apparently are, and it is perfectly acceptable. This new policy, if passed, would bring official policy more in line with the differing religions and views making up the organization.

        Feel free to talk amongst yourselves, I will not further comment to people who use insults.

      • ScoutMommaX3 –
        The issue is that although the BSA as an organization has held this policy for some time, there are many, many folks within the BSA who do not agree with the current policy. Many of them have friends and family who are gay. In some areas of the country, openly gay folks have been included in community life for many years now – in schools, in the workplace, in churches, and yes, in scouting on a “don’t ask, don’t tell” basis. This policy would allow each BSA troop to reflect the values of the chartering organization. Just as the BSA has Catholic troops and Jewish troops and even Hindu troops, which do not share the same religious views, so it can have troops which differ on this issue. Scouts are good people – they can respect each other and make this work.

      • Really? You compare differing religious views to LGBT issues? Hardly the same! I know all about the ‘gay community’ I have a gay sister, along with several cousins, aunts and uncles who are all gay (we’re a large family). Yet they all respect BSA’s policy – they support my scouts (and the other boy scouts in our family) when they can, through popcorn sales, attending ceremonies, etc. They get that some organizations have limitations.

        As you can tell by this forum there are also plenty of people that DO agree with our policy. As I’ve stated above I would not expect any other private organization to ‘change’ their rules for me when there are other options available to me. I am not trying to force my way into a group that so clearly has rules (upheld by the Supreme Court) that does not welcome me. I make known what organizations align with me and my families and avoid the others. If people feel so strongly AGAINST BSA – DON’T JOIN! There is no one saying that there cannot be a LGBT scouting organization – go start one – leave this one alone. If there are so many that feel strongly about this, then they will be a very successful group. But how many ‘straight’ people who claim to be such huge gay supporters would go join a LGBT scouting organization? I would bet none.

        Let’s face it this is only about wanting to reverse the ‘bully’ mentality and destroy a group that is well established and supports only ‘traditional’ values. It really grinds them that the Supreme Court upheld the decision so they started to ‘bully’ the businesses that support BSA. They will not stop until they’ve ruined anyone or anything that does not share their point of view on their lifestyles. Hypocrites.

      • I don’t think anyone who is working for this change from within scouting wants to destroy the organization. No one wants to bully anyone. These are folks who love the BSA. Many of them also support the First Amendment, which allows the BSA and other private organizations to make any policy they want regarding membership. It’s not hypocritical to believe that an organization is for the most part extraordinarily good, but that there is one thing that might be able to be a bit better.

        In many areas of our country, the BSA does not reflect the values and moral beliefs of the majority of its members. More importantly, many troops are struggling with the fact that the BSA does not reflect the values of their CO.

        The proposed policy is a good compromise that won’t require anyone to join a troop they aren’t comfortable with, or any CO to sponsor a troop that doesn’t uphold its values – on either side.

      • Outstanding comment ScoutMommax3! and yes, we still live in a pluralistic society, not a dictatorship.

      • Let’s get this straight. If the straight community wants to “fill the void” we can start our own organization? Isn’t that what we hold out to the gay community? Start your own organization. Why do we have to change for you?

      • Steve that is EXACTLY my point. BSA is a private organization that’s policy was upheld by the supreme court in July. The people fighting for this change keep saying that we (who do not want to change the program) can ‘leave’ start a new program. WE already have a program that fits our standards and morals. They need to go start their own scouting program. It is all about bullying their way in and forcing change and their lifestyle/agenda (whatever you want to call it) in a place that does not want/need it. They will not rest until they have destroyed anything that stands for ‘traditional’ families/life!

      • For the record, the Supreme Court didn’t hear a case regarding this issue recently. BSA v. Dale was in the year 2000.

  165. I agree with the change, I only wish it had happened last year before we lost our CO, a PTO that had chartered our pack for over 30 years. If CO’s own the unit and provide leadership they should be able to choose the correct path for themselves. I wonder how much of this decision is actually based on pressure from World Scouting and the hosting of the World Jamboree in 2019(?). Did boycotts threats from other Scouting Organizations bring this around again this year?

  166. I have been reading most of the comments on this blog and am appalled at the vitriol and the dearth of logical and critical thinking. First, this change is NOT inevitable unless those in leadership positions vote for the change and/or give up the fight. Second, as it is imperative in any discussion of the constitution to refer to The Federalist Papers, in discussing a fundamental change to the BSA we all must look to Baden Powell’s vision, and founding principle’s when he founded the organization. Here are some of his quotes,

    “Scouting is nothing less than applied Christianity”
    “When asked where religion came into Scouting and Guiding, Baden-Powell replied, It does not come in at all. It is already there. It is a fundamental factor underlying Scouting and Guiding.”
    “No man is much good unless he believes in God and obeys His laws”.

    What is clear is that the BSA was founded upon Christian principles. Thus, having a starting point and since the Bible is the “rulebook” for Christians, it is clear that the change contemplated by the National clearly destroys the Boy Scout Priciples.

    Please do not call me names as I am sick of the “bigotry” label being thrown around on the blog and don’t tell me I am being discriminatory because I follow my religion and so was B.P when he started the BSA. We all discriminate everyday.

    FYI: Once the BSA adopted the policy of allowing openly gay scouts in one troop or pack then the entire organization must admit openly gay scouts to every pack and troop because separate but equal access is not legal.

    • Well, gays may be allowed in every troop, but I am a straight, white male and I can guarantee you there are some troops I would not be expected in, and would not want to join, because of the teachings of their C.O. I’m sure that will be the same with gays too. Gays will figure out pretty soon which troops really want them, and which ones don’t.

    • Separate but equal is perfectly legal for a private organization. Allowing troops to choose whether to accept gay members, based on the values of their CO, is a very good way for the BSA to remain a strong organization into the future. It is a self-correcting policy. If there is a large interest in no-gay troops, there will be many to choose from. If the majority prefers a gay-ok troop, they will vote with their feet. Either way, folks can choose the option that best fits their beliefs. It’s a good way to respect the moral beliefs and concerns of all scouts on this issue.

  167. As someone who was strongly influenced by the BSA, and former venturing scout, local camp counselor, Philmont ranger, and leader in my council, I will be very glad to once again support the BSA if they remove discrimination from their practices. I hope that all youth can have opportunities to grow and learn with the BSA.

  168. Are we going to remove “morally straight” from the oath? How can they do their duty to God when their leadership is defying Him? Homosexuality certainly isn’t “reverent,” and I won’t even mention “clean!”

    • . . . and morally straight.

      To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs. The values you practice as a Scout will help you shape a life of virtue and self-reliance.

      What does that have to do with Gay? nothing.. please read the scout law and oath and try to live by them..

  169. As an asst SM and parent of two Scouts, I believe this will be a HUGE mistake by National. On a personal level, I will not continue to be a leader if they cave to the pressure. Then I will be forced to make a hugely difficult decision on whether to allow my sons to continue for their Eagle. I also think National is doing an incredible disservice to their units and COs by exposing them to the threat of lawsuits. I have already heard at least three gay activists say the phrase “this is a good start”. If National thinks this change would end the gay attacks on BSA, they are either naive, ignorant, or both. Sad day if this happens…

    • I think you will be doing your sons a disservice if you stop them from becoming Eagle Scouts because you dislike a certain segment of our population. A scout is kind.

      • James, a Scout is honest and putting words into Mack’s mouth is simply dishonest. Please do not take offense at what I am going to point out to you, but read again what Mack posted. Mack never said that he dislikes a certain segment of our population. This is not something that you can refute or debate..it is what we call a fact. Further, can you recognize the difference between rejecting sin and amoral acts and loving the sinner? Loving the sinner is how we as Scouts are kind. Hope this helps clarify. I have three sons, and we -like Mike-are out of Scouting if BSA National caves to those who would bully us on this issue!

      • This is unfortunate Scoutleader, because I really would like to share a cup of coffee with you, and everyone here, around the campfire. I am tolerant of others ideas and beliefs, and respect yours. These discussions are happening all over, in many organizations, and I think it is good for the country. I am sorry to see you leave scouting, we should be coming together, not apart.

      • No offense intended James, but it is clear from your above-post that you failed to apologize for putting words into Mack’s mouth. I find it odd that you then go on and talk about coming together….. just after you tell Mack (with zero basis to judge him this way) “you [he] dislikes a certain segment of our population.” I hope you don’t take this the wrong way, but seriously you need to apologize to Mack. It is easy for us to come together as we all uphold the traditional and moral values of Scouting. James, will you please come together with us on this when the Board makes the right decision next week?

  170. This Cyclical argument is really boring me.. it’s simple.. the scout law and oath.. neither have anything to do with sex.. let’s leave it that way.. and Reverence should not be confused with Religious..

    If anyone wants to chat outside of this.. well this is my fb.. I have nothing to hide..

    • John,

      This is too simplistic. You can’t pretend that sexuality is somehow outside of the domain of morality. The two are closely intertwined, and the way we conceive one greatly affects the way we conceive the other. Boy Scouts is an organization that aims to promote value and character in boys. It is inherently moralistic. We can’t pretend that this isn’t an issue. It’s an enormous issue, which is why we’re having this discussion.

      This is a debate between those who think homosexuality is morally wrong, and those who find it morally acceptable or benign. Those who find it immoral have historically defined the values of the BSA. And those who find it morally acceptable want to redefine those values. This can’t be smoothed over by saying that Scouting has nothing to do with sex. The debate is not really about sex. It’s about right and wrong. And Scouting has a lot to say about right and wrong.

  171. The number to call and let your voices be know is 972-580-2000
    This is for BSA home office

    • I tried several times today, They did not answer. Here is the list of Executive Board Members From the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, Not sure who the Current Board Members. Ominously difficult for Google to find! Lets look them up and email them asap!

      Steve Weekes, Committee Chairman
      John Gottschalk
      Tico Perez
      Jack Furst
      Wayne Perry
      Keith Clark
      Nathan Rosenberg
      Steve Hanks
      Bob Reynolds
      Mike Daniel
      George Francis
      Ed Lewis
      Ron Yocum
      Margaret Lifferth

  172. The Bible clearly states that homosexuality is a sin. To take an oath to God would infer deceitfulness. If we are to teach morality to our boys we cannot allow homosexuality because it is not. Society does not dictate right and wrong. What kind of society would allow morality to change with every whim? A dying one. My boys will not attend if this is enacted.

    • What does BSA have to do with the Bible? The Bible is the foundation for many chartering organizations, but not for the BSA. That is why this issue rightly belongs at the chartering organization level, not at BSA national.

    • Amen Leslie! Scouting will either stand firmly on its timeless values by clearly reaffirming that Scouting will not allow its charter organizations to condone amoral homosexual acts by its scouters or scout leaders, or Scouting will elect to plant the seed of its ultimate destruction. We love Scouting, its timeless moral values and the clear moral compass that it provides our youth. The Soros bloggers on this website better not underestimate our ability to preserve it!

  173. This will destroy Scouting. Why would anyone allow a gay male leader into a position of authority over a group of young boys? How about putting your young boy in a tent with a homosexual boy? This is MADNESS.
    Young boys can be confused by inappropriate contact. In 2001, the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior published a study entitled Comparative data of childhood and adolescence molestation in heterosexual and homosexual persons. The abstract for this article states the following:
    In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation.
    This policy will GUARANTEE more molestation and other problems. After all, molesters are more likely to molest.
    PLEASE STAND UP FOR SCOUTING!

  174. If you have a half-baked policy at the troop level, then what will be the policy at summer camp, high adventure base, camporee, and jamboree?

  175. Does anyone think for a minute that this “agenda” ends here? Will it even be three years before BSA morphs this policy into all out embracement of the gay agenda?

      • It’s available on the liberal media! [and probably being pushed by, as Time Magazine called him, “The Gay President”!] 🙂 Many of these folks seem to be getting much of their information from Mr Beck and company. “If it’s different from what I think, then it must be wrong.” It is interesting also to note that so many of the participants in this conversation are apparently members of the Westboro Baptist Church and are furvent homophobes.
        Also note which side seems to be more rational and is coming from a more fact based and less emotional standpoint.

  176. When is the bullying going to end? The Gay/Lesbian/Atheist community is bullying businesses, politicians, schools, organizations, etc. We are opposed to changing the BSA policy on homosexuality and atheists. Why does everyone think they are being discriminated against if they can’t join a particular group? It won’t stop with just letting them join and be leaders. It will work it’s way from each unit being able to decide on their own “policy” to being forced to meet quotas. The previous post on all the organizations that have policies as to who can and cannot join…that’s a great post!

    • LGBT individuals are typically on the receiving end of bullying. All they are doing, in actuality, is standing up for their rights.

      • Let’s see if I understand this they are standing up for their “Right to Sin”! I am not sure I can get there. I did not make the rule, and I am not going to challenge the Being that did.

      • Their right to sin? In the eyes of whom? It is not up to me to decide that. The BSA does not make it their business to decide amongst sinners, either, as they do not endorse any particular religion.

      • And that’s what are we doing too Beth! See we have rights too! But it IS bullying on their part. They have been fighting and gaining more rights for years now – when will they say ‘we’re good, we don’t need to be EVERYWHERE’!?! – they will not stop until they’ve ruined anything that values ‘traditional family’ values. Or else they would abandon this fight and leave BSA alone and start a new scouting organization that aligns with their values, not destroy mine and millions of others.

      • Why SHOULDN’T gay people have rights? What people who oppose gay people are doing is fighting for the right to take rights away from others. Which, really, isn’t a right at all.

      • Beth are you even reading and comprehending what most of us are saying?! They HAVE rights – the RIGHT to go start their own scouting program that can allow whoever and whatever they want use whatever values they want – WE have the right to be left alone to a program that has been around for 100+ years. WHY do they need to stomp on our rights in order to ‘claim’ their own? That’s what this is about taking away our rights to ‘prove’ their own or else they would be putting their energy into a new program. AGAIN it’s about destroying any group that wants to uphold ‘traditional values’ – You people can talk all you want, but that is the clear fact! I have read NOWHERE on this board where someone is denying them a scouting program/opportunity we’re just asking them to leave this one alone. Can you see that?

      • Yes, I am reading what is being said. I comprehend what is meant. I respectfully disagree that gay people starting their own camping group is a viable solution. Others have outlined the reasons why, and I won’t go in to that in this post, because I haven’t the time. The simple fact is, the BSA leadership itself is currently considering changing the official policy that excludes a segment of our population from the BSA as a whole. This organization no more belongs to you than it belongs to me. I, for one, and many more like me, want this policy to change. No one is trying to destroy the organization.

      • As a PRIVATE organization BSA can include and exclude whomever they wish. Similar to Freemasons; I meet all their requirements except being a male. So I cannot join their order. That’s discrimination is it not? OR rather then force my way into the Freemasons I could join one of the various options associated with them for females. Alternative options allow everyone to have their rights protected without destroying an organization that has existed for many, many years. However, it is much easier to overtake an existing organization than to start a grass roots movement of a gay scouting group. If the gays really believe in their cause/need for a gay scouting program then it would work. The fact remains they are the minority here in scouting and there is not enough real interest, other than to ruin a group focusing/teaching their sons about traditional family values. Any of the reasons that would not make them successful on their own will be the demise of having them in BSA, if it wouldn’t work as a stand alone program it will not work in this organization. So again, their goal flat out is destruction of traditional values.

      • I agree with you… a private organization has the right to discriminate. What is happening right now is that the BSA leadership is deciding what the official membership criteria are to be, moving forward. If they can choose to discriminate, they can also choose to not discriminate.

        Do freemasons discriminate against women? Yes, they do. I personally don’t think they should. I also don’t think the BSA should discriminate against LGBT individuals. I am a member of the BSA, and I have been for years. I believe that all people should have the right to be members if they would like to. They want to be scouts for scouting purposes. Not because they are gay. Because they are scouts. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.

      • They are deciding this (again) because pressure was put on major financial sponsors by the LGBT community! It is a seek and destroy mission. If they truly just wanted to be ‘scouts’ they would happily start their own organization that would want/welcome them with open arms. I accept the standing of Freemasons because, one there is an alternative option for me (and other women) and because I am okay with the fact that sometimes in life we have limitations to learn to live within – to tolerate – BSA’s current policy would only be hurtful to the LGBT community if there were no other options. Clearly society (in the bigger picture) is more accepting so there is no reason to not go off and start a new program. You know it, I know it and they know it. However they would rather take away the rights of one group for their own. THAT is selfish and hurtful so it makes me disrespect them more.

      • If LGBT’s way of “standing up for its rights” is to spit in the face of the rights of others including the right of the the BSA to maintain its timeless values as embodied on our Scout oath and law, then the LGBT is properly classified as an in tolerant bully. As Scouters, we will never back down from a bully and we say to LGBT and others, if you don’t like what we stand for, then LEAVE and don’t let the door hit you on the way out!

      • It is not only LGBT individuals asking for this national ban to be lifted. There are many of us already involved in scouting that feel that this ban is wrongheaded and would like to see a policy change.

        I am simply amazed by the simple failure of so many to realize that another group asking for their rights to be recognized does not take away anyone else’s rights.

        The plain difference is that they are not saying you must be gay to be a scout. You are saying they can’t be gay and be a scout.

      • Beth, what you don’t understand and/or acknowledge is that these beliefs are contradictory and therefore cannot exist together. Those who believe that homosexuality is wrong have already significantly compromised their beliefs! We have accepted gays in the Scouting organization as a compromise, with tolerance.

        But that is not enough for you who believe otherwise. It has reached the tipping point and you folks do not acknowledge that!

      • Spot on GreegO! Beth’s intolerance is remarkable and very dangerous to our pluralistic society. She is an extremist.

      • It’s quite clear that this is a well-organized effort to hijack and destroy the BSA!

        To go about making such reckless changes via secretive backroom dealings illustrates the evil nature and intent of some of the men on BSA’s board. These actions taken James Turley (CEO of Ernst &Young) and Randall Stephenson (CEO of AT&T) and other willing to do their bidding, speaks volumes about the extent through which Soros funded left wing extremist groups such as Glaad (http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late) and others are willing to go through to destroy anyone or any group affiliated with traditional values like that of the BSA. Make no mistake…this is just a harbinger of things to come for those that love and stand for truth and righteousness.

        The negative consequences of these actions WILL RESULT in more than a house divided…IT WILL SADLY LEAD TO THE UTTER DESTRUCTION OF THE BSA. Art of War author, Sun Tzu, would be proud Mr. Turley and Mr. Stephenson for the underhanded actions. What better way to keep your enemies close than to sit on their board.

        PEOPLE THAT ARE FRIENDS OF SCOUTING BETTER WAKE UP BECAUSE THE BSA IS AT STAKE! You can also be rest assured it will not stop here!

      • beth, regarding your first point, your inability to grasp obvious distinctions is remarkable. There is no place for threatening, bullying and intimidating corporate donors of the BSA by Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community who intentionally infiltrate an opposing organization with the intent to destroy it from within, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community to threaten, bully and intimidate members of an organization with different values to do something that spits in the face of their timeless values and does not reflect actions that its members want (yea, we understand that 100% of Scouters do not support the timeless values, but most do). The actions of these outside groups is indefensible and antithetical to our pluralistic values. You either acknowledge this simple truth or you demonstrate your extremism. Let’s now turn to your second point,
        First, active homosexuals have no “right” to an association with the BSA. See, BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA V. DALE (99-699) 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (May I suggest that you stop proffering opinions that are incongruent with fact, it reflects badly). Second, the proposed policy change DOES change Scouting and its mission, and further, it destroys our timeless values including that of a Scout being “morally straight” and “clean” (you can take the position that you think that this policy change is a good idea, but you cannot assert that the policy change does nothing…of course it does and this is why what is being discussed is newsworthy). Let’s review the facts, the “mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). Additionally, the US Supreme Court also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. The BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000), and the Court clearly recognized and upheld the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. Finally, yes, we have some within our ranks that do not favor the current policy, however, they decided to join the BSA knowing what we are about and our timeless values. As a point in fact, millions of us in the Scouting movement are a part of this organization and have invested time and money because we like, agree with and desire to involve ourselves and sons in such a program that teaches and instills in them these timeless values. As such, the rights of those who seek to defend the institutional values are superior. Let me describe it this way. A certain development is built next to a dairy farm that has been operating for decades. A new home buyer knows of the dairy and elects to move into the neighborhood. After a while the home owner tells the dairy farmer that it needs to shut down because the home owner does not like the smell. Any idea what the dairy farmer and the law will say to the home owner….if you don’t like your decision, then leave and don’t let the door hit you on the way out. With all due respect screen name beth, we firmly and lovingly say the same to you. Hope this helps..

        T

        inf .First, the BSA gets to define what the

  177. Wow, lots of fear in this discussion. Here is some news, there are gay people in scouting right now. There always have been. They staff summer camps, philmont, jamboree. They participate in OA, ceremonies, and service. They are camping, hiking and providing exceptional leadership. They are not out to “turn” anyone gay, “molest” anyone, or start “Project Runway” merit badge. They are in Scouting the same reasons we are. Can we all accept that?

    • I think it is understood that gays are in scouting. But it also needs to be undestood that compromising these principles in this way threatens the fabric of Scouting, and compromised the safety of our youth. 1-3% of the population is responsible for 33% of sexual child abuse. A grossly disproportunate rate. Scout Leaders, including the BSA Executive Board must address the issue of Youth Protection. Abuse was totally avoided in our society until 30 years ago. The Boy Scouts responded appropriately then. Blew it by protecting pedafiles on occasion, and are now leaving that standard to apease that same 1-3% of the population. I AM NOT SAYING ALL GAY MEN ARE PEDOPHILES! I am saying a disproportunate number of gay men are perpitrating male victims.

      • So if you understand gay people are in scouting now, what are you against? The gay people in scouting now are the same people that will join tomorrow. It isn’t about gay/straight, it is about a person who wants to participate in scouting. News flash, the flood gates are not going to open and a million gay people are not going to join scouting. Those who want to will and already have joined. Those who don’t will not. The world goes on, and my son will have a great scouting experience just like his brother did, I did, and my father did. I don’t see what the problem is.

    • With the utmost respect…kindly don’t marginalize the importance of what is being decided next week. Scouting will either stand firmly on its timeless values by clearly reaffirming that Scouting will not allow its charter organizations to condone amoral homosexual acts by its scouters or scout leaders, or Scouting will elect to plant the seed of its ultimate destruction. We love Scouting, its timeless moral values and the clear moral compass that it provides our youth. Don’t underestimate our ability to preserve it.

      • Us and Them. Good, let’s divide our family instead of coming together for the good of scouting. My point is scouting is bigger than this. We will survive, but we should do so united. I see no reason to be a divided group.

      • James, can you be more precise about what you think that BSA needs to do to be united for the good of Scouting?
        1. Are you merely referring to love and support for those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and who are committed to seeking after and living a moral life (if so, then I for one-and I suspect the larger Scouting community-am with you my brother); or
        2. Are you advocating for the BSA to support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? and
        3. If it is #2 above, do see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting?
        If your answers to questions #2 and #3 above are “yes”, then with all due respect and love…Scouting is not the place for you. Amoral homosexual acts “spit in the face” of our Scout oath and law. A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts. To do so would turn Scouting on its head!

      • Ok “BSAscoutleader” you and I have argued against the policy change.

        BUT…

        That being said, you are obviously much more radical than I and way overly concerned about specific sexual behaviors which is kind of creepy to say the least.

        I know I have some strong views and reading over what I have posted in the last couple of days, I probably didn’t express them as eloquently as others, making me look as wacky as some of the people I was arguing with.

        But my concerns are not really about what sexual acts are being done, but how this change, if passed, can be done to assure fairness and respect for all sides, including those who disagree with the gay community. Not to mention how we can minimize the disharmony, fractionalization and bad feelings on both sides after this happens.

        I don’t like how this is happening, as it is being primarily driven by money and pressure from outside activist groups.

        So thanks for making me not look so radical.

        Now, if you want people to take you more seriously, stop using a handle and use your real name. If you are going to say it, at least stand behind it.

      • Jo, I’m on the other side, but I agree with your post. This part in particular:

        “But my concerns are not really about what sexual acts are being done, but how this change, if passed, can be done to assure fairness and respect for all sides, including those who disagree with the gay community. Not to mention how we can minimize the disharmony, fractionalization and bad feelings on both sides after this happens.”

        I think that, with thoughtful, intelligent folks like you in the organization, the BSA will weather this storm just fine, and come out the better for it.

      • “EagleMom”, I say this with no intent to offend, but call it as it is…so here it is….based on an objective review of ALL of your posts from the past several days (when do you find time to work?), you and Jo are in the same extreme camp that seeks to change Scouting. You are both intolerant of Scouting’s rejection of an amoral life including disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders (I reference this as this is the issue being considered next week by BSA National). You want the BSA to change its views because they don’t fit your personal views. If you don’t like the values of Scouting, then leave.

        Do you also agree with this part of “Jo’s” post:
        “Now, if you want people to take you more seriously, stop using a handle and use your real name. If you are going to say it, at least stand behind it.” If so, I make the same offer to you, and at the same time, respectfully point out to “Jo” that his mean-spirited and unfounded comment to me was discriminatory in nature as it was directed at EagleMom, CWGMPLS,db and others who hold his extreme views on Scouting.

      • I would say well said Jo! The world is constantly changing, this is a great thing IMO. As we discuss this, I love our open, honest communication. But I hate the fact that scouting is being torn apart because of this.

      • A scout is honest “James.” We are all looking forward to your response to the post from DantheScoutingman from last night at 11:28PM. The timeless values of Scouting (including honestly James) are called “timeless” because they never change. Homosexual acts have always violated the Scout oath and law and will always violate the Scout oath and law. If you don’t support the values of Scouting, you can choose from any other number of organizations. This is one of the few places where we can raise our boys in the timeless values evidenced by our Scout oath and law.

      • “Jo” (assuming this screen name is your real name), with all due respect it is you who is extreme in your views. It is you who is intolerant of Scouting’s rejection of an amoral life including disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders (I reference this as this is the issue being considered next week by BSA National). You want the BSA to change its views because they don’t fit your personal views. If you don’t like the values of Scouting, then leave. Don’t force your amoral views on Scouting. You are the radical as you seek to change the good and moral nature of Scouting. To be clear, “Jo” or who ever you are…is not and will never be radical to teach and live the ideals of the Scout oath and law. It is called that which is good, right, just and true. You “Jo” are the radical as you (and those in the minority like you) seek to ram your amoral values upon us. If you don’t like what Scouting stands for, then find another organization to join! This is one of the last places in America where I can raise my boys in a wholesome environment and everyone knows this. This is why we join and this is why the BSA is being attacked. A Scout is morally straight, and as Scouters we do not compromise the ideals of virtue and chastity. As far as who you really are “Jo”, my post offer still stands…post a copy of your driver’s license, BSA member id number and phone number and let me verify who you are and I will do the same. Also, glad to see that you agree that EagleMom, CWGMPLS and db need to do the same for others to take you and them more seriously. Until such time stop using your screen name “Jo” and give us proof of your real name per my offer to you. If you insist on going down this path, then at least stand behind your words and accept my offer.

      • Scoutleader, what I advocate is for the love and acceptance of anyone who wants to join scouting. My point is this, boys do not join scouting for sex, they join for the adventure, fellowship, and spirit that scouting provides. I know this from friends, eagle scouts, camp staffers, good, honest people who only wanted to participate in the program. They were not interested in any sexual encounters with us.

        The thing is, for #2, I do not consider this amoral or disgusting. With all due respect, I have friends and family members who are gay and love them the same. I do not pry into their private sex lives, nor do they mine. So I fail to see the problem with this. I think this is where we differ.

      • We can all love and support those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and who are committed to seeking after and living a moral life. However, you are not tolerant of the BSA view to not support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders. This is simply not consistent with the timeless values of Scouting. If you disagree, that is fine and I can still love you and those who disagree, but we can be honest with each other and say that Scouting is not the place for you. Amoral homosexual acts “spit in the face” of our Scout oath and law. This is a private organization and you should respect our values. A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts. To do so would turn Scouting on its head!

      • While we’re at it, let’s get rid of those amoral, divorced scout leaders. Our timeless values are quite clear on the fact that “Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery.”

  178. The evidence (basic math) indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.

    The arguement will be that statistics lie, but even if the Gay Lobby’s false claim that the Homosexual polulation is 10% instead of 1 to 3% were true, the statistics say this change in policy is dangerous for our youth.

    It is unreasonable under these conditions to believe that the National BSA Council can continue any legitimate Youth Protection Policies with this policy. It is not reasonable! The BSA Executive Board is passing an insideous and dangerous buck to the Chartering Organizations and Units.

    The news will shortly read, ” Small Rural Church anc Chartering Organization Rep is sued by family after an approved gay scout leaders molested their Scout. Glaad, a gay rights organization pays for Scouters defense, Church folds under financial pressure of law suit. Young Scout lives the rest of his life wounded from the abuse after being betrayed by his Scout Leader and lose of support from his folded Church. National BSA commented by saying “the Boy Scouts (did) not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents” , (so its not our responsibility.) “

    • I heard the last review took two years to complete and decided against accepting gays in the BSA. My question is… what changed? Why are they looking at this again? What new information do they have now that they didn’t have when the review was done? What new information could possibly render the findings of the last review obsolete?

      • In a word * MONEY! The decision was upheld in July and by November both UPS and Intel both pull

      • Sorry we lost internet for a short time (mid thought) To finish it is that UPS and Intel both pulled financial funding from BSA because THEY felt we were ‘discriminating’ – Really? but apparently they did not feel that way when they started funding BSA. Just a bunch of cowards to afraid to stand for morals!

      • There are two high ranking executives building a personal legacy. Do not be fooled. This is not about the youth it is about personal ego and hubris.

  180. Just a Sunday ago, one of my Methodist Ministers gave a children’s sermon about children with two mothers and two fathers.
    I cannot abide inculcation of the normality of homosexual behavior to my children, particularly young ones who cannot distinguish tolerance of persons who sin from tolerance of sinful behavior.

    If there were a social equivalent of bomb shelter I would be building it.

    I never wanted to belong to a liberal or conservative scouting or church or much of anything else. But if our society is running as quick as it can, like lemmings over the moral cliff, I and my children are not going to follow.

  181. Here is the flaw in the thinking at BSA National. We do not know what the litigation burden will be from this. I work closely with those who are trying to figure this out as we all debate. Essentially what National has done is pass the burden onto the CO’s and walked away. I know lawyers who work closely with the LGBT Community and they tell me their next round of discrimination lawsuits will be aimed at CO’s that continue to exclude ANY male member for any reason. National used to provide assistance for the CO’s however under the proposed policy they will no longer have an obligation to assist they will simply walk away. That means the burden shifts and National plays Pontious Pilate to those who have stuck by them over many years. Anyone who thinks this solves the LGBT issue is naive and has no grasp of what is happening on the ground in local Districts and Units. Many are arguing that by following the new guidelines National will continue support their partners. The legal system does not work like this in discrimination cases. The individual CO becomes the defendant not National. That means the CO foots the bill. There will also be a new round of lawsuits focusing on which CO’s can or should be able to use schools or other tax payer funded venues. Essentially there will be a “have and have not” division where that was not an issue. Additional litigation can include Camps, Pow Wows, Leadership Training, Jamborees, and Conclaves. VOA programs and OA programs will also be subject to additional baggage were none existed before.

    • Andrew you are right on target this is a way for the National organization to pass the libility on to individual Councils and Church and civil Charters. As a BSA recruitor it has been difficult to recruit in public schools. This will completely shut the doors. Thanks National

      • The only reason public schools shut you out is because the National BSA policy conflicts with the school’s own nondiscrimination policy. Moving the decision to each CO will allow your CO to craft a nondiscrimination policy that no longer conflicts with the school, if it wants to. This will actually open the door to more schools for your troop, not less.

        Of course, if your CO does not want to agree to the school’s nondiscrimination policy, you will still be shut out. But now the decision is yours.

  182. Instead of yelling at each other why not call the National Scout Exec at 972-580-2000 ext .2002

    • smruss don’t you think that the executives are not reading these comments. Most of the comments are constructive and will give the National Board of Directors something to think about. Most of the comments want the BSA policy to remain as is excluding homosexuals from the organization and this is a fact. Thanks for the phone number I will be contacting him soon. Trenton

  183. If the BSA bends to pressure from such amoral interest groups, it will face class action lawsuits from its donors, members (like me) and charter organizations who will leave in mass numbers and demand a return of past payments/contributions given to BSA to promote the timeless values of Scouting as reflected in our oath and law.

  184. Any leader or scout who has same gender attraction and WHO ACTS on it by engaging in gross, despicable, and amoral homosexual acts “spits in the face” of our Scout oath and law. Does the proposed rule change apply equally to practicing and non-practicing homosexuals? To be clear, there is zero room in Scouting for PRACTICING homosexuals. My three sons and I are gone if BSA gives charter organizations the ability to bring PRACTICING homosexuals into Scouting. We are a Scouting community, we attend summer camps, camporees, jamborees, woodbadge, etc. and other events together, and allowing PRACTICING homosexuals to take on the Scout name places a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle. The simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral and will forever be amoral. I will not be a part of any organization that puts our future generation of men at risk or that promotes, allows or condones these despicable values! I will also join a class action lawsuit against the BSA to seek an apology and a refund of every dime we have put into this organization under false pretenses.

    • Oh, but it was okay to keep quiet about all of the child molesters who were leaders over the years??

      • Yes, there is ZERO room in Scouting for PRACTICING homosexuals, child molesters, etc. The clear and simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral and will FOREVER be amoral. Do we need to talk in real and honest terms about the disgusting and filthy nature of homosexual acts. If the BSA bends to pressure, I will go to the mat on this and will join a class action lawsuit to sue the BSA in order to seek an apology and a refund of every dime my family and I have put into this organization under false pretenses.

      • Should the BSA make public immediately all of the perservion files , up to today? ( not just the old ones, but files though 2012)

        Should the molesters be prosecuted? Removed from Scouting?

        All officials that hid the perversion files prosecuted and removed from Scouting?

      • Again, there is ZERO room in Scouting for PRACTICING homosexuals, child molesters, etc. If you (like me) fully support our legal process (which is designed to punish criminals/bad actors) then you have your answers. The law also gives me and my family rights, and that is why I will take this fight to the mat and plan on going to join a class action against the BSA if the BSA bends to pressure. We are a Scouting community, we attend summer camps, camporees, jamborees, woodbadge, etc. and other events together, and allowing PRACTICING homosexuals to take on the Scout name places a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle. The clear and simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral and will FOREVER be amoral. No one can honestly claim that these amoral acts have any place whatsoever in Scouting. This is a bright line in the sand that will not be moved!

      • pss… i did answer all questions…I (and I presume you agree with me on this as I didn’t get your answer to your own questions or any comment from you on the simple and clear truths that I have stated) FULLY support the legal process.

      • ps…do we (in order to be FULLY open an honest in our discussions about the amoral nature of homosexual acts and in order to avoid attempts by many to disguise or conceal the truth about the nature of these disgusting homosexual acts) require that BSA National leaders (before they vote next week) view homosexual acts being performed so they can better appreciate and understand how sick and disturbing these acts are and to better motivate them to keep our Scouts and our future men of moral character FAR away from this kind of filth and disgust?? Again, the clear and simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral (and will FOREVER be amoral) and are not consistent with the timeless values of Scouting as reflected in our oath and law!!

      • My gosh, can you simply answer the questions?

        No where in my questions is homosexuality mentioned.

      • Wow, what about…I (and I presume you agree with me on this as I didn’t get your answer to your own questions or any comment from you on the simple and clear truths that I have stated) FULLY support the legal process do you not seem to understand? My gosh…still don’t have any comment from you on the simple and clear truths that I have stated, which truths are directly relevant to the issue being decided next week. The fact is that any leader or scout who has same gender attraction and WHO ACTS on it by engaging in gross, despicable, and amoral homosexual acts “spits in the face” of our Scout oath and law. This is not the only example of how one can “spit in the face” of the Scout oath and law and as you point our child molesters are also in this camp!

      • Any molester, whether heterosexual or otherwise has no place in Scouting, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

        Homosexuals do not molest any more than heterosexuals .

        There are evil heterosexuals ( Jerry Sandusky, catholic priests that molest) as thre are evil homosexuals that molest.

        The issue is not orientation, but rather molesters and hiding their evil acts I perversion files exposing countless your to their heterosexual molestations for decades

      • Again David, you are talking about apples and I am talking about oranges. The fact is that any leader or scout who has same gender attraction and WHO ACTS on it by engaging in gross, despicable, and amoral homosexual acts “spits in the face” of our Scout oath and law. Allowing PRACTICING homosexuals to take on the Scout name places a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle. The simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral and will forever be amoral. I will not be a part of any organization that puts our future generation of men at risk or that promotes, allows or condones these despicable values! I will also join a class action lawsuit against the BSA to seek an apology and a refund of every dime we have put into this organization under false pretenses.

      • If those files are protecting any pedophiles or predators that are still in a position of being with youth, absolutely.

      • Great!

        We finally agree on something.

        The molesters need to be brought to light and prosecuted. And the officials who hid them removed.

      • How could anyone be against that? I would go to almost any length to protect any youth that are entrusted to me.

  185. I am a Canadian. I am married with 2 boys in the Scouts program. I am not a leader but plan to join next year. This is a quote from an American friend regarding Ontario’s first woman Premier and Canada’s First Out LGBT Premier” but I thought it was applicable and wanted to share. .” People are not born with bias, fear and hate. i want the smartest doctor, the smartest lawyer and the smartest political leaders. i don’t give a hoot what they look like or what they are doing when they aren’t looking at a medical test result or trying to solve huge problems.” In response to this another friend said “I don’t believe the people of Ontario judge their leaders on the basis of race, colour or sexual orientation – I don’t believe they hold that prejudice in their hearts. They judge us on our merits – on our abilities, on our expertise, on our ideas – because that is how everyone deserves to be judged. That is how we want our children, our grandchildren, our nieces and nephews to be judged.” Whether this is true yet or not, I can not say, but hope that this is the lofty goal we all should strive to achieve not matter where we live. ” My hope is that over time society will grow to be more accepting. God help some of the parents who have commented here. Because if your child ever comes out to you I hope you will find it in your heart to be accepting of who your child is.

    • Dawn, can you be more precise about what you think that BSA needs to accept and condone?
      1. Are you merely referring to love and support for those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and who are committed to seeking after and living a moral life; or
      2. Are you advocating for the BSA to support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? and
      3. If it is #2 above, do see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting?
      If your answers to questions #2 and #3 above are “yes”, then with all due respect and love…Scouting is not the place for you or your boys. Amoral homosexual acts “spit in the face” of our Scout oath and law. A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts.

    • Does your wife support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? Does your wife see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting? If your wife upon hearing these questions answers “yes”, then with all due respect and love….Scouting is not the place for her or your boys. Amoral homosexual acts “spit in the face” of our Scout oath and law.

      • No offense was intended, and I hope none was taken. My comments (as i cleared stated and intended) were given with all due respect and love. That being said, my response is honest and true. If someone is looking for an organization that will support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders and if someone looks at the BSA as a place where such disgusting acts can be viewed as being acceptable and consistent with the timeless values of Scouting, then (for that person) Scouting is the wrong organization to join! A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts.

  187. I have never been happier as a Scouter than the moment I read about this unexpected, but welcome, change of heart. I will never be prouder of being a Scouter than I will be the day the new policy is adopted.

    In my community this policy has become a troubling matter of conscience for many of us in Scouting. The only way we can justify participating in a discriminatory organization to our friends, neighbors, and families has been to commit to being voices for change from within.

    As a practical matter, continuing the discriminatory policy is having an ever-increasing impact on recruitment and retention in Scouting in our community. All of us know families who boycott Scouting as a moral stand exclusively over this issue.

    Thanks to all in Scouting who are freeing us to serve all our sons and secure the future of Scouting in our community.

    • Does it matter to you whether or not the proposed rule change applies equally to practicing and non-practicing homosexuals? Do you support and condone amoral and disgusting acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts. There is zero room in Scouting and in our Scout law and oath for PRACTICING homosexuals. We are a Scouting community, we attend summer camps, camporees, jamborees, woodbadge, etc. and other events together, and allowing PRACTICING homosexuals to take on the Scout name places a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle. The simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral and will forever be amoral. I will not be a part of any organization that puts our future generation of men at risk or that promotes, allows or condones these despicable values! I will also join a class action lawsuit against the BSA to seek an apology and a refund of every dime we have put into this organization under false pretenses.

      • Unfortunately, we differ so widely in our views on homosexuality that I doubt discussion between us will lead us to much common ground. I am simply glad that my Pack and CO, which shares my views, may soon have the privilege to offer Scouting to all.

      • In order to better understand your views, do you support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? Do see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting? If so, I find this to be a very odd and extreme position indeed.

      • You find homosexual acts amoral. I don’t. Neither do my fellow scouters and scout parents in my community. We view this very differently from you.

      • This gets us to the core issue being decided next week, and this is precisely why Scouters (unlike the George Soros funded bloggers on this website) are going to fight tooth and nail on this issue! There is ZERO room in Scouting and in our Scout law and oath for PRACTICING homosexuals. We are a Scouting community, we attend summer camps, camporees, jamborees, woodbadge, etc. and other events together, and allowing PRACTICING homosexuals to take on the Scout name places a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle. The simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral and will forever be amoral. I will not be a part of any organization that puts our future generation of men at risk or that promotes, allows or condones these despicable values! If the BSA caves on its values next week, I will go after the BSA and will join a class action lawsuit against the BSA to seek an apology and a refund of every dime we have put into this organization under false pretenses. I further propose (in order to be FULLY open an honest in our discussions about the amoral nature of homosexual acts and in order to avoid attempts by many to disguise or conceal the truth about the nature of these disgusting homosexual acts) that all BSA National leaders be required (before they vote next week) to view homosexual acts being performed so they can better appreciate and understand how sick and disturbing these acts are and to better motivate them to keep our Scouts and our future men of moral character FAR away from this kind of filth and disgust! All those who are reading this post and who are actually Scouters repeat after me…”On my honor I will do my best, to do my duty, to GOD and my Country, to keep my self physically strong, mentally awake and MORALLY STRAIGHT! and then contact the BSA national office ASAP….Erik has told you what this fight is about!!!!! Get off your chair and take action now!!! If it is not for the boys, it is for the birds…..

    • Wow Erik, so if BSA’s policy is ‘discriminatory’, tomorrow I (a white female) will be heading down to file a lawsuit to get the money from the African American College Fund I was denied. See I grew up feeling like I was really a black person trapped in a white persons body (apparently ‘God’s’ fault just ask the LGBT’s that’s who they blame) but, I just KNOW I should’ve been born black and it’s not my fault I wasn’t, so they obviously discriminated against me by not allowing me to qualify for their programs. Then I’ll take on the Free Masons because I meet all their requirements (oh except being a male – hello – discrimination!!) Ooooh and the VFW won’t let me join either something about not being a Veteran and/or taking part in a foreign war – discrimination! I totally support our troops and what they do why can’t I be part of their organization? why is it just for them?! Pesky details all these groups have that ‘discriminate’ against someone -OR – could it be that they are PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS (like BSA) that have rules and I must learn to grow as a person and ACCEPT sometimes there are limitations?! Maybe accept that the world is not fair and will not keep changing the rules to suit me and what I WANT.

      And as a ‘practical matter’ we also know how many families chose scouting because it aligns with their morals and will walk away if they change. No one is denying the LGBT community the right to a scouting organization – just let them start their own with their own rules and if any of these ‘non gay hatin’ people want to leave the ‘gay hatin’ BSA to go join/support them go ahead but let’s face it – they won’t. They’re a bunch of hypocrites looking to push an agenda.

      • We’re just happy that our Chartered Organization will hopefully be able soon to offer Scouting to all, which is what our community’s values teach us is the right thing to do.

      • So please take your CO and go start the LGBT Scouts of America and leave BSA to us. Obviously according to your previous comment you don’t agree with BSA policy as it is (and has been), you feel you have to ‘defend’ your position to other, so get out, leave, I’ll hold the door for you and your ‘community’ We will not miss you when you’re gone. Rather we can breath a sigh of relief that your twisted morals are not tainting our organization. Bye bye now….

      • Exactly what ScoutMommaX3 said…you should just start LGBT Scouts of America where you can reshape your values to reflect whatever, but don’t hijack the BSA.

      • Well, ScoutMommax3, as it happens I just turned in our recharter paperwork on Monday. While my District Executive and I were going over it, I duscussed with him how our Unit feels about the proposed change. After a good talk he accepted our application, signed it, and we shook hands. So I guess to my District and Council, who actually decide what is or is not a CO and who is and is not a Scouter, we’re still a Unit, I’m still a Scouter, and Scouting is stuck with us for at least one more year.

      • Erik, can you be more precise about what you think that BSA needs to do to offer Scouting to all?
        1. Are you merely referring to love and support for those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and who are committed to seeking after and living a moral life; or
        2. Are you advocating for the BSA to support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? and
        3. If it is #2 above, do see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting?
        If your answers to questions #2 and #3 above are “yes”, then with all due respect and love…Scouting is not the place for you or your charter organization. Amoral homosexual acts “spit in the face” of our Scout oath and law. A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts.

      • BeAScout, you have clearly and forcefully expressed your views.

        I don’t think it would profit us for me to take up your questions here in turn, because I already gave the only answer that matters above: I, and my fellow Committee members, and my CO, don’t feel being or, since you insist, “practicing” as a gay person is immoral. Since we don’t think it is immoral, it is, to us, no reason to bar someone from being a Scout or Scouter.

        I’m not trying to change your mind. I am just speaking up for other views on this issue that my community of Scouters–yes, Scouters, not outsiders–hold just as sincerely.

      • The views that I have clearly and honestly expressed are simply the timeless views of Scouting as embodied in our oath and law–yes, not your views or the views of a minority of people like you who seek to pervert and damage Scouts and Scouting. I am not seeking to change your mind. This discussion is very good as it is highlighting for the Scout community the real agenda behind what is going to be decided next week. You have clearly and forcefully advocated for the BSA to support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders. This is an extreme position and goes well beyond tolerance and support for those who struggle with same gender attraction, but remain resolute and committed to the morals of Scouting. As a community of Scouters, we reject this extreme and amoral position and say to you with love and firmness that will not be moved that the Scout oath concludes with being “morally straight,” which means we do not deviate or compromise standards of chastity, virtue, or wholesomeness.

      • BSA Scoutleader –
        I’m curious, do you feel that celibate gay youth should be allowed to be scouts? Do you feel that sexually active (non-celibate), unmarried heterosexual youth should be allowed to be scouts?

      • Excellent question–this is where we can all find common ground….the Scouting program promotes the timeless values of the Scout oath and law….Scouters have always been and should continue be encouraged to not deviate or compromise standards of chastity, virtue, or wholesomeness.. this applies to all Scouter including those with same gender attraction. As such, ANY boy who desires to develop the moral character and timeless values of the Scout oath and law is welcome in the organization. Sadly, this is not the type of compromise being discussed next week. As a community of Scouters, we reject the extreme and amoral position which departs from over 100 years of BSA tradition and seeks for the BSA to condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders engaged in by PRACTICING homosexuals. This is simply and extreme and wrong position and will destroy Scouting!

    • Again David, you are talking about apples (I completely disagree with the faulty study you cite, but with all due respect it has nothing to do with why PRACTICING homosexuals have no place in Scouting), and we (actual Scout leaders and not George Soros funded bloggers) are talking about oranges. The fact is that any leader or scout who has same gender attraction and WHO ACTS on it by engaging in gross, despicable, and amoral homosexual acts “spits in the face” of our Scout oath and law. Allowing PRACTICING homosexuals to take on the Scout name places a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle. The simple truth is that homosexual acts are amoral and will forever be amoral. I will not be a part of any organization that puts our future generation of men at risk or that promotes, allows or condones these despicable values! I will also join a class action lawsuit against the BSA to seek an apology and a refund of every dime we have put into this organization under false pretenses.

  189. I am a scouter at heart.but we’ll quit scouts & pull out both my boys. Even if the Mormon church continues. National events cant protect them from the exposure of the LGBT life style. The scouts should be the one place we dont have to have this conversation

    • Spot on Blondie…a bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts.

    • Agree with you Blondie. We are in a similar situation. One of my sons just moved up from Cubs and is loving the whole Scouting experience. I have another in Cubs about to move up. If this happens, I’ll be pulling them both out regardless of the position my church.

    • Please understand – there are gay scouts in the BSA now, they are just not open about it. As an example, my kids went to high school with a gay Eagle scout. Scouting was a huge part of his childhood, and his family was very involved in scouting. He even went to Philmont with his brother and his dad.
      In addition, many scouting families have gay family members – siblings, cousins, aunts and uncles. They also have gay co-workers, teachers, neighbors, and other community members.

      Your children may already be making friends with fellow scouts who are gay or who have gay friends or family members, just as you may already know people from church or your community who have gay friends or family members. You can’t completely insulate your children from this.

      Under the proposed BSA policy, though, you *would* be able to join a troop that does not allow gay youth to be members, so their primary relationships within the BSA would be with those who share your values on this issue, even if they eventually may run into folks at higher levels who differ. In the same way, they will eventually run into folks at camp who have vastly different religious or political views. Meeting people from different walks of life who share a common bond in scouting is one of the major advantages of being involved with the larger scouting movement.

      • We have family who is gay, you are trying to tell me something as if I lived under a rock. I am in the world, please do not insult me,
        Scouts should not ever be about sex or sexuality. That should be left at home and has no place in a pack, troop or den meeting.
        I send my sons there to learn how to be leaders, to gain skills, NOT to be taught about the gay lifestyle. Leave that at home where it belongs.
        Under the proposed new BSA policy my unit could choice to not allow the LBGT lifestyle but if we go to philmont of anywhere else … we can encounter it.

      • We’re not talking about adding discussions about sexuality into scouting. Nothing would change. There’s not going to be a big influx of gay scouts wearing pink neckerchiefs with sparkles. Your troop will have the same members it has today going on campouts just like they ever did. Are you saying you prevent your kids from ever meeting someone who might be gay? Your children never can go to a public school or university? You never go to a grocery store? Or the library? You never go out to eat? You never go to the shopping mall?

      • I agree that scouts should not be about sex or sexuality. It *should* be left at home, and you are right that it doesn’t have any place in a pack, troop, or (God forbid) den meeting. This policy would not change that. No one is suggesting any “teaching about the gay lifestyle”.

        You are right that your unit might encounter gay scouts at Philmont if the new policy passes. (Or, in fact, even if it doesn’t. I know a gay Eagle scout who went to Philmont with his dad and his brother.) But if you have gay family members, then you know that they don’t go around discussing their sexuality constantly. You also know that kids nowadays are used to interacting with gay peers, and it’s generally not an issue.

        We can trust scouts with different beliefs on this issue to nonetheless work together in scouting. Because we know that scouts are kind, friendly people, hard workers, and thoughtful leaders.

      • It WILL be left at home. Just as it is now. The aren’t discussing making it a topic to be covered in scout meetings. Leadership and scout skills will still be the topic. The same things they do now.

  190. Dear “friends of scouting”, I would like to ask for prayer. My husband and son have been involved with scouting since 2006. We have decided that if the membership policy is changed, we will leave scouting. My husband is a Webelos II leader and the boys adore him. I am sure when we go, many will follow. We know our son will be crushed. He wanted so much to be a Patrol leader and to get his Arrow of Light, February 23, 2013. We however, understand it is more important for him to learn the cost of being a disciple of Christ i.e. taking up our cross and following Him, not an agenda. We could never be a part of an organization that allow homosexuals to mentor our sons. I feel as though someone I loved has died and it really hurts to see this organization fall. God help us. Thank you.

    • Kim – if your troop does not want homosexuals in leadership positions, they have that option under the proposed policy. Yes, you might encounter some at camp, for example, just as you may encounter some leaders who are Jewish, or Muslim, or HIndu. But if so, it’s because they have earned the position, by showing thoughtful leadership qualities and other scout skills. And even with the policy change, the vast majority of mentors within scouting are heterosexual.

      Give it a chance – take it one day at a time. Your husband can accompany him to activities beyond the troop level, to monitor the situation. You can always leave if you encounter a specific problem, or when he begins to spend significant time in activities beyond the troop level. And you may find that it will be less of an issue than you fear. At least let him stay until he is awarded his Arrow of LIght – it’s only a few weeks away.

  191. Before I sign off for the evening, I just want to add a thought. While we discuss this matter back and forth, we need to remember that anger is not a solution. Discourse on this topic should be freely exchanged, without malice. I, myself, have occasionally wanted to rant at some posters for their position. Largely I’ve contained my emotions (although I’ll admit a comment or two slipped out). I want to thank my friend Jo, who sees this from a different point of view but still takes a strong and healthy stance that doesn’t lower himself as a Scouter.

    As I write this, I’m hopeful that the meetings that will occur over the next week or two bear some positive and open discussion. I hope that those that have been entrusted with this decision maintain the wisdom of Solomon. And I pray for all the BSA to come to terms with what may be the most challenging issue they’ve faced.

    I hope their wisdom leads them to a path that satisfies the goals of the BSA both now and for the next 100 years. Regardless of the outcome, I hope that we all can find a way to sit by the campfire and tell our favorite Scouting stories.

    Before I go, I want to remind everyone – regardless of the outcome, we all joined Scouting for our boys. And in the end, it’s our influences and morals that they will most likely take home at the end of the day. So let’s comport ourselves as such, regardless of how much we challenge one another to think about a problem from a different point of view as we continue to discuss this in the days ahead.

    • With the utmost respect…kindly don’t marginalize the importance of what is being decided next week. Scouting will either stand firmly on its timeless values by clearly reaffirming that Scouting will not allow its charter organizations to condone amoral homosexual acts by its scouters or scout leaders, or Scouting will elect to plant the seed of its ultimate destruction. We love Scouting, its timeless moral values and the clear moral compass that it provides our youth. Don’t underestimate our ability to preserve it.

      • The decision to be made by BSA National next week is not a game being played. When you say… “Regardless of the outcome, I hope that we all can find a way to sit by the campfire and tell our favorite Scouting stories.” ..you fail to grasp the significance of what is being decided next week… Scouting will either stand firmly on its timeless values by clearly reaffirming that Scouting will not allow its charter organizations to condone amoral homosexual acts by its scouters or scout leaders, or Scouting will elect to cause a grand exit from the program and it will plant the seed of its ultimate destruction.

      • Actually, I grasp it just fine. I know that it has a chance to fundamentally change the organization. I realize that there are those who believe either way that it will be for the better or worse. I understand that people in this forum feel strongly about one side or the other. I wasn’t marginalizing. Marginalizing would be – the outcome doesn’t matter, your opinion doesn’t matter. Fail to grasp the significance? No, that’s not true either. This will fundamentally change Scouting and there are many who believe just as strongly that it will be for the better as those who believe it will be for the worse. So again, thanks for playing, but I really don’t agree with your continued stance of beating up on people in this forum. Although you’re still welcome to come and sit at the campfire.

      • Marginalize means to relegate to an unimportant or powerless position within a society or group. When you say… “Regardless of the outcome, I hope that we all can find a way to sit by the campfire and tell our favorite Scouting stories.” …you fail to grasp that Scouting will either stand firmly on its timeless values by clearly reaffirming that Scouting will not allow its charter organizations to condone amoral homosexual acts by its scouters or scout leaders, or Scouting will reject its timeless values and thereby cause a grand exit from the program. Nothing personal directed at you or anyone else, but we in the Scouting community will not be sitting by the campfires if BSA National abandons the timeless values of Scouting. Specifically to your point, the Scouting community is not so powerless that we will go along happily with this singing at the campfire together. You will see lawsuits and millions of Scouts and leaders leaving! Although I don’t agree with your continued stance of attacking the messenger and not the message, you likewise are always welcome to come and sit at my campfire. It just won’t be at a BSA campfire if we in the Scouting community are abandoned by BSA National. All the best,

  192. At the troop level, BSA is about good folks volunteering their time and money to help build character and leadership in young men. Beyond the troop level, BSA is all about the dollar. The National Executive Board is trying to pimp the volunteers just so they can get back into corporate America’s pocketbook. In the end, neither party will have any respect for BSA, and they will be bankrupt within ten years.

  193. Before I sign off for the evening, I just want to add a few thoughts. As issues are being discussed back and forth, you should acknowledge that you have no way to determine who is actually a Scouter and who (is not a Scouter on this website and) is seeking to shape your opinions and the general opinion within the Scouting Community. As such, you should carefully consider the merits of what is being said, and then listen to what your heart is telling you about what is correct, moral and just vs. what is amoral and repugnant to all that Scouting stands for.

    Recognize that the decision to be made by BSA National next week has nothing to do with loving and supporting those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and those who are committed to seeking and living a moral life. We as Scouters instinctively reach out in love and support to all such individuals.

    Recognize that the decision to be made next week by BSA National (if wrongly decided) will result in BSA support for and condoning of amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders. A Scout is Brave…have the courage to stand up and clearly state the truth. Being honest and truthful in our communications with other is a way to manifest our love for others. A Scout is clean and reverent…the simple and honest truth is that homosexual acts are ugly, amoral and disgusting. Any such acts by Scouts and Scout leaders are not consistent with the timeless values of Scouting.

    Finally, your voice matters, and if we stand firm and true to the timeless values of Scouting, BSA will make the correct decision. We do this for the boys and if it is not for the boys, it is for the birds. If, however, the BSA caves to outside pressure and allows PRACTICING homosexuals within charter organizations to take on the Scout name, it will place a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle and the BSA will have lost its moral compass and with it a large portion of its membership base. If such is the decision BSA National, then it must face the consequences of its decision. Not the lest of which will be many lawsuits. I for one will be forced to join a class action lawsuit against the BSA to seek an apology and a refund of every dime we have put into this organization under false pretenses. Now is the time to speak up and remind BSA National of the following…”On my honor I will do my best, to do my duty, to GOD and my Country, to keep my self physically strong, mentally awake and MORALLY STRAIGHT!

    • “As issues are being discussed back and forth, you should acknowledge that you have no way to determine who is actually a Scouter and who (is not a Scouter on this website and) is seeking to shape your opinions and the general opinion within the Scouting Community.” I use my name – so who are you? Hiding behind a nom de plume, on either side of this argument shows a fear. There is at least one other Scouter – on the other side of the fence that can confirm who I am and my roles in Scouting. You could be anyone…including the type of people you rail against.

      Oh, and this ‘Morally Straight’ bit? Please stop doing that. You’re revising history. ‘Straight’ as a term to define sexuality was first used by homosexuals in the 1950s. As Scouting was created much earlier, the use of it in this argument is null and void. Lord BP meant to be able to make moral decisions – to know right from wrong, to not steal, lie, and deceive. It had nothing to do with sexuality.

      • Charles (I am ONLY assuming that this is your real name. We who are in the Scouting community have no way to verify who you are unless you want to post a copy of your driver’s license together with a copy of your BSA membership card and phone number..at any time feel free to post a link to this information so we can verify, and if all of the other Soros funded folks on this site do the same and I can verify real names and real Scouters by talking to you on the phone, I will do the same)…in the meantime, with all due respect the following statement is honest and accurate….”As issues are being discussed back and forth, you should acknowledge that you have no way to determine who is actually a Scouter and who (is not a Scouter on this website and) is seeking to shape your opinions and the general opinion within the Scouting Community.” You failed to comment on the most important part of the first paragraph…”As such, you should carefully consider the merits of what is being said, and then listen to what your heart is telling you about what is correct, moral and just vs. what is amoral and repugnant to all that Scouting stands for.” Within the Scouting community, our hearts and minds tell us that homosexual acts go against everything that is good and moral as embodied in the Scout oat and law.

      • Okay if you have been following this blog for the past couple of days you know that Charles and I have quite differing views.

        That being said, I can assure you that he is who he says he is. We are members of the same council, OA lodge and so on. He is well respected and dedicated. I have worked with his eldest son (a fantastic young man) and he has worked with my sons who hold him in high regard.

        Both of us are using our real names. I wi

      • (Hit post too fast)

        I wish we all used our real names here, or better yet, had our “myscouting” accounts linked here to verify who is actually part of the BSA and who is not.

        So we use our real names. Why not stop hiding and reveal yours? That goes out to everyone on both sides of the issue.

        If Charles wants to let you know which council we are a part of, then you could call and verify.

      • Yea, lots of different screen names are bring used on this site. I concur with your suggestion regarding linking our “myscouting” accounts as a way to verify. Until such time, my prior offer stands (again, I can ONLY assume that Jo is your real name). We who are in the Scouting community have no way to verify who you are unless you want to post a copy of your driver’s license together with a copy of your BSA membership card and phone number…at any time feel free to post a link to this information so we can verify, and if all of the other Soros funded folks on this site do the same and I can verify real names and real Scouters by talking to you on the phone, I will do the same.

      • Interesting. I’m going to actually take on face value that BSASL is an actual Scouter. On the other hand, I still think it shows a fear of his/hers that he/she will not offer their name when they post. I will say the belief that most of those in here posting on one side of the discussion are funded by Soros (or a similar entity) is laughable at best. Just as I’m done for the moment talking to Doc, I think I’m going to also refrain from engaging with BSASL at this time. Nothing to be gained from it.

      • Hi Charles–Erik is my real name, but I choose not to identify myself, my Unit, or my CO more out of discretion rather than fear. I have spoken with the other leaders in my unit and I know their views on this issue. But I have not asked them or my CO for permission to “fly their flag” in public debate. So, I try to share my thoughts for what they are worth on their own merits, without claiming permission to speak on the record for my Unit.

      • Charles, in response to your post regarding BSASL, he is my brother-n-law of 20 years and yes he is an attorney. He has also dedicated a significant portion of his life to the BSA or at least what he thought was the BSA. I myself have been involved as a leader for more than 10 years and have one crossing over and another approaching his Life. I’m very disappointed in the BSA and, along with thousands of others, will be pulling out of scouting if your side wins. There’s not one single leader I’ve been in contact with that is in favor of this tragic proposition. Maybe the agenda is to simply destroy the BSA since we are already well on our way.

      • Very convenient for you to say that you take at face value a screen name as a way for you to avoid my offer. Again, screen name “Charles Featherer” or whoever you are, my post offer still stands…post a copy of your driver’s license, BSA member id number and phone number and let me verify who you are and I will do the same. Also, glad to see that you agree that EagleMom, CWGMPLS, db, etc. (others on this site who also hold your extreme views) need to post a copy of their driver’s license, BSA member id number and phone number so we can verify that they are Scouters and also so they can met the fear test that you have also failed until you accept my offer. If you insist on going down this path, then at least stand behind your empty words and screen name and accept my offer. Until such time, I fully stand by what I have said and to this point you have given us no reason not to carefully consider the posts and then listen to what our hearts are telling us about what is correct, moral and just ….”As issues are being discussed back and forth, you should acknowledge that you have no way to determine who is actually a Scouter and who (is not a Scouter on this website and) is seeking to shape your opinions and the general opinion within the Scouting Community. As such, you should carefully consider the merits of what is being said, and then listen to what your heart is telling you about what is correct, moral and just vs. what is amoral and repugnant to all that Scouting stands for.”

      • This is rich. If you see others’ words as empty because you don’t know exactly who they are, especially those who have posted their full names, what does that say about you, “BSASoutleader” if, in fact, that is your REAL name. Comical, in the least.

        Also, I’d like to point out to you, that throughout this forum, you have repeatedly stated that you feel homosexual acts are amoral. In which case, I would deduce that you really have no problem with homosexuality. Amoral means neither moral nor immoral. If you don’t believe it to be immoral, what’s the problem?

      • Glad that we agree that screen names can be invented and that we have no way to determine who are Scouters and who are Soros funded folks seeking to shape opinion in the Scouting community. I like your suggestion on using our “myscouting” accounts. Until such time, my prior offer to Charles still stands and I will make the same offer to you Jo (again, assuming this is your real name). That being said, however, we should all be more concerned about the substance of what is being said in considering the decision to be made next week and then listening to our hearts in making correct, just and moral decisions as we defend the timeless values of Scouting.

      • I don’t believe BSAScoutLeader is a member of the BSA. I think he works for Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council, and he’s flooding the comment section of this blog with his homophobia and bigotry.

      • You want me to give you, someone hiding behind a screen name, a copy of my id’s? Why not start by posting a link to yours?

        You want my phone number? Give me your real name and email address.

        Jo is short for Joseph by the way.

  194. Do I care about the new policy? No, makes no difference to me. What bothers me is the appearance (and my belief) the BSA sold out its moral, values, and stance because of money.

    I’ve read many comments about God and Christian organization. If any god will work, not just the Christian God; why not homosexuals or no god. Where is the outrage over other religions being allowed in the BSA.

    Why are so many that do not follow or adhere to their religion allowed to stay in Scouts? They are doing their duty to god. It is because the “sins” we aren’t tempted with are not as bad as the “sins” we tempted with. Example: Homosexuality is a horrible unforgivable sin; however, adultery – well that’s not so bad …..you see there were these circimstances, it just happened (a few dozen times), it’s all right because I am a “christian” and we are not perfect.

    • Jo and OldManDan (again, assuming you are Scouters and that these are real names and that you are not the same person logging on to another PC in your house with a different e-mail address) your counter-offers are declined, but I STAND by my original offer (also, the webmaster has my e-mail address and can confirm my “myscouting account”..this is all that I really care about as I want BSA National to hear from us volunteers who are in the Scouting community and who speak for the majority of us). Let me know.

      Failure to accept my offer and respond to the content of my message is telling. In the Scouting community, we are aware of what is at stake next week. We will not be distracted, and we simply and resolutely will not allow the BSA to condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders. The simple and honest truth is that homosexual acts are ugly, amoral and disgusting. Any such acts by Scouts and Scout leaders are not consistent with the timeless values of Scouting.

      • “We will not be distracted, and we simply and resolutely will not allow the BSA to condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders.” I couldn’t agree more!

  195. Jo Poplawski and BSAScoutLeader have been very vocal and repetitive in their objection to any change in the BSA membership policy.

    I’d like to point out how the BSA membership policy breaks the last point of the scout law. A scout is reverent.

    Mainstream protestant churches do not kick out LGBT folks. Most of the denominations now will ordain LGBT ministers and pastors and bishops. Many of these denominations will marry and bless same sex unions. Clearly these churches have a much different view of what is moral than that of the person who calls himself BSAScoutleader.

    The BSA has declared gay ministers and clergy as unfit to be members of the BSA. I can’t think of anything the BSA could do that would be more insulting to the beliefs of these churches.

    It is time for the BSA to honor their congressional charter and welcome all Americans. It is time for the BSA to obey the scout law and welcome all religious beliefs.

    • Let’s be clear, the churches that are making these ‘changes’ are ‘man-made’ changes NOT scriptural changes. The Jesus (and the bible) are the same “Yesterday, Today and Forever” (Hebrews 13:8). Many churches and denominations welcome and accept LGBT who are not living an active homosexual lifestyle. Jesus did not eat with the sinners, tax collectors and the prostitutes to ‘join’ them He was looking to convert them – to give them an opportunity to get ‘clean’ and ‘morally’ right with Him.

      So, please take yourself and all the so called LGBT that feel the need to scout and go start the LGBT Scouts of America. BSA has never hidden their stance people know it going in so if you feel it doesn’t fit your lifestyle then DON’T JOIN!

    • db, can you be more precise about what you think that BSA needs to do to be “reverent”?
      1. Are you merely referring to love and support for those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and who are committed to seeking after and living a moral life; or
      2. Are you advocating for the BSA to support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? and
      3. If it is #2 above, do see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting?
      If your answers to questions #2 and #3 above are “yes”, then with all due respect and love…Scouting is not the place for you or any such charter organizations. Amoral homosexual acts “spit in the face” of our Scout oath and law. A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts.

    • I couldn’t agree with you more. I believe that several aspects of the Scout Law are neglected with the current exclusionary policy.

      A scout is brave… I believe that in undertaking this potential policy change we are living up to this point, especially. Do what is right, even if you are called out for it.

      Thank you.

  196. Please do not allow a vocal minority determine the dictates of the total organization. BSA is a private organization, and are entitled to follow what the majority of its members want. As a former boy scout, and parent of a current scout, I do not support this.

  197. I see a parallel with the Episcopal church. Inclusion has not improved their numbers. Whole districts and councils will leave, or would if they had a spine.
    …
    Jeremiah Wright got his wish. Do you think it will get better after they take your guns?

  198. I have been in the Scouting program for over 40 years now, and I’ve seen many changes througout the years… Some good, some bad, and some just plain stupid! When making decitions that affect the program we must ask ourselves “is this good for the Scouts?” When the “powers that be” decided to move the program towards “urban Scouting” by taking the OUTING out of Scouting back in the early 70’s, they nearly destroyed the program (one of the “stupid ideas” I spoke of). So I look at the question being considered now and ask myself “how is this going to help the Scouts?

    It’s NOT! First of all, we all are part of this wonderful program because we are people of LIKE VALUES. I belong to the organizations I choose because they represent my ideals and values. Scouting has always represented what I hold to be what’s right for me and my family AND my country! If there are people in the BSA that do not have the moral gumption and backbone to stand up to those who wish to destroy our program, then it is they who should “pack their bags” and leave and NOT try to pass the problem off to the Chartered Organizations! This is an ill concieved ploy that will ultimately cost the BSA many thousands of members and will only serve to alienate those Chartered partners who see through this obvious attempt to “pass the buck” to them. Once again we have someone who is letting a few people dictate what the majority of the members do not want. What’s next, are we going to told that the 12th Scout Law can no longer be observed?

    So… Is this decision “good for the Scouts?” No, it’s only good for the execs and lawyers at the BSA who are giving up the fight for what’s right and passing the problem off to others to deal with. Shame on them!

  199. I find it very exciting that there ever be a debate on homosexuality. Tolerance should be our guide! Not condemn the people! In Germany, such a discussion would be unthinkable. Also we discuss. But rather on the content, not about exclusion. And when we discover exclusion from scouts, we go against it.
    Yours in scouting
    Germanscout

    …sorry for my english…

  200. The US Supreme Court ruled that BSA is not discriminating & has the freedom of association. In typical progressive fashion the LGBT community has chosen to bully businesses & organizations into dropping BSA from grant programs. BSA will cave to them just like they caved to women that just didn’t understand why only a man should be scoutmaster. It’s not discrimination, it’s a point of view.

    Scouting has tried to uphold that only men should be mentoring boys. It would be like me teacing a childbirth class compared to my wife.

    If we allow homosexuals in then the next obvious step would be for the ACLU & Freedom From Religion crowd to threaten businesses that support Scout troops that do not allow atheists. The LGBT crowd talks about how it wasn’t an issue until 30 years ago. It really wasn’t acceptable to be LGBT in any part of the country until 30 years ago. I assume that most of you are from the west coast or New England due to the fact that you continue to speak of the level of acceptance in your “community.” Nothing is stopping you from joining Baden Powell S.A. The frustrating part here is the fact that LGBT crowd on here keeps talking about tolerance, but they really mean is us tolerating their point of view.

    • No. The Supreme Court did NOT rule that “the BSA is not discriminating”. They ruled that the BSA was free to discriminate because it was a private organization and not subject to the New Jersey public accommodation laws.

    • The parents of Cheverly Cub Scout Pack 257 strongly urge BSA change its policy. Cheverly Cub Scout Pack 257 does not discriminate. Period. However our program will not survive the exodus if the national council fails to alter its policy, so as to accommodate families which will not tolerate discrimination. The future of scouting in our area depends upon our standing by our values. v/ r-D

      ——————————————————————————–

      Local pack and troop committees–with the support of council leadership and with the benefit of screening tools and research infrastructure provided by BSA–are able to discern what is safe for their children. BSA has been doing the right thing in its youth protection training and policies. Now let’s get rid of the discrimination based on sexual orientation that undermines BSA’s future.

      It is not just a practical issue. I and many others in Scouting see this as a moral issue.

      As an Christian, an Eagle Scout, and an American, I’m appalled when the cultural baggage of 30 A.D., 1780, and 1910 usurps the core values articulated by founders and early followers of these progressive movements. Whether it is against the principles of respect (Baden Powell, founder of Scouting), equality (Jefferson and other founding fathers), or treating others as ourselves (Jesus, Paul, and followers), well-meaning adherents can disrespect, repress, and injure in the guise of upholding traditional values.

      That Jefferson owned slaves is a testament to the prejudices of his time, not a guide for interpreting the Declaration of Independence. Real relationships with the “other” undermine our prejudices and allow us to live more fully—straight–into moral principles that have stood the test of time. Historians have observed that Abraham Lincoln’s relationship with Frederick Douglass
      may have strengthened his resolve to lead the nation out of slavery. In the face of countless relationships as well as social research, the equation of homosexuality with sexual immorality/predation that supports discrimination in the BSA is fast losing its ground and leaving everyone associated with it looking hypocritical.

      After BSA took a hard-line stance in 2012, part of me wanted to keep my 7-year-old out of Scouting. But that would be a capitulation to the insanity of the phenomenon I describe. The tradition is too rich for me, the grandson of a West Suburban Council executive, to abandon. I’m not the only one taking pause. In an otherwise civic-minded community filled with kids—and other youth clubs like girl Scouts, Roots and Shoots, etc.–our tiger den is hanging by a thread. One member comes from 25 minutes away to participate every week because there are so few packs. Am I recruiting? No. I would be much more enthusiastic in promoting the program if this draconian policy were ended.

      Yours In Scouting,

      Daniel
      Tiger den leader, Pack 257
      Eagle Scout, 1993

      • Daniel, just curious, in what state and BSA counsel are you located? You are certainly entitled to your opinion. In fact, would you agree that it would be wise for BSA National to survey all of its volunteer leaders before acting rashly and caving to financial bullying by outside groups. GreggO was spot on in his comment that “If this is an argument on tolerance, where is the tolerance for those who believe that homosexual acts are wrong? It is clear that this is not about true tolerance – it is about ‘selfish tolerance’. “my way or the highway” is what we are being offered.” I agree with GreggO that Scouting already allows for homosexual participation. If a Scout who has same gender attraction issues commits to the timeless Scouting values, he is not prohibited from participating. If, however, such a Scout is promoting homosexual acts and engages or seeks to engage in homosexual acts with other Scouts, then such Scout must be removed from Scouting. Please be tolerant of our point of view.

      • “If, however, such a Scout is promoting homosexual acts and engages or seeks to engage in homosexual acts with other Scouts, then such Scout must be removed from Scouting. Please be tolerant of our point of view.”

        Right… so the Scout is promoting homosexuality by being gay.

        Just like tall people are promoting being tall by being tall. Or how black people are promoting being black by being black.

        “Gender attraction issues”

        The World Health Organization has long ago stated in no uncertain terms that homosexuality is not a disorder, and that same-sex attractions are natural.

        And, how, exactly, is the proposal of ending the ban being intolerant of your views? It’s not stating you can’t have them – in fact, it was made clear very early on that the BSA would let chapters decide for themselves whether or not to allow homosexuals. You are not being told that you cannot espouse your views. You are not being told that you must hide who you are from those you are close with or risk being kicked out of the BSA. Gays never chose to be that way. You are perfectly capable of changing your opinion on homosexuality; homosexuals are not capable of choosing who they love.

        Is it truly so hard to understand the principle of live and let live? If your chapter chooses to allow homosexuals and you don’t approve of that, then just go to a chapter that doesn’t. If your chapter doesn’t allow homosexuals, and you don’t approve of that, go to a chapter that does.

        As an openly gay teen who would currently be an Eagle Scout if not for unexpected issues that arose that made attending BSA functions and thus membership in the BSA impractical (in hindsight, this was probably for the better, because otherwise I would still be closeted), and the personal confidant of another teen Eagle Scout who is well-known on our state level for his accomplishments, and who happens to be gay and in the closet, I support an end to this unjust ban.

      • Thanks for your comments Andy. Best wishes to you. I hope you will soon be able to be an Eagle Scout.

      • You’re real funny David. The exodus will take place when the policy is altered to meet the demands of the homosexual crowd. The Scouts were created to help boys become upstanding, moral men. Homosexuality is not upstanding, nor is it moral. Let open homosexuals enter some Packs, and it gives boys the message that National Council is saying homosexuality is moral, upstanding, and good.

      • Paul you are 100% correct. I pray that BSA National is listening to its volunteers. We don’t need any corporate sponsor that seeks to change our core values. Scouting will be stronger and better without this money. BSA National, are you listening???? Don’t go off the cliff next week!!! Stay true and be morally straight!

      • National is not listening to the Councils around the west. I called every Council in Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Utah, Nevada, and Colorado. Every single one of their Public Affairs/Media Relations offices confirmed they have received no survey or questionnaire from National in regards to this policy change. The Great Salt Lake Council and Utah National Parks Council are very concerned that National is not seeking input. The news article in one of the local papers in Utah the quote that struck me hard was from Kay Godfrey (PR Great Salt Lake Council), “This whole thing caught us off guard.” So I ask what is the rush?

      • David, I couldn’t agree with you more. I married into a Scouting family — my husband and his brother were all Eagles in the 1970s, an era when Scouting had no such discriminatory policy. Their own father was a Scout in his time.

        My son is a Life Scout now, determined to make Eagle, but deeply troubled by Scouting’s intolerance to so many of his friends. There is nothing in the oath, slogan, law or motto that bans homosexuality. If you believe, as he does, that one’s sexual orientation is given by God, rather than chosen, then discriminating against anyone on the basis of sexual orientation directly contravenes the tenets of Scouting. To pretend that DADT is an acceptable solution is to scoff at the Boy Scout Oath. From the usscouts web site:

        “…and morally straight.
        To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs.”

        There is much that is good in Scouting, but the current ban on homosexuality is not good at all.

      • BSA had no written policy at that time because homosexual acts were still illegal. It would have been tantamount to issuing a BSA position on tax evasion or double parking- it was the law in most of the land and that was that. But, to your point, BSA has never in it’s history condoned, promoted, or allowed homosexual behavior amongst it’s members. No matter where you stand on the issue, it’s good to get your facts straight. The current written policy is no different than the unwritten policy BSA has used since inception.

      • Beth, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you (and those who are pushing this extremist agenda) are not entitled to change Scouting’s core values. GreggO was spot on in his comment that “If this is an argument on tolerance, where is the tolerance for those who believe that homosexual acts are wrong? It is clear that this is not about true tolerance – it is about ‘selfish tolerance’. “my way or the highway” is what we are being offered.” Beth, think about the shoe being on the other foot…..and be honest with yourself….will you be tolerant of Scouters that joint the LGBT and tell them to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight?”

      • Dan, everything you accuse others of, “my way or the highway,” etc. can be turned back to point at you. You don’t want gays to be accepted into Scouts and THAT is a my way or the highway position. Hiding it under babble like “people who are tolerant should also tolerate intolerance” doesn’t cover up that your point is mainly an emotional one: you don’t like gays, don’t want to be around them, and resent that you might have to be.

      • Thanks for your thoughtful post. With folks like you involved, the BSA has a better chance of meeting the needs of boys in our communities, regardless of their sexual preference.

      • David,
        Thanks for your thoughtful post. Contrary to the suggestion in some of the other posts, ending a discriminatory policy is not about BSA endorsing a particular sexual preference, it is about BSA living up to its values of citizenship and tolerance. We live in a country where the President of the United States has spoken out against such discrimination, where our Armed Forces have ended such discrimination, and where the Federal Government prohibits it. In addition, many localities, including my own, prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and students in our schools are taught tolerance. I realize that some families may decry these changes, but they have happened and our public institutions have endured and many would say, been strengthened. How can Scouting profess to teach our scouts citizenship if it engages in the kind of discriminatory conduct that our military, federal and many subsidiary governing institutions prohibit?

      • “How can Scouting profess to teach our scouts citizenship if it engages in the kind of discriminatory conduct that our military, federal and many subsidiary governing institutions prohibit?”
        So, since the government can’t discriminate regarding religion or creed, you’re all on board for allowing atheists as well, right? And don’t give me that “it’s against the Scout Law” thing, since BSA can change that just as easily as it did away with the Cub Oath and Law of the Pack this summer. Discrimination is discrimination, unless you’re pushign a particular agenda.

      • I would not use some of the things our government has done lately as a guide to go by. A quote from Henry Ford may apply here, “Anyone who thinks a big government can bring them happiness and prosperity should look closely at the American Indian.”

    • To Wayne Brock etal
      AS A FORMER SCOUT AND SOME OF MY CHILDREN AND GRANDSONS THAT ARE FORMER SCOUTS THIS IS A VERY TRAGIC AND SAD DAY FOR OUR YOUNG BOYS AND MEN AND SCOUTING. I NEVER THOUGHT THAT THE BSA WOULD FOLD ON THIS MOST MAJOR ISSUE. How could a parent ever send their son into a possible environment that would destroy the rest of his life e.g. Penn State’s Coach Jerry Sandusky. Homosexuality is Sodomy and Sodomy is condemned by God.

      Even more tragically is the fact it is based on the new god of America; MONEY. Another article from MEWSMAX quotes BSA; several local chapters and some members of the national board, including corporate CEO Randall Stephenson of AT&T and James Turley of the Ernst & Young accounting firm, called for a reconsideration, USA Today reports. This is what happens when an orginazation compromises it’s core values for the sake of “cash”.

      The three major promises of the Scout Oath are:
      Duty to God and country,
      Duty to other people, and
      Duty to self (to keep oneself morally straight)
      EVERYONE NEEDS TO WRITE AND CALL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA AND TELL THEM NOT TO CAVE IN AND DO THIS ESPECIALLY BECAUSE OF MONEY. BSA, be forewarned, there is a tremendous backlashes coming with this decision and major withdrawal of support way more than this compromising of your core principles; “Be morally straight. To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs. The values you practice as a Scout will help you shape a life of virtue and self-reliance.” God will hold you accountable for these actions.
      GOD HELP OUR YOUNG PEOPLE.
      ##########

      • Taylor, you are saying that homosexuals are pedaphiles and there is no proof to that at all. Sandusky is not homosexual, nor were most of the priests or Scout leaders convicted of molesting children. Two deep and youth protection protects our boys from molesting by any adult and this subject should not even be part of the discussion.

      • That is like saying Hitler was not a Nazi!
        He was and is a Homosexual, a Sodomite, you are playing word games and you know it. So werer the priests and anyone male who molests a young boy is committing Sodomy. But, then you know this.

      • So, anyone who molests is a homosexual? Jerry Sandusky? ( I think he is married), Catholic Priests ? and all the men listed on the secret perversion files are homosexuals? Really? I am not sure that Jerry, the Priests or the men in the perversion files would agree.

        The problem is child molesters, not homosexuals.

        ( Also, not all Scouts are Christian )

      • Jerry Sandusky is married. He identifies himself as heterosexual, as do the vast majority of pedophiles. What he did is horrific. The current membership rules of the BSA would have allowed Sandusky to be a member until it was revealed what a monster he was.

      • Taylor. Your main compaint is about “sodomy”. Yet sodomy is also practiced is heterosexual relationships. So by your rationale any members of the BSA who practice Sodomy in heterosexual relationships should also be barred from BSA membership. If this is the case how would you put it into place? I can imagine that many people being asked that question would reply – “none of your business!” and that’s the crux – it’s not!
        You have every right to your opinion, but at the end of the day, that is all it is.

    • I mention these three scenarios because they will happen. We know they will. No one is willing to address the what then? No one is willing to look and say wait a minute maybe we need to rethink this. Has anyone asked who and how the Scout Oath and Scout Law will be re-written because I can tell you from experience multiple definitions will cause problems at the District and Council level. Specifically when it comes to Eagle Board of Reviews. The Districts are not rubber stamps for the Units nor should they be. We know from the posted conversations on this blog that Units are not following the rules. We know that Unit leaders are following bad information e.g. you completed the requirements, had a decent project, and you are 18 so you can have Eagle Rank. So what then? Who cleans up the mess? National is walking away so it falls to the Districts and the CO’s.

      Scenario #1. Two Units in the same District and Council. One CO has made the decision no homosexuals. The other has decided to follow the new proposed guidelines. So far we would all agree both CO’s are within their rights under the proposed policy. No harm no foul. Time for the fundraising for summer camps, equipment, etc. As the funds total up one Unit has raised far more money than the other and a major reason is the National policy. What then? We all know that lawsuits will be filed and there will be divisions across the board. Both following BSA policy yet clearly discrimination.

      Scenario #2. Same two Units as above. Two young men have completed the requirements for Eagle Scout. One openly gay Scout passes the Scoutmasters Conference, lives their CO’s definition of morally straight and is forwarded onto the District for the Eagle Board of Review. The other fails to meet his CO’s definition of morally straight and is denied. Lets further complicate matters and say both pass their Scoutmasters Conference because their leaders fail in their duty and the District has to make the choice. The Eagle Board of Review through the course of the process learns that one of the boys has violated the morally straight interpretation of the Scout Oath and Law as applied by their CO and is denied at the District level. Lets go one step further. The Board of Review members are split on what is defined as morally clean. One boy is openly gay and clean while the other is straight but got caught drinking a beer. What then? Both completed the same requirements but one fails in the morally straight category. Since Eagle Rank is NOT supposed to be a right of passage or reward fro completing some checklist what happens? We all know that appeals will be made, lawsuits will be filed, and there will be divisions across the board. Both following BSA policy yet clearly discrimination.

      Scenario #3. Same two Units again. Scout Camp. Two deep leadership and all other BSA guidelines followed. 2:00 am and the Scouts are awake (we all know it happens so be honest) discussing the things boys discuss. Billy and Johnny are friends but in different Units due to the the new policy. Scoutmasters are friends as well and for logistics they book two campsites adjacent to each other. Both Units working together and around each other and enjoying Scout camaraderie. Billy is gay and Johnny is straight. Since camp jumping is not unheard of both end up in a tent together with some other boys. Locker room talk ensues. Uncomfortable questions are asked. Feelings get hurt. No laws were broken, every attempt to follow policy was made yet there is discrimination. Billy “feels” bullied and discriminated against and demands to leave because everyone is intolerant. What then? We know lawsuits will be filed when mom and dad find out.

      • Scenario 1 – I assume that it’s not uncommon for different troops to have different funding levels. If nothing else, different troops are in different income areas, geographically. How would it be any different if the reason was this policy? (I am genuinely asking – I don’t know how this is handled now – is there any kind of subsidy, or scholarships, provided that might become an issue?)

        Scenario 2 – A legitimate concern, worthy of consideration. These situations will no doubt arise. However, a scout who is nearing Eagle would be wise to consider this up-front, and change troops to one that is in agreement with his and his family’s moral values. For what it’s worth, no one is asking scouts if they are celibate outside of marriage now before awarding Eagle; presumably that won’t change.

        Scenario 3 – I don’t feel what you’ve described is “discrimination”, so much as it is unkindness. If everyone remembers the core scouting values of kindness and friendliness, things should go well, or if not be able to be handled appropriately after the fact, in the skilled way most scout leaders already handle similar situations. In addition, most gay kids learn pretty darn quickly how to handle inappropriate questions, and to have a thick skin. And by the time they are old enough for this kind of talk, boys from either kind of troop should have had some instruction/discussion on how to behave around people who have differing values than themselves. One of the most valuable things about camp is meeting folks who are quite differerent than yourself.

        While it won’t be perfect, I trust the individual leaders, and the scouts themselves, to handle themselves appropriately and to work out any conflicts that may arise. Scouts are good people, on the whole, regardless of their feelings on this issue. If you believe that, all the details will fall into place.

      • Excellent points on all three scenarios. It won’t be perfect, you’re right. Just as it isn’t now. That is something that will NEVER change, no matter how many times policies are revisited.

      • Andrew, nicely done and very helpful. If our policy gets changed, lawsuits will be filed and what you identify is just the tip of the iceberg. The only moral and correct path for BSA National is to remain true and loyal to our timeless values of Scouting. Thank you for the thoughtful way that you outline some of the concerns with the policy change. Also, check out Tenton’s post…we “have just signed a national petition supporting the BSA’s right to set their own policies and govern as they see fit, and am urging BSA officials to stand firm against this latest attack by pro-homosexual activists.
        http://www.grassfire.com/252/petition.asp?PID=38175808&NID=1
        In response to a massive petition delivery by pro-homosexual activists said to include 275,000 citizens, Grassfire Nation officials are moving to counter this effort by mobilizing at least as many who support the Scouts. They will deliver petitions to the BSA headquarters as they reach their goal.”

    • IGNORANCE BREEDS INTOLERANCE!

      When will BSA have sensitivity training curriculum, modules, and supplementary literature available?

      Our Scouts must “Be Prepared” to be tolerant of others, for the coming Jambo, and for each scouts future Council and District activities!

      Specifically;

      Major Religions of the World;

      Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Folk religions, Taoism & Confucianism, Shinto, Sikhism, Judaism, etc….

      Irreligions;

      Atheism, Agnosticism, Secular humanism etc….

      Sexual Orientation;

      Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Bisexuality, Pan sexuality, Poly sexuality, Androphilia & Gynephilia, Inter sexuality, Third gender, Bestiality, etc….

      • Tom – While I support the proposed policy change, I don’t think teaching about sexuality should ever be a part of scouting. Leaving it up to families is, and always has been, the sensible path. Scouts can be friendly and kind without these details.

      • Absolutely EagleMom. These things should not be taught in Scouting. But I am nervous, that this new change and some of the groups outside promoting this change will force this issue as well. Their websites already claim this new policy is not enough. Will the BSA be strong enough to stand up to those protests when we don’t stand united on this one?

      • What if the BSA simply stops making homosexuality such a big issue? Then everyone can go on learning all the many things Scouting teaches without all of this drama. Ultimately, this is about doing the right thing. It is morally wrong, I believe, for a major organization to kick out a boy who has been with them since childhood simply for realizing he is gay. I hate the hurt that this creates, I hate the way someone is considered trash simply because of their sexual orientation. I hate the message this sends to my brothers and sisters out there and I think it reflects poorly on BSA. There will always be people who don’t want to change, who want to say they are standing on their “beliefs,” but BSA should not cater to these people. Many inside and outside BSA want these policies to change.

      • I would emphatically argue that it is your point of view that should not be “catered” to or indulged. You have implied that those who oppose this policy change are somehow unworthy and unwelcome in the “new” Boy Scouts. Who do you think built it? Who did 100 years of hard work? You are entitled to your opinion but do not ever claim your version of the Scout Oath and Law is the traditional one. Those of us battling to keep the traditional policy understand that the Oath and Law work collectively as a seamless collection of values. We know that you do not get to pick and choose what to follow and what to selectively alter. Baden Powell was very selective about who he allowed to join. He was abundantly clear that you met the whole unedited standard or you did not. He understood as do we that if a volunteer organization did not meet your views you walked away. Everything we do in Wood Badge, Philmont, Sea Base, and all the other trainings that tradition and adhering to the traditional view of the Oath and Law is how Scouting survives the world. Those who claim otherwise have missed the point. As I have posted time and again I do not care about your God or my God. None of us are qualified to even know what God will do or say. You want gay Scouts fine I do not care. There is no civil right to join the Boy Scouts. How will you rewrite the Oath and Law? How will you make it apply evenly across the board? You cant

      • I would emphatically argue that it is your point of view that should not be “catered” to or indulged. You have implied that those who oppose this policy change are somehow unworthy and unwelcome in the “new” Boy Scouts. Who do you think built it? Who did 100 years of hard work? You are entitled to your opinion but do not ever claim your version of the Scout Oath and Law is the traditional one. Those of us battling to keep the traditional policy understand that the Oath and Law work collectively as a seamless collection of values. We know that you do not get to pick and choose what to follow and what to selectively alter. Baden Powell was very selective about who he allowed to join. He was abundantly clear that you met the whole unedited standard or you did not. He understood as do we that if a volunteer organization did not meet your views you walked away. Everything we do in Wood Badge, Philmont, Sea Base, and all the other trainings that tradition and adhering to the traditional view of the Oath and Law is how Scouting survives the world. Those who claim otherwise have missed the point. As I have posted time and again I do not care about your God or my God. None of us are qualified to even know what God will do or say. You want gay Scouts fine I do not care. There is no civil right to join the Boy Scouts. How will you rewrite the Oath and Law? How will you make it apply evenly across the board? You cant because if you separate and parse them out the entire program fails. There are good people who have values and morals that you summarily dismiss that have valid concerns that matter. We understand that we would never join an organization that we disagree with then demand they change. We would never destroy an organization with behavior contrary to 100 years of demonstrable good. Yet today you demand that we give you our organization and desecrate all we have done to make it great. I vehemently oppose the way this has come about. I strenuously oppose being called vile names and being told I do not know what BP had in mind. Any person that allowed any young man to acquire ANY rank including Eagle by telling that young man to lie, obfuscate, distort, hide, manipulate, or con the remnants of the Oath and Law for any reason I say get out of my organization. The ends do not justify the means, ever. BP understood what values and standards built young men. I will have honest disagreements all day long but they will be based in fact and history and not edited, false, rewritten garbage that says allow questionable behavior because we cant hurt someones feelings or some boy might get excluded. There is no right to join the Boy Scouts. There is no right of inclusion.

      • Who did those 100 years of hard work?

        People like this.

        People like me.

        People like my friend, an Eagle Scout who is well-known and still active in the BSA, who is forced to remain closeted.

      • I will simply say again ANYONE in Scouting who attained Eagle Rank (or any rank) through willful and deliberate lying, stealing, obfuscating, misleading, cheating, hiding, or in ANY way misrepresenting themselves should walk out the door. Any leader that encouraged such character traits should also walk out the door. The ends NEVER EVER justify the means, period. I do not care who they are or what they have claimed to do. This applies to gay, straight, obtuse, short, tall, big, small, or anything in between. Gay does not matter. Why? Because they violated more tenants of the Oath and Law that I care to mention or rehearse with someone who is willing to reward bad behavior or personal preferences. Anyone in Scouting truly following the Oath and Law would never put themselves or their own desires ahead of 100 years of clear and consistent meaning. Actions have consequences despite today’s world telling us differently sometimes as adults we have to hold the line and hurt feelings along the way. Sometimes we have to be the adult and say congratulations you met half the standard that is not good enough. Come back when you meet all of them. Baden Powell would never advance a boy who failed to meet EVERY standard set forth and neither should we no matter whose feelings get hurt. Gay or straight should never matter.

        As for who has done 100 years of work if you haven’t figured that out by now you most likely never will. We will agree to disagree and move forward.

        Again I could care less about the gay issue. My posts have been consistent against the process and legalities involved. I have been consistent in talking about the 100 year meaning of what Scouting has always been about. I reject the revisionist reality you live in because it is not consistent with the tenants and standards created by Baden Powell and upheld by 100 years of traditional Scouters.

        I reject your position that anyone has an inherent right to belong to an organization that is volunteer based. I reject the argument that Scouting is for everyone even those who fail to meet the standard. I reject the idea that we need to be more enlightened. I reject all of these ideas not because they lack validity but because they do not apply to what Scouting has been and what Scouting is. These arguments are designed to tear down the Scout Oath and Law one line at a time and reward bad behavior. These arguments are designed to do nothing more than destroy what others have built. These arguments are put forth by individuals who knew that Scouting had standards and demand that the entire organization change just for their own personal minority because they feel entitled.

      • Don’t like being told you might be immoral, huh? Doesn’t feel very good, does it? Perhaps you should reflect on that the next time you are talking about how “immoral” gays or their supporters are. I certainly hope you will let some softness into your heart: I described a rather heartbreaking scenario about somebody being forced to leave the Scouts he loves because of a technicality, and all it did was cause you to redouble your efforts to say that it is immoral and opposed to Scouting.

        Shame on you. Shame on you for caring about your narrow interpretation of the Oath more than about people, more than about CHILDREN.

      • The Scout Oath and Scout Law are technicalities. They are the reason that the Boy Scouts have been great, and different. As adults we have to tell children and young men no, even when it is hard and it is the right thing to do. We inflict tremendous damage when we fail to teach the value of no. You do not always get what you want. Sometimes you have to break some hearts. Life is not fair but that is the real world. I would rather hire a young man that failed at being an Eagle Scout but upheld EVERY aspect of the Oath and Law than hire a young man who cheated his way there because the truth was just too hard. You want to fixate on being gay but if you read what I posted I could care less about gay or straight. What is immoral is joining an organization knowing you do not meet the standard then demanding that that standard be altered because you are offended. What is immoral is ANY member of the Boy Scouts regardless of age, religion, sexual orientation, color, size, IQ, or gender lying, cheating, stealing, obfuscating, distorting, misleading, or through trickery attaining a rank that they did not meet the requirements to have. There is more to being an Eagle Scout than finishing some list of requirements. Anyone who knowingly helps ANY young man do this needs to leave their uniform and membership at the door because trustworthy, obedient, reverent, and morally straight was totally obliterated.

      • Andrew, I am replying to myself here because there is no more room in the right-hand column. Your comments about eagle scouts who are gay and who had to hide it being unworthy of being called Scouts are particularly ugly. You’ve created a no-win situation for them. As openly gay, they are not allowed to participate because they violate, in your mind, Scout principles. But if they hide their sexuality, then they should also not participate because in doing so they are violating Scout principles. This double-bind is completely crazy, damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don’t.

    • As an Eagle Scout I sent the National Executive Board a message imploring them not to change the policy. I think it will eventually lead to troops chartered by Mormon, Catholic and Evangelical Churches to split from the national association. While each chartering organization can mandate the membership requirements for their troop they cannot impact what happens in the OA Lodge or at the Council summer camp. The Lodge is more problematic than the summer camp as the camps are troop based and the Lodge Advisers come from all troops in the Council. I think the change will cause disunity and eventual schism. The Southern Baptist Convention is openly decrying the proposal and predicting an exodus of Evangelical Scouts. The Mormons refused to comment on ‘a proposal’ and the President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops was ‘unavailable for comment’. Mormon, Catholic and Evangelical make up the vast majority of chartering org. Joining the BSA is ‘highly encouraged’ by the Mormons and they sponsor more troops than anyone. Its sad that we are bowing to economic blackmail. When the United Way of South Florida defunded the Council in Miami and Dade County schools kicked us out the community responded and made up for the lost funding via direct donation. These corporations are only concerned their bottom line. They have no moral base. They are afraid of alienating any segment of consumers. We must not bow to this economic blackmail. It is a capitulation that will result in the serious damage to the BSA.

      • cpc, you are spot on..also, please check out Trenton’s post and sign the “national petition supporting the BSA’s right to set their own policies and govern as they see fit, and am urging BSA officials to stand firm against this latest attack by pro-homosexual activists.
        http://www.grassfire.com/252/petition.asp?PID=38175808&NID=1
        In response to a massive petition delivery by pro-homosexual activists said to include 275,000 citizens, Grassfire Nation officials are moving to counter this effort by mobilizing at least as many who support the Scouts. They will deliver petitions to the BSA headquarters as they reach their goal.”

    • Dear Scouters I am returning to this forum with some important information I hope that all whom support leaving the current policy of not allowing homosexual as is will go to the Grassfire website and send a message to the National BSA Board that you do not support the pending lifting the ban on homosexual members in the BSA. Homosexual activists are aggressively targeting the Boy Scouts of America attempting to strong-arm them into amending their membership policies to include gays.
      The Boy Scouts of America has a long-standing policy of not admitting homosexuals believing it would be a distraction to the mission of the Scouts. In fact, they write in their membership policy “same-sex attraction should be introduced and discussed outside of its program with parents, caregivers, or spiritual advisers at the appropriate time and in the right setting.”
      I have just signed a national petition supporting the BSA’s right to set their own policies and govern as they see fit, and am urging BSA officials to stand firm against this latest attack by pro-homosexual activists.
      http://www.grassfire.com/252/petition.asp?PID=38175808&NID=1
      In response to a massive petition delivery by pro-homosexual activists said to include 275,000 citizens, Grassfire Nation officials are moving to counter this effort by mobilizing at least as many who support the Scouts. They will deliver petitions to the BSA headquarters as they reach their goal.
      Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • Trenton, outstanding post! Just signed the petition. This is a call to action… we all need to facebook, twitter and e-mail this link to everyone. I might suggest that they also add a place for our BSA Member ID as this message is more powerful when they can document that it is coming from within the organization from the adult volunteers. I would like for the site to also call for a delay in any action by the Board on this and call them to slow the process down so we can all get some transparency and to educate the Board on the legal risks of any such proposed and hastily made change. We should also all be pressing our executives to e-mail this link to all adult scouters so their voice on this KEY ISSUE can be heard loud and clear!!! Super work!!!!! We will not cave to outside pressuring and bullying.

      • BSAScoutleader, while I understand what you are shooting for bay calling for our BSA information, what about my friends/family and others with boys that are not yet scouting age but have every intention of becoming members based on the current policy? That eliminates the voice of future generation scouters who ALL deserve a say as well. So I say there should be a spot to indicate if you’re a current member/future member/etc. and if you have BSA info put it in.

    • Brad you are spot on! db, with all due respect and with no offense being intended, your statement regarding the holding in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000) is simply false.

      SCOTUS found that (after looking at all of the facts and BSA documents/positions/statements) the “mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). Further, the US Supreme Court also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court clearly recognized and upheld the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. The proposed policy change will destroy the legal underpinnings that resulted in the BSA being able to successfully protect and defend its expressive association message, and charter organizations that prohibit practicing homosexuals will be sued. Our BSA program, and our values will be lost. The National Board is on notice of the irreparable damage that it will inflict on Scouting and its timeless values if it takes hasty and reckless action nest week. It is advised to govern its actions accordingly!

      Further, we call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts and who are honest of heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! Millions of eligible class members who (are part of US Scouting and have nothing to do with other scouting groups) have donated time and money based on the timeless values of Scouting in the US, will be part of the lawsuits that will be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National. We are aware of the foul play going on, improper influence by outside groups and and the reason behind the rush to change the policy before rational voices from adult member volunteers can be considered (see posts on this site and do your research). We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on, and we WILL NOT be moved! Are you listening National Board!
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

  201. If this is an argument on tolerance, where is the tolerance for those who believe that homosexuality is wrong? It is clear that this is not about true tolerance – it is about ‘selfish tolerance’. “my way or the highway” is the real message by those promoting this change. Scouting already allows for homosexual participation. That already intrudes on the beliefs of many/most of us in Scouting. Please be tolerant of our point of view.

    • I think the BSA’s proposed policy *is* being tolerant – of both views. Each CO can choose which approach to take with their own troop. No one is forcing a CO to accept a policy that is contrary to their values – on either side.

      • EagleMom, It is not tolerant of both views. Although a CO could choose their approach, that control does not extend beyond the Pack/Troop/Crew. And Scouting is not limited to the local CO group. It goes beyond in a number of ways – Jamboree, High Adventure camps, OA events, Leadership Training events, etc. Given this change, the CO cannot assure their beliefs are upheld and that a safe environment for those beliefs can be maintained. Therefore many, many COs will no longer hold charters for Scouting.

      • Greg, my Eagle has worked at summer camp for many years and is in OA, so I know that scouting is much broader than just the troop level. But honestly, I don’t think it will come up much in day-to-day scouting. I’d hate to see troops throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because someone at an OA weekend might mention their significant other in passing with a “he” instead of a “she”. The actual, in-real-life gay folks I know aren’t particularly interested in forcing the details of their lives on people who do not approve of them. They’re actually amazingly skilled at avoiding the topic altogether. Give it a chance. The military did, and it largely proved to be a non-issue. If they can do it with grace, so can the BSA.

      • EagleMom, you just hit the point…but in reverse. It is not the Troops that would be “throwing the baby out with the bathwater”. It is the gay community doing so. This is the tipping point.

        I would be shocked that someone in OA who uses the wrong pronoun would be removed from Scouting. At the same time, if I mention in passing a propensity for some inappropriate behavior, I do expect the possibility of removal from Scouting. For example, if I begin to use inappropriate language or badgering boys for their failures, I know I will be taken out of leadership.

        Scouting cannot be equated to the military. Scouting is for youth not adults. There is a difference which needs to be respected.

        (btw GreggO not Greg)

      • I’m sorry about dropping your “O”!
        I saw it and thought I typed it but obviously not!

        I agree with your middle paragraph. And if the BSA had a formal DADT policy, perhaps that could be a workable compromise, although there would issues to be considered. The important thing is that these discussions can help get us all beyond the initial “this is great”/”this is awful” reactions and understand each others’ concerns, so that we can respect them as much as possible.

      • GreggO, spot on and well said my friend! EagleMom and everyone on this blog is aware of what damage happens if the door gets opened next week to permit practicing homosexuals in Scouting. In addition to the problems and conflicts that you point out, BSA National would be in effect saying that practicing homosexual Scouters are able to live the Scout oath and law. This can never be. Homosexual acts are not compatible with the Scout oath and law and never will be. There is no resolution to this concern other than remaining true and faithful to the ideals of Scouting! EagleMom, for the majority of us who clearly and lovingly tell you that homosexual acts are not compatible with the Scout oath and law and never will be, what workable compromise can you offer us? Would you be willing to compromise on this…those who have same gender attraction, do not act on this attraction and commit to the morals and ideas of Scouting are welcome in Scouting with open arms and those who seek to force homosexual acts into Scouting can join another organization? I think we all know the answer and the off the cliff direction that the decision (next week if poorly decided) will take Scouting. Wake up National Board and listen to your volunteers!

      • DantheScoutingman –

        The BSA does not now inquire into the details of heterosexual scouts’ romantic relationships. Some are no doubt waiting until marriage; others are not. The BSA leaves this area to the scout and his God, where I believe it belongs. Most scouts are of an age where this is not an issue anyway.

        Many churches, such as the Catholic and the LDS church, believe that those with same-sex attraction can lead an honorable, moral life if they choose celibacy. I see no conflict whatsoever with the BSA for scouts who follow this path, and I would hope that most of the folks in this discussion could agree that these scouts should not be excluded. I would argue that for these folks, being open about their same-sex attraction should not be an issue either, assuming they don’t make a huge deal of it.

        While your proposed compromise makes sense on some levels, I don’t think it would be appropriate for Scout Masters to feel that it is part of their job to keep informed as to a scout’s sexual behavior, regardless of sexual preference. Frankly I’d be concerned about a SM who displayed interest in discussing such details with a scout. Thus, on a practical level, the idea of differentiating between sexually active scouts and celibate scouts just doesn’t work.

        Rather than exclude those homosexual scouts who are in good standing with their church’s doctrine, in order to avoid those who are not, I think it would be better to include homosexual scouts on the same terms are heterosexual scouts are included – that sexual acts of any kind are not appropriate within scouts, and sex outside of scouts is between the scout and God.

        I think some are forgetting that the people we are discussing are SCOUTS. They are involved, or want to be involved, in the BSA because they love all that it has to offer – camping, hiking, badge work, community service, leadership. .

        Get to know a gay scout or two. You might find that you have a lot in common, and that his sexuality really isn’t an issue..

      • EagleMom, is not content with “those who have same gender attraction, do not act on this attraction and commit to the morals and ideas of Scouting are welcome in Scouting with open arms and those who seek to force homosexual acts into Scouting can join another organization?” She and radicals like her seek to force her amoral values upon us. They will also force these amoral values on our boys if the BSA makes the wrong decision next week. Any Scout or Scout leader who promotes or engages in homosexual acts that come to the knowledge of a Scout leader must leave and is not welcome in the Scouting program..just like any other Scout who does not want to follow and live the Scouting ideals. Can you imaging a future rainbow patrol of sexually active Scouts at summer camp, camporee, jamorees, OA events, etc. Such actions spit in the face of our Scout oath and law. Homosexual acts are not compatible with the Scout oath and law and never will be.

      • Why is it that we who believe this is morally wrong be forced to change. Homosexuals are free to form a youth organization of their own.

      • einhard – In some parts of the country, I believe a *majority* of scouts and adult leaders support this change. After all, three states just voted for legalizing same-sex marriage. In other parts of the country, a majority would like things to stay the same. Rather than forcing the same rule on the entire country, the BSA is trying to help troops reflect the values of their communities. If you are part of a troop that supports the current policy, that won’t change. If you are part of a council in a “red state”, chances are there will be very few troops who choose to change. There aren’t a ton of gay kids out there to begin with. I think this will end up being much less of a change than many fear.

      • einhard, you are spot on and your views are 100% in line with America’s legal, moral and proud tradition of pluralism.

      • Throughout history man has loved the dark and stayed away from the light. And throughout history man also has rationalized sin as OK. But, EagleMom, just because a majority of people believe it to be true or right, does not make it so. Nazi Germany, the antebellum American South are but two examples from history. Lastly, just because your son was an Eagle Scout, doesn’t make it your right to tell my kid what is right and wrong and if scouts allows gays in, that is exactly what you are doing.

      • >>”…just because a majority of people believe it to be true or right, does not make it so.”

        This is true. We must each reflect upon the issue, and pray for guidance. Each of us must advocate for what we feel is the right moral path. Ideally, the BSA could create a policy that allowed each of us to work within a troop that reflects our moral standards. This policy doesn’t do that, because troops come together in activities like summer camp. But the BSA must do the best it can to respect the moral beliefs of *all* its members.

        >>”…just because your son was an Eagle Scout, doesn’t make it your right to tell my kid what is right and wrong and if scouts allows gays in, that is exactly what you are doing.”

        I think that *everyone* involved with scouting, regardless of which side they feel is morally right, should advocate for what they believe is the right path for the BSA on this issue.

      • BSA has never wanted to be compared to the military. It is recommended to refrain from calling the tan, button, field shirt as “Class A” although it is common to do so. Both entities, the BSA and the military have very different aims and goals.

      • Eagle Mom, National BSA is not even being tolerant of it’s own stated rules, which are rooted in Judeo Christian morals. By allowing this influx of homosexual activists (which is what it will be– homosexuals flooding into the scouts to push the envelope even further), there’s is no tolerance for the vast majority base of scouts. But I think that’s the objective of homosexuals– get inside the organization in order to destroy it, ie, Obama tactics at destroying America.

      • Paul, do you have kids? My teens are *busy* people. They have school, scouts, sports, friends, church, and family activities and obligations. It’s a huge juggle, not to mention a huge family commitment (of time and money), to fit all the activities they want to do into our schedule. They have to carefully pick and choose their top priorities and let the rest go.

        My teens, and their peers, have absolutely no time for infiltrating organizations to destroy them.

        If you’re involved with BSA, you know being a scout is hard work, and kids who aren’t interested and willing to put the time and work into it don’t last long.

        Remember that homosexual scouts are SCOUTS – interested in badge work, outdoor activities, leadership, and all the other things scouts do. I think you’ll find that gay scouts are pretty much the same as other scouts. In fact, if you’re involved with scouting, there’s a good chance you already know some.

      • ps….einhard…Trenton Spears gave a super post….”I have just signed a national petition supporting the BSA’s right to set their own policies and govern as they see fit, and am urging BSA officials to stand firm against this latest attack by pro-homosexual activists.
        http://www.grassfire.com/252/petition.asp?PID=38175808&NID=1
        In response to a massive petition delivery by pro-homosexual activists said to include 275,000 citizens, Grassfire Nation officials are moving to counter this effort by mobilizing at least as many who support the Scouts. They will deliver petitions to the BSA headquarters as they reach their goal.” Stand up and act now to save Scouting. Sign the petition and e-mail the link to this to all of your friends on facebook, twitter, etc. also press your executives to make this information available to all adult BSA volunteers so their voice can be heard. All the best to you my friend!

      • BSAScouter here is another petition website
        http://www.ipetitions.com/…of-james-turley-and-randall
        James Turley, CEO of Ernst & Young, and Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T, must be removed from their positions of honor on the BSA National Executive Board. Much of the current pressure to put homosexuals in leadership roles is coming from these two national board members. Stephenson is slated to become president of the BSA national board in 2014. The BSA Board meets Wednesday, February 6, 2013.
        Despite the fact that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the BSA’s ban on homosexuals in 2000, and in light of all the reports and litigation over the abusive predation on boys by homosexual adults in leadership positions with churches and other organizations, the notion that the BSA is considering lifting its ban on homosexuals holding such positions is shocking.
        These BSA board members are endeavoring to force their social agenda on 3.6 million Scouts and adult leaders. They want Scouting to comply with their corporate policies, which have adopted the homosexual agenda under pressure, primarily from the Gay and Lesbian Alliance against Defamation and the so-called “Human Rights” Campaign.
        We must unite the 3.6 million members in the 290 Councils and the more than 115,000 religious and civic groups under which BSA Troops are chartered and call for a change in the Executive Board not a change in our policy.
        Please add your name and join us in proudly standing our Scout oath:
        “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” Sincerely, Trenton

      • How do you know that the priests that molested boys ( and I assume all of the miles terms in the Boy Scouts own perversion files kept secret for years and I guess Jerry Sandusky ) are homosexuals?

        Or is it that you classify all molesters as homosexuals?

        Can a heterosexual be a molester? Or dies a heterosexual become homosexual when they molest?

      • Trenton, superb work!! Just tried to sign the petition, but the site does not work. Do you have a better link? Yes, I am proud to add my name and join Scouters in proudly stating our Scout oath:
        “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.”

      • Paul, excellent comment! As Glaad and other pro-homosexual (living) groups lost big-time in the SCOTUS in 2000 and the legal door was closed to them, they began working hard to destroy the BSA from within. We are now seeing the fruits of their amoral works. This is a fact (not opinion)…for starters take a look at…http://www.glaad.org/actions/list.

        What is remarkable to me is that we have folks (supportive of outside groups like Glaad and others) posting on this site who are fully aware of what these outside groups have been (and are) doing and support the attempt to hijack and destroy the timeless values of Scouting from within the organization. Our eyes are open to what is really going on, and we will not allow anyone to destroy Scouting and its timeless values.

      • Brad, could you explain your feelings? I don’t understand how a policy that allows a CO to decide whether to either continue with the current position or to allow gay members isn’t tolerant? Surely folks can just choose to join a troop that reflects their values – something we encourage when we advise new scouts to shop around for a troop now.

        Do you have thoughts or suggestions as to how the policy could be different, but still include a place for scouts on both sides?

      • I am stating there is no tolerance for those that support the current possition because national is now considering dropping the position(if they have not already). Those that support the current position will be forced to accept openly gay scouts or leave the program when the announcement comes out. While they may not have to accept them in their unit(for now), they will be at scout functions. Unfortunately, the divide is too great and any policy will not be acceptable for either side.

      • I think I see your point, and I guess I understand your concerns, at least a bit.

        Brad, my kids have a few gay friends (including one Eagle), and it’s just not a big issue. You probably couldn’t even pick them out from the crowd when we have a group of teens over. You may find, should this change be implemented, that you’ve already been interacting with gay scouts and just not known it. Or you may not – it often simply doesn’t come up. I don’t honestly think a whole lot will actually change in day-to-day scouting activities.

        Most of today’s teens have grown up with kids who turn out to be gay (no matter how much their parents may have wanted to prevent it). They know gay friends, cousins, classmates, and even fellow scouts. About a quarter of our population lives in a state that allows gay marriage. And lately three states actually passed it by a majority vote. For many of these people, who personally know and love good, moral gay folks, it’s just not the huge moral problem it was for their elders.

        If our military men and women can handle this change, I know the BSA can too. It might be uncomfortable, and there will be details to work out. It sounds like national is trying their best to think it through.

      • Eagle Mom,
        While I appreciate your thinking that this is no big deal, it is to me. I joined this organization because it’s beliefs and policies were closely aligned with mine. Just because something is accepted by society does not make it right. While I am not so naive to believe that there are no gays in scouting, I am very worried what will happen if the policy changes. Have you looked at the websites of the organizations pushing for this change? They state this is a good start. What does that mean? Is acceptance in the organization not enough? Like I said before, the two sides are so far apart there is not going to be a solution that is acceptable to both sides. Your comparison between the military and the BSA are totally off base. The military is government run and open to all, the BSA is a private organization.

      • I also joined this organization because it’s beliefs and policies were closely aligned with mine and because BSA has held itself out to be such. BSA National needs to strongly consider its significant financial exposure from class action lawsuits that will be filed if it now changes its policies. Make no mistake -volunteer members will seek a refund or past donations made and monies invested in things like BSA uniforms. BSA National would be wise to take a very close look at this and not rush into a very bad decision.

      • But, Brad, most people I know who join Scouts do so because they love the idea of being a part of something, of reinforcing common values like honestly, courage, etc, and because they want to learn all the skills Scouts offers. Or they join because their parents were in Scouts. Many, many more of us would love our sons to be in Scouts but are opposed to the current anti-gay policy. If you picked Scouts purely because they exclude homosexuals, then I just have to say that that’s an unusual choice. At least among the people I know.

      • Angie, I did not join purely because the excluded homosexuals. Strange how you twisted that when I said I joined this organization because I agreed with it’s beliefs and policies you only assumed that meant excluding homosexuals, Since you are one of the people pushing for this change can you please seriously address my concerns instead of going off topic.
        Have you looked at the websites of the organizations pushing for this change? They state this is a good start. What does that mean? Is acceptance in the organization not enough?

      • EagleMom, do you interact with these “military men and women” that are supposedly “handling” the change in DOD policy? I’m retired military, I continue to work in the DOD amongst service members from all four branches daily, and while the higher leadership directed a change, it’s “handled” by being forced upon people. If you don’t accept homosexual behavior as normal and make any comment or any action counter to it, you’re singled out, counseled and a paperwork trail is started that can lead to your eventual dismissal from the military. You have to attend (or complete online) multiple tolerance and consideration classes every year. You can be investigated for intolerance (another possible career killer, depending on the outcome) as easily as someone reporting you, with little to no evidence to legitimize starting the investigation.
        This is the reality of the military “accepting” the policy change. Is this what you want for Scouting?

      • I do interact with military men and women who are dealing well with the change in the DADT policy. We discussed it just this week, in consideration of the proposed BSA policy change. No problems were noted. Your complaint is that you can’t express your intolerance of others? So would it be the same if someone were to make derogatory statements against individuals of a different race or religion? Women?

      • Well Beth, I certainly don’t know about your interactions, but I can say that between the 3 commands where I work, we’re talking well over 2,000 active duty and reserve soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coastguardsmen. While I certainly haven’t spoken to all of them, I can confidently say I’ve spoken to or listened to several hundred that expressed their disagreement with the policy change. I’d say sample size is important.
        I’m pretty confident you regularly express your intolerance of others. What are your feelings on pedophiles? Thieves? Arsonists? Murderers? Rapists? Go to the library and pick up a copy of the DSM IV, then read about how many of these “illnesses” are thought to be something one is born with, not unlike the claim of many homosexual supporters. We (and I’m guessing you) have no issue with discriminating and punishing these conditions with which people are born, but you won’t hold homosexuals to the same standard. What’s good for the goose is not good for one’s favored gander, I guess.

      • Steve, this is how things always are when change is implemented. Same thing when blacks were integrated into the military. My question would be, why do people in the military have to go around spouting off their opinion about how wrong homosexuality is? They are the ones creating the problem by thinking they can verbally intimidate others they don’t agree with. Those are common tactics used by people to try to push someone out again who has recently been given access to something.

      • That is so true, Brad! They talk about acceptance and tolerance but it’s only for those who accept and tolerate the homosexual agenda. They will go after the charter organizations after making inroads into the individual units. Following that will be required “quotas” per council.

      • @EagleMom, that position is not tolerant because it forces an acceptance of a belief. It is exactly the same complaint that gay members are stating, that is, Scouting is currently not accepting their beliefs (although that is not fully true).
        Since the two beliefs are in direct contradiction, there can be no full acceptance and tolerance. Only compromise is possible and that has already been implemented.

      • GreggO, could you explain what you mean by a compromise that has already been implemented? I was unaware that there is already a compromise policy in place. But maybe I’m misunderstanding?

      • The compromise policy already in place is that gays are allowed to be members. They have been members and continue to be members of Scouting groups. (in fact the video you posted is clear evidence that this is true). No one is asked of their personal preferences (except possibly by particular COs) and no one tries to find out (to my knowledge or experience). It is only those people who feel compelled to reveal or broadcast their sexual preference that cannot join Scouting. We who do not believe in this lifestyle must live with the fact that there are those who do within Scouting organizations. That is a compromise but it is apparently unacceptable to the gay community.

      • GreggO –
        Hmmm. So you’re saying there’s a defacto, unwritten, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy? I think it would be stronger if it was a formal policy, rather than a “we say one thing, but actually do another” type thing.
        Do you think that a formal DADT policy would be a good compromise?

      • It is formal. Just not well publicized. But the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell isn’t a long term solution that has proven to work in other settings over the long term.

      • Okay Eagle Mom you oversimplify. So, there’s a pack (we’re not called “troops”, that’s the Girl Scouts) and its leaders decide we’re opening up this pack and it’s dens to openly stated homosexuals. Half the members disagree with that policy. It’s half that agree and half that disagree.. Who calls the shots? Isn’t that the reason why the national policy makes it clear we are a unique organization designed for a specific purpose. Our rules do not allow certain elements that bring down the morals and character of our group. You’re free to disagree, but since you refuse to comply with our rules as an open homosexual,, you are not welcome to stay. But feel free to go start your own club– which excludes straight men as leaders. That’s fine, do as you wish, but leave our organization alone.

      • Yes, in Cub Scouts we are called packs. in Boy Scouts, we are formed in troops, the same terminology used in Girl Scouts.

      • As I understand it, Cubs have Dens, Scouts have Troops.

        If half of a troop decides to be open and the other half wishes to be closed, then under the proposed policy, the answer would be to split the troop into two. In that way, each scout (and their family) can find the troop that best fits their family’s values and religious beliefs.

        Please understand that it is NOT just the few gay Scouts and Scouters who oppose the current policy.
        In my part of the country, MOST Scouting families oppose the current policy. I assume the numbers differ in other areas of the country.

        Please don’t assume only gay people oppose the current policy.

    • I am fully Tolerant of your view, but Boy Scouts is not yours. I am Married man, 3 kids, 2 boys in the program. I will not allow my son to have his Eagle removed because it turns out he is gay…he did not choose that,but he did choose to be a scout at age 6. He is currently 12, ASPL and a fine Scout. His morals ans values are right in line with the program. I would be ashamed if the program kicked him out and turned him away because he was part of the 10% that turn out different in ONE way.
      I am tolerant of your view, but Boy Scouts is my sons, and I have no idea where life will take him, but I know scouts will prepare him for it, and will support him his whole life, no matter what.

  202. For those like Bruce that are worried about lawsuits against Chartered Organizations – most of the lawsuits filed are not against the BSA, but are filed against local governments who support scouting financially. They are often against cities that give favorable terms to the BSA for leases and parks and moorages. The argument is that taxpayers don’t believe the government should be subsidizing an organization that discriminates. The BSA joins in the defense of these suits. It’s quite possible that these suits will continue, since the BSA Nationally will have a policy that still discriminates. But the CO isn’t going to be brought into it as a defendant. If local councils adopt non-discrimination clauses, then you could expect that such lawsuits would cease – for example, the case of Bolboa Park.

    • BSA National also better consider the lawsuits that will be filed by volunteer Scouters if they try to abandon our Scouting values.

      • DantheScoutingman, could you elaborate on what grounds National and COs could be sued by volunteers who are against the change?
        Their troops could remain exactly the same; it would only be at the higher levels that they would experience any difference, and even then only if there is a troop in their area who changes to be open to gays. I think it would be hard to show any kind of adverse impact; keeping in mind that at these events scouts are already exposed to other scouts who hold widely different religious beliefs, and the BSA not only allows but encourages this, and embeds it in its interpretation of “reverent”.. .

  203. I can see by these comments that this has already created a fracture in this organization. Arguments are being made by both sides and it is just creating a larger fracture in the organization. No organization can be everything to everyone. Whatever the result of this upcoming vote will be, the organization will never be the same, the damage has been done. Sexuality has not been a part of the program and by changing the rules now it will be a part of the program. Applicants will need to ask if the unit they wish to join accepts gays or the unit will have to ask the applicants if they accept gays.

    • Brad, it will be fairly straightforward for a CO to have a “We Believe” statement, that members can sign acknowledging that they are aware of the stance (open or closed) of the troop they are joining. This is common in many organizations. There need be no discussion of sexuality; the statement will speak for itself.

  204. Scouting has basically been functioning under a don’t ask don’t tell mantra for 103 years. Sex does not come up in conversation period in a well-run unit. So in essence this has not been an issue until someone wants to flaunt their sexual preference (usually a gay preference) and challenge the moral principles of the organization. I am beginning to understand that this is a money thing. Which means the BSA is being sold out by confessing it has no principles. If the Supreme Court upheld this position, who are the people on the board to reverse that decision?

    • I have to agree. I am not so naive as to believe that there weren’t homosexuals in the military or BSA when I was younger. However, it was “don’t ask, don’t tell” for heterosexuals and homosexuals. It should never be brought up. I find it ridiculous that some people choose to use sexual orientation to identify themselves. I don’t run around telling people I’m a heterosexual or I’m straight. And I certainly don’t need my own month observed by the Federal government. I’m sure people would be upset if their tax dollars were used to make posters observing “White, Heterosexual Male Month.”

      • Brad, SPOT ON! This is the DIFFERENCE!! For some reason, the “homosexual community” has a compelling need to be identified by their sexual orientation. They seem to act as though they desire to be a member of a discriminated group to have any value or to be appreciated. I’m sure the young man in the video posted by EagleMom has received wonderful feedback from youths at the camps where he served. Why isn’t that enough? – it is for me.

      • I think he just wanted to not have to fear for his job, and in fact his whole life in scouting, if he slips up and says “he” when others expect him to say “she”. That’s a lot of pressure to live under, especially around your friends. Honestly, the gay kids I know in Real Life really, really don’t want to make a big deal about it. Really.

      • EagleMom, someone is making a big deal about it! So much so that BSA is considering a change most likely because financial support is diminishing because of the bullying and badgering being done to corporate sponsors. If gays dont want it to be a big deal, they need to call-off their leadership.
        We all can have fear for our job. I may fear that if I cuss too much, or at all, I will loose my position. I may fear that if a Scout’s Own service given by my Scouts includes to many direct references to Allah, I would loose my position. What is the difference?

      • It’s a big deal right now because there have been some very highly publicized cases where people have been excluded because of this policy. On a day to day basis, however, most people who this would directly affect do not want to make a big deal about it.

      • LGBT individuals don’t want to be discriminated against because there is a history of society discriminating against them. They don’t want to be discriminated against.

      • There is also no medical evidence showing that this is genetic condition. If it’s not a choice then explain how bi-sexuals sometimes favor one sex over the other, but are open to both. Explain how it is that heterosexual men in prison can bring themselves to having sex with other heterosexual men. It seems like there isn’t a lot of evidence to support that people are born homosexuals unless you chalk it up to a condition of the mind. Furthermore, most liberals that support “gay rights” also believe they are born like that and believe in evolution. Evolution completely contradicts their theory that homosexuals are born homosexuals.

      • Evolution and homosexuality are NOT antithetical.

        I will grant you, there are many intricacies associated with a topic so complex as human emotion and sexuality.

      • But Beth, by insisting on changing BSA, the LGBT community is discriminating against me and others! Why is the LGBT community’s view more important, significant, or valid than ours?

      • No, the BSA would not be discriminating against you and others. You would still be free to belong to a unit or units that holds the same values that you hold.

      • But how do you suppose we will handle council, district, and national activities when the various scouting units would usually come together? You CANNOT have it both ways. NO national policy means we are not united any longer!

      • Really?! Cause right now I don’t have to explain to any of the boys in our troop/pack about boys with two moms or two dads or why ‘johnny’ is holding hands and kissing boys, while ‘billy’ has a girlfriend. So NO, not the way we deal with it now.

      • Does the current policy exclude children that have two moms or two dads? I don’t believe it does. It addresses gay scouts and scouters. A boy scout shouldn’t be holding hands or kissing a boy or a girl at scout events. These things shouldn’t be an issue.

      • Will YOU guarantee it?! Once you open the Pandora’s box that this is, it’s all downhill from there. Boys see each other outside of scouts as well so it will be seen no matter what. The difference now is that so far we have not encountered it because either these people avoided BSA or under the current unspoken DADT I keep reading about on this forum it is kept under wraps (but certainly in our 10 years of scouting it has not been an issue – yet). That will no longer be the case if this policy is changed. It will be like opening a dam, you will see an increase in the ‘openly’ gay participants to test the waters and push the boundaries – thus ruining the program for all of those who are one against this policy and two have invested many years, time and dollars into it and by the time the ‘storm’ passes it will be to late. BSA will be nothing more then a disgraceful joke.

      • Yes, it is seen no matter what. I agree completely. So you may still have to explain it to your sons, unless you lock them in a room.

        Will I guarantee it… of course not. Misconduct of all sorts occurs. When it does, it is dealt with accordingly.

      • I am a former scout and some of my sons and grandsons that are former scouts
        I have never seen so many comments on an issue, but there certain individuals that seem to have far too much time on their hands. Some of defend homosexuality and LBGT so vigorously that one has to assume you are involved with them and one of them. This is a little long, but please take time to read and digest it.
        This is one of the most important issues facing parents and it is up to you to educate your children and warn them of the signs and dangers of predators.
        THE BOTTOM LINE.

        The bottom Line to all of this is whether homosexuality (LBGT) is a moral issue or an immoral issue. The vast majority of you believe it is an immoral issue and so does the BSA at least until they started allowing wealthy businesses and business men to become involved and on their board and this is the results.
        This is what happens when an organization compromises it’s core values for the sake of “cash”.

        The Boy Scouts of America was founded on Godly Christian principles.
        The three major promises of the Scout Oath are:
        Duty to God and country,
        Duty to other people, and
        Duty to self (to keep oneself morally straight)

        I deal only with facts, but today the majorities are not interested in the facts. Founding President John Adams said many years ago, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
        Regarding Homosexuals serving as leaders in the Boy Scouts of America, they are a private organization and have held to the standard for a century. The organization has fought numerous court battles over the last decade ago for its right to set standards for leaders who interact with children.
        In 2000 that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts of America is a private organization and has the right to enforce a “morally straight” standard, even if prevented homosexuals and atheists from being leaders.
        Homosexual activists have stolen the word “gay” because it enhances their desirability and attractiveness. So, let’s look at the facts and the truth.
        Frist, “Columbia University psychiatry professors Drs. William Byrne and Bruce Parsons stated: ‘There is no evidence that at present to substantiate a biological theory’.”
        The claims that they are “born” homosexuals is completely false and an outright lie. It is a behavioral decision and yes there are some environmental issues that can have an effect, but the bottom line is it is a decision on an individual’s part. There are consequences to this behavior (AIDS AND HIV just for starters) published by the American Pediatrics Association and sent to all Superintendents of Education in the U. S. and are available if you are interested in the facts..

        Regarding that homosexual assaults on young boys some say, “All male child sexual abuses are not committed by homosexual men, they are committed by pedophiles”. That is correct in that a pedophile is an adult who has sexual desire for children or who has committed the crime of sex with a child. Now, there may be a very small percentage of this crime that are women, but for arguments sake let’s say it is 95% men who are male homosexuals. This is why the Scouts have taken this hard line stand for 100 years, but seem to now be folding because of money.

        Dictionary definitions of Homosexuality:

        Gay (gay) Webster’s 1913 Definition: Excited with merriment; manifesting sportiveness or delight
        Up until the last quarter of 20th Century “Sodomy in the first degree was a Class A felony.”

        “Homosexuality is the condition of ‘sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex’.”
        Definition of HOMOSEXUAL
        : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex
        1bug•ger
        Definition of BUGGER: : sodomite, a : a worthless person
        Merriam-Webster Dictionary

        Medical definition of BUGGERY: sodomy
        Merriam-Webster Dictionary

        Sodomy (sodomy)
        1. Carnal copulation in a manner against nature; buggery.
        SOD’OMY, n. A crime against nature.
        Webster’s 1913 Definition
        You may not agree with this and that is your choice. But, base your opinion on facts and not on emotions or propaganda from the media.
        #####

      • I am not saying families will not have to explain it to their children EVER (sadly that is what the world has become) but instead of me deciding when (and cubs are FAR to young) BSA will force the hands of many families (if they stayed) sort of like stepping on my rights as a parent now huh? If you want to be part of BSA here’s what you must do….

        Oh and, who will deal with it? I mean if there’s no longer a national policy to cover ALL the CO’s who’s responsible? The individual? The CO? The camp it maybe occurred at? national if it happens at a jamboree? WHO will deal with it?

      • ScoutMommaX3 – But didn’t you say you had a number of gay relatives? So you have some experience including these folks in your family. It’s pretty easy to simply say “Aunt Sue and her friend Mary are in love. I know that seems odd – it seems odd to me too. In fact, we don’t approve of that, because our religion teaches that it’s wrong. Nonetheless, we love Aunt Sue and we will be kind and friendly to her, and to Mary.” It’s that simple. No need to go into further details.
        I know it’s scary, but you may find that many of the scouts already have gay friends or relatives, and their parents have already talked about it with them. If the policy changes, I’m assuming that the BSA will come up with some training around these issues, which can help scout leaders to have pre-thought-out answers ready for common questions that may arise. This won’t destroy scouting. The good kids who love scouting can handle this in stride. Really.

      • First, my children have very little interaction with these family members and those they do, being Catholic do not live ‘active’ gay lifestyles. My boys understand what the LGBT is about and are grateful they had a place to go that was ‘safe’ from this lifestyle choice. Yes it’s a choice to either live actively gay or not to. Churches such as LDS (got most of my knowledge of them on this forum from it’s members) and the Catholic church accept gays that are NOT actively living gay. It sounds like BSA is not looking to do that, they fear they must have an ALL open door. That stomps on the rights of the families that have joined and invest in BSA looking for that type of program. Those who’ve joined and feel different have only tried to deceive themselves and others. The policy has been clearly put, why did they join if they don’t align with their families values? I’ve been saying go start your own group but according to another comment here there is a scout program that accepts/wants them, but they come here (BSA) for the ‘prestige’, because when you say ‘Eagle Scout’ it has clout. Well that my friend is deception. NOT honest or trustworthy. NOT true scouts. No this won’t destroy scouting it will destroy BSA the program that was for boys/families that had traditional values.

      • Those of us who chose the BSA, even though we disagreed with their policy, did it the way we choose all activities for our kids – we weighed the pros and cons, and found the pros far outweighed the cons. We then did what we could to minimize the cons – in my family’s case we donated generously to the troop (with did not discriminate) but did not participate in FOS or any fundraising where the money went beyond the troop level. We discussed it with the Scout Master, who understood that we had to do this because of our moral beliefs, and fully supported us in doing so.
        This is a strategy that may work for you, if you want to support your local troop but not the higher levels, should the policy change.

        No activity is perfect. We as a family choose those we think are, on the whole, the best-if-imperfect fit for our kids, then work to improve the areas we feel are lacking.

      • So then why force BSA to change now? You said it yourself, it’s not a perfect fit for you, but you made the choice to join anyhow. So leave it alone or leave. Personally we chose virtue and values for our children and do not ‘compromise’ our family values. Either something aligns with us or it doesn’t. If there’s something we don’t agree with withing a group we skip participating in it (we do the same with where we shop). That way we never feel slighted we feel we choose wisely, and accept our limitations because there will be limitations in life. Not everyone needs to have the same values we do, but we do not need to welcome them in our everyday lives either. We NEVER force our way on or into a place it is not wanted. BSA made a clear stance in the 90’s but people chose to continue to join and chose to compromise their families. They have options they can continue to accept what BSA is or go to another organization. Those in support of the change keep saying we (those who do not support the change) can leave but why, for over 2 decades this program has had a open policy that WE agree with why should we leave? How about those who compromised their families in the first place go.

      • >>So then why force BSA to change now?

        Because many people, after years of reflection, study, and prayer, feel have changed their minds on the issue, and now, in my area, the majority of scouting families believe that the current policy is morally wrong, and should be changed.

      • This is some of the most twisted logic I’ve heard in awhile. It is people like you who object to them joining that are making a big deal about their sexual orientation. They’re saying let us join regardless. They’re saying it shouldn’t matter. You people are saying it’s so important that it’s worth excluding them for.

    • The Supreme Court upheld the BSAs right to set their membership criteria. That doesn’t mean that the BSA can’t at a later date decide to change their membership criteria as they see fit.

      It isn’t necessarily a question of ‘flaunting’ someone’s sexual preference. Do you have a wife? If so, people likely assume that you’re straight. If a man has a husband, well, what is the assumption? Gay people have families. You can look at the composition of a person’s family and see that he is gay, even if he doesn’t dress in rainbows and attend gay pride parades.

  205. Scouting has basically been functioning under a don’t ask don’t tell mantra for 103 years. Sex does not come up in conversation period in a well-run unit. So in essence this has not been an issue until someone wants to flaunt their sexual preference (usually a gay preference) and challenge the moral principles of the organization. I am beginning to understand that this is a money thing. Which means the BSA is being sold out by confessing it has no principles. If the Supreme Court upheld this position, who are the people on the board to reverse that decision?

    • “Sex does not come up in conversation period”

      If you are right that sex does not come up in Scouting, period, then the board is doing the right thing by moving the issue to each CO. Sex is not a core Scouting issue. It is a CO issue.

      The only way BSA national can have a nation-wide position with regard to gays is if sex is a national Scouting issue. But you just said sex never comes up. Which is it? Is sex a national Scouting issue or not?

      • But sex is coming up in this conversation by national. That is what they are voting on. Are we going to allow OPENLY gay members? We will now need to ask sexual orientation questions of applicants to determine if they fit the guidelines of the CO.

      • Sex first came up in conversation by national in 1991 when they publicly stated:

        “We believe that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirement in the Scout Oath that a Scout be morally straight and in the Scout Law that a Scout be clean in word and deed, and that homosexuals do not provide a desirable role model for Scouts.”

        BSA brought sex into the national Scouting conversation. It has been downhill for BSA ever since. Trying to move sex back out of the national conversation, and back to the CO where it belongs, is the right move.

      • I disagree with your stance. There needs to be one policy for the entire organization. Not multiple policies depending on the unit. With the current policy, the issue is not raised at the local level because it has already been addressed by national policy.

      • So you DO want a national BSA policy about sex. Fine. Then let’s stop pretending that BSA does not currently have a policy about sex.

        That is how things are right now. BSA has a national position about sex, and a majority of American families don’t want to sign their 11-year-old boys up for a youth club that teaches about sex. That is a big reasons why families are staying away, and national if finally figuring that out.

        You can keep your national position about sex, and you can keep having families go elsewhere, because national statements about sex are not what families are looking for.

        I really don’t think that a standard policy about sex is what Scouting is about.

      • Chartering Organizations have always held discretion in selecting both youth leaders as well as adult leaders for their troop. Having the CO decide whether or not they want gays is no different then having the CO decide whether or not they want woman leaders, or Jewish leaders, or any other quality that they currently use for selecting leaders. The CO is free to select any leadership criteria they want, just as they do now, as long as it is in accordance with the values of that CO.

      • I suppose if the CO has concerns, they can ask the person. They are responsible for determining who they feel is appropriate for their organization. There’s no need to change the application. There is a national ban right now, and it isn’t on the application.

      • There is a policy in effect, and yes it is a National Policy. It has worked for 103 years. If you don’t like it you can form your own group. As I have heard on this board several times if the straight community doesn’t like the change let us in and “go create your own organization “again””. Seems like an inefficient way to go.

      • @swgmpls says: The CO is free to select any leadership criteria they want, just as they do now, as long as it is in accordance with the values of that CO.

        Yes, so why make any change?

      • Because right now a CO is not allowed to select a gay leader, even if he fulfills all other requirements of BSA and fully meets the standards of the CO.

    • Steve, it’s actually more complicated than just sex itself. I found this video, of a gay camp staff member discussing his experience as a gay person in scouting to be very interesting. He is not asking for sex to be part of scouting – just to be able to share little things about his life with his fellow scouts.

      • Sharing that is not a part of Scouting. He chose to press the issue just as I described. Sex is NOT a part of Scouting period. Don’t rub it in our faces and expect us to accept it.

      • Steve – did you watch the video? All he was asking for was to be able to go out to the movies with his fellow staff and mention that a particular actor was cute, or to be able to mention when he got a text from a boy he was sweet on in the same way his friends would mention a text from a girl they were sweet on. That hardly rises to the level of rubbing anything in someone’s face, or pressing an issue, or anything to do with sex per se. It’s just normal teen conversation.

        Most kids nowadays are used to being around out gay kids anyway – it’s not a huge deal to them. I’m guessing this will be harder for the adults than for the scouts.

      • Eagle mom The postive things that Derek Nance talked about are occuring all over the scouting adventure as for the activity in camps and scout gatherings they have nothing to do with homosexuals in the scouting programs. Derek seems to promote that the homosexuals have made a difference just because they are homosexuals thier lifestyles have nothing to do with the success of the Scouting Program the last 103 years is the difference . The things that bother me is that homosexuals have violated the Scout Oath,Law and moral fiber of Scouting. If they were so proud of their homosexual lifestyes why did they hide their homosexuality from the BSA. These are not the ideals that scouting represent’s I would have more respect for scouting homosexuals if they would have not remained in a secret lifestyle that was a lie to the ideals of scouting. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • They hide because they wanted to be in Scouting, and this was more important to them. I have gay friends, gay scout friends, have staffed camps with gay eagle scouts. It isn’t easy when you have to hide who you are. Usually from adults, the boys (I was one) didn’t care at all.

      • James What happened to building charactor If I had to hid my core beliefs I would either not join the BSA or look for something else. Camping and adventures are not an exclusive BSA thing they were around long before scouting. Look at the Assembly of God Church they have the Royal Rangers and is a very successful organization. As far as the withdrawing funding to the BSA by huge Corperations like AT&T of which supports homosexuality. What if AT& T decided that the BSA must include Atheist or they will with draw their funding. One of the most powerful legal organizations is the ACLU and they are standing by to represent the Atheist to push there way into the BSA. Where will it end when will it stop. Sorry BSA you are going the wrong direction. You will need more lawyers on the payrole than Scout Adminstrators. What a mess this is. Trenton

    • Steve you statement is at best speculative. Don’t ask don’t tell is a law that Clinton put in in 1990’s for the military and has nothing to do with the BSA. I was a Boy Scout in 1949 and I never heard of homosexualty. At that time they were refered to as queers and something to fear and stay away from. I no longer fear the gay movement as I believe that it is a personal choice for that individual. What I fear most is the divisiveness in todays world it always leads to failure and the loss of great organizations. I believe that things will work out if we stay the course and let each individual work out their beliefs in their own way. If they are gay and want to remain in the BSA just leave their preferences to themselfs. It is a persons concience that is important and if we have had homosexuals in the scouting program for years and things worked out let it lie we don’t need a change in policy to legitimize a life style in the end everyone will be accountable for themselves not a bureaucratic measure like the National BSA is proposing. If anything make me angry it is a person that stands in my face and says I am this and you have to accept it or I will threaten you or sue you or take away your funding. That is what is happening now in the BSA. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • Trenton I understand Clinton coined the phrase and applied it to the military in the 90s. Sex having no part in Scouting was effectively the same thing. When I was a scoutmaster and a scout nobody brought it up because it had no place in the program. I agree with you that this issue does not need to be pressed or policy changed. I don’t know of anyone that has gone searching for gays to ferret them out of the program. It is only when they want to flaunt their counter beliefs that an issue follows.

    • Well, currently the “moral” principles are “flaunting” the virtue of the heterosexual orientation. If you are discriminating against someone purely because of their sexuality, then you are the one with the problem. They’re asking for the group to not be “flaunting” the heterosexual preference and to just accept everyone. Simple as that.

      • Angie I have seen know evidence of the BSA fluanting heterosexual preference. The BSA has been supporting the values of honesty, duty to God for a 103 years and some who don’t like it are pressuring the BSA to change theses God given values. We would have to have a new slogan America is doing away with values that Scouting used to represent. Angie we just can’t accept that Scouting is format for everything and every position there must be a foundation of core values that are truly timeless. Sincerely Trenton Spears

      • Trenton, by making heterosexuality mandatory to participate in BS, BSA is, by default, “flaunting” heterosexuality. BSA does have a foundation of core values, and those don’t have anything to do with homosexuality, but with other values. That’s what attracts people to BS. That’s what attracts GAY people to BS (or that makes kids who started in scouts and later discover they are gay want to stay). Leave sexuality out and you are still left with a great set of values. Let’s focus on those and leave the hand-wringing over someone’s sexual behavior out of it.

  206. “Boy Scouts of America to reconsider national membership policy”

    And I guess I will be, too…

  207. BSAScoutLeader keeps harping on the “disgusting” sexual acts of homosexuals. I’m curious as to what sex acts he’s obsessed with? Heterosexual couples engage in the same sexual acts. So does BSAScoutLeader have a suggesting on how we keep heterosexuals who participate in “disgusting” sex acts out of scouting?

    • OldManDan- Being as I think most of us are adults, we all have a pretty good idea what he is referencing. I think this is suitably ‘gray area’ material that we need not go any further down this road.

      • OldManDan makes a valid point. These ‘disgusting acts’ are certainly things that take place between opposite sex couples, as well as same sex couples. (or even more than just couples). How are we to know who is doing what? We aren’t to know! Because it is none of anyone’s business. Just the same, it’s none of anyone’s business what gay folks are doing. They don’t come in wearing a tshirt with their favorite positions. They aren’t trying to publicize their sex lives. They come in to be scouts. I’m not arguing with you, Charles. I agree with largely every post of yours I have seen. I just think that OldManDan is illustrating a very good reason why this policy is due to change.

      • Beth, understood. I just have a feeling that if you leave the door open for discussion, it will get graphic fast. I wasn’t looking forward to BSAScoutleader actually answering question 1. It’s not that I can’t take it, it just doesn’t belong here. My opinion anyway. I find OldManDan’s point taken in full context to be a justifiable argument.

      • Understood, and agreed. I did my best to keep it from becoming graphic while still illustrating the point as best I could.

    • While you all focus on the adults please remember this is a ‘BOY LEAD’ organization. How do you stop raging hormones of ANY sexual orientation!? Up till this point when scouts are at meetings/outings it is all boys. Can they be disgusting – yup – I’m the only female in our house where loud belches and farts = eruptions of hysteria (and it is the same at any scout event I’ve attended) They can be boys, being boys. At home and or with their scout buddies they can talk about girls and how confusing girls are – they can be boys. Now you want to add to that mix two (or more) gay youth with raging hormones with the same attractions (maybe to each other) who’s going to regulate that?! It’s a Pandora’s box. A train wreck waiting to happen. Yes YPT helps when dealing with Adult/youth interactions – NOW we’re going to need to address Youth/Youth interactions. My son doesn’t want to tent with a boy that likes boys – anymore then I want to tent with a woman that likes women. I have a family FILLED with gays but we respect each others comfort levels. HOW WILL THIS POLICY ADDRESS THAT AND STILL NO BE ‘DISCRIMINATING!! YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! My heterosexual children and I have rights to. I will always say – GO start a gay scouting organization where they will be wanted/welcomed with open arms and leave this one alone.

      • Scouts are friendly and kind. They can respect each other’s comfort levels, just as you and your family can. And their leaders can thoughtfully guide them to do so. There aren’t *that* many gay kids interested in scouting, and the ones who are interested tend to be friendly and kind just like other scouts. And again, most teens nowadays are used to interacting with their gay peers. It really won’t be a huge issue.

  208. I have two sons in Scouting, one an Eagle and the other currently Life. They’ve been in Scouting for more than a decade. We live in a conservative part of the country. I am an assistant scoutmaster in our troop and, in more than 10 years, I have never observed the sexual orientation of any Scout in any troop be an issue to any other Scout. As best as I can tell, BSA’s position is intended to keep a Scout’s sexual orientation exactly what it is, that is, a non-issue among most Scouts themselves.

    I grew up during the school integration fights. My father joined the military soon after President Truman integrated the troops. The arguments of those who oppose BSA’s position largely resemble the arguments of school integration opponents or troop integration opponents, essentially “they’re different and must be excluded”. During the integration fights, we students endured bomb threats, protesters, and outside agitators. We soon realized that most students, regardless of race, just wanted to go to school, see our friends, and otherwise be left alone. I understand that most soldiers don’t care whether another soldier is white or black, or gay or straight but, instead, is focused on one question: when the shooting starts, does the soldier next to me have my back? After 10+ years in scouting, It appears to me that our Scouts just want to be Scouts, hang out with their friends, have fun together, and otherwise be left alone. I believe this is a reasonable approach. While I support BSA’s new position, I will respect those with different opinions and hope and trust that those whose position is different than mine will respect my opinion. Thanks.

  209. I think everyone is forgetting the youth – and the youth of gay parents. Take your personal belief system and put it on the shelf for a minute – let’s face reality.

    Gay marriage is probably going to be recognized as legal by the Federal Government before too long and already has been in some states. What about the youth of married gay parents? I personally know 4 couples that would love to get their sons into Scouting – some were in Scouting themselves when they were young – Eagles, Members of the OA, etc.

    Let’s be clear – these youth are not gay nor are we talking about gay leaders.

    Under the current climate they are unable to do so – no, there is no “Are you gay” question on the membership application but Tigers are required to have Adult Partners – correct? Currently can a gay couple comfortably go camping with a Pack, Troop or Crew with their son or daughter? If gay marriage is recognized as legal by the Federal Government then under YPT & GSS they are perfectly eligible to stay in a tent together.

    I feel that this is a practical issue more so than a moral issue. Those children & young men should not be excluded and neither should their families. Most of the arguments I see on here from both sides are religious in nature – but remember Scouting was founded in the USA by Boyce who wanted boys of all races and creeds be included. Scouting was focused on teaching self-reliance, citizenship, resourcefulness, patriotism, obedience, cheerfulness, courage, and courtesy. [excerpt]

    All of those things can be achieved regardless of your sexual orientation or gender for that matter. As I see it we are really just going back to what our US founder wished for when he started the program on this side of the pond.

    • Kathy, why must they join Scouting? Why must they be included into a group that does not believe in their beliefs? Why must they insist that Scouting agree with them?
      I really don’t understand why they would want their children to associate with a group of people who have no desire to accept their lifestyle or beliefs.
      Please also be aware that the the legality of gay marriage is not equivalent or meaningful to gays participating in a youth organization. There is a difference between youth and adults that must be respected.

      • Maybe they just want to be scouts. The gay scout friends I have had no goal of converting anyone or seducing anyone. They know scouting is a conservative organization, they are not insisting scouting agree with them. All they wanted was an opportunity to camp, learn leadership skills, staff camps, go to philmont, and generally have a good time with other kids. I see nothing wrong with this, I have camped with gay scouts, the issue never came up and never changed anything.

      • Right James! Those gay scout friends of yours have been in Scouting! So why make any change? There is no need!

      • Your argument sort of reminds me of how segregationists wondered why black people had to get into “their” clubs, why they couldn’t just form their own. Because everyone wants access to the best, not to be second-class citizens. If you think Scouts is so great, can’t you see why they want to join? And it’s not just gay people who want to be included, it’s people like us who want our sons to be able to join Scouts but are opposed to the exclusionary policy. Basically, we’re sick of the hatred. Change is a-comin’, and it will only be for the good.

      • This may seem obvious but let us all be really clear on this one point, there is no right being violated here i.e. the BSA is a private organization and no one has an inherent civil right to belong. I see many comments that use segregation, and exclusion. Again there is no inherent civil right that says you have a right to join the BSA. The “civil rights” argument does not apply as per the SCOTUS ruling.

      • Andrew, you seem to have a very limited understanding of what civil rights are (and I see you have posted this same response to everyone who has mentioned the term). Civil rights do not apply just to public entities. The civil rights movement in the 50s sought access to whites-only private entities like restaurants, clubs, hotels, etc. If you are relying exclusively on what SCOTUS said about BSA in a prior ruling, are you then willing to change your mind if it rules differently? My guess is not. My guess is that you are happy to exclude gays and welcome any technicality that legitimizes that stance. Fortunately, BSA leadership seems to be coming around to the broader and more sound definition of civil rights: equal access to all. So it is circumventing the legal issue altogether.

      • Actually I have no problem with homosexuality or women in the BSA. What I oppose most vehemently is the manner in which this has come about. This was not some grass roots movement that gained a majority of the members. This is a result of legal terrorism and extortion. I oppose that no matter who it is. We are not talking about a group being denied anything because the BSA is voluntary and that distinction is crucial. I also oppose National simply transferring the legal liability to their member CO’s. There is still a tremendous legal liability. I see language like great first step, more is needed, change is good, not quite there yet, does not go far enough, etc. The NY Times has even come out and said the proposed policy is basically rearranging the deck chairs because it does not go far enough. I make no judgements on the morality of homosexuality only God is qualified for that task. I merely look at the context in which the Boy Scouts were founded. I follow the beliefs and morality of the man that founded it. I look at the inherent traditional meaning of the Scout Law and Scout Oath and apply it. You cannot remove that context because that context is key. As I have mentioned before I believe in the competition of ideas. If the LGBT Community and their supporters do not like the BSA’s policy form your own group and compete. Beat the BSA the old fashioned way and do the hard work. Show them how wrong they are by taking their donations and make them work for your organization.

      • Do you have inside information as to what actually led the board to reconsider this policy? Yes, there have been several corporate sponsors that have pulled funding. There have also been quite a few petitions directed toward the BSA started on change.org. So do we know what their motivation really is? Perhaps it is a combination of both.

      • Angie, it may remind you of the segregationists but that is where you are wrong! Segregationists assigned attributes or characteristics to black people that were not true. I am not making anything up about homosexuals. I don’t believe in what they do and how they want to promote it! TOTALLY DIFFERENT!

        You may be “sick of the hatred” but don’t assume that because I want to have an organization that does not allow people doing things I and other members disagree with, doesn’t mean I/we hate them! You don’t know anything about my reaction to gay people. I have no hostility towards them at all EXCEPT when they become bullys! I hate bullys not gays.

        I simply don’t want my children nor those for who I am responsible be exposed to the gay lifestyle or the acceptance of it. My desire is no different than not wanting those same children to be exposed to drinking, smoking, explicit sex, violence, etc! And yes, I join organizations that help me protect children from these actions!

      • Gregg, segregation was evil because it treated one class of persons as inferior to another and it denied equal access to the good things in society. Furthermore, it denied them access because of an immutable characteristic: race. Sexual orientation is similarly immutable, unlike smoking, drinking, etc. If you don’t believe that fact, which science continually supports, then you are doing what you accused the white racists of doing: assigning characteristics to them that aren’t true. At any rate, do you object to Scout leaders who smoke? Or those who occasionally drink? What about those who enjoy explicit sex in the privacy of their own homes? 😉

        All this is to say that your kids being around homosexuals would not be witnessing homosexual acts. All it would be is the being around other people much like themselves. Right now you seem very afraid of homosexuals, even if you say you aren’t bothered by them. That is very similar to the way racists felt about blacks. Remember, racists didn’t mind blacks, as long as they were kept “in their place” and had their own schools, water fountains, etc. Something for you to think about.

    • Kathy, I will never put my “moral belief system on a shelf.” Unfortunately, that’s what National BSA looks like it’s about to do next week and I think it’s going to stay on that shelf and forgotten. Appeasers don’t make good leaders.

  210. Well guys, I am going to sign off. I have spent way to much time on this, and have enjoyed the conversation and discussion, but I have crossovers to attend to and new scouts to accept into our troop. So encouraging to see scouting continue to thrive!

    I do want to express my appreciation for everyone who expressed their views, this is what makes our country great! The part that really bothers me is this (what I consider) small issue is going to drive a wedge in BSA. This hurts me. I am an eagle scout, my father is an eagle scout, my older son just got eagle, and my youngest son crosses over to scouts in a week. We are a scouting family. I would love to sit around the campfire with each and everyone of you, the scouting family, and discuss this and other pressing topics like cobbler and coffee.

    Please, do not let this topic drive you away. Let it make us stronger, and build a bigger and better scouting program!

    Scout on everyone!

    • James, all that is needed for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. While you sign off for the night fellow Scouters like myself will continue to work to protect our boys and the timeless values of Scouting. I (like most) work hard all day and try to raise my family in the values expressed by our Scout oath and law. If you don’t agree with these values, then join another organization. We are not going to change your mind, and based on your comments, you are not tolerant of the moral traditions of Scouting. Sitting around the campfire will not help you learn that homosexual acts are not in harmony with Scouting values. Perhaps if we were to show you a video of these types of gross acts being performed your conscience would speak the truth to you. I hope and pray so. Teaching our boys that homosexual acts are good and moral and consistent with the Scout oath and law is a lie and it will not make Scouting bigger and better. It will destroy our future Scouting generations, and we will not stand by and do nothing to stop this.

      • Danthescoutingman, Your comments are like a breath of fresh air. What a clear and right on target your message is. I hope that there are more Scouters on the voting Board next week like you. I fear that the National Board has already made the decision to lift the ban on homosexual’s in scouting. I believe that they have discussed this issue with large organizations like the LDS Church and have been assured of their support to remain in the BSA program. I believe this based on the content in LDS websites and this forum. I also believe this matter would not be an issue if they did not have the support of long time supporters. I am a member of the LDS Church and I certainly do not support the allowing of homosexuals as members of the BSA or as Scout leaders in my Church. Thanks for your support. Trenton Spears

      • I never expected you to change your mind Dan, simply that you would learn to accept other people for who they are. I see that will not happen, and I am sad you are so against others. No one is teaching anyone to be a homosexual, please re-read and understand what is going on. I pray for you as well.

      • But you are seeking to change Scouting and you are saying that homosexual acts are consistent with the values of Scouting. Danthesoutingman is 100% correct, “Teaching our boys that homosexual acts are good and moral and consistent with the Scout oath and law is a lie and it will not make Scouting bigger and better. It will destroy our future Scouting generations, and we will not stand by and do nothing to stop this.” We all know what is going on here and BSA National better be listening loud and clear to its local volunteers!

      • No, we are saying homosexual acts are irrelevant to the values of Scouting. Just as irrelevant as left-handed acts, or Latino acts, or Norwegian acts.

      • You are right that all it takes for evil to prevail is for good men (and women) to do nothing. That is why good people have been fighting prejudice, hatred and fear to allow decent people who also happen to be gay to join Scouts. It is the right thing to do, the moral thing to do. I look forward to the day when opinions like yours will be the minority or you will see the light.

  211. From purely a organizational standpoint and not factoring in Religion or Politics… basically national kicks it down to the individual charter organizations; most of which are affiliated at churches (especially in the Southeast) and who view scouting as youth outreach extension of their church – even if the unit isn’t overtly Christian. National doesn’t even have the decency of instituting a national policy so now any charter that refuses membership can be subjected to discrimination lawsuits. The charter organization ends up dropping their charters for fear of reprisal. The Boys Scouts are no longer a unified program so what is the point? Why continue? The standards are different and you no longer have the protection of the national organization. Why pay a chartering fee? Why pay for overpriced licensed material? We might as well start individual camping clubs. We now have autonomy to decide who we let in and who we don’t; don’t we?. What other policies can we ignore or bend because someone doesn’t like it? I say we take out the camping and pretty much all the outdoor stuff. Give rank solely on age and not merit; because we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. Let’s make Eagle so watered down that everyone, regardless of time in scouting, gets Eagle if they are 17 years old – No scout project, no pesky patrol leaders! The point is; the national council did not have the guts to own their own mandate. If it was a national policy have the guts to own it. It moved from long held belief and policy to selective discrimination. Those charters that hold out get picked off and then you have an integrated policy anyway. We need another alternative because the leadership has lost their nerve. Either be for it or against it all the way! Our scouts deserve decisive leadership. We expect more.

  212. I have given this discussion some thought, in our forced downtime. Here are a few items I wish to share. Some are being repeated, others may be rephrased or borrowed.

    Morally Straight – Has no bearing in this discussion. ‘Straight’ as a reference to sexual preference was first used by homosexuals in the 1950s. So please, stop using it here as an argument.

    A Scout is… – The Oath and Law are important in this discussion. As we’ve seen it used, it’s easy to turn around for either side of the argument. I think we could all do with a little bit of study though as to what was originally meant by the terms and phrases used. I’m wracking my brain, but I can’t remember the word homosexual coming up at any point in “Scouting for Boys.” If someone knows of a passage where it is spelled out, please let me know. I would like to read it for myself.

    Lawsuits – On both sides, there are fears and threats of litigation. I agree with many of the previous posts. I think if National follows through with the plan currently under consideration that Charter Organizations will be opened to possible litigation for either failure to open their doors to failure to close their doors. Knowing the legal system and tricks of lawyers, they’ll also go on to name the Scout Leaders, Committee Chairs, the local councils, and National as targets (along with everyone’s sister’s, mother’s, cousin’s best friend from grade school). Apologies to lawyers present who don’t follow this mantra, but basically the more people they name the more money they can win.

    Reverent – Means different things to different people. For me, I understand that there are faiths that accept homosexuals as members in good standing. People here may not agree with that stance, but fact is they do (including but not limited to many Methodist, Episcopalian, and Jewish groups). As BP’s belief was that one had to subscribe to a higher power but specifically stated it can be any of them, if we’re going to move forward from here we should remember that. Your belief may conflict with that. Your reading of the bible or chosen text may conflict with that. But while the RCC, the LDS and others may hold a significant presence in Scouting, they don’t own it.

    National Events – The arguments, “Well, what about Jambo?” are interesting. I don’t know if anyone has outright used this position in answer, but Two Deep Leadership doesn’t stop happening at those events. Guide to Safe Scouting is there at all times. If you fail to follow it as a leader, than that’s an issue. But Youth Protection is the rule at all times, and being at a National event or camp – or even at your summer camp doesn’t suddenly equivocate those guidelines we all have to follow.

    Homosexuality/Pedophilia – I won’t give this argument any more breath. Those that believe there is an increased correlation I don’t think can be argued with to accept otherwise.

    Scouting Will Die – No. It won’t. It will change, but it won’t die if this revision goes through to the national policy. Ten scouters from your unit and their friends may leave. But for every one that leaves, one will join. It’s not only LGBT families that would join in the wake of a change like this. There are many non-LGBT families who have not joined out of protest of a policy they find discriminatory.

    You Wouldn’t Want Your Kid w/ a Homosexual – Please. 1 in 20 to 25 male boys are homosexual by some accounts. My sons do know some other boys in their age group who are and likely for every one they know there are two others. My boys are tolerant and understanding that some people are different from them. They have been taught that they can make their own choices in life in this regard and their parents will still love them. By the way, homosexuality isn’t a liberal or a regional thing. It’s in every state, county and city of this nation – people can’t hide from it. People can ignore it, that’s a choice. But it is a facet of humanity that will persist whether someone wants it to or not.

    Other Programs – Yes, there are other ‘programs’ open to youth who wish to learn Scouting skills. None of them have the backing, funding, history, resources or personnel that Scouting has. And not by a long shot. Scouting is desirable to those in the LGBT community because it is established and reasonably well supported nationwide. When one hear’s of an ‘Eagle Scout’ – that is almost as recognizable as Mickey Mouse. We know what it means. Employers and colleges look for it. Joining one of these pseudo-scouting organizations does not confer any similar designation.

    Funding – Perhaps, just perhaps the biggest pressure faced by National to change this policy is fiscal. I’m sure that organizations that have EEO hiring guidelines find it difficult to continue to support Scouting if they haven’t already dropped them from the the groups they offer financial help to. Money could be the driving force – and if it is no amount of poking holes in each other’s arguments here will matter.

    Lord BP – We really haven’t talked to much about him. This organization is his legacy. I know that biographies offer conflicting viewpoints regarding the man, so I suggest anyone interested should review the numerous books that are available on his life. I’m going to search for one before the end of the week and apply myself to reading it.

    I believe that Scouting will open its doors. I don’t think it will happen with this review in policy (although if it wasn’t close, I don’t know that the story would have been leaked to every news outlet that it was under review) – but I feel that it will happen. I think that the legal challenges will force this back to the discussion table at least one or two more times. Even if it does come out, it will likely take anywhere from 3 months to a year to become policy.

    Anyway, I’m going to try to pull back from this discussion some. My friend Jo Pop said he’d being doing so as well – although I would expect he may answer a point or two of mine here. It just gets to the point where I know there are some people with opinions I can’t change. Before frustration sets in, it’s always best to take a little breather.

    • For starters, telling us what “straight” does not mean in the phrase has nothing to do with the definition of “morally straight”. Let me define “morally straight”… it means that we as Scouters do not deviate or compromise standards of chastity, virtue, or wholesomeness. “Straight” meaning that we do not deviate or compromise standards (which is oddly what you clearly advocate that BSA National do next week). “Moral” meaning chastity, virtue or wholesomeness. Homosexual acts are not and will never be moral. As Scouters, we should all be able to agree that remaining true to our Oath and Law has everything to do with the conversation and the issue to be decided next week. Our oath and law is what should unify us. If you don’t agree with the Scout oath and law, don’t enter into it. Hope this helps!

      • I would like to add that changing the policies of an organization to secure donations is NOT morally straight.

      • The same dynamic was at work in the 1990s when BSA banned gays to secure donations from the LDS and Catholic church.

        Organizations need money to survive. As impure as that fact is, there is some consolation in the idea that at least money gives the people most dedicated to Scouting a way to express their needs. It even happens in church: “I’ll donate ten thousand dollars, as long as I get a voice in saying how it is spent.” There are a lot of “morally straight” churches who fall for this trap every day.

        It is a sad fact that, at least in the U.S., money talks. Money shaped BSA policy in the 1990s, and money will continue to shape BSA policy in the 21st century. You may think that is sad. But it is pretty much the way most things are run in the U.S.

        I would take your complaint more seriously if you were equally upset when the Catholic and LDS church shaped BSA policy toward gays in exchange for money in the 1990s.

      • So you’re dismissing my complaint because I do not agree with you? This is exactly what I meant by saying there is no tolerance of those that support the current policy.

      • I am not dismissing your complaint. To the contrary, I am acknowledging your complaint, and pointing out that what you are complaining about is the way BSA has always operated.

        In 1991, when BSA sold their values to the highest bidder at that time, I felt exactly the same as you feel now. I’m with you, brother!

      • That’s a pretty self-serving definition of morality. The two greatest commandments include this one: love your neighbor as yourself. That means loving homosexuals and treating them as fully human as yourself. The emotional angle of your point of view comes through crystal clear… you just don’t like homosexuals. To protect your tender emotions, you are willing to exclude, demonize, and call them “immoral” just so you won’t have to deal with them. I call that cowardice. Is cowardice a Scout virtue?

    • Thank you for this excellent summary. It will be helpful to those who will be advocating for a change in the policy. Like you, I have enjoyed this discussion, but only have so much time to continue it. In the end, I think it’s helpful to remember that we’re talking about SCOUTS – teens and tweens who love badge work, camping and other outdoor activities, community service, and working *hard* alongside other scouts to create the summer camps, jambos, and other activities that are the BSA. These are good kids.

      There is no place for sexual activity at scouting events, and that isn’t going to change.

      Our teens already know gay kids – siblings, cousins, friends at school and church. It’s just not a big deal to them to work alongside gay peers. They can weather this change just fin. We as adults need to lead the way. We need to change the policy, so our boys are not embarrassed to be part of an organization that excludes their gay friends and relatives, something that many of us feel is simply not friendly, kind or morally straight.

      • Thanks EagleMom for the kind words and examples. That last paragraph hits on a topic I talked about in these forums the last time this came up 6 months ago. Kids…most just don’t care one way or the other. So who are we protecting if we keep the BSA closed to LGBT? I know I’ll never get one here, but I would like to see an honest comparison survey. Take 1,000 Scouts (let’s keep it fair and ask only 14-17 year-old Scouts so at least they better understand the question), 1,000 Eagle Scouts, and 1,000 Scouters, randomly selected. Ask the question – Do you have a problem with LGBT groups joining Scouting? The numbers would be interesting. I think on both sides of this argument there are people that would be shocked by the outcome. (I’m hoping it wouldn’t be me – but who knows?)

      • Can you tell me that if the youth does not care either way, why I have heard from several that are upset with this change?

      • And I’ve heard from many who aren’t. Anecdotal evidence will only get us so far, Brad. When I mean randomly selected, I’m suggestion a nationwide survey, not randomly selected in one geographic area or another. Everyone on both sides of this argument would agree that the NE (and likely California) would go one way, the South and Utah would go another, and then it’s a matter of filling in the blanks from there. Again, I’m not an expert in this, I just think that it would be interesting if it could be conducted.

      • Brad, I agree with Charles. There is a huge geographical difference on this issue. In the northeast, gay marriage is legal in most states; in some cases due to a majority vote. California is probably similar. We’ve been comfortable with gay friends, relatives, and co-workers for many years, and the BSA’s position seems outdated, unnecessary and even cruel. We understand that in other areas of the country, things are quite different.

        But when you look at nation-wide surveys on issues like gay marriage, you’ll see that there is a huge generational difference. It’s just not that big of a deal for the nation’s youth. If scouting is to survive, it needs to listen to the concerns of the scouts themselves. I think that, while some areas of the country differ, the overall trend in our schools, communities, and churches, is towards welcoming gay youth. The BSA is wise to seek ways to reflect the values of the communities it serves. The proposed policy is clearly a compromise, designed, if imperfectly, to do just that.

        We should all support the BSA’s efforts to try to work with the concerns of folks from both sides. It’s not an easy thing to do. While none of us *love* this policy (as we’d all like to see BSA completely on our own side, whichever side that may be) , they are faced with an increasingly difficult situation. They are trying. Let’s try to support them.

      • I’m sure there are many that are not pleased with the proposed change. I can assure you that there are also many that are not pleased with the current rule. There are probably many that don’t care either way.

      • Amen.

        In some ways, it is unfortunate that BSA is not purely a boy-led organization, in the true spirit of the “Scout Method”. If it were, I’m quite sure this change would have been made long ago.

  213. I’m appalled at the deceit of the National BSA Executive Council. I believe someone leaked this development the day before yesterday, but it was supposed to be a secret until after the new policy was sneaked through under the cover of darkness. When I called the national office the person asked me whether I supported the changes to the existing policies or not and said they were polling everyone. Oh, so now they want to know what we think– when the vote was going to be taken at the earliest, next Monday from the getgo? Something smells rotten here and I think the national leaders are pulling a fast one on us. On something so controversial and contentious why didn’t the leaders have this “poll” of active scout members done much earlier? I’ll tell you why– the Exec. Board (consisting of AT&T Execs. and other hot shot company CEOs who require sensitivity training for their organizations and fun “gay day parades.” doesn’t care what the members all over the country think. It’s obvious that there will overwhelming support to keep the rules as they are. Those in Scouts tend to be more conservative, religious, and moral. Will BSA be transparent with the results of their informal poll or not? Will the Scouts be transparent about which Board Members voted to scrap the common-sense existing policy? I think if board members are so apt to disregard scout rules, they should be relieved of their positions.

    Sample Email post

    • Paul, I agree 110%. Working right now on something to call for the removal of these rotten Board members. I am also aware of other action being planned. Anyway for us to communicate off line?

      • I am interested to hear your thoughts on a strategic response to this devistating policy change. How do we get in touch without being sewed by GLAAD for talking freely?

    • There was no call for input when BSA created their policy banning gays in 1991. Did you complain then?

      BSA has always been run by a strong national council, made up of representatives from its largest private and religious supporters. All decisions have always been made in secret by this closed council, with no direct input from Scouters at large.

      This is how BSA has always been run. Why do you suddenly, now, want to turn BSA into a democracy?

  214. The homosexuals can start their own group called the “Gay Scouts of America.” Their logo could be a flamingo waving a rainbow colored flag. If flaming homosexuals want to be scouts they should make their own organization, their own rules, etc. Then they can keep those bad, judgemental, hateful heterosexuals out of their club.

    • There is a group that allows anyone in. Unfortunately, people would rather force their way into an organization and make them change their policies. Rather than using all of their time, energy, and money to change this organization, they could use those resources to strengthen the other group.

    • You don’t get it. Gays are trying to get sexuality OUT of Scouting, after BSA National inserted it into Scouting in the 1990s. Gays don’t want Gay Scouts. They want Scouts, the way Scouts used to be before 1991.

      • Getting sex out of Scouting would actually open up BSA to people who hold all views about the topic. Getting sex out of Scouting is the most tolerant position BSA could take.

      • She wasn’t being intolerant of you, she was disagreeing with you. Please give up the victim mentality.

      • I would love to take the sex out of scouting, but in my opinion this current proposal is not the way. I think the topic of sex will come up more and more as each unit has to make it’s own policy.

      • Well, a CO is free to make the policy: “we don’t talk about sex” That would pretty much take care of it.

        It is only the COs that want to ban gays that will have to keep talking about sex.

      • And the only reason they have to keep talking about it is because gays are being forced on them. It is abundantly clear that we will not agree on this issue or how it is tearing this organization apart. I’ve gone back and forth with you on a few occasions and I don’t feel it has been the least bit productive. There has been no meaningful exchange on how these two extremely different sides could ever manage to coexist in one organization.

      • The same way troops who disagree with woman leaders, or Muslim leaders, or black leaders, co-exist with those who do agree with those leaders since the founding of BSA. It is quite simple. BSA has been operating with troops with widely divergent beliefs since its founding. That is the beauty and strength of BSA’s chartering organization structure, to permit people with extremely different beliefs to organize around the shared values in the Scout Oath and Law.

    • What the hell is a “flaming homosexual”? And how is that different from a regular homosexual who wants to be a Scout???

  215. The policy change proposed is to let local Councils and charter organizations decide the policy. No national policy means no uniformity. Why not let them decide Youth Protection, Safe Scouting, Rank Advancement, and Uniform policy at the local level as well? Really then the question becomes, what do we need National for anyway? Be careful what you ask for because you just may get it.

    • The COs and Units that leave BSA because of this change WILL decide all the issues you listed on there own.

    • They are not throwing away all national rules. Just rules about sexual orientation.

      There are currently no national rules about religion, or race, or gender of adults, or disability, or ethnicity. Why should there be a national rule about sexual orientation?

  216. Even the NY Times doesn’t like the BSA’s current proposal. Why? They claim it simply doesn’t go far enough and the battling will continue. Even if the proposal is approved, the Times predicts that the money won’t be restored, the banter will continue, and local units expressing their preference for basing their morals in scripture will be hounded until they change or leave scouting.

    DON’T BELIEVE ME — READ IT FOR YOURSELVES.
    http://troop113.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/even-the-ny-times-doesnt-like-the-bsa-proposal/
    or
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/opinion/the-boy-scouts-fall-short-in-policy-on-gays.html?_r=0

    • The NYT article is pretty accurate. However, it fails to recognize that leaving discretion to the local CO is an essential part of how BSA is organized. In the 1960s, BSA never told COs that they MUST admit black scouts, they let the local CO decide. In the 1970s BSA never told COs that they MUST admit female leaders, they let COs decide.

      The same now with gays. BSA is structured to allow each unit to reflect specific teachings of its CO. BSA does not dictate non-core teachings to each CO.

      BSA is removing sexuality from its core teachings, just as it has treated race and gender of leaders in the past. That is the way BSA is intentionally organized, and the way BSA functions best.

      • Exactly. And in 1949, some troops did not allow blacks. That is my point. BSA national let each CO decide if they wanted blacks or not. That is what they are proposing to do with gays, and it is the right thing to do.

      • cwgmpls Those troop’s who did not allow blacks were wrong and their decision to not allow those blacks was not based on immoral issues. To compare racial discrimination to immoral discrimination is completely different and you know it. Trenton

      • Many COs who prohibited blacks in Scouts did so because they felt blacks were a morally inferior race. They believe blacks were cursed by God for all generations in Genesis 9:25, because of the immoral behavior of Ham, the forefather of blacks, in Genesis 9:22.

        For these COs, the exclusion of blacks was based on the belief that all blacks are morally inferior. It was, and is, a moral issue for those who hold those beliefs.

      • cwgmpls Our dialog could go on forever. If a black is denied joining any organization it will be won on racial discrimination. Biblical Quotes would not be used and so it is with this issue most people who support the Homosexual movement have tried to link sexual choice discrimination with racial rights discrimination just as you are trying to do in your support for the upcoming pending change by the National BSA Board next week. Whether they vote to change the exclusion or vote to keep things as they are it will not be the end to this discussion. I firmly believe that this is a lose lose situation and the BSA will regret bringing this to a vote. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • Protection of gays and protection of blacks always get written into the same nondiscrimination statements for specific legal and moral reasons. That fact that you don’t like it doesn’t make it not true.

      • Hi Trenton Spears – You say you are a member of the LDS church. Then you of all people should know that mistreatment of people of color has historically been based on scripture. Religious people used the moral teachings of their church and holy books to justify their actions. Even slavery was justified from excerpts of the Bible. Was it moral? To those who read their Bible in a certain light it was. There were others reading the same Bible and came to a different conclusion. What was true then is true now. Please let us whose church teaches us that we are all God’s children and that every human is worthy of love and kindness to apply our moral values to the problem at hand. You are welcome to be part of a scout troop that decides differently. Unless you are afraid that your CO is going to make a national decision that you disagree with?

      • db I am a member of the LDS Church and I would like to explain some misconceptions. First the Church has always allowed blacks in the Church. The male blacks were not allowed to hold the Holy Priesthood prior to 1978 .This was changed in 1978 by a revelation to the Prophet of the Church. It was based on Biblical scriptures and till this revelation was revealed to the prophet of the Church the Church was bound by scripture to abide by the scriptures and thus it was finally lifted and blacks were allowed to hold the Holy Priesthood. The other misconception is the matter of homosexuality in the LDS Church. The Church is quite clear on the its position regarding the membership of homosexuals being members of the LDS Church. The homosexual must not be active in any same sex activity. The Church has given the homosexuals a opportunity to live a Christian life in the Church. The homosexual is in reality on a path to repent and convert to and live by the teachings of Jesus Christ. The Church admonishes any sinner to repent no matter what the sin is. The Church teaching’s in regarding sex it should be performed only within the boundries of marriage between a man and a women. The Church will always treat its members the same. All Scout leaders in the Church are subject to the law of morality and any homosexual that practices any same sex act will be removed from their position no exceptions. I hope that the National BSA Board will consider the same expectations that the LDS Church has for its homosexual members. Trenton Spears

      • You said “If a black is denied joining any organization it will be won on racial discrimination”. That is simply not true. Private organizations are allowed to structure their membership any way they like, and exclude anyone they like, for any reason. The Supreme Court reaffirmed this with the BSA case. Private country clubs, for example, can and do continue to exclude people based on race or religion. Much of this has died out because it has become socially unacceptable, and these clubs have either changed or closed, as people have decided that they do not want to be associated with such organizations. Decisions to exclude do have consequences, as members and outside funders, including government funding sources, may decide to discontinue their association with the organization. But private organizations are within their rights to choose their membership as they see fit.

  217. The purpose of the homosexual movement is not to gain acceptance by the Boy Scouts, but to destroy another moral-based organization and attempt to gain acceptance and normality within our society of (what I and many others consider) immoral behavior. This is the straight forward tactic of “death by a thousand cuts.” Now that local units and chartered organizations will be separated from the National Council, it will be much easier to litigate the Boy Scouts into obscurity as they will not be able to survive the expected onslaught of discrimination lawsuits. We do not specifically blame the Boy Scouts for the current situation, but we do expect them to stand on their time-honored principles as they have encouraged so many young men to do for so many years.

    Homosexuality is inconsistent with our religious values, the Scout Oath and Scout Law. If/when the Boy Scouts changes its policy, my wife and I will end our 40-year affiliation with the Boy Scouts. We will not subject our boys to this immoral lifestyle nor will we support it with our time, effort or funding.

    • Homosexuality is not inconsistent with the religious values of all scouts or scout families.

      BSA’s Declaration of Religious Principles is quite clear that BSA teaching must never contradict the religious instruction of a boy’s family or religious organization. BSA’s current gay ban does just that. Removing religious teaching from BSA national, and moving it to the local CO, is exactly how BSA was designed to operate, and will put BSA back into compliance with its own DRP.

    • So you think homosexuals have nothing better to do with their time than try to “destroy” something you have? Most of them are too busy trying not to be depressed because of all the hatred they are exposed to on a daily basis. And, by the way, it is also heterosexual people, like myself, who want it to change. So our sons can join a group that isn’t discriminatory.

      • The other curious thing that the homophobes in this discussion is that they think there are a bunch of gay folk who are going to rush out and join scouts? No. That’s not what this is about. That’s crazy thinking. This is about accepting people who are already in scouts for who they are. The folks who hate homosexuals apparently enjoy kicking boys out of scouts after they come of age and realize they are gay. The existing BSA policy is to do just that. A young tiger cub joins scouts and hasn’t a clue if he is gay or straight. They spend five years in cubs and get the arrow of light. They cross over into a scout troop and work their way through the ranks. Maybe they are a Life scout. Maybe they’ve already achieved Eagle. And then they come to terms with their sexual orientation and realize they are gay. Maybe they’ve known for awhile. In either case they can’t tell anyone because the BSA must kick them out. That’s the policy that exists today. Is that moral? Is it just? No. Its bigotry pure and simple. A fine young man who has spent ten or more years in an organization he loves says he is unworthy and unfit to be a member.

      • db – Calling people names (homophobes, bigots) is not helping the discussion. There are good people on both sides. Please keep it civil.

  218. The Boy Scouts of America has a strong youth protection policy that prohibits openly homosexual men from serving as volunteer leaders.

    This is a sound policy.

    I urge the Boy Scouts of America to reject any changes to this policy. If the BSA departs from its policies on allowing homosexual scoutmasters and boys in the program, it will destroy the legitimacy and the security of this iconic institution.

    • Please re-read your manual. The banning of gays is not found in BSA’s youth protection policies. The banning of gays is specified elsewhere.

  219. I am a libertarian and I struggle to deal with some issues more than others. I do not care what others do in their own home or business they own. Boy Scouts are free to decide what they wish to do with their own organization. Just like many other organizations that set membership based on gender, military service, academic status, etc.

    I think the biggest problem that I have had with this policy issue is not the fact that homosexuals and some heterosexuals want the policy changee. The issue is how people are adressing it. Calling people ignorant or telling them that beliefs that they grew up reading in the Bible are wrong is not the way to go about it. You couple this with political activist groups like Unions, Communist Party of America, LGBT groups, the ACLU calling you racists or homophobes whenever you disagree and you begin to feel like there is nowhere in the country where you and your family can go that shares your values.

    I do not agree with anyone on here that uses pedophiles as their argument. Statistically most pedophiles are heterosexual. I believe that homosexuals are good people and just like heterosexuals you have some people you don’t want to associate with your children. I can see why some of the people on the opposite side of the argument are saying some of the things that they are saying. I don’t believe that using the Bible is necessarily the best way to argue it either and it’s not because some are saying Jesus is okay with homosexuality. It has more to do that there are so many different types of and views on religion. Myself, I’m a Deist.

    I do not think that homosexuals would make poor examples of Scouts. If that was the case then BSA would not send Scouts to the World Jamboree or host foreign Scouts at the National Jamboree. Keep in mind, we’re one of the few Scouting organizations that do not allow homosexuals. My struggle with it is because I just feel like there is a bit of liability in the camping situations and if you have young Scouters (18-20 something) that are close in age to some of the older Scouts. It’s not perverted, it’s not bias. I would have the same issue if it was heterosexuals. It’s nature and when you’re young sometimes it’s too easy to give in to those hormones….even when you’re a Scout. I also have a bit of a problem with discussing homosexuality with my seven year old son, I will when I feel it’s an appropriate time.

    I found myself on the defense when I first read many posts and in some cases I probably shoudn’t have posted anything until I found myself in a better place. I truly believe that most of us in this country have become too politicized in the last decade. There are a lot of groups out there taking advantage of this fracture of our society. Most of us want to be free to live our lives, free of interference from the government and political activist groups. I think that’s something that both sides can find common ground on.

    I know my concern is the political extremists would attempt to exploit the policy change. Perhaps I need to trust that there are people within the LGBT community who are just as fearful of this. There are good people within the LGBT community, just like there are good union members, etc. We just need to trust each other and look out for each other and respect each other. I believe that if both sides can prove they are trustworthy that we will be able to keep the organization the way it has always been.

    I watched the video of the Eagle Scout that was a camp program director. It left me conflicted. If there is a way to work on the camping aspects and liability issue I might be able to come to grips with a new policy. I just wish BSA would’ve given this more thought about how to handle it. Hopefully they learn that there is a better way to go about policy change. I have decided to stay in Scouting no matter what for my sons. Like someone else said on this blog, I think the boys just want to hang out with their friends, have fun and run around the woods.

    • Brad, thank you for this most excellent post. You are clearly an intelligent, thoughtful person whose main concern is what is best for your sons and the other scouts. The BSA is lucky to have you. Sometimes the media leads us to believe that those who disagree with us are shrill extremists out to insult us. In fact, most of us “regular folks”, and especially those of us in scouting, are reasonable, sensible people, who agree on most things. It is in you, and others like you, that I place my trust in the BSA.

      As I’ve said in other posts, if a kid is wiling to put in the many hours of *hard* work – badges, community service, and leadership – that scouting entails, then that kid is sure to weather this storm and come out better for it – whether he is straight or gay. Scouting raises good kids – we can trust that they can handle this.

    • Brad, thanks for your comments here. Very thoughtful. Your concern about the logistics of having young fay scouters and older gay scouts at camp together is not unfounded. But. We have straight young men and straight young women on staff as well. There is as much opportunity for misconduct now as any change in policy would provide. I don’t understand why it all of a sudden presents as more of a problem than it ever has. The potential for misconduct has and will continue to exist whether the policy is changed or not. If misconduct occurs, it must be dealt with.

    • Brad, I think the problem is that most people who say they believe homosexuality is wrong because of the Bible don’t really mean that. They don’t like homosexuality because they think it’s icky. And probably because they’ve been raised hearing so much about how homosexuals are the devil that they now see them as dangerous aliens rather than as fellow human beings, especially fellow human beings who suffer a lot of discrimination and therefore are deserving of the love and comfort of Christians!

      If they really were serious about the Bible, they would note that homosexuality is mentioned only about 5 times, whereas other sins like greed, dishonesty, lust, and not caring for the “least of these” among us are mentioned dozens if not hundreds of times. They would put homosexuality in perspective, rather than letting it crowd out everything else (everything else being, of course, sins they might themselves be guilty of).

      So I’m sorry if you have felt that these people’s beliefs were being disregarded. As a Christian, I believe if you are truly living a Christ-filled, love-filled life, you must feel uncomfortable with what the Bible says about homosexuality, and at least must make an effort to wrestle with that. Those who don’t make that effort are those who find it too easy to hate others, and to use the Bible to back up their hatred. Somehow, I can’t see Jesus doing that.

  220. What’s next? We have to change the requirements of the Family Life Merit Badge to fit into this as well? We have to use that to explain that there are some families with 2 daddies or 2 mommies? We do not allow male & female Venturing Scouts to sleep in the same tents or use the same showering/bathroom facilities. Do we segregate the homosexuals as well? I spoke to my son, a Life Scout, about this, asking his opinion. We have raised our children not to judge someone because of their race, creed, or sexual orientation; however in this context of allowing homosexuals in Scouting when my son was asked about it by my wife and I he displayed some uncomfortable behavior. He does not like the idea of having to share a tent with someone that is gay. I posed a further question, what if he found out today that another Scout (who he has known for years) was homosexual or a mentoring leader was, would it change his mind. He said “no”, but admitted that it would, in fact, change the way he dealt with them. This change will create more problems than it will fix. This change will make this issue something that has to be addressed with our youth members, as well as our adults, and many of them are not prepared; mentally or emotionally, to handle this kind of discussion and this type of discussion should not be held with children. This is a discussion that should be held within the family environment, not the Scouting environment.

    • There is nothing in any of the seven requirements for the Family Life Merit Badge that has anything to do with sexual orientation.

      (I guess our church sponsors haven’t gotten around to re-writing it, yet, thank goodness!)

      So I don’t see anything to worry about.

      What’s next? Your CO will now be free to express their teachings about sexuality to your troop, if they want to. Or, your CO can elect to keep sex out of Scouting, if they want to. Instead of having sex policy dictated by national, your CO will now have control over how sex is handled, or not handled, in your troop. That is what is next. Sounds like a good thing to me.

      • What about requirement #7: Discuss the following with your counselor:
        a. Your understanding of what makes an effective father and why, and your thoughts on the father’s role in the family
        b. Your understanding of the responsibilities of a parent.

        How can you discuss this with a family that has no father?

      • The scout, his family, and merit badge counselor involved will decide how to deal with that. One can certainly discuss the role of a father even if there isn’t one present in the household. This is already an issue for many families. Mine, for example. I’m a single mom. My son has never met his father. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t understand the concept of what a father is. He has other male role models that he can look to for guidance.

        Furthermore, a scout with two moms in his house is already NOT excluded. The scout himself wouldn’t be excluded if he is straight (as most boys raised by only women are). His mothers may be excluded from being leaders, but they can easily have a child in scouting and not be a registered leader.

      • In much the same way you do now with a boy who has no father, due to death, divorce, abandonment, or other circumstances. If I remember correctly, the requirement does not give a “right answer”, rather encourages the boy to consider the question, in part because he is likely to take on the role of father himself eventually. The question is not asking “is your father doing his job”, rather it’s asking, “how will YOU become a good father to your children”.

      • Because divorce is immoral. If we’re going to be sticklers on biblical morality here, gotta throw that one in.

      • Gene, I think what point you’re really trying to make here (sorry if I’m wrong but if I’m right I totally agree with you) is that this is simply another attack to take down traditional families and traditional family values. It’s not enough for them to be making grounds in some states to legalize gay marriage they need to steamroll any organization that still want to teach the importance of traditional marriages and families.

      • ScoutMommaX3 – It’s not just coming from “they”. It’s coming from other scouting families who have gay friends, family, classmates, neighbors, and co-workers who they interact with in other venues just fine. If we can work side-by-side with LGBT folks in other places, it feels wrong to us to exclude these folks from the BSA. We are not “steamrolling” the BSA. Rather, we are using our dollars and our influence to advocate for what we believe is a positive change, consistent with the basic values the BSA has always stood for.
        I am part of a large extended Catholic family, just like you. Just like you, we have extended gay family members who we love and value. For us, including LGBT folks in the BSA is very much in line with our family values.
        Get to know us – we’re not that much different than you. Really.

      • Wait – I thought Scouts taught camping, woodworking, knot-making, and virtues like hard work. You’re saying they teach the importance of traditional marriages and families? That actually sounds kind of… gay.

      • Really? I’ve discussed this with many scouts in families that have no fathers.

        The phrase “help other people at all times” seems to be an empty recitation by way too many folks that profess to embrace the ideals of scouting in these comments.

  221. Most of the comments That I am reading her seem to be the opinions of adults. In scouting we teach our scouts to be strong, independent, and free thinkers. Has anyone taken the time to ask the people that we serve, the scouts, what they think? I think that their answers might surprise a lot of people.

    • The National Policy on this issue always used the statement (to paraphrase) that human sexuality was not a topic that was to be discussed in Scouting. I have spoken to my own son about the prospect of a change in the policy to gauge his opinion, but I will not be bringing this topic up to the Cub Scouts or Boy Scouts under my leadership. This is not a topic to be discussed with the youth. If National changes their policy any discussion of making a policy for a specific unit lies with the Chartered Organization and NOT the Scouts or Leaders.

  222. Observation – We are in the midst of our Friends of Scouting drive. Since the announcment, all our donors are indicating they will not donate if there is a policy change and some have requested re-fund of thier donations. BSA is going to take this in the pocketbook as well as the membership roster.

    • ” BSA is going to take this in the pocketbook as well as the membership roster.”

      Starting about two years ago, the LDS started admitting open gays as full members to their church. I’m pretty sure LDS accountants are using the same math as BSA accountants. I’m guessing they both ran the same numbers, and came up with the same answer.

      I know that sounds crass. But if you reduce the question to one of finances, I’m pretty sure they’ve already done the math.

      • Brian makes a great point, and in regards to “Starting about two years ago, the LDS started admitting open gays as full members to their church” that should read that the LDS church allows “Celibate, non practicing Gays to join” , there are NO Openly Gay Practicing members of the LDS Church, and no,money has had zero effect on that decision.

        But I do think that FOS contributions will be affected if the change does happen. Many CO members will vote with their wallets, and do what another post said, shift contributions to the troop, instead of the Council/National.

        Since the proposed changes are “not going far enough” for the LGBT groups (see the NYT article posted before) the previous moneys withheld would not be restored, National will be looking at a serious shortage of funds. I really am curious to know if National really looked at their “Proposal” and what effects it will have to the future of BSA.

        What I really want to know is why now?
        We just had a “2 year review”, that concluded just a few months ago, and the decision was for no changes to the current policy.
        So, what happened between now and then?
        And who is leading this charge and why?

  223. We all know the basic root of a possible new national membership policy is money – it always is.

    Real Scouts and Scouters must remain true to the Scout Oath and Law. We must not deviate or compromise our standards for the sake of money. A change in policy to admit openly gay or lesbian people to the BSA simply to placate those groups and the monied, morally corrupt corporations that support them will show how far America and mankind have strayed from His teachings and that of Baden-Powell,

    I hope the members of the National Executive Committee are reading this blog. They would be well served to properly interpret the true meaning of the Scout Oath and Law. Otherwise, they have no honor, show no duty to God, and certainly do not know what is right and true and love what is good and consciously choose it.

    Members of the National Executive Committee who vote in favor of a new national membership policy should be removed from their positions.

    • There is no need to divide Scouts into “Real Scouts and Scouters” vs. “Non-Real Scouts and Scouters”. It is possible to be a “real” member of the BSA and have different opinions on *any* proposed policy; this one is no different. Neither side is more “real” than another. We all care for the BSA – that’s why we care about the policy. The pressure to change is coming in part from outside organizations, including funding sources, but it is also coming from within – the scouts themselves, their families, and their CO churches. It’s not “us vs. them” – it’s “what is the best way the BSA can serve scouts, families, and COs who have different deeply-held moral beliefs on this issue”.

      • This Eagle Scout believes that Scouts, Scouters, and even National Executive Committee members who properly interpret the Scout Oath and Law know that openly gay and lesbian people have no place in Scouting. If that divides us between “Real” and “Non-Real”, so be it – that’s what an opinion is.

        Again, in my opinion, the basic root of a possible new national membership policy is money. The BSA must not deviate or compromise its standards for the sake of money by admitting openly gay or lesbian people simply to placate those groups and the monied, morally corrupt corporations that support them. The BSA should simply fold up their tents and go home if they think admitting openly gay or lesbian people is the best way to serve Scouts, families, and Chartering Organizations.

      • What about all the gay scouts currently in scouting, including eagle scouts? Are they “not real”? Realness is Scouts is defined purely by heterosexuality? Not by how one embodies any of the other Scout traits? Or how many badges a person has won? Listen to yourself. What you are saying is quite ridiculous.

      • Sorry Eagle Mom, but the vast majority of comments on this blog (and many others) advocating for a policy change are activists…you may be one too for all I know. I have seen their same screen-names and almost word-for-word comments on other Scout related sites. The post above is just saying that those of us who have dedicated our lives to Scouting should have a say in the policies that govern “our” organization (i.e. those who are currently in it) to have a say over the “static” generated by agenda-driven non-Scouters. As your observation indicates, the discussion is certainly about and between Scouters and non-Scouters.

      • Bryan, for what it’s worth, I’m not an activist. I’m the mom of an Eagle scout, as my screen name implies. I completely agree that those involved in scouting should have input on this, and all, proposed scout policies. I agree that outside voices should be largely treated as “static” and the BSA should focus on the boys they serve and their families. I’m actually surprised to find that the BSA doesn’t seem to have a structure already in place to gather input on all kinds of policy changes – things like badge requirements, etc.

        However, many on this site who are against this proposed change seem to think that the only people who want the change are those who are not involved with scouting. My experience is the opposite – most of the scouting families I know would welcome the change. I understand that in some areas it’s the opposite. The members of the BSA are divided on this issue. How divided? We will see if the policy is passed. My guess is that many “red state” areas will have largely no-gays troops, and many “blue state” areas will have largely “gays-welcome” troops, but I also think it’s likely that many areas will have a mix.

        The proposed policy will let scouting families vote with their feet – they can join a troop that reflects their family’s values. If the vast majority of scouting families prefer a no-gays troop, then the vast majority of troops will be no-gays. It’s even possible that some councils could have only no-gay troops.

        I don’t think we have to worry about a large influx of gay scouts to the BSA. For one thing, most teens are very busy nowadays. If they didn’t start in scouts as cubs, they are unlikely to join now that they are older. And of course boys of cub age generally don’t consider themselves gay or straight – they are too young for all of that.

      • Because people who feel differently from you but as passionately about their side as you are “activists”? Then I guess you are an activist too!

    • So cwgmpls, since you know so much about the LDS church, you would know that the Mormon church has never shunned anyone from joining and/or participating, including gays, but it’s not just some club where anything goes and only members in good standing are afforded full participation (e.g. holding leadership positions, entering the temple, etc.). Members are expected to must follow the commandments, and homosexuality is considered and remains a “sinful behavior” which would remove them from good standing. The main REQUIREMENT for membership in the LDS is baptism and a gay person would have had to fully repent of and abstain entirely from their homosexual lifestyle to be baptized. If they were to return to living that lifestyle, they would be subject to disciplinary action by the church (just as any other member for commission of sinful behavior) up and to including excommunication (see also “good standing” above).

      After many years of working with and associating with LDS Boy Scout Units, it would be hard to imagine that they would continue their association after BSA enacts the reported policy change. Wikipedia shows that the LDS church sponsors ~38K units consisting of ~421K youth…with just the registration alone, that would equal a 23% loss in participation and funding alone, not to mention the millions in donations provided by LDS members, volunteer service by LDS leaders at all levels of the organization, etc. I would bet this will be a prime consideration when they walk in to the board meeting next week.

      • Bryan I am a member of the LDS Church and thank you for such a great explanation of the position of the LDS Church. With all the controversy about homosexuals in the LDS Church there needs to be clarification and yours was most truthful and informative. I am not sure what the future of the Scouting program will be in the LDS Church. Seven years ago the Salt Lake Presidency sent out a letter to all of the Stake Presidents in the Church to advise the Youngmen Presidents and Scout leaders to attend a Woodbadge course as soon as possible. This was a unpresidented move by the leaders of the Church and many Scout leaders signed up to complete the Woodbadge Training there were 17 scout leaders signed up in my Stake alone in 2006. At the time I did not give much thought about it as I had taken the Woodbadge course years before. Another LDS member and I was discussing this move by the Church and we came up with a thought that in the years ahead the Church would need well trained leaders in order to run its own Scout program. As you know the LDS Church is always planning things way ahead of need and maybe this is the result of having well trained Scout Leaders to run the Scouting program in case the
        National BSA either made changes that conflicted with the teachings of the Church or the BSA might close its doors in either case the LDS Church has made preparations for any scenario like is going on now with the vote next week by the National Board on lifting the ban on homosexuals. Will it happen? Time will tell. Thanks for your support Trenton

      • So you are okay with gays who do not engage in homosexual behavior being members of BSA, right?

        Why not let BSA have the same policy toward gays that the LDS church has?

        Right now, gays are excluded from BSA, even if they never engage in homosexual behavior. Why not let gays who agree to remain celibate be members of BSA, just as they can now be members of the LDS?

      • cwgmpls There has been many comments about the position of The LDS Church allowing homosexuals in the Church. As the teachings of Jesus Christ have revealed through the Bible his mission is to save every soul and come onto Christ so it is with the LDS Church their mission is the same as the Savior. The Church only allows inactive homosexuals as members if they declare before their baptism that they engage in the act of sexual conduct as homosexuals they will not be allowed to be baptized to become members of the Church there for exclusion. Will they cheat and sin against their covenant to remain sexually inactive after their baptism only God and their concience knows. As with any serious sin that goes on without repenting those members I can assure you if they do not repent and sin no more will certainly face dicipline and can lead to excommunication from the Church. The BSA has a different role in homosexuality it has no diciplinery action as it should be they are not a Church as it should be. If the ban is lifted the BSA would have no control over active homosexuals and the harm they would bring to the values of the present BSA position. I hope that this information will be of beneifit to explain the position of the LDS Church. Shifting values lead to no values in the end. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • “The Church only allows inactive homosexuals as members ”

        I agree. And BSA does not allow inactive homosexuals as members. That is my point. BSA policy is more strict than LDS policy.

      • cwgmpls My comments about the mission of the LDS Church were for clearification of the Church doctrine.The BSA does not have a mandate to convert homosexuals to change their lifestyle as the LDS has. As a private organization the BSA has no control on a persons life outside of the BSA only when they want to join this private organization can they asks those who want to join to live by its rules. The BSA does have the mandate to run there organization the way the see fit the Supreme Court has ruled so. I hope that this will clear up any misconceptions about the difference between the LDS Church and the BSA. There are major differences as I have stated in my recent comments and to try to link the LDS Church position and the BSA pending change to lift the present ban on exclusion of homosexuals is not the same Please don’t keep misleading the commentors on this forum. Whether the ban is lifted or not I believe that the BSA and its future will be fractionized and I fear that division will be the future of the BSA. Like I have said shifting values will turn to no values in the end. Trenton Spears

      • BSA’s and LDS’s policies regarding membership of homosexuals speak for themselves. I am not leading or misleading anyone, just quoting official policy.

        LDS: “Members of the Church who have same-sex attractions, but don’t act on them, can continue to enjoy full fellowship in the church, which includes holding the priesthood”

        BSA: “We do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals”

        The policies speak for themselves, no matter how you try to spin them.

      • cwgmpls I am along time member of the LDS Church and what I know about the Church is not spinning. I am also a long time member of the BSA 30 yrs. What I know about the BSA is not spinning. I can see that no amount of conversation will convience you that what I say is true. I respect you right to say what you want I don’t respect some of the things you say. If anyone is spinning it is you. I have listen to other commentors regarding you comments and what they have to say is a clear negative endorsement of your comments. Trenton Spears

  224. I mention these three scenarios because they will happen. We know they will. No one is willing to address the what then? No one is willing to look and say wait a minute maybe we need to rethink this. Has anyone asked who and how the Scout Oath and Scout Law will be re-written because I can tell you from experience multiple definitions will cause problems at the District and Council level. Specifically when it comes to Eagle Board of Reviews. The Districts are not rubber stamps for the Units nor should they be. We know from the posted conversations on this blog that Units are not following the rules. We know that Unit leaders are following bad information e.g. you completed the requirements, had a decent project, and you are 18 so you can have Eagle Rank. So what then? Who cleans up the mess? National is walking away so it falls to the Districts and the CO’s.

    Scenario #1. Two Units in the same District and Council. One CO has made the decision no homosexuals. The other has decided to follow the new proposed guidelines. So far we would all agree both CO’s are within their rights under the proposed policy. No harm no foul. Time for the fundraising for summer camps, equipment, etc. As the funds total up one Unit has raised far more money than the other and a major reason is the National policy. What then? We all know that lawsuits will be filed and there will be divisions across the board. Both following BSA policy yet clearly discrimination.

    Scenario #2. Same two Units as above. Two young men have completed the requirements for Eagle Scout. One openly gay Scout passes the Scoutmasters Conference, lives their CO’s definition of morally straight and is forwarded onto the District for the Eagle Board of Review. The other fails to meet his CO’s definition of morally straight and is denied. Lets further complicate matters and say both pass their Scoutmasters Conference because their leaders fail in their duty and the District has to make the choice. The Eagle Board of Review through the course of the process learns that one of the boys has violated the morally straight interpretation of the Scout Oath and Law as applied by their CO and is denied at the District level. What then? Both completed the same requirements but one fails in the morally straight category. Since Eagle Rank is NOT supposed to be a right of passage or reward fro completing some checklist what happens? We all know that appeals will be made, lawsuits will be filed, and there will be divisions across the board. Both following BSA policy yet clearly discrimination.

    Scenario #3. Same two Units again. Scout Camp. Two deep leadership and all other BSA guidelines followed. 2:00 am and the Scouts are awake (we all know it happens so be honest) discussing the things boys discuss. Billy and Johnny are friends but in different Units due to the the new policy. Scoutmasters are friends as well and for logistics they book two campsites adjacent to each other. Both Units working together and around each other and enjoying Scout camaraderie. Billy is gay and Johnny is straight. Since camp jumping is not unheard of both end up in a tent together with some other boys. Locker room talk ensues. Uncomfortable questions are asked. Feelings get hurt. No laws were broken, every attempt to follow policy was made yet there is discrimination. Billy “feels” bullied and discriminated against and demands to leave because everyone is intolerant. What then? We know lawsuits will be filed when mom and dad find out.

    • You raise interesting questions. I’m not going to jump in with my thoughts. Rather, can I ask for a clarification of #1? What is the logic behind one unit raising more than the other? Fundraising typically breaks down to how hard one works. Surely there are other considerations, but I’m not getting the leap in logic here that is presented. Any help understanding this situation would be appreciated.

      • The jump I was making is that you will have organizations that will donate within their ideological realm. Scenario #1 could go either way e.g. businesses donating more to the “traditional” as opposed to the new policy. Basically if a straight troop raises more funds BECAUSE they are straight and the BSA’s policy factors into that then you have a discrimination and bias issue where there was none before. That in turn could lead to a massive lawsuit directly challenging the proposed policy being debated now. Yes there will always be some Units that will have more based on socio-economic and geographical situations but National is changing the dynamic. I would remind you to look at the language being used by the other side. Good first step, more is needed, the BSA can do better, change is good, come into the 21st Century, etc. What do you suppose that means? In my mind it means the BSA will have to adopt the GSA’s protocols of anyone anytime regardless.

      • I can see that one troop or another may raise more funds because of their position on the policy. In some parts of the country it will skew one way, and in some parts another.

        But I can’t quite see how this would lead to lawsuits. What would be the grounds? It’s not discrimination when I or my company gives to one troop over another, for any reason. Same for giving to other organizations – many folks give to organizations that reflect their stance on various issues, and avoid giving to organizations they differ with. In the US, we encourage such “voting with your dollars”.

        There might be a concern if certain areas did not have a mix of troops, but rather had only one option, presumably because of the local culture. In that case, I would hope that boys in areas where there is not a nearby troop that allows them membership (or that the Scout could in good conscience join) would be able to be Lone Scouts.

  225. We are against the BSA cowering to another political agenda group. What we want to know is why the BSA, with it’s millions of MEMBERS, were going to quietly decide on this issue at a board meeting where just a few would have a say in this 103 year old institution.

    • Another good question, one that was asked last time. I don’t know if anyone here can answer it satisfactorily.

    • Because quietly making decisions at secret board meetings is how BSA has been making decisions for 103 years. I don’t like it either.

      That is why, even if BSA makes this change, I’m still not sure I would sign up my three boys for Scouting. I think I’d rather have them involved in a local club where there is more transparency about how they operate.

      BSA has a great philosophy at its core. Unfortunately, its organization is based on an industrial age, top-down structure. There are very few institutions structured this way that will survive the 21st century. I might just hook up with a local club where I know everyone and have some say in what goes on instead.

      • cwgmpls, just wanted to say you’ve been a force of nature on this board and I’ve appreciated everything you’ve said. Keep fighting the good fight!

  226. My religion (along with countless others, including Episcopals, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Moravians, Quakers, Unitarians, the United Church of Christ, Buddhists, Anglicanisms, the Disciples of Christ, the Reformed Church of America, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church, to name but a few) support homosexuals and are not of the belief that being gay is in conflict with the word of God. So to me (and many other Scouts), someone can be gay and still do their duty to God. Based on my religious teachings, being gay and being a good Scout are not in conflict.

    If you say gay people can’t be Scouts because they don’t subscribe to YOUR duty to YOUR God then you truly don’t understand what it means to be reverent (respecting the beliefs of others). Perhaps Jewish Scouts should petition to have all non-Kosher Scouts removed from the program (as they feel eating pork is going against the word of God, and is not being clean or obedient) or perhaps Muslim Scouts petition to have all Scouts that don’t observe their daily prayer calls removed (as they feel not practicing Salah is against the word of God and is not being reverent or obedient).

    The BSA welcomes Scouts of all faiths who believe in a higher power… and not all faiths believe that being gay is wrong.

    • Nice words Steve!

      I’m from the UK, where being female, gay or LGBT is not a barrier to being a member of the Scout Movement, as Scouting is open to all – both my daughters are Scouts.
      I spent a wonderful summer in the USA on Summer camp in 1994 in Ohio and still have good friends in the BSA. I have read many of the posts and can see both sides of the argument.

      You have the people who feel betrayed as their personal Religious faith condemns the gay lifestyle and they feel that they are being forced to betray their principles and are being bullied into condoning something that is against their beliefs.

      You have the people who believe that Scouting is open to all and that being gay or LGBT should not be a barrier to experiencing the amazing adventure that is Scouting.

      I am a Heterosexual male. My sexuality has no bearing on my role in Scouting, as by their very nature Scouting activities are not sexual. Just as being black or Muslim or having special needs has no bearing on being a Scout, as Scouting is ethnically diverse, multi-faith and seeks to empower those with special needs.

      If I was a Homosexual male, my sexuality would have no bearing on my role in Scouting, as by their very nature, Scouting activities are not sexual…

      If the motion is passed and people feel that they can no longer be members of the BSA, I would like to ask them to consider if their personal views are more important than making sure that the children in their care get the best start in life. I know they care or they would not be posting on the forum.

      If they feel they have to leave the BSA please accept this grateful thanks for all your their hard work and devotion from a fellow Scouter from across “the pond”

    • Beg to differ, Steve, but the Reformed Church in America (it’s “in America”, not of America) does not support homosexuals and does believe that being gay is in conflict with the word of God. Please see
      https://www.rca.org/homosexuality, where you can read the article,
      “Summaries of General Synod Discussions and Actions on Homosexuality and the Rights of Homosexuals”.

      In part, it says, “In 2012, General Synod voted to affirm its position on homosexuality: While compassion, patience, and loving support should be shown to all those who struggle with same-sex desires, the General Synod reaffirms our official position that homosexual behavior is a sin according to the Holy Scriptures, therefore any person, congregation, or assembly which advocates homosexual behavior or provides leadership for a service of same-sex marriage or a similar celebration has committed a disciplinable offense; and further, that the General Synod Council shall oversee the creation of an eight member committee made up of representatives appointed by each of the regional synods to pray and work together to present a way forward for our denomination given the disagreement in our body relative to homosexuality. The purpose of the committee is not to revisit our stated position, but shall operate with the understanding expressed earlier in this recommendation and issue a report with practical recommendations to the General Synod of 2013 (MGS 2012: 149-150).”

      • Steve, I also beg to differ… the Presbyterian Church is split on the beliefs regarding homosexuality. In fact, there are two major denominations of the Presbyterian Church (PC USA and PC in America) that have significantly differing views on this topic (and some others). This has been a major point for many of the major denominations in the country, so you cannot generalize that religious teachings support the gay lifestyle!

      • My congregation has a gay pastor… so obviously there are Christian denominations and religions that support homosexuality. They may be the minority, but they exist. Why shouldn’t members of those religions be allowed to be in Scouts? They aren’t going against their religion or their duty to God.

        By your logic (excluding gays because your religion says it’s wrong and you’re in the majority), then we should also exclude all Jewish and Muslim Scouts because they don’t believe in Jesus Christ as their lord and savior (and your religion says that’s wrong and, again, your’e in the majority there). But we don’t we respect the beliefs of others and don’t exclude or force of beliefs on others. It’s called tolerance!

      • Mark, in answer to your question regarding why shouldn’t members of christian churches that have caved on biblical teachings be allowed in Scouts, please note the following:
        First, obviously there are members of Scouting who do not support the timeless values of Scouting, and currently no policy exists prohibiting such from joining (although I would advocate that we consider such a policy to stop infiltration of the BSA by Glaad and other groups who seek to destroy the BSA)
        Second, no one asserts that 100% of Scouters support the current policy. Finally, the current policy correctly prohibits practicing homosexuals from associating with Scouting. If your church does not like the policy, it does not need to participate in Scouting. Your group came to the BSA and the BSA is a moral organization that teaches our boys to be “morally straight” and “clean” and the BSA position is that homosexual acts violate these standards. Seriously Mark, this logic is really not very hard to follow.

      • BSA your argumentation isn’t hard to follow, but I think it’s a stretch to call it logic. Your argument is basically this: I, BSAScoutleader, believe the BSA rules have always supported my point of view, it’s the only way to view things, things should stay exactly as they are, and if you disagree with me you are attacking me and trying to destroy me. You’ve rejected the sound logic that cooler heads on here have offered and keep falling back on your paranoia that homosexuals are out to “destroy” Scouts. I understand that that’s your fear and that’s where you’re coming from, but please don’t try to pass it off as “logic.”

      • GreggO, thank you for your contribution and information. Happy to see that certain denominations of the Presbyterian Church are not giving in to intolerant and extremist bully organizations like Glaad and other pro-LGBT groups! I hope that these denominations are aware of the agenda that seeks to treat such true and correct positions as being hate speech and not protected by the First Amendment. Don’t doubt me on this, their intolerance will not stop with the BSA. They will be coming after such denominations of the Presbyterian Church if they succeed in destroying the BSA.

      • I agree with you 1000% BSAScoutleader and GreggO! I won’t stop here! These people are well funded and organized via secret combinations that the average God fearing person trying to rear a family in today’s world can’t even begin to understand. BSAScoutleader, what can be done legally to fight this board if they go through with this?

      • Thank you for your contribution and information. Happy to see that the Reformed Church is not giving in to intolerant and extremist bully organizations like Glaad and other pro-LGBT groups! I hope they are aware of the agenda that seeks to treat such true and correct positions as being hate speech and not protected by the First Amendment. What a wonderful message regarding “compassion, patience, and loving support should be shown to all those who struggle with same-sex desires.” This message demonstrates grace, compassion and tolerance for all.

  227. I am a former scout and some of my sons and grandsons that are former scouts
    I have never seen so many comments on an issue, but there certain individuals that seem to have far too much time on their hands. Some of defend homosexuality and LBGT so vigorously that one has to assume you are involved with them and one of them. This is a little long, but please take time to read and digest it.
    This is one of the most important issues facing parents and it is up to you to educate your children and warn them of the signs and dangers of predators.
    THE BOTTOM LINE.

    The bottom Line to all of this is whether homosexuality (LBGT) is a moral issue or an immoral issue. The vast majority of you believe it is an immoral issue and so does the BSA at least until they started allowing wealthy businesses and business men to become involved and on their board and this is the results.
    This is what happens when an organization compromises it’s core values for the sake of “cash”.

    The Boy Scouts of America was founded on Godly Christian principles.
    The three major promises of the Scout Oath are:
    Duty to God and country,
    Duty to other people, and
    Duty to self (to keep oneself morally straight)

    I deal only with facts, but today the majorities are not interested in the facts. Founding President John Adams said many years ago, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
    Regarding Homosexuals serving as leaders in the Boy Scouts of America, they are a private organization and have held to the standard for a century. The organization has fought numerous court battles over the last decade ago for its right to set standards for leaders who interact with children.
    In 2000 that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts of America is a private organization and has the right to enforce a “morally straight” standard, even if prevented homosexuals and atheists from being leaders.
    Homosexual activists have stolen the word “gay” because it enhances their desirability and attractiveness. So, let’s look at the facts and the truth.
    Frist, “Columbia University psychiatry professors Drs. William Byrne and Bruce Parsons stated: ‘There is no evidence that at present to substantiate a biological theory’.”
    The claims that they are “born” homosexuals is completely false and an outright lie. It is a behavioral decision and yes there are some environmental issues that can have an effect, but the bottom line is it is a decision on an individual’s part. There are consequences to this behavior (AIDS AND HIV just for starters) published by the American Pediatrics Association and sent to all Superintendents of Education in the U. S. and are available if you are interested in the facts..

    Regarding that homosexual assaults on young boys some say, “All male child sexual abuses are not committed by homosexual men, they are committed by pedophiles”. That is correct in that a pedophile is an adult who has sexual desire for children or who has committed the crime of sex with a child. Now, there may be a very small percentage of this crime that are women, but for arguments sake let’s say it is 95% men who are male homosexuals. This is why the Scouts have taken this hard line stand for 100 years, but seem to now be folding because of money.

    Dictionary definitions of Homosexuality:

    Gay (gay) Webster’s 1913 Definition: Excited with merriment; manifesting sportiveness or delight
    Up until the last quarter of 20th Century “Sodomy in the first degree was a Class A felony.”

    “Homosexuality is the condition of ‘sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex’.”
    Definition of HOMOSEXUAL
    : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex
    1bug•ger
    Definition of BUGGER: : sodomite, a : a worthless person
    Merriam-Webster Dictionary

    Medical definition of BUGGERY: sodomy
    Merriam-Webster Dictionary

    Sodomy (sodomy)
    1. Carnal copulation in a manner against nature; buggery.
    SOD’OMY, n. A crime against nature.
    Webster’s 1913 Definition
    You may not agree with this and that is your choice. But, base your opinion on facts and not on emotions or propaganda from the media.
    #####

    • You may be right that opposition to homosexuality is a “Godly Christian principle”. But Godly Christian Principles, or any religious principles, for that matter, are to be left to the CO, not taught by BSA National. Please re-read the Declaration of Religious Principles.

      • If that is the case why has it been their policy for over 100 years. You are injecting your personal beliefs into a policy they have fought for in courts and even Supreme Court which they won. This is a moral issue and battle and it is not a Civil Rights battle. If they allow this it will expose young boys to extreme danger and will destroy the Boy Scouts of America. If homosexuals and lesbians want a scouting group they can start one.
        Thhis battle is in the schools across the country and Hollywood is glamorizing it.

      • It has been official BSA policy since 1991. Prior to that official BSA policy was to leave teaching about sex to parents and clergy.

      • As a Christian, I don’t think it is a “godly Christian principle,” unless you are only deciding for yourself whether to engage in homosexual acts or not. When it comes to other people, it should be judge not, lest ye be judged.

  228. This is what I sent to the national office (personal data redacted):

    I oppose the change in policy by the National Council.

    Background: I’m an Eagle Scout, 35+ years in the program, Scoutmaster, father of a Life Scout/Lodge Chief, Council Executive Board member, Silver Beaver and James E West Fellow. I’ve worked with 6 troops in 3 states plus Germany. I’ve had Eagles from my troop who came out as gay later, and I’ve also dealt with the after effects of sex abuse of 8 of my Scouts by a Red Cross Swim instructor (reference – Troop 5, Bremerhaven, Germany 1991).
    My current troop (T-xxx) has 35 youth members, is chartered to the Catholic church and will not change its membership policies.

    Justification: This policy will directly impact my troop in several ways.
    1. MY MEMBERSHIP WILL DECLINE. It will make it more difficult for me to “sell” Scouting to new parents. Parents are becoming more and more concerned with their children’s safety, from requiring cell phone calls to check in to injuries from football, etc. It is already hard for me to convince many parents that their 11 year old child will be safe with me at a week-long summer camp without them wanting to hover. How do I tell them it will be OK, not knowing if the other leaders or boys will leave her child alone? I know we have policies and procedures, but this is just one more reason for people to not trust their sons with us.
    2. MY TROOP WILL ATTEND FEWER SCOUT CAMPS. We will likely have to start producing our own summer and winter camp for our boys so that we can control the scouts and leaders our children come in contact with. This means lower attendance at Council Camps and High Adventure Bases. We camp 40+ nights a year now – we will just eliminate the ones I mentioned.
    3. MY TROOP MIGHT NOT RECHARTER. I have already heard from other churches that they don’t want the liability that comes with rejecting homosexual leaders. Since they won’t change their religious beliefs and the BSA will not take the heat for a charter organization’s decision, this makes the individual churches targets of lawsuits. Rather than bear that cost, it’s easier for them to drop Scouting from their church ministry. I don’t know whether the Catholic church will do that, but I have scouting friends whose troops are not re-chartering this month as scheduled. You can confirm that with our Scout Executive X X.

    Finally, until this is resolved, my annual FOS contribution of $xxxx will not be made, nor will several others in my council. That is not a threat, that is simply a fact.

    I know you are being bombarded with thousands of emails pro and con, but my heart bleeds for Scouting and hate to see this happen.

    • Flash, spot on with your letter and great work, but don’t stop! We are in the middle of a major battle and we cannot let up! This should be posted on facebook, twitter, etc. WE REALLY NEED TO PRESSURE BSA NATIONAL NOW NOT TO TAKE ANY ACTION NEXT WEEK. Class action lawsuits are going to be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National, but it is better for BSA National to delay the vote and provide transparency. There is all kinds of foul play going on (see posts on this site and do your research), and we need to call for transparency and demand that no action be taken until we get a real and formal poll/vote from the adult volunteers on this.
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

  229. I like to see how many people professing Christ on here and yet being complete and utter Hypocrites at the same time. To say you are a professing Christian and to also say you support Homosexuality?? Not sure how you manage to miss the boat on this one. The Bible specifically states numerous times on the issue of Homosexuality, going so far as to call it not only a sin but a detestable sin (Lev. 18:22). It also states you cannot serve two masters i.e. the world and Christ (Matthew 6:24). So pick one. Be on either side of the fence not playing in both fields.

    Also lets be honest here, if Homosexuals want a boy organization they are free to make on themselves. Nothing prohibits them to create their own. They could also work alongside the BSA if they so chose just like the AHG (American Heritage Girls) chose to do after they broke away from the GSA. So the argument here is pretty easy. Make your own group. Its not discrimination to say that this PRIVATE organization desires to only allow certain members into it. That is why its a club. You think everyone can be a Free Mason? Or how about join a Frat or Sorority? I don’t think so. All this endless whining and debating over the subject is both ridiculous and self-serving. If anything we scouters SHOULD be proudly standing up for our organization not tearing it down and contributing to the destruction of its principles.

    As an Eagle Scout and a scouter for over 18 years (yes I am young), working for years at GSA and within my own district as well as helping train many leaders I am saddened by what I read from my fellow adult leaders. How can you lead your troops and packs and yet hate the organization? What are you teaching them? Are you being truthful? How about Loyal? You certainly aren’t being helpful or Kind? I could name all 12 points but lets end with Reverent? Reverence is respecting other people’s religious beliefs. You think this discredits and discounts those of the Christian faith? I don’t see any small print on the page stating that. I never learned that Reverence works for Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics, or anyone who wasn’t a Christian. Stop being two faced! Its a shame that shouldn’t even be seen.

    TO the BSA,

    Keep up the fight. You have done so well over 100 years of prejudice and hatred has hardened you and kept you going strong. You have blessed us and kept us going in times of hardship. I am proud to serve an organization that refuses to balk to the scum of the earth who would treed on my values simply to raise the values of someone else. Keep it up and keep on fighting. And if Homosexuals want a group encourage them to start their own. In its infancy the BSA started out on its own, they can too. Maybe they might form their own group that may survive 100 years. But there is no reason YOU the proud BSA should have to lower YOUR standards to fit their lifestyle.

    • Hi David. I would like to specifically address two of your points.

      First, those that are involved in scouts and support a change in the current policy that works to exclude LGBT individuals do not hate the organization. What we are teaching our scouts is to follow the Scout Oath and Law. We throw in scout skills and have fun along the way. We don’t talk about sex in scout meetings. We leave that up to their parents.

      We aren’t disrespectful of Christians. Most of us ARE Christians. We may be a different brand of Christian than you. We respect your right to believe differently than us. Do you respect that we have the right to believe differently than you?

      • Beth, you and several others keep beating this falsehood to death. Let’s flip this around and ask you the same question, “Do you respect that we have the right to believe differently than you?” If “YES,” then leave us alone and start your own organization. If “NO,” then forceably hijack the BSA. Oh…wait a minute…you’re already doing that one. BTW..are you sure that you and Angie aren’t one in the same?

      • As I believe I stated in the post you replied to, though I can’t see the entire thing currently to verify, I stated that I believe we all have a right to our own religion, our own values, our own very beliefs. Yes. You have the right to believe differently than I do. This is the value of the new policy under consideration. It allows each chartering organization to determine what is best for them. You don’t have to belong to a unit that doesn’t hold the same values that you hold. I don’t have to belong to a unit that isn’t in line with my values. Win-win.

        Angie isn’t even my middle name. I can’t speak for her, but she’s not me. Thanks.

      • Beth, with the shoe on the other foot…..does this belief system that you tell us that you believe also extend to Scouters who seek to join the LGBT, tell the LGBT folks that they are intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and then dictate to the LGBT folks that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? If so, then please preach your set of beliefs on the LGBT folks…trust me…they REALLY need to hear from you. If no, can you please share with us whether you also believe that it is good to be a hypocrite? To be clear, we stand BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000) and recognize that the BSA is a private organization and is free and able to teach correct principles as contained in our Scout oath and law and which timeless values include the teaching that homosexual acts are not morally straight and not clean.

      • The difference is, LGBT individuals aren’t telling you that you can’t be scouts unless you’re gay. You are telling them they can’t be scouts if they are gay.

      • Beth, please honestly answer the question and stop evading…in the above-example, should the LGBT be forced to admit non-gay Scouts as members and allow LGBT chapters that will form in the schools that will teach Scouting values like being “morally straight” and that will teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions. Do you support the rights of Scouts to do this?

      • –>”…in the above-example, should the LGBT be forced to admit non-gay Scouts as members and allow LGBT chapters that will form in the schools that will teach Scouting values like being “morally straight” and that will teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions. Do you support the rights of Scouts to do this?

        I’m sorry, I don’t understand.

        Should the LGBT [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender] be forced to admit non-gay Scouts as members of WHAT?

        Allow LGBT [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender] chapters of WHAT?

        Are you asking, “Should gay people be forced to admit non-gay Scouts to the gay community, and then require groups of these gay people and the straight Scouts into schools, where they will teach that gay people should be celibate in order to live a moral life.”?

        There are organizations of gay people who believe that gays should live a celibate life already.

        I know you are frustrated, but I *am* trying to understand your question so I can answer it.

    • >>>>I like to see how many people professing Christ on here and yet being complete and utter Hypocrites at the same time. To say you are a professing Christian and to also say you support Homosexuality?? Not sure how you manage to miss the boat on this one.

      David, different Christian denominations have different interpretations of the Bible when it comes to homosexuality, just as they have different interpretations of many, many other issues. In fact, these differences are *why* there are different denominations. The BSA does not favor any one denomination’s views over another’s. In fact, the BSA doesn’t even favor Christianity over any other religion.

      A Scout is Reverent; he respects the beliefs of others.

  230. Can someone please make a moral argument for or against sexual intercourse between children during Scout campouts? Assume that those involved are both/all old enough to understand what sex is and how it is done. Assume that those involved both/all consent. Refrain from using religious texts as not all here ascribe to the veracity of these documents. I’m just really curious how people think about this.

      • I can’t think of an answer.

        So I wanted to hear from people who come down on the other side of the question. I just want to know if they have a good answer. I want to know if they have an ethical objection to their children having sex on Scout camping trips. And if they do, why. And if they don’t, why.

      • Fair enough. I’m not a Venturing Crew leader, so I don’t know what the answer here is – beyond that I think there are supposed be be separate arrangements for sleeping to help prevent this. Since I don’t run a Crew though, I won’t comment further as a result.

      • I’m looking for more than just a rule stating it should be this way or that way. I really want to know why people think it should be one way or the other.

        Here’s how I think the argument has to go (if you want to make an honest argument):

        Homosexuality is good. This has to be taken as self-evident, something equivalent to “people are valuable.”

        If homosexuality is good, homosexual behavior is good. Again, this has to be taken as self-evident.

        Since homosexuality is good, and homosexual behavior is good, there is no reason to circumscribe it.

        You can extend that argument to heterosexual behavior as well.

        I want to know if there is something I’m missing. I don’t personally take the goodness of homo or hetero sexuality to be self-evident. So I don’t need to follow this logic in making a moral case about sex between children.

      • Doc, if you really believe what you are writing you have be homosexual. Either way for young boys to have sex witheach other is Perversion. Here is an answer to your question.
        I am a former scout and some of my sons and grandsons that are former scouts
        I have never seen so many comments on an issue, but there certain individuals that seem to have far too much time on their hands. Some of defend homosexuality and LBGT so vigorously that one has to assume you are involved with them and one of them. This is a little long, but please take time to read and digest it.
        This is one of the most important issues facing parents and it is up to you to educate your children and warn them of the signs and dangers of predators.
        THE BOTTOM LINE.

        The bottom Line to all of this is whether homosexuality (LBGT) is a moral issue or an immoral issue. The vast majority of you believe it is an immoral issue and so does the BSA at least until they started allowing wealthy businesses and business men to become involved and on their board and this is the results.
        This is what happens when an organization compromises it’s core values for the sake of “cash”.

        The Boy Scouts of America was founded on Godly Christian principles.
        The three major promises of the Scout Oath are:
        Duty to God and country,
        Duty to other people, and
        Duty to self (to keep oneself morally straight)

        I deal only with facts, but today the majorities are not interested in the facts. Founding President John Adams said many years ago, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
        Regarding Homosexuals serving as leaders in the Boy Scouts of America, they are a private organization and have held to the standard for a century. The organization has fought numerous court battles over the last decade ago for its right to set standards for leaders who interact with children.
        In 2000 that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts of America is a private organization and has the right to enforce a “morally straight” standard, even if prevented homosexuals and atheists from being leaders.
        Homosexual activists have stolen the word “gay” because it enhances their desirability and attractiveness. So, let’s look at the facts and the truth.
        Frist, “Columbia University psychiatry professors Drs. William Byrne and Bruce Parsons stated: ‘There is no evidence that at present to substantiate a biological theory’.”
        The claims that they are “born” homosexuals is completely false and an outright lie. It is a behavioral decision and yes there are some environmental issues that can have an effect, but the bottom line is it is a decision on an individual’s part. There are consequences to this behavior (AIDS AND HIV just for starters) published by the American Pediatrics Association and sent to all Superintendents of Education in the U. S. and are available if you are interested in the facts..

        Regarding that homosexual assaults on young boys some say, “All male child sexual abuses are not committed by homosexual men, they are committed by pedophiles”. That is correct in that a pedophile is an adult who has sexual desire for children or who has committed the crime of sex with a child. Now, there may be a very small percentage of this crime that are women, but for arguments sake let’s say it is 95% men who are male homosexuals. This is why the Scouts have taken this hard line stand for 100 years, but seem to now be folding because of money.

        Dictionary definitions of Homosexuality:

        Gay (gay) Webster’s 1913 Definition: Excited with merriment; manifesting sportiveness or delight
        Up until the last quarter of 20th Century “Sodomy in the first degree was a Class A felony.”

        “Homosexuality is the condition of ‘sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex’.”
        Definition of HOMOSEXUAL
        : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex
        1bug•ger
        Definition of BUGGER: : sodomite, a : a worthless person
        Merriam-Webster Dictionary

        Medical definition of BUGGERY: sodomy
        Merriam-Webster Dictionary

        Sodomy (sodomy)
        1. Carnal copulation in a manner against nature; buggery.
        SOD’OMY, n. A crime against nature.
        Webster’s 1913 Definition
        You may not agree with this and that is your choice. But, base your opinion on facts and not on emotions or propaganda from the media.
        #####

      • Taylor, if you’ll spend some time looking, Doc has been a proponent of maintaining the current rules (at least, that’s my take). He’s got an honest question that he would like answered. So please – A. Don’t repost your letter just to prove a point you feel you need to make, we’ve all seen it, and B. Let Doc get have his conversation. Anything less is rude.

      • Taylor, not that this has anything to do with the BSA and its clear and undisputed legal right to retain its timeless values in our Scout oath and law, but let me help Doc and perhaps Charles see what some would say…all people have bad thoughts and people have bad thoughts for lots of reasons. Having bad thoughts does not make you bad. Doing bad things makes you bad. If you are having bad thoughts, then learn to exercise a thing called self discipline and put the bad thoughts out of your mind and replace the bad thoughts with good thoughts. This takes effort and work and with God’s help our condition is improved. This has broad application and hope you find it useful in your exercise. Scouting is a tool to help our young men do good things and to become moral men of conviction. This is exactly why glaad, pro-LGBT and soros folks are working hard to bully us and push us off the cliff. We in the Scouting movement are wide awake and see what is occurring, and we will not stand for this. Taylor take action to facebook, twitter, e-mail, call and do all you can do to STOP ANY VOTE FROM HAPPENING NEXT WEEK!!! We don’t want to have to do this, but class action suits WILL BE filed if the BSA takes any action to harm our boys and the timeless values of Scouting!

      • How is this relevant to the discussion? And why are you haranguing people for “not having an answer” when you yourself don’t have an answer?

    • Sexual activity has no place during campouts. That’s the rule now. That will still be the rule if this policy changes. That is something both sides generally agree on. No one here is arguing that this rule should be changed.

      • I’m not asking for a rule. I want to know why there is a rule. Why should there be a rule? Please tell me why sexual activity has no place during campouts.

      • Doc-

        Between youth? My answer here would be because sex between minors, even consenting minors, should not be allowed to occur under the watch of qualified leaders. We’re there presumably, to provide a safe environment for their activities. Not to provide a method for an unsanctioned rendezvous.

        We’re also there to teach them the importance of good citizenship and help them develop strong values. They are there to learn, grow, and be exposed to new experiences they can’t find at home (I’m trying not to leave this one open ended, take it for the literal meaning please). Developing interpersonal sexual relationships can’t be argued as a path any of that. I don’t see how it has a place on a trip yesterday, today, or in the future under any set of rules or circumstances.

        (Honestly Doc, I’m not sure where this line of questioning is going, but I am trying).

      • Because Scouting is for youth members (adult leaders not withstanding) and yes, I would have a problem with my son having sex during a camp out. Sexuality, sexual intercourse, any type of discussion about the topic has no place in the Scouting program or on a Scouting camp out.

    • I’m sure Venturing has faced this question before. They have mixed-gender outings, and the age of participants is from 14 to 21. Certainly prime hormone ages!

      I’m not aware of a national rule in this regard. Certainly, sex between consenting people of legal or similar ages is not illegal in most states.

      And then you’d have to define “sexual intercourse”. Seriously. People can get pretty creating in how they define this. Just ask Bill Clinton!

      In my experience, every youth outing has an acceptable behavior policy that everyone agrees on before they leave. This policy is usually written by the local unit or CO and everyone is aware of it and agrees with it. This policy may not have specific language about “sexual intercourse” but there is almost always a clause about people spending private time together, as well as a general clause that an adult has authority to intervene when any behavior is considered unreasonable, even if that behavior is not specifically listed.

      So, it is not so much of a moral issue, it is an issue of following behavior guidelines that everyone agrees on. “Sexual intercourse” would be outside of the bounds of any behavior that I can imagine. I guess the moral argument is that you should always follow the rules.

      • cwgmpls,

        Can you please explain if you think that this rule is a good idea or not, and why? I want to know how you think about this, not what some policy says about it.

      • I believe it is a good idea to let each unit or chartering organization make specific behavior guidelines for each outing.

        The details of expected behavior can vary quite a bit from one CO to the next. Some may require youth to attend daily prayers. Some may prohibit any public display of prayer. Some may require boys or girls wear specific type of clothing (or underclothing!). Some may require boys and girls to sleep, eat or wash in different locations. Some may be okay with boys and girls sharing a single tent, shower, latrine, or quinzee.

        Specific behavior rules should be set and enforced locally. As long as they don’t violate applicable laws, or violate national Scouting policy.

      • cwgmpls,

        You are evading the question. Tell me what you think. I am beginning to think you don’t really have a good answer.

      • At any youth outing my youth would be involved in, I think any intimate contact between two participants (including sexual intercourse) should be prohibited. It is neither the time nor the place for this type of behavior. It is a matter of common courtesy. Like prohibiting spitting. Or intentional burping at the dinner table. Or public urination. Or any number of other discourteous behaviors.

      • Hi Doc, The argument against minors engaging in sexual activities is that there are consequences to sexual activities and the youth are unprepared to deal with those consequences. Unintended pregnancy. Disease. To name just two. But the list is long. Simple display of affection have negative effects on group activities. Cliques. Distraction. Gossip and then the fall out when relationships end. I don’t have experience in how coed Venturing crews deal with this – but the youth group in our church has rules that restrict couples from public displays of affection and from isolating themselves. This is for the good of the group. You can’t control what they do on their own time, but you can enforce rules for your troop, your crew and your church youth group while they are meeting.

      • db, your 1/31/2013 at 6:09pm post does a nice job of giving all of us who support the timeless ideals of Scouting just a hint (on so many levels) why the policy change being considered is an absolute joke. Unreal! This isn’t the dating game..it is Scouting and sex needs to stay out of it.

      • Dan, I don’t understand your objection to what db said in his post above yours. He makes a case for why sex doesn’t belong in scouting. Which you agreed with in your last line in your above post. Clarify exactly what you disagree with, please?

    • OK, let me respond to myself, because this page display is crazy.

      I am asking you guys personally. I’m not looking for a reference to some rule.

      You are arguing for adding homosexuals to the BSA. This (I’m assuming, for some of you anyway) is because you find homosexuality to be morally acceptable. I do not. I am searching for a common moral ground on sexuality. I want to find out if there is something out there that you might find morally objectionable. I felt like kids having sex might be objectionable to most here, maybe not. I want to see your logic on where you draw the line on sexual morality.

      I believe that cwgmpls is saying that he/she does not have a moral objection to kids having sex. The reason he/she does not want it happening is because it is discourteous to others.

      I believe that db is saying that he/she does not have a moral objection either. The reasons he gives are practical, not moral.

      I think Charles thinks kids shouldn’t be doing this, but I’m not entirely sure why. He does list character development as something good and apparently opposed to this. But I’m looking for a why.

      I am asking if people think this is good or bad. Not if it has this consequence or that consequence. I think we (again assuming) agree that lying is bad in and of itself. Even if we get away with lying such that there are no bad consequences. It is inherently wrong. I want to know if you guys think that kids having sex is good or bad, right or wrong. I want to know where you choose to draw the line between what is morally good and what is morally bad.

      • Doc…a fair question…the obvious and historical result of their approach is that the line continues to move further and further from what is moral and good (for example, sodomy was a crime in all states in the US when Scouting was founded and things have just started to erode in states since the 1970’s) and deeper towards moral decline…the destructive path that Chales, db, cwgmpls and others like them would take Scouting leaves us with terms like “morally straight” that meaning nothing, absolutely nothing. However, the BSA is one of the few remaining places where likeminded parents and families can adhere to the timeless values of Scouting. Any guess why so much outside pressure is being brought to destroy Scouting? Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Charles, db, cwgmpls, EagleMom and others like you, are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization????

      • Ah, the morally acceptable argument. We’ve covered this ground before, Doc. I appreciate you define it differently than I do. So I’ll not go into it again.

        I don’t see Scout trips now as permission for kids to have sexual relations. It’s not tolerated in Venture Crews that are co-ed, so what leads you to fear inclusion of LGBT families/Scouts would lead us down this road? In fact, if Venture Crews can operate now as a co-ed unit, does it not prove that we would be able to find a way to prevent it from being a problem at the Troop level?

      • Again Charles,

        I’m not asking you for some sort of method for preventing this type of thing. I’m not afraid of it either.

        I want to know why you believe differently. We discussed previously that we had different senses of morality, but we never addressed why.

        Is there some way to bold the word “why?”

        I want to know why you believe what you believe. You are arguing for a looser or more open sexual morality. I want to know how loose you’re willing to be and why. I want to know why you believe that homosexuality is good, but that teens having sex on Venture Crew trips is bad. I want to know where you draw the line.

        It is my conjecture that you don’t have a good reason for where you draw the line.

      • Hi Doc- You’re still wondering when is sex wrong. One thing that I can say is when it is hurtful. Kids shouldn’t be having sex because it isn’t going to end well. So yes – its immoral. Basic morality says that if something is right for me, then there’s no way I can say it is wrong for you. Most kids have sex by age 17. But most don’t get married until their mid-twenties. So most folks in this country apparently do not find pre-marital sex immoral. Others believe it is immoral. Do we kick everyone out of scouts who ever had pre-marital sex?

      • Doc-

        No, you misunderstand where I’m coming from, so I’ll try to clarify. If this doesn’t explain my position than I don’t know how else to make it clear.

        LGBT Scouts and families are currently blocked from entering or participating in the BSA (with the exception of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell rule, which has little bearing on the current question).

        My argument is allowing them to enter doesn’t diminish the values of Scouting. The values of Scouting will remain. The purpose of Scouting, to teach the ability to make moral and ethical choices over a lifetime, will remain.

        Scout trips are not going to become orgies. Leaders are not going to be expected to teach sexual education classes. Boys will be taught how to fish, cook a tin din, interact with adults in a respectful manner and overall, business as usual will take place on trips and in meetings. The Two Deep Leadership rule won’t suddenly burst into flames.

        Homosexuality isn’t good. It’s not bad. It simply…is. Just as heterosexuality isn’t good or bad. Sexuality, as it enters into the argument, is something that should still be taught about in the classroom at school or in the home. Parents should teach their children what it means to be a responsible adult in this regard. Scout Leaders…we should teach respect (not that it’s not taught at home, but it becomes more important when it isn’t), citizenship, and how and when to make a taut line hitch.

        On trips, sexual behavior isn’t encouraged now, what makes you think that adding one demographic of the population will change that? I think that many people who argue here against it (and I’m not pointing a finger at you, Doc, I’m stating a belief that I have) are uncomfortable with either their own sexuality or are to some degree uncomfortable with homosexuality. It’s not a curse or a plague on mankind – it’s a state of being for some people.

        One of my points, as I continue to try to make it, is that the BSA serves all faiths. Some faiths out there accept and support families and individuals who are LGBT. So it’s a case of ‘good for some, but not good for all’. It bothers me that we’re exclusionary for that reason. I know Scouts who are LGBT. I’m sure that if you know enough youth, you do as well (whether or not they admit it to you or you know that they are). Do we currently have problems with sexual situations in Scouts as a result? I have yet to see or hear of any.

        I’ve been in Scouts for 14 years as an adult. I’ve seen some of the pain that this policy brings with it, on both sides. Parents that refuse to sign their kids up – not because they themselves are LGBT or because their son is homosexual – but because they don’t care for the current policy of the BSA. For every family like that, there is a kid who is missing out on the greatest adventure I think a boy can have.

        To say that I’m arguing for a looser more open sexual morality isn’t the way I perceive it. Rather, I perceive it as I’m asking for a more open environment where people of all walks of life feel welcome. Sexual morality, as you put it, isn’t something that enters into the conversation for me. The opportunity to serve more youth does.

        I’m starting to ramble a bit…happens when I’m tired and typing. I don’t know if I’m making my position any clearer to you.

        It pains me, to know that there are Scouts in the program that have to hide who they are while in Scouts. While they are at home, while they are at school, they don’t have to hide. Their friends, of both sexes, accept them (or don’t) for who they are. But while a Scout, they have to keep a secret to stay. When they’re at school, their hetero friends aren’t targets of their affections. So why would it be different while in Scouts? This is the problem I think. I’m not afraid of what homosexuals joining Scouts would mean. I’m who I am, and I know that I’m not interested. Scouts aren’t any different.

        Here’s the last thing I’ve got to say on this topic tonight. Generations change. As we get older, new generations come forward. The youth of today don’t feel the same level of stigma associated with homosexuality that adults of various ages do. And the older the generation, the greater the difficulty we have as a population. It’s not that morality is changing – although I think that does happen. But in this regard, I think that perceived fears lessen. Youth these days have fewer fears about what it means to be homosexual or to have a friend who is homosexual or a teacher or a guidance counselor or a relative…

        Kids do make fun. The become uncomfortable talking about sex and sexuality. But not as much as they used to years ago. And their fears are not as strong as they once were. Sure, in some more sheltered or shuttered environments this may not be as true. But nationally, taken as a whole, it’s an absolute. So who are we protecting from homosexuals? Us? Our kids? Our sensibilities??

        Feel free to tear into this some more. I don’t think though that I can explain myself any better at this point. Doc, I do appreciate talking with you – again, I’ll state that I think you represent an intelligent other side of the argument. I hope to meet you on the path of Scouting one day.

      • Charles, it is not an argument to state that homosexual acts are not consistent with the timeless values of Scouting, it is the simple truth. I recognize that you don’t like this fact, but facts are stubborn things. In BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000), the BSA (not USSCOUTS.org) successfully argued that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of BSA, which is a private, not-for-profit organization. The Court found the BSA to be an “expressive association” as its adult leaders seek to inculcate Scouts with the BSA’s value system. The BSA successfully and correctly stated that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior. The Court gave deference to the BSA’s statements regarding the nature of its expression and recognized the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct.

      • You say it’s a fact that homosexuality is inconsistent with the values of scouting. Its actually your opinion.

      • Beg to differ..First, the BSA gets to define what the Scout oath and law mean. see, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). Second, the BSA successfully argued in that case that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of BSA. Specifically, the BSA successfully and correctly stated that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior. I stand with the BSA, and you seek to change the BSA. Can you now see the difference between fact and opinion?

      • You do realize the BSA has been backing off all the statements it has made in the past denigrating homosexuality? It was interesting to note when the BSA announced the results of its secret two year commission last year it didn’t say homosexuality was immoral or inconsistent with the oath or law. The BSA said it was continuing its membership policy because that’s what a majority of its members wanted. There was no moral reasoning behind it.

      • BSAScoutleader: Finally Beth has some facts for her to think about. I am not sure how long Beth has been in Scouting but her comments seem to be of one who has not had much experience in the history of the program. I am sure she is a great person and hope that she is a scout leader we need more leaders. This is my last comment on this present forum and have enjoyed all the comments. No matter what the outcome next week it is forums like these brings out the best in a person and everyone should be congratulated for their comments it only shows how dedicated scouters are to the youth of America and the First Amendment has given all of us a voice. I will wait for next week vote and certainly put my big mouth in the thick of things as always after the vote. Sincerely,
        Trenton Spears
        Scoutmaster Troop 144

      • db, the “reasoning” behind our policy is that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. Everyone knows that BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000) is good law and that BSA has not changed its policy. Hence, the reason why glaad, pro-LGBT and soros groups are working so hard to name call and bully to be able to push a change through next week and before the Scouting community can act to protect its program. Our response..a Scout is BRAVE!
        The fact is that NOW is the moment to take action and save Scouting. Now is the time to stand firm and we WILL prevail. This is our organization, and we love the values of Scouting. I ask members of the Board who see these posts to be wise and not take any action next week given the improper and amoral influence on our organization from these outside groups…have tons of links I can send..this is a real effort to kill Scouting…
        http://cnsnews.com/blog/j-matt-barber/lefts-orwellian-censorship-campaign
        http://www.catholic.org/comments/news/45290/?page=4
        http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

      • Beg to differ again..the BSA has made no change to its position in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000) where it successfully and correctly stated that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior. What you don’t seem to be grasping is that timeless values don’t change. If you are aware of a policy change, please share it with the rest of us? If you along with Glaad, pro-LGBT groups and other Soros funded groups continue to push and pressure for a rush for a policy change next week, we will take all legal and other steps necessary to oppose this action. We all see what is going on, and we are not going to let our Scouting program be taken from us! Are you listening Board members??

      • BSAScoutleader finally Beth has some facts for her to think about. I am not sure how long Beth has been in Scouting but her comments seem to be of one who has not had much experience in the history of the program. I am sure she is a great person and hope that she is a scout leader we need more leaders. This is my last comment on this present forum and have enjoyed all the comments. No matter what the outcome next week is forums like these brings out the best in a person and everyone should be congradulated for their comments it only shows how dedicated scouters are to the youth of America and the First Amendment has given all of us a voice. I will wait for next week vote and certainly put my big mouth in the thick of things as always after the vote. Sincerely,
        Trenton Spears Scoutmaster Troop 144

      • The Scout Oath and Law have not been defined to exclude homosexuals. That is a separate policy. Which the BSA leadership may soon overturn. I am fully aware of the difference between fact and opinion.

      • DantheScoutingman, please be careful when using facts with beth, db, cwpgls, EagleMom, Angie, Charles Featherer and other LGBT activists as they will confuse it with fiction! Like 99% of the folks on the left, facts are discarded as bath water. They aren’t going to let facts get in the way of their supporting their LGBT ideology. Facts have no place at this fireside! I still can’t believe that this is even being discussed.

      • You misrepresent my position. I believe discourteous behavior is immoral. So I do have a moral objection to people having sex when there has been a common understanding they will not.

      • You are setting up a straw-man argument. You are arguing as if there is some disagreement about the morality of kids having sex at a Scout event. When, in fact, everyone is in full agreement that they should not. And nobody, besides you, has ever hinted that kids should be allowed to do so.

    • Doc, raging hormones are raging hormones whether it’s between two heterosexuals, homosexuals or kids who are ‘unsure’ what seems like a good idea when your in that phase (ie, inappropriate behaviors) that turns into something you may regret after the fact. By then the damage is done. I was no saint as a teenager and I made poor decisions – ones you can not take back. While BSA does not ‘teach’ sex anymore then schools, church groups etc. we ALL know there are incidents occurring the issue is to avoid or control them. The difference now with BSA (not going to go into Venturing) is that it is all boys (with the majority heterosexual – though I hear people talking about a DADT – that is not an issue where we scout) Now you have to deal with tent/sleeping/showering/changing after swimming issues with boys who prefer boys. No they aren’t all coming to BSA to ‘troll’ for a date but there will be a clear violation of the boys who are uncomfortable in these situations causing – you guessed it – more discrimination when there needs to be gay vs non gay tent arrangements, showers/baths and changing rooms. You cannot have it both ways there is always going to be someone that feels that their rights have been violated and they have been discriminated against. Letting the CO decide will not solve it because what happens at events outside your troop on a larger level? Who’s rights get to prevail then? Who’s liable when a boy feels like he’s been ‘hit on’ by a gay scout from another troop? It’s a Pandora’s box Doc. That is the best I can do without being biblical about it.

      • ScoutMammax3 – you do raise sensible concerns. But many, many organizations have figured out ways to minimize the problems, without excluding anyone. Schools, 4H, travel sports teams, colleges which run dormitories, and even our military – they all have to work on these issues. In fact, even under the current policy, it is wise to assume that there *will* be gay scouts on any given camping troop, simply because most gay boys aren’t aware of their sexual orientation when they join the BSA as cubs. If other organizations can do it, I *know* the BSA, with all it’s intelligent, thoughtful leaders, and hard-working, kind and friendly scouts, can manage it.

    • Guys,

      Some of you are on here arguing for changing this rule. Some of you are on here defending it. The argument goes something like this:

      “We need to change this rule because it isn’t fair.”

      “No, we shouldn’t change it because homosexuality is wrong. My holy book says so.”

      “I don’t believe in your holy book.”

      I agree with those who want to change the rule that citing a holy book is not particularly convincing if you are not a member of that religion. But no one who is demanding change has offered any explanation for their source of morality. I want those who are arguing to change this rule to explain why they think homosexuality is good. After that, I want to hear where they draw the lines on sexual morality, not consequences, not practicalities, not rules, MORALITY. I want to know how they know that lying is bad and homosexuality is good. I want someone to justify why teens having sex on campouts is not ok using the same moral framework they used to justify homosexuality (just some sexual situation that I considered possible, and that people might object to).

      Nobody does this. No one on the change-the-rule side is ever asked to justify their moral framework.

      • Hi Doc. We’ll agree that lying is bad. But we’re not on here arguing that “homosexuality is good”. Homosexuality is one aspect of humanity. Just like being left handed. I’m not old enough to know first hand, but I’ve heard stories that teachers used to whack kids with rulers if they tried to write with their left hand. They were forced to learn to write with the right hand. Is being right handed “good” and being left handed “bad” ? No. It has nothing to do with morality. It’s not even scientifically understood how or why people are left handed. God just made them that way.

      • Sexuality, right or wrong, good or bad, is completely irrelevant to Scouting. One’s source of morality on the subject is irrelevant, because the subject has no place in Scouting.

        “Education for sexuality belongs in the home… Scouting should reinforce rather than contradict what is being taught in the family and by the youth’s religious leaders” BSA Statement on Human Sexuality, 1984

  231. This may seem obvious but let us all be really clear on this one point, there is no right being violated here i.e. the BSA is a private organization and no one has an inherent civil right to belong. I see many comments that use segregation, and exclusion. Again there is no inherent civil right that says you have a right to join the BSA. The “civil rights” argument does not apply as per the SCOTUS ruling.

    • Correct. However, there are arguable parallels that can and should be examined as we discuss this.

      One point I haven’t tried making yet, but others have is this one:

      When the discussion started on allowing women into Scouting as leaders, I’m sure some of these things were said: we’ll have to have separate facilities, we’ll have to be more careful about things we say, we’ll have to stop our trek to skinny dip at the one lake, leaders will have sex on camp outs, what if a female leader touches one of my kids, etc, etc, etc,.

      I can make almost any sentence a parallel here. My point is, women didn’t kill Scouting. They revitalized it. Those that couldn’t accept the change left. And change – did come at a cost. Concessions had to be made. Policies had to be adopted. But the organization survived. Imagine that.

      We may be a private organization, but that doesn’t mean we can’t learn from our mistakes. And there are many people in this room right now that thing barring LGBT is a mistake that should be corrected.

      • You gave him too much credit, Charles. Civil rights never have and never will apply only to public entities. The blacks who marched for civil rights held sit-ins at diners and other whites-only PRIVATE organizations. If the government gave full access to black people at its facilities but hotels, restaurants, clubs, and private bussing organizations still had whites-only areas, that would not be civil rights.

        I don’t know exactly how legal experts draw the line between civil rights that must be legally enforced and those that are not (i.e., allowing private entities to bar whomever they choose), but I do know that Fair Housing/Fair Lending laws, for example, bar owners of apartment buildings or banks, etc. from discriminating based on race, gender, etc. So obviously those private entities are not allowed to choose. My guess is that, because BSA is a voluntary organization and not essential to basic well-being (the way housing is, for example), that that’s why SCOTUS went the way it did.

        But all of this is irrelevant. BSA is opting to voluntarily change its policy. Clearly they have seen the broader civil rights issue and are not being bound by narrow legal interpretations of what “civil rights” are.

      • You hit the nail right on the head. The BSA is a private volunteer organization and that is exactly why this is not a civil rights issue and should not be framed in the way it has been framed. This is an access issue and the two are different precisely because of the volunteer status. The interpretation you so easily dismiss today may be critical to another group tomorrow. This is one of the things I believe Charles was also hinting at.

      • A few clarifications and observations…First, the statement that “the BSA is a private organization and no one has an inherent civil right to belong to it” is 100% correct and is properly classified as being a “fact”. Further, the BSA is within its legal and moral right to exclude those who have no desire to adhere to its timeless values. Second, none of the above has anything to do with one’s “civil rights.” No “civil right” to join scouting exists, and the BSA can legally exclude a person who has no desire to adhere to the values of Scouting. For example, a boy who has sex with another boy at a campout and then brags to other Scouters about doing this (at least for now and assuming BSA national makes the right decision) can be removed from the troop and the BSA and that youth cannot claim that his “civil rights” were violated because he was kicked out of Scouting. As for the bizarre statement that what BSA national is considering next week constitutes the “BSA” is opting to voluntarily change its policy, first, what is occurring is a result of pressure and bullying from outside of BSA and second, how do you define the “BSA”? BSA National is getting pounded by its volunteer members (keep up the great work!!!)crashing servers and bring down phone systems. Given this reaction, BSA National must do a formal and full poll of all adult member volunteers before voting on this issue, and it is clear that the vote next week must be delayed and simply cannot go forward.

      • I agree there are things we can learn but one of the things that is wrong on many opinions expressed here is the way they are framed. I happen to believe that in America you compete on a level playing field. The LGBT Community does not like the BSA’s policies that is fine. Start your own organization. Do the hard work. Build it up. Use the money spent in lawsuits and the passion trying to change the BSA and pour it into a better organization. Defeat the BSA in the area of hard work and ideas. Many believe that there is an inherent civil right granting immediate inclusion to the BSA. There is no such right. We can make a case for or against changes in BSA policy but we must do it in a manner that strengthens the intended position. When you start off with a fallacy it diminishes the overall outcome.

      • Andrew, and here is the problem. Why does there need to be a redundancy? Do you have any idea how many people there are in the BSA right now that don’t want the current policy to continue?

        It’s not just people who want in. It’s people who are in that want the change as well. And most of those people aren’t LGBT. (Arguing blindly, I know, but I’m trying again). Those of us that are in the BSA that would like it changed see the potential to be greater through opening our doors. You think it would lessen us. But if you’re heart is strong, if your will is true, you can make it stronger as well.

      • Charles, Yes I do know and it is the majority. Their reasons may vary but to them they are valid reasons. I am in the BSA and have been for well over 20 years as a Scout and Scouter. My son is an Eagle Scout with 4 Eagle Palms. He has earned his Denali and he is half way to Venture Silver. I am looking for a community Venture Crew for my oldest daughter so she can participate. I have had every Unit position you can hold except COR and I am a District Chair. What lessens us is turning away from the historical context of the Scout Oath and Scout Law. Understanding who Powell was and what his message was. The Oath and Law are meant to be an anchor in times of trouble. Today due to nothing more than legal terrorism that anchor is being redefined. I believe in the principles contained in the Scout Oath and Law. I do not parse them out or pick and chose which one works and which one doesn’t. They work together. Any Eagle Scout that lied, hid, obfuscated, or misrepresented himself should never be made an Eagle Scout period. The ends do not justify the means. Our tradition and our heritage sets us apart from all other youth organizations. The BSA should never lower its standards if people want to join then raise yourself up to meet the criteria. There is the GSA and the AHG on the girls side, two redundant organizations. There is no reason why the same cannot be done on the boys side. So I say again compete in the arena of ideas. Create a group that does everything you want and take the BSA by storm. What makes most people angry is the way this has all been done, Many feel as if they are being mugged and left hanging in the wind. I do not blame them one bit. They are not homophobes or bigots, They have deep personal feelings that are legitimate. If you look at most of my posts they focus on the process and the legalities. They focus on the potential damage no one wants to discuss.

      • Thanks for a rational argument. I’m going to offer one idea though that has been floating around in my head for a day or two. When we talk of Baden-Powell, do you think that he meant Scouting to be for all boys? I’d like to think he did, without the qualification that people seem to want to place on it.

      • When Scouters (who uphold the timeless values of Scouting) talk of Baden-Powell, they do so with a desire to uphold and teach the moral values of Scouting to our next generation of moral and good men and fathers, and yes, these values are for ALL boys, including those who are confused about sexual orientation or have same gender attraction. It cannot be disputed that Baden-Powell would have us teach all boys to be “morally straight”, yet you and extremists like you would have BSA take the position that homosexual acts are ok and consistent with the Scout oat and law. As you well know, sodomy was and has been a crime in all states until in the 1970’s when some courts started the path of our current moral decline.

      • Let’s explore….I concur that you are in the same extreme camp that seeks to change Scouting. You are both intolerant of Scouting’s rejection of an amoral life including disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders, and you want the BSA to change its views because they don’t fit your personal views. Have I misstated what you have already said in your posts? I think that the question asked by Danthescoutingman to others on this site is a good one and would be helpful to us in seeking how you view tolerance, inclusion and respect: how do you feel about Scouters who “joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight?” Your thoughts on this are very helpful to better understand your views on tolerance, inclusion and respect.

      • Dear BSAScoutLeader: the BSA policy would allow you to have a troop charted to a church that does just that. If your chartered organization teaches that homosexuality is a sin and you wish to not allow homosexuals into your troop, then you would be free to do so. During Scout’s Own services you can preach the virtues you hold dear. All we’re asking is that you allow those of us who believe an opposing Christian viewpoint to have the same opportunity.

      • db, we are fully aware of the implications of the proposed action to be taken by the Board and understand why we will NOT let this happen. The more interesting question for those who seek to force these amoral values on Scouting is this…if the shoe was on the other foot… and we had Scouters who joined the LGBT and then told the LGBT that the the LGBT was being intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and “clean” such that the LGBT folks need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should work to become “morally straight” would YOU support this? and if so (if not, you would be a hypocrite, correct?) please spend your time at the LGBT site and preach to them YOUR standard for tolerance, inclusion and respect. As for me and my fellow Scouters, we stand with the US Supreme Court and support the right of the BSA (a private organization) to teach and live by its own moral, correct and true Scout oath and law.

      • I don’t know. It’s kind of a crazy question, isn’t it? I guess the answer to your question is that these “chapters that teach homosexuality is immoral” already exist – so yeah – go ahead – form them. These chapters that exist already preach exactly what you’re espousing and you’re free to join them if you’re not already a member. There are many churches that fit the bill.

      • I do not know. The first Troops were extremely selective. Only the most dedicated and talented ones were allowed to join. Powell himself was said to be very demanding. The first generation of leaders that trained under Powell were equally tough. They demanded perfection and they did not sign off on a skill until it was demonstrated perfectly. Clearly the tenants he set forth still apply today. The man was a spy, a soldier, an author, a naturalist, and a teacher. In his world loyalty, honesty, and duty were not treated as buzz words or out of date terms too difficult to live up to. The Scout Law and Scout Oath are a direct result of experiences gained in the most demanding of situations. Both in their entirety embodied what Powell believed made boys into men. Given the social norms of his day, and his religious beliefs homosexuality would never have entered the equation. It would have been unheard of for anyone to admit that abhorrent behavior (please remember the 1900’s context) in public and then openly seek or demand approval. Powell was specific when it came to sex and morality, it was to be taught at home and had no place in Scouting. He also was clear that morally straight meant morally straight. There was nothing ambiguous. Atheists would never be allowed either because an atheist lacked a duty to God. Women were excluded yet he encouraged and help create the Girls Scouts. At the end of the day anyone who did or said anything that detracted from the mission he set forth would never have been allowed to participate. At the end of the day I think Powell would shake his head, chastise all of us for focusing on the wrong thing, and then teach us all how it is supposed to be done. I believe his words would be if you meet the standard and are dedicated then you have a place. If you do not meet the standard keep trying until you do. I wonder if we as leaders would make it under Powell’s watchful eye. I also wonder if today’s BSA Executive Board would meet muster.

      • To the person who goes by the screen name “Charles”. Do you ever go to work or does Soros pay your bills? Here is what we know (I have been on the phone with our Council CEO who is not happy about what is going on)…BSA National is getting pounded by its volunteer members (keep up the great work!!! I am getting reports that our voices are being heard loud and clear!) crashing servers and bring down phone systems. BSA National just set up today a new e-mail address for BSA members to log complaints about this bizarre action being contemplated next week. What we also know is that BSA National is being bullied by the pro-LGBT groups into taking a hasty vote next week. BSA national would be wise to slow down and formally poll ALL of its adult volunteer members on this issue. Given this reaction, BSA National must do a formal and full poll of all adult member volunteers before voting on this issue, and it is clear that the vote next week must be delayed and simply cannot go forward.

      • Another Soros fan. Yes, I work. Let’s move on from that concern. Your Council CEO is not a CEO. He or she is a Scout Executive. Yours feels one way, perhaps mine feels another.

        I’ve suggested that a poll would be a good idea as well. Go ahead and scroll back if you like. However, my suggestion for a poll is different than yours. Either would work equally well. A poll may be the fairest way to help determine the future of our beloved BSA. But I don’t think they’ll do it. Instead, National is going to make a determination in a conference room just as they did before. They’ll weight different arguments, form opinions and cast a vote. And we’ll all need to live with it.

        (A word on that. The decision may already be made if it is financial pressures that are forcing the reconsideration of position).

        Everyone will have a choice. If they don’t approve the change or if they do, we’ll all have a chance to say – this isn’t for me anymore. And our Charters will have a chance to do the same. When this was first discussed 6 months ago, I could see the writing on the wall. The BSA will change. I thought it would take another 2 to 5 years, but I felt strongly that it would make the change to policy to allow LGBT families to register. And here we are only 6 months later. Just 6 months. If that doesn’t tell you something, I don’t know what will.

        By the way, I still find it funny how people poke at who I’m registered as from behind nom de plumes. But I won’t change your mind about that. If you’re not willing to share with who you are, how can I take anything you say seriously?

      • Charles: Dan here sounds quite a bit like BSAScoutleader, don’t you think? Talking about Soros, implying that Charles probably isn’t your real name, and I think I’ve seen multiple references to the “timeless values of scouting.” Ironic that BSAScoutleader accused others of logging in multiple times with multiple email addresses to comment over and over.

      • The only thing missing is a repeated reference to the “amoral” behavior of homosexuals. Which, considering the definition of amoral means neither moral nor immoral, leads me to believe that he shouldn’t really have a problem with homosexuality. Have a nice evening. 🙂

      • It is clear from your countless posts that You, Beth and others seek to create a false sense of division with in the BSA on the correct position that homosexual acts violate the Scout oath and law and have no place in Scouting. Only by doing a fair and open poll of all adult leaders of the BSA can BSA national properly consider this issue. This rush to reconsider (only after a few months have lapsed since the last vote.. what has changed) smells bad. It smells of back-room deals and big-time pressure from those groups who hate Scouting. All of the LGBT groups (are prepared for this and appear to be working in concert with bad apple Board members) like glaad ganging up on us now and are telling their members to (twitter, facebook, call and e-mail bomb the BSA to) pressure this change and push us off the moral cliff (google their websites these folks are all working in concert we even have some of these folks posting on this site all day long without going to work). The fact is that BSA is feeling a lot of pressure from the majority of Scouters who hold fast to the timeless values of Scouting. I see no legitimate way for any vote to occur next week. By the way, please share with us how you and Beth feel about Scouters joining the LGBT and telling them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that would have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral (amoral for Beth) and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Are you and Beth willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work…do you really want me to go back an pull all of your posts and list the times of day you are posting?) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization???? We will not abandon Scouting, and we are going to fight to keep it from being perverted!

      • Danthescoutingman is spot on…given this outside interference by Soros, Glaad and tons of other pro-LGBT groups, BSA National must (it is not a suggestion) not take action next week. Full transparency from our Board is required and it is being demanded by the Scouting volunteers. A full accounting of the backroom dealings is needed as is the undue influence going on, and we (actual Scouters who love the timeless values of Scouting) need to be able to communicate our views to our Board. The 1.4 million e-mail blast from glaad folks to our Board creates a false sense of support from within the BSA to abandon our timeless values. We call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts and honest of heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process and get some real polling/voting from our volunteer leaders on this issue. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! As for Charles’ comment that we will all get a choice, that is simply not true..unless a formal poll/vote is conducted of all adult volunteers. The legal and real effect of the Board action (if wrongly decided) will be that the BSA condones homosexual acts and finds these acts to be compatible with the Scout oath and law. This is a cliff that we can not come back from without significant litigation and destruction of the BSA. DO NOT TAKE ANY ACTION NEXT WEEK!

      • Seriously. You are using a screen name. Both Charles and I have been using our real names. (We’re not in complete agreement on this issue by the way.)

        We’ve given enough details in addition to our real names that you should easily be able to research and find our connections to Scouting.

        I can assure you that Charles is a real Scouter and is using his real name.

        I’d certainly like to know who’s paying people to post their opinions here, no one offered me anything. Perhaps I wasn’t vocal enough? 🙂

        So why don’t you post your full real name?

        By the way Jo is short for Joseph. Most people in my area of Scouting know me by the name of “Mr. Jo Pop” or just “jopop”.

      • Thanks again, Jo Pop.

        I promised myself last night I was done, but I felt drawn back into it today. I really do need to back off some, there are enough people here with valid viewpoints that one voice either way isn’t necessary. You see me in here tomorrow, you have my permission to smack me around next time you see me. (For those that don’t know him, Jo’s a big guy – so I have reason now to behave for at least 24 hours).

      • Danthescoutingman, I suggest that whatever person is using screen name “Jo Poplawski” and “Charles Featherer” post a copy of their driver’s license, BSA member id number, and phone number and let all of us verify who they are and we can then all agree do the same including EagleMom, CWGMPLS and db, etc. All agreed??? No counter offers will be accepted and please stop with more empty words..just the facts. If Jo and Charles (or whoever they really are) insist on going down this path, then at least have the courage to stand behind your empty words and accept my offer which will put your personal attacks to bed. We all know what is happening on this site, and what outside groups are trying to do to our Scouting program…
        http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

      • BSAScoutleader, I have been very careful to avoid personal attacks here. I am the mom of an Eagle scout. I don’t see GLADD’s discussion of this issue as a bad thing. Their mission is to eliminate discrimination against LGBT folks. That’s what they’re trying to do. No doubt there are groups on the other side who are doing the same. It’s how our great country works. We are allowed – and in fact our culture encourages us – to speak out when we would like to see change. We are allowed to advocate for a boycott, or to shun a company or organization, if we feel they are doing wrong. It’s a peaceful way to raise an issue. Organizations are free to listen or not, agree or not, as they see fit. I love our country, and I wouldn’t have it any other way.

        I’m hoping that the BSA is keeping their focus on their members’ concerns on both sides, and on the best interests of Scouts, but they do not seem to be particularly transparent on this issue, so I don’t know.

      • Pointing out that screen name “Jo …” and “Charles …” are only critical of my screen name (because I support the timeless values of Scouting) and not EagleMom, CWGMPLS and db, etc. is not a personal attack is what we call fact. No offense was intended and I hope none was taken. Now that we have addressed this, perhaps you will join with us in declaring firmly to the Board that there is all kinds of foul play going on (see posts on this site and do your research), and that BSA National should be listening to its adult volunteer leaders who are firmly opposed to what is happening and not cutting deals with outside groups like glaad, pro-LGBT and other soros funded groups. WE MAKE A DEMAND FOR TRANSPARENCY and further demand that NO ACTION be taken until we get a real and formal poll/vote from the adult volunteers on this. Further, we call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts and who are honest of heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger!

        Glaad needs to respect the decision in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000) where the US Supreme Court found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and where the Court recognized BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. As such and with all due courtesy, acknowledge and accept BSA’s rights under the law and please do not use words like discrimination. Why? Because a Scout is HONEST.

  232. I’m going to suggest something novel here…If BSA is truly a boy run organization, let the boys decide free of coercion (either way). It is their organization.

    • Because the unit may be youth led (if it is a Boy Scout troop or Venturing crew) but the unit ultimately belongs to the Chartered Organization. The youth members should have no say so in the policy set down by National or by the Chartered Organization. That is one of the reasons I believe in the standing policy, because human sexuality and discussions thereof have no place in Scouting and should not be discussed with the youth members. That topic is for families to discuss, we are there to teach them citizenship, character, outdoor skills, conservation, and other Scout Skill, not human sexuality.

    • The amount of pressure that the pro-LGBT groups are putting on right now is crazy. The smell blood in the water given certain plants and bad apples on the BSA Board (who by the way MUST BE FIRED. We need to identify them and tell them to leave the BSA) and they are pushing all out to destroy the BSA next week. Go to their websites and verify what I am saying, they are calling for over 1 million e-mails to blast the BSA. As the BSA is getting hit by folks who are not even registered Scouters and given all of this outside pressure and influence on our Organization, BSA national MUST do a formal and full poll of all adult member volunteers before voting on this issue. Otherwise, it will have no credibility. BSA needs to slow down. talk to its adult volunteers and think about what they are doing as class action lawsuits are being prepared and will be filed against the BSA if it takes action to harm the organization. The pro-LGBT folks don’t want this process to slow down as they are trying to catch us flatfooted and off-guard. These groups are well funded and have slowly been working to destroy us from within since they could not do so using the legal system. Do you see a little more clearly what is really going on here?

    • I have no doubt that, if left up to the scouts I know, they would change the policy immediately. They have grown up with gay friends, classmates, and co-workers, and in many cases family members – aunts and uncles, cousins or even siblings. They even know a few gay scouts. They have lived and worked side-by-side with these boys (and girls!) for many years, and respect them. They have no reason to exclude them from scouting.

      I know that things are different in other parts of the country. I think the proposed policy is trying to make sure that, at least at the troop level, no one who is uncomfortable with this change has it forced on their troop. By the time scouts are working above the troop level, they are capable of working alongside others who have very different beliefs – Christian next to Jew, Muslim next to Hindu. That’s part of what scouting at the higher levels is all about. I have the utmost faith that good scouts everywhere can find a way to live with this policy, even if they aren’t happy with the change.

  233. Pulled directly from USSCOUTS.org

    DUTY TO SELF: Keeping yourself physically strong means taking care of your body. Eat the right foods and build your strength. Staying mentally awake means learn all you can, be curious, and ask questions. Being morally straight means to live your life with honesty, to be clean in your speech and actions, and to be a person of strong character.
    Doesn’t say anything about sex or sexual orientation

    A Scout is Helpful.
    A Scout cares about other people. He willingly volunteers to help others without expecting payment or reward.
    A Scout is Friendly.
    A Scout is a friend to all. He is a brother to other Scouts. He offers his friendship to people of all races and nations, and respects them even if their beliefs and customs are different from his own.
    A Scout is Courteous.
    A Scout is polite to everyone regardless of age or position. He knows that using good manners makes it easier for people to get along.
    A Scout is Kind.
    A Scout knows there is strength in being gentle. He treats others as he wants to be treated. Without good reason, he does not harm or kill any living thing.

    A Scout cares about other people. Respects them even if their beliefs are different. A Scout is polite to everyone.
    Maybe we all could do with a refresher course. Take a deep breath and enter the 21st century.

    • Keith, with all due respect and please do not take offense, but are you a Scouter? In BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000), the BSA (not USSCOUTS.org) successfully argued that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of BSA, which is a private, not-for-profit organization. The Court found the BSA to be an “expressive association” as its adult leaders seek to inculcate Scouts with the BSA’s value system. The BSA successfully and correctly stated that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior. The Court gave deference to the BSA’s statements regarding the nature of its expression and recognized the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. You asked for a refresher so…..hope this helps.

      • This is correct. But it is a bit odd that people are arguing that a line of argument that was expressed in the year 2000 somehow expresses the foundational principles of Scouting.

        Keith is asking us to reflect on the foundational values of Scouting. Not on a line of legal argument that was constructed by some church leaders and a few lawyers in the year 2000.

      • cwgmpls, fyi..2000 is the year that SCOTUS heard BSA v. Dale. What is correct is that AT LEAST as of 1978-the year James Dale (the party in the case) entered Scouting-the official position of the Boy Scouts was that avowed homosexuals were not to be Scout leaders. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). Don’t re-write history. This whole gay issue is an invention of the last 30 to 40 years and is being shoved on us by glaad, pro-LGBT and other Soros funded groups. The BSA made this policy to deal with the declining moral culture in the past 30 or 40 years and the BSA has never changed. Further, we will not allow this to change next week or ever!

      • The Boy Scouts have repeatedly and publicly expressed its views with respect to homosexual conduct by its claims and dollars spent in prior litigation. For example, Curran v. Mount Diablo Council of Boy Scouts of America, No. C-365529 (Cal. Super. Ct., July 25, 1991); 48 Cal. App. 4th 670, 29 Cal. Rptr. 2d 580 (1994); 17 Cal. 4th 670, 952 P.2d 218 (1998). The BSA policy on this has never changed and this is why glaad, pro-GLBT and other Soros funded groups are piling on right now and working hard to kill Scouting. Newsflash for these folks, Scouting will not allow this hijacking to occur next week or ever!

  234. We will be leaving BSA when this is adopted, which in my opinion is a done deal. I don’t see a future for us in this new BSA. Our Troop is in agreement with this. But we are like family and we are determined to proceed growing our boys in leadership, learning skills and having fun without BSA. However, I’m interested in forming an alternate national organization similar in structure and programming to BSA with values like AHG (our sister group) that are based in churches to move our guys into as soon as possible. Something where we honor everything they have done in BSA and the interim period so they can keep working on their own or with their current Troop and receive as soon as we can get it together. Does anyone know of others interested in doing this? It is a huge undertaking and will require lots of money and paperwork but I’m not about to let our boys down. I will put the 20 hours a week or more that I spend working on our three BSA units working to get a national alternate up and running asap.

    • abetterbsa, I agree 100% with your concern and yes you correctly see the problem, but solutions are needed….this is a critical time for you and your troop to turn this into productive energy to fight for our boys and the timeless values of Scouting. All of the LGBT groups like glaad ganging up on us now and are telling their members to (twitter, facebook, call and e-mail bomb the BSA to) pressure this change and push us off the moral cliff (google their websites these folks are all working in concert we even have some of these folks posting on this site all day long without going to work). You and your troop are needed in the fight! Come join the fight! Don’t give in to the vocal and amoral minority. The BSA is feeling a lot of pressure from the majority of Scouters like us, and we are winning. BSA National just set up today a new e-mail address for BSA members to log complaints about this bizarre action being contemplated next week. BSA national would be wise and should continue to be pressured to slow down and formally poll ALL of its adult volunteer members on this issue. Given this reaction, BSA National must do a formal and full poll of all adult member volunteers before voting on this issue, and it is clear that the vote next week must be delayed and simply cannot go forward.

    • abetterbsa, I’m in the same boat. I hope it doesn’t come to it, but count me in if you need help forming an alternate org.

      • Thanks abetterbsa and Allen n TX, your words mean a lot and Scouters appreciate what you are saying. I would only add that NOW is the time to take action and the policy has not changed. If you abandon Scouting and form a new group, what will stop or prevent Glaad and others from doing to this new organization in say 5, 10, 20 or 100 years what they are doing to the BSA now. We have countless of billions into the BSA and the branding of BSA and outside groups are seeking by hostile take over to steal our timeless values. This action is offensive. You need to get in the fight and get on facebook, twitter, e-mail call and talk to your Packs, Troops, and friends to call on all members of the Board who are honest in heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! Millions of eligible class members who (are part of US Scouting and have nothing to do with other scouting groups) have donated time and money based on the timeless values of Scouting in the US, will be part of the lawsuits that will be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National, but it is better for BSA National to delay the vote and provide transparency. There is all kinds of foul play going on (see posts on this site and do your research), and we need to call for transparency and demand that no action be taken until we get a real and formal poll/vote from the adult volunteers on this. We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on and we WILL NOT be moved!
        http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

  235. Beth, EagleMom,

    Thank you for all the time and thought you’ve devoted to this thread over the last few days. You’ve been patient and kind, often in the face of hysterical fear-mongering. Please know that there are many who share your views of tolerance, inclusion and respect.

    Yours in Scouting,
    Fred
    ASM, Eagle ’82

    p.s. – Beth – thanks for the capitalization! 😉

    • Fred, can you more clearly define your views of tolerance, inclusion and respect:
      1. Are you merely referring to love and support for those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and who are committed to seeking after and living a moral life; or
      2. Are you advocating for the BSA to support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? and
      3. If it is #2 above, do see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting?
      If your answers to questions #2 and #3 above are “yes”, then with all due respect and love…Scouting is not the place for you or your boys. Amoral homosexual acts “spit in the face” of our Scout oath and law. A bright line in the sand exists and it will not be crossed….Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts.
      Further, I think that the question asked by Danthescoutingman to others on this site is a good one and would be helpful to us in seeking how you view tolerance, inclusion and respect: how do you feel about Scouters who “joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight?” Your thoughts on this are very helpful to better understand your views on tolerance, inclusion and respect.

      • BSAScoutleader, I can take a stab at your question regarding the LGBT being tolerant if the roles were reversed…they would have a nuclear meltdown! Their ideology is like a religion to them and they will not stop until all that oppose them are removed from existence. Sad to say it, but it seems to be the current trend in today’s world. If not the BSA, where is our refuge outside of church?

      • Allen in TX – Did you watch the video I posted elsewhere in this thread, of a gay camp employee? He is not having a nuclear meltdown. He doesn’t seem to have an “ideology like a religion”, and he certainly doesn’t seem to want to remove anyone from BSA. He’s just a regular scout, who seems to love scouting, and is clearly respected by his scouting peers, given that he is Program Director at his summer camp. If the BSA changes, it will change for and because of scouts like this, their families, and their scouting friends. – not for or because of some outside force that knows nothing about scouting.

      • EagleMom, here is an honest question that you need to seriously ask yourself so you can better understand the deficenices in your view of tolerance….will you be tolerant and understanding of Scouters that joint the LGBT and tell them to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight?” How do you feel about Glaad, pro-LGBT, and soros folks and their effort and meddling in BSA affairs to bring in 1.4 million names/people in a petition to influence, bully and coerce BSA Board members in to abanding the Scout oath and law?
        http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

      • I will try to answer your questions.
        –>”will you be tolerant and understanding of Scouters that joint the LGBT and tell them to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight?” ”

        I’m not sure I understand your question – what do you mean by “Scouters that joint the LGBT”? Do you mean will I be tolerant and understanding of troops that choose not to allow openly gay Scouts? If so, then yes, I understand that CO’s can choose to exclude those who they feel do not reflect the values that scouting entails, and I think such decisions should largely be left up to the CO’s. Clearly different CO’s have different ideas of what “morally straight” encompasses, on all kinds of issues. I’d rather have a wide variety of troops available, than to exclude from BSA those who do not agree with me on this issue. Scouting is enriched by this kind of diversity. Christian and Jew, urban and rural, black and white, and so on – the opportunity to work on common goals, alongside others who are different than you, is part of the reason my family values scouts.

        –>”How do you feel about Glaad, pro-LGBT, and soros folks and their effort and meddling in BSA affairs to bring in 1.4 million names/people in a petition to influence, bully and coerce BSA Board members in to abanding the Scout oath and law?”

        I don’t know who soros is, so I can’t comment on that.

        As for Glaad, I assume outside organizations on both left and right are advocating for their point of view, as is common when controversial issues arise in our country. Of *course* the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation would have an opinion on this issue, and would encourage their members to speak out about it. However, I think the BSA needs to listen to their *members*, first and foremost, rather than outside voices.

        In my area of the country, I think most BSA members would welcome the change. Here, our kids go to school with gay kids, they have gay relatives, and sometimes gay teachers, so it would be no big deal to them to have gay scouts in their troop. I realize that the opposite is true in other areas. I think this is why the BSA is proposing this “each troop can choose” policy, rather than a more blanket policy that would force all troops to take the same policy. I’m OK with that.

      • EagleMom, thank you, but we already know that you support the proposed policy change. You really need to answer the question put to you (all reading this post see that you are avoiding a question that makes you very uncomfortable with what you seek to do to our Scouting organization) and honestly tell us how you would react if the same policy change was being considered in for LGBT chapters…so..here it goes yet again…”will you be tolerant and understanding of Scouters that joint the LGBT and tell them to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight?” With all due respect, we are still waiting for your answer? It will help us better understand your views (and the views of pro-Glaad, etc. folks posting on our Scouting website) on tolerance.

        As for Glaad, pro-LGBT, and other well funded Geoge Soros folks who are targeting the BSA and seeking to destroy it from within (after they lost the SCOTUS case in 2000), your view of tolerance says that this is ok, that this is fair, that this is honest, that the BSA be targeted by outside groups. You say that this is how we express tolerance, that this is how we demonstrate respect for the beliefs of others, that this is how we are kind. This acts mock the meaning of tolerance, respect and kindness. As such and based on you position, you must (to be consistent in your belief..which you are not..you talk only in terms of a one way street. my way and my belief system or the highway) support any Scouters that joint the LGBT and tell them to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight.”

        We Scouters who hold fast and firm to the timeless values of Scouting declare clearly and respectfully that a hostile take-over of the timeless values of Scouting by outside groups is not compromise, it is not honest, it is not reverent, it is not tolerant. It is WRONG, and we will not let this happen. Further, we will hold to legal account anyone who tries to do so!

      • You’ve asked again, ”Will you be tolerant and understanding of Scouters that joint the LGBT and tell them to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight?””

        I still don’t understand what you mean by “join the LGBT”.

        “LGBT” is an abbreviation for “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered”. It’s not a club or organization. So I don’t know what you mean by “joining” it.

        So I’m reading your question to be “”Will you be tolerant and understanding of Scouters that joint the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered and tell them to change their policy to allow Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight?””

        What do you mean by “join the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered”?
        The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered WHAT?
        Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered chapters of what?
        Of the BSA?
        Of a BSA-like group for LGBT members?
        I’m trying to answer your question, because it seems important to you, but I really don’t understand what you are asking.

      • Allen in TX – I read the article you linked. I’m not sure I fully understood it. Basically, was it saying that liberal people and organizations advocate vigorously in an effort to get people to agree with them, and/or to make it unpopular to express conservative views?

      • That’s what I got from this article as well, EagleMom. That, and that liberals are bad for doing so… (Although it is also what others who feel strongly about a certain position do as well, including conservatives.)

      • EagleMom and beth, I also read it and am disturbed at what is going on. Let me put into context the article link that Allen in TX posted..from all of the posts you have both made, it is clear that you support Glaad and don’t like the current policy, but can you examine squarely how offensive is it for Scouters to learn that outside (agenda driven) and well funded groups are targeting the BSA and seeking to take it over and destroy our timeless values?…. This is like working to turn a vegetarian group into a group that eats meat. If you want to eat meat, join the meat eater’s group. Don’t seek to come in to the vegetarian group and take their name and program and money and tell vegetarians who now want to leave the organization to be more tolerant. This called theft. It is not friendly, courteous or kind to seek to do this. Can we agree on this? If not, help us see why? Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization?? Please specifically answer my questions. For your own good, you really need to openly and honestly answer the question that you keep avoiding, and I ask it with the hope and prayer that you will open you heart and examine the soundness and correctness of the current BSA position even though you disagree with it. The current proposal does not work and is extreme and outside groups need to STAY away from the BSA!

      • Hang in there BSA Scoutleader. They can’t handle facts, logic, and reason. And this argument is not about any of that. It’s just fundamentally good vs evil. The Scouting policy currently in effect stands for good.

      • Anyone care to speculate why Fred does not want to more clearly define HIS views of tolerance, inclusion and respect? Perhaps because His view is a one way street? As Scouters we support and defend our rights to have timeless values such as being “morally straight” and “clean” in our pluralistic society and also to allow those groups that disagree with our values to exist. However, we DEMAND that they reciprocate this respect and tolerance! Any questions?

    • Thanks Fred. Your words mean a lot to me. I think if those on both sides try hard to understand the others’ fears and concerns, and if they can work together to find solutions to the inevitable snags that will come up, the BSA will find a way to allow all scouts to belong to a troop that reflects their values. It will be harder on the higher levels of scouting, where troops blend, but I’m convinced it can be handled with grace and thoughtfulness. The most important thing is to remember the basic scouting values of friendliness and kindness. Those words *mean* something. Sometimes it takes hard work to live by them. But it’s so, so worth it in the long run.

  236. Interestingly enough, if you review the charter for the Boy Scouts (http://usscouts.org/aboutbsa/bsacharter.asp), the purpose of the Scouting organization as chartered by Congress as a Patriotic and National Organization is as follows:

    The purposes of the corporation are to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916.

    Morality, religious beliefs and many of the other things mentioned here that some feel are being “betrayed”, “trampled on” or otherwise sullied are not even mentioned as part of the purpose. Scouting in the US was formed and exists under the rules and guidelines of this charter. Everything else – all of the policies and guidelines are set by the Executive Board. It has been this way since the beginning. It is not a democracy and never has been. The Board has always been free to adopt and amend bylaws for the organization. There are no rules required to do so, no basis for the guidelines, no religious underpinning – at its core, the BSA is simply another corporation with specific rights and privileges spelled out very clearly in their charter. The Board isn’t circumventing anyone or somehow doing something immoral, illegal or otherwise shady. They are operating EXACTLY how they are allowed to and supposed to. The fact the some people don’t like a potential decision (that hasn’t even been made yet!) by the organization is simply a result of people failing to understand the workings of the organization they are a part of.

    As an aside, I also did some quick searching and noted from Wikipedia:

    “Homosexual people are not restricted from membership or leadership positions in Scouts Canada, the Baden-Powell Service Association in the United States, Scouts Australia, and most European associations, including The Scout Association of the United Kingdom, Ring deutscher Pfadfinderverbände of Germany (German Scout Federation), and the Swedish Guide and Scout Association.[10]”.

    The World Scouting movement hasn’t apparently suffered from such a policy and Scouting seems to be just fine, with some 30 million Scouts worldwide (~2.8 million in the US).

    I also wonder that just because people who believe a certain way (either side of this issue), do they really have a right to try and say that anyone with another viewpoint can’t be in the organization? The organization exists due to an Act of Congress and is a perpetual organization. It has seen many changes over its lifetime and will surely see many more. Some people will be happy and some will not. Some will leave, some will threaten to leave; others will join to take their place. The organization will survive no matter what. No one person or group or prevailing set of beliefs “owns” the Boy Scouts of America. It is made up and owned by the citizens of the US (all of them, not just a majority or minority) and, as such, will change over time as the population changes.

    • Just to add on to what texas aggie is saying – many of the folks who are against change are saying “go create your own scout group”. The BSA has used this congressional charter to sue and put out of business any competing scout group. That’s another reason why the BSA should be open to everyone – because they have a congressional monopoly. Either that or they should give up their congressional charter and help competing groups rather than sue them out of existence.

      • db, just to add..your comment is not true…go join royal rangers, royal ambassadors, pathfinders, christian service brigade, calvinist cadet corps, awana, woodcraft rangers, navigators USA, etc. or start your own youth group….leave BSA alone. Based on your posts, your tolerance is “my way or the highway”… think about the shoe being on the other foot…..and be honest with yourself….will you be tolerant of Scouters that joint the LGBT and tell them to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that can set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach (correctly, I will add) that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be “morally straight?” I reject your idea of tolerance and say stop bullying and leave alone one of the very last places in the entire US where we are are able to freely teach our youth the timeless values of Scouting. If you don’t agree, then don’t join. Further, we call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts to BE BRAVE AND HONEST and do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on and we WILL NOT be moved!

      • Actually – this solution is not my way. This is a compromise solution. I would prefer it if the BSA had a comprehensive non-discrimination clause that included everyone that every unit had to observe. But I’m willing to compromise so that my unit doesn’t have to be a bully and mistreat gay teenagers. Are you willing to compromise?

      • Yea, we remain “morally straight” and “clean” and if you don’t like the current policy, leave BSA. Seriously, we already don’t ask folks about gender attraction so if you are not active and you are seeking to be clean BSA is a great place to learn the timeless values of Scouting. in case you missed it…”Even if the proposal is approved, the Times predicts that the money won’t be restored, the banter will continue, and local units expressing their preference for basing their morals in scripture will be hounded until they change or leave scouting. In case anyone is blind, the agenda here isn’t compromise……see the below from a current post…
        DON’T BELIEVE ME — READ IT FOR YOURSELVES.
        http://troop113.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/even-the-ny-times-doesnt-like-the-bsa-proposal/
        or
        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/opinion/the-boy-scouts-fall-short-in-policy-on-gays.html?_r=0
        Guys, this is the ball game. Do you LOVE Scouting? If so GET TO WORK AND FIGHT LIKE CRAZY OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR SO TO SAVE SCOUTING NOT JUST FOR THE BOYS IN YOUR CHARTER ORGANIZATION, BUT FOR ALL BOYS AND THE FUTURE OF SCOUTING! CALL, E-MAIL, FACEBOOK, TWITTER…SPEAK-UP! THE pro Glaad, pro-LGBT and soros funded groups are organized, have all the media support and well funded, and they should be taken very seriously in what they are and have been doing to Scouting.

      • Steve, you are spot on! Get your packs, troops and friends into the fight…use facebook, twitter, e-mail, calls and call on all members of the Board who arehonest of heart to do the right thing and DELAY ON ANY ACTION on a policy change until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! Millions of eligible class members who (are part of US Scouting and have nothing to do with other scouting groups) have donated time and money based on the timeless values of Scouting in the US, will be part of the lawsuits that will be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National, but it is better for BSA National to delay the vote and provide transparency. There is all kinds of foul play going on (see posts on this site and do your research), and we need to call for transparency and demand that no action be taken until we get a real and formal poll/vote from the adult volunteers on this. We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on and we WILL NOT be moved!
        http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

      • db, you made a false claim by asserting that folks cannot create their own program if they don’t like the BSA and BSAScoutleader called you on it. You need to apologize for making a false claim. Scouters seek honestly and truth. None of us Scouters buy into your Glaad, pro-GBLT and other Soros funded talking point nonsense about what is being considered is a compromise position. This is another false claim. We all realize that what is being proposed will destroy the timeless values of Scouting and all of the legal underpinnings in BSA v. Dale will be lost. The Glaad, pro-GBLT and other Soros funded folks know this and that is why they are fighting to push this on us so suddenly next week with their full time bloggers pounding our BSA websites trying to dishearten and deceive us and mis-shape opinion. Such acts are despicable!
        http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

      • I didn’t make a false claim Dan. You can’t create an organization in the US and call it scouts, without the BSA suing you. This goes back to the founding when Hearst’s USBS – the United States Boy Scouts. The BSA sued USBS in 1917 right after the BSA got their federal charter. And they’ve been doing it ever since. Here’s one of the most recent examples: Youth Scouts.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrenn_v._Boy_Scouts_of_America

        So Dan – I’m patiently waiting for the apology from you.

      • db, please..you said nothing about calling the name of the new group BSA…of course you cannot steal someones name. What you said was “go create your own scout group”. This a false claim, you can go out and great you own scout group.” It a free Country (and becoming less free each passing day), you just cannot (as is should be) call yourself BSA if you are not chartered by the BSA. Again, go join royal rangers, royal ambassadors, pathfinders, christian service brigade, calvinist cadet corps, awana, woodcraft rangers, navigators USA, etc. or start your own youth group….leave BSA alone.

      • Actually, as an Eagle Scout and leader for over 20 years, I don’t feel I should have to leave *my* organization just because someone else in my organization feels differently than I. I respect that you have a different opinion than I do, but that doesn’t mean your opinion is “right” or “wrong” – just different. I just wouldn’t have the audacity to ask or suggest you to leave Scouting simply because you disagree with me. It is as much “my” organization as it is “your” organization and I have a right to help work to change it to adopt policies that are in line with my world views as much as you are free to do the same. At some point, however, National is going to have to find some compromise because the viewpoints are at odds with each other just like they did when women were first put into leadership roles (and I’m sure if we had social media back then there would have been just as much uproar over that).

        As for transparency in the process, the organization is acting within the bylaws from what I recall. There is exactly as much transparency as there has always been and this is in line with the charter. National does not have to (please correct me and cite the bylaws if I am wrong) run all policy decisions past the membership, put them up for public comment or even explain them. Now, should they? That’s another question. But to somehow imply that the executives are violating the bylaws of the BSA or being dishonest is, I believe, patently wrong. The fact that you don’t like the potential changes that might be coming doesn’t mean that they would have been enacted unfairly. The BSA could decide tomorrow that no one under 12 can be in Scouting or that no Scouts without siblings can join. They are completely free to change their membership criteria at any time as a private organization for any reason, just as they have done in the past when women were admitted to leadership positions and (more recently) when background checks were required for adults.

    • Beg to differ with your incorrect conclusion/assumption…the mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). The US Supreme Court also found that..”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court recognized the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct.
      Further, we call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts and honest of heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! Millions of eligible class members who (are part of US Scouting and have nothing to do with other scouting groups) have donated time and money based on the timeless values of Scouting in the US, will be part of the lawsuits that will be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National, but it is better for BSA National to delay the vote and provide transparency. There is all kinds of foul play going on (see posts on this site and do your research), and we need to call for transparency and demand that no action be taken until we get a real and formal poll/vote from the adult volunteers on this. We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on and we WILL NOT be moved!
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

      • Who decided to amend the BSA charter in 2000? Why didn’t they start their own scouting organization, instead of messing around with the core values of BSA?

    • texasaggie94, nice try, but we have already covered this ground and are all well aware of the purpose of Scouting as decided by SCOTUS (who by the way looked at all of the facts, without cherry picking). I strongly suspect that you are acquainted with the SCOTUS dissent, but as you are aware the dissent is not law. Presenting half truths and omitting any consideration of what SCOTUS as the ultimate finder of fact decided on this issue is not being truthful…so…here you go…Danthesocutingman said it best, “I stand with the ultimate finder of fact (SCOTUS) and do not stand with those who would destroy the core values of Scouting in saying (by the way not my words, the legal conclusions of our highest court after reviewing all of the Scouting documents and not just the ones you think support your position) “the general mission of the Boy Scouts is clear: “[T]o instill values in young people.” Ibid. The Boy Scouts seeks to instill these values by having its adult leaders spend time with the youth members, instructing and engaging them in activities like camping, archery, and fishing. During the time spent with the youth members, the scoutmasters and assistant scoutmasters inculcate them with the Boy Scouts’ values-both expressly and by example. It seems indisputable that an association that seeks to transmit such a system of values engages in expressive activity.” See Roberts, supra, at 636 (O’Connor, J., concurring).” Further, the US Supreme Court also found that..”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court recognized the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. We as Scouters did not join Scouting outside the US and have no desire to do so, but perhaps you and others who want to change our policy should consider doing so… we won’t be offended. Please understand our desire to live our timeless values. Thanks for your desire to respect our timeless (meaning they DON’T change and if someone tries to do so improperly they need to consider the legal implications of any such improper action) Scouting values.

      • The comments from a court case do not get to rewrite what the BSA is. I appreciate the court case references but they are just that – court cases. They are other people’s (judges’) opinions of what the BSA purpose is and may apply only in the context of that court decision. Courts rule on what is in front of them on the issues at hand. The bylaws of the BSA govern day to day operation and what the Scouts can and cannot do. They are set by the BSA executive council and can be changed at will. I found a copy of the bylaws of the BSA here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/8919588/Charter-and-Bylaws-of-the-Boy-Scouts-of-America

        Section 2 covers the purpose. It reiterates what is in the congressional charter and adds: “In achieving this purpose, emphasis shall be placed upon its educational program and the oaths, promises and codes of the Scouting program for character development, citizenship training, and mental and physical fitness.”

        I understand the desire to live by values but that doesn’t mean that the Scouting program and message can never change over time. We have to change as society changes.

        Also, I don’t get the legal implications argument that is thrown around. The COs today have always been able to apply whatever criteria they desire to leaders, etc.. I cannot, for example, have my son join an LDS unit because he is not an LDS member. I cannot join some units in my area because they are for homeschool students and parents only. COs already accept legal liability for accidents, membership, and all other aspects of having a unit. This doesn’t add or change that – it is a red herring. Anyone can sue them for anything they way, regardless of this proposed policy change.

    • Beg to differ with your incorrect conclusion/assumption…the mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). The US Supreme Court also found that..”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court recognized the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct.
      Further, we call on all members of the Board who are reading these posts and honest of heart to do the right thing and call for a DELAY ON ANY ACTION until we can get some transparency in this process. This will only serve to make Scouting stronger! Millions of eligible class members who (are part of US Scouting and have nothing to do with other scouting groups) have donated time and money based on the timeless values of Scouting in the US, will be part of the lawsuits that will be filed immediately if wrong action is taken by BSA National, but it is better for BSA National to delay the vote and provide transparency. There is all kinds of foul play going on (see posts on this site and do your research), and we need to call for transparency and demand that no action be taken until we get a real and formal poll/vote from the adult volunteers on this. We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on and we WILL NOT be moved!
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late

  237. There are some very strong feelings on this subject, both for and against including gays. But what I don’t see is any guidance on how to implement this plan. I don’t think this was thought through very well. If we let each unit decide and a unit says no gays, what happens when a boy says he is gay. What then? Do we kick him out of the unit and tell him to go elsewhere?
    Also, no one has ever addressed my concerns about some of the groups pushing for this change. Have you looked at the websites of the organizations pushing for this change? They state this is a good start. What does that mean? Is acceptance in the organization not enough?

    • Brad, yes there are serious and legal causes for concern about Glaad, pro-LGBT and soros funded groups putting all kinds of pressure and money into the destruction of Scouting’s timeless values. Transparency is required and given all of these outside influences, no Board action can be taken (and none will be respected) until we get some transparency and we have a real and formal poll/vote from the adult volunteers on this (folks outside of BSA should not be driving and dictating our internal decisions). Board members at BSA National who hold fiduciary duties and who are pushing an outside agenda are advised to slow down. When pro Glaad, pro-LGBT and soros funded groups say this is a good start, they mean that the say. Don’t be naive! If the BSA caves on its values, it will not be able to undo the damage and the legal underpinnings in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) will be lost. As they have done before and in other settings, these groups will work to have homosexuality be taught by the BSA to be natural, moral and they will work to have anyone who teaches traditional values prosecuted for hate crimes. The lesson…never compromise your values and all that is needed for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. We are wide awake to the dangers and implications of what is going on, and we WILL NOT be moved!
      http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late for our program.

      • From a prior post…in case you missed it…”Even if the proposal is approved, the Times predicts that the money won’t be restored, the banter will continue, and local units expressing their preference for basing their morals in scripture will be hounded until they change or leave scouting.

        DON’T BELIEVE ME — READ IT FOR YOURSELVES.
        http://troop113.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/even-the-ny-times-doesnt-like-the-bsa-proposal/
        or
        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/opinion/the-boy-scouts-fall-short-in-policy-on-gays.html?_r=0

        Guys, this is the ball game. Do you LOVE Scouting? If so GET TO WORK AND FIGHT LIKE CRAZY OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR SO TO SAVE SCOUTING NOT JUST FOR THE BOYS IN YOUR CHARTER ORGANIZATION, BUT FOR ALL BOYS AND THE FUTURE OF SCOUTING! CALL, E-MAIL, FACEBOOK, TWITTER…SPEAK-UP! THE pro Glaad, pro-LGBT and soros funded groups are organized, have all the media support and well funded, and they should be taken very seriously in what they are and have been doing to Scouting.

    • To add to my post, the HRC rates companies that donate to organizations based on those oganizations support of gays. They state they will change thier rating system to rate those companies that donate to the BSA as not gay friendly even if the changes go through.

    • Brad asked what do units that do not allow homosexuals do when a teenage boy comes out of the closet? Would they kick him out following the new rules? Yes. They would do exactly what they do today. They kick him out. But now the kid has an option of trying to find a different unit to join.

      • And who would pay the legal fees when the leaders, unit and chartered org are sued? And what happens if there are no units in the area that are open to him? There are a lot of variables that still need to be addressed before this decision is made.

      • Why should the whole of BSA cover the legal fees for a chartering organization that not all members of BSA agree with?

        If a chartering organization has strong beliefs, they certainly feel strongly enough about them to defend the in court when asked to.

      • I’m just asking, because this was not thought through by the BSA. I think a lot of places will revoke their charter if there is a threat of lawsuits. I for one would not have the financial means to defend myself in court and some organizations that charter units do not either.

      • What would stop people from suing a scouting unit and it’s leaders when the ask a boy to leave because his sexual orientation does not align with the chartered org?

      • Actually until the liability issue is answered it is very likely that an individual CO (church or .community) will face litigation. The next step is attack the “discriminating” CO’s at a local level to force additional change.

      • Why do you assume the board hasn’t thought about these things? I’m sure they take their responsibilities very seriously.

      • I’m not saying they don’t take their responsibilities seriously. I don’t think this was handled well which leads me to the conclusion that this was rushed and not thought all the way through. The last time it took them over 2 years before they came out with a decision. I have a lot of questions and I’m sure others do as well. I would have liked to see how this was going to be handled before they announced the upcoming vote. And leaving it up to the CO is not enough of an answer.

      • The reason you do not want the CO’s defending themselves in the courts for following BSA policy is many CO’s will not risk the liability. The LDS Church, and the Southern Evangelicals will simply leave. Both of these faiths charter more Units collectively than any other. When you add in the potential liability to the individual volunteers the risk grows exponentially. National is effectively walking away from their CO’s and leaving them defenseless. Until the liability question fro following the proposed policy is answered in full I cannot risk my family and my home because Johnny does not meet the current defined standard. The District I reside in has more registered boys than 80% of the Councils around the nation. Worst case scenario is the BSA will be facing a back breaking exodus in dollars and manpower.

      • I am looking for the same information on what happens to those that ask a boy who does live by the CO’s beliefs to leave the unit. I would not risk my family’s home or assets either. I have a feeling I know the answer, but I sure hope I am wrong.

      • Andrew, what you site is not the worst case scenario. Wost cast scenario for the BSA if it is harmed as you described by breaches of fiduciary duty of its National board members (who are being improperly influenced by bad actor groups like Glaad and who are seeking to improperly act on this before opposition can be properly mounted) is that certain BSA directors face personal liability and a massive class is certified such that the BSA folds because it cannot pay the massive damage claim. Groups like Glaad and other Soros funded folks cannot effectuate a hostile take-over of the BSA with impunity.

      • The BSA’s right to set it’s own policies was upheld by the supreme court in 2000. If they change their policy. This will still be their right.

      • I don’t see it, because I’m not on that page, but it was something about people suing individual COs for discrimination.

      • beth, your description of the holding in BSA v. Davis is remarkable and not accurate or truthful. In BSA v. Davis, SCOTUS held that BSA is an expressive association as BSA adult leaders inculcate its youth members with its value system. It found that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly those represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean,” and that the organization does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior. The Court give deference to the Boy Scouts’ assertions regarding the nature of its expression, see, Democratic Party of United States v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette, 450 U.S. 107, 123—124. The Court then inquired as to whether the homosexual adult’s presence as an assistant scoutmaster would significantly burden the expression of those viewpoints. The homosexual by his own admission, is one of a group of gay Scouts who have become community leaders and are open and honest about their sexual orientation. His presence as an assistant scoutmaster would interfere with the Scouts’ choice not to propound a point of view contrary to its beliefs. See Hurley, 515 U.S., at 576—577. This Court rejected the New Jersey Supreme Court’s determination that the Boy Scouts’ ability to disseminate its message would not be significantly affected by the forced inclusion of this homosexual. First, contrary to the state court’s view, an association need not associate for the purpose of disseminating a certain message in order to be protected, but must merely engage in expressive activity that could be impaired. Second, even if the Boy Scouts discourages Scout leaders from disseminating views on sexual issues, its method of expression is protected. Third, the First Amendment does not require that every member of a group agree on every issue in order for the group’s policy to be “expressive association.” As the Boy Scouts’ expression would be burdened, the Court then inquired whether the application of New Jersey’s public accommodations law ran runs afoul the Scouts’ freedom of expressive association, and concluded that it did. Now that we all understand what SCOTUS decided in 2000. What certain pro Glaad BSA National Board members seek to do next week under the cover of darkness has nothing to do with the holding that the BSA’s has the right as an expressive association that uses BSA adult leaders inculcate its youth members with its value system to keep active homosexuals out. 100 plus years of our BSA value system that we have invested in will not be destroyed by the National Board. Certain members of the BSA national board who are seeking to use improper means and seeking to take improper action next week are well advised to slow down and listen to its adult member volunteers, not the Glaad, pro-GLBT folks and Soros funded groups who are working day and night (just got back from a date night with my wife and looks like the same extreme posters are making the same tired posts again and again…seriously..we all see what is going on save your energy for the legal battles coming if Scouters anyone attempts to betray or harm Scouting) to take us off the cliff. The class action bar is licking its chops right now!

    • Brad, I think you raise some good concerns. I would *assume* that before the BSA actually implemented such a policy, they would think through these kinds of issues and have some guidelines in place to deal with them. If not, then I think both sides would be upset, and there would be any number of unfortunate incidents.

      As to what happens when a gay scout ends up in a “no gays” unit, I think for the benefit of all he would have to be referred to another troop (which is a nice way to say, kicked out of the old one). If there isn’t a suitable troop nearby , I would hope he could become a Lone Scout.

      As to the outside groups advocating for this change, presumably gay advocacy groups *would* prefer that all troops would be open to gay scouts, That’s not surprising. There are also outside advocacy groups that would prefer that all troops be closed to gay scouts.

      The proposed policy is a compromise between those within scouts who feel that accepting gay scouts is immoral, and those within scouts who feel that NOT accepting gay scouts is immoral.

      Whether the policy eventually is changed to make one side the rule for all troops remains to be seen. Our country has changed dramatically on this issue over the recent decades, and most of the change has been in the direction of more acceptance of gays in our communities. If this trend continues, then BSA could decide to push things further down this road. Conversely, if those who disagree push back, BSA could decide to move in the opposite direction.

      However, I think neither will be the case. You see, the nice thing about this compromise, is that to some extent it is self-regulating. If more scout families prefer a closed troop, there will be more of those troops. If more scout families prefer an open troop, then those troops will grow in number. Different parts of the country are likely to have different ratios of open/closed troops. In this way, the BSA can let the scouts decide, with their troop selection, where the balance should lie. This kind of policy could work for a long time to come, and avoid the need for the national organization to force further change in one direction or another.

      • So you’re assuming the boy asked to leave the unit would just quietly walk away and join another unit with no backlash against the current unit or it’s leaders? I would like to hope that would be the case, but I am not so naive to believe there wouldn’t be some lawyer licking his chops over the opportunity to sue.
        I would like to know what this would mean for summer camps, jamboree and high adventure camps. If a troop is so strong in their feeling about not having gays in their unit, summer camp would force them into contact with troops that do. Would there be gays welcome weeks and no gays allowed weeks? What about jamboree where boys from all over the council are organized into new troops? What is the answer there, if you don’t accept gays, don’t go? Our council also organizes treks for Philmont the same way. What then? Summer camps, jamboree and high adventure camps are only months away. Money has already been spent, gear has been purchased, vacations planned around those dates.
        You speak of this as a compromise, I would like to know what the people that want gays allowed are compromising?

      • Brad, your analysis on the legal implications of the proposed policy change is 100% correct. Thank you for helping the Board better understand and appreciate the need to slow down on this!

      • Is there any recourse, check, or balance if the board does pass this other than a quick lawsuit?

  238. Wondering, if the decision to allow homosexuals into Scouting is largely based on the “born this way” and “civil liberties” argument, but also leaves open the ultimate decision on the inclusion/restriction of homosexuals is left up to each Charter/Unit, would a Charter that chose to exclude homosexuals be then logically equivalent to one that would exclude scouts based on race? Can/do units exclude scouts based on race? Seems like they shouldn’t be able to. Wouldn’t a unit be in serious trouble and looked down upon if they did this? How would exclusion of homosexuals be any different?

    • Bruce, in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000), the BSA successfully argued that homosexual conduct is not consistent with the values of BSA, which is a private, not-for-profit organization. The Court found the BSA to be an “expressive association” as its adult leaders seek to inculcate Scouts with the BSA’s value system. The BSA successfully and correctly stated that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior. The proposed policy change will destroy the legal underpinnings that resulted in the BSA being able to successfully protect and defend its expressive association message and charter organizations that prohibit practicing homosexuals will be sued. Our BSA program and our values will be lost. The Board is on notice of the irreparable damage that it will inflict on Scouting and its timeless values if it takes reckless action nest week. It is advised to govern its actions accordingly!

    • Yes, a chartering organization can legally exclude people on the basis of race, if the presence of people of a certain race would significantly interfere with group’s freedom of expression.

      Would a unit be looked down upon if they excluded based on race? Yes. But the First Amendment protects all speech, not just popular speech. In fact, it is usually unpopular speech that is in greatest need of legal protection.

      • ps…cwgmpls, with all due respect you mis-state the law. Further, the holding in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000) is limited to the BSA’s right to exclude practicing homosexuals from the Scouting program. Again, the BSA successfully and correctly stated that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. The BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.

        The proposed policy change (which is what we are addressing) will destroy the legal under pinnings that resulted in the BSA being able to successfully protect and defend its expressive association message. Charter organizations that prohibit practicing homosexuals will be sued, and our BSA program and our values will be lost. The Board is on notice of the irreparable damage that it will inflict on Scouting and its timeless values if it takes reckless action nest week. It is advised to govern its actions accordingly!

  239. There are many religions that support homosexuality. There are many religions that do not believe homosexuality is against the word of god. They may be in the minority here, but those religions and denominations do exist. Why shouldn’t members of those religions, living in accord to their faith, be allowed in Scouting? They aren’t going against their religion or their personal duty to God.

    By the logic of many Christian Scouters here (of excluding gays because your religion says it’s wrong), then we should also exclude all Jewish and Muslim members from Scouting because they don’t believe in Jesus Christ as their lord and savior (and your religion says that is wrong too). But we don’t do that. We respect the beliefs of others and we don’t exclude members with differing beliefs, or force our beliefs on others. It’s called tolerance! It’s called being reverent (respecting the beliefs of others). It’s called being a good Scout.

    • We don’t share your one way approach to tolerance. Fact..the BSA is one of the FEW remaining places where likeminded parents and families can adhere to the timeless values of Scouting. The pressure being brought by Glaad, GLTB and other Soros funded folks to destroy Scouting is telling. We ARE aware of what you are doing on our blogs and will take all legal action to STOP this attack. Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization?? We cannot wait to hear your answer.

      • Dan, you are the one with the one way approach to tolerance. Those of us that favor a change in a discriminatory policy are in support of the proposed change, that will allow my unit to be open to all, while yours can still remain true to it’s values and remain closed to membership by gays.

      • beth, from your posts, it is clear that you don’t like the current policy, but can you examine squarely the question put to you?…allowing CO’s to set their own homosexual policies (which policies depending on the CO will permit active homosexuals in Scouting) changes our existing policy on association and necessarily places a Scouting moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle as engaged in by PRACTICING homosexuals. The proposed change is a clear admission by BSA that a practicing homosexual’s life is consistent with the Scout law and oath. Any disagreement so far? While, you may agree with this and like the result. You must admit, the legal result is a complete change (I would phrase this as a complete rejection) of the timeless values of Scouting and the meaning of “morally straight” and “clean”. This is like working to turn a vegetarian group into a group that eats meat. If you want to eat meat, join the meat eater’s group. Don’t seek to come in to the vegetarian group and take their name and program and money. It is not friendly, courteous or kind to seek to do this. Can we agree on this? If not, help us see why? Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization?? Please specifically answer my questions. For your own good, you really need to openly and honestly answer the question that you keep avoiding, and I ask it with the hope and prayer that you will open you heart and examine the soundness and correctness of the current BSA position even though you disagree with it. The current proposal does not work and is extreme.

      • You say the proposed change is a clear admission by BSA that a practicing homosexual’s life is consistent with the Scout law and oath. Well, I (and many others) think that a practicing homosexual’s life is consistent with the Scout law and oath. You say that being gay “goes against the timeless values of Scouting and the meaning of ‘morally straight’ and ‘clean.'” I disagree.

        In my religious teachings, homosexuality is not morally unstraight nor is it unclean. So, to me, someone can be gay and can still live by the Scout oath and law.

        Now your religion may say being gay is morally wrong, unclean, and not in accord with one’s duty to God. Therefore you propose we exclude gays from being Scouts.

        Well to Hasidic Jews, eating pork is morally wrong, unclean, and not in accord with one’s duty to God. Therefore Jewish Scouts should petition to exclude all pork-eaters from being Scouts. Right?

        To Catholics, not accepting Jesus Christ as your lord and savior and taking Catholic communion is morally wrong, disobedient, and not in accord with one’s duty to God. Therefore Catholic Scouts should petition to exclude all non-Catholics from being Scouts.

        To Muslums, not observing Salah is is morally wrong, disobedient, and not in accord with one’s duty to God. Therefore Islamic Scouts should petition to exclude anyone who doesn’t observe their prayer calls from being Scouts.

        Just because your faith says it’s wrong, does not mean the faith of every Scout agrees. There are religions that support homosexuality. You can’t force the feelings and beliefs of your particular religion onto every other Scout. If your faith says “don’t be gay,” then don’t be gay. If your faith says “don’t eat pork,” then don’t eat pork. You don’t have to force every other Scout to follow your religion.

      • DantheScoutingman: I am not an “outsider” from some LGBT or GLAAD organization. I am a Scouter. I am an Eagle Scout. I have been with the program since I was a tiger cub. I am a Venture Crew advisor, and an assistant Scoutmaster. I am a member of the Order of the Arrow. I am a district- and council-level volunteer. I worked on the summer camp staff of my local council camp for over 10 years. I am Woodbadge and BSA National Camp School trained. I have been to Philmont and Seabase multiple times. I am a Scout.

        And I hold the belief that excluding homosexuals from this program is inconsistent with my faith and with the principles Scouting is striving to teach.

      • Mark, let’s take what you say at face value (also knowing that we have well funded outside pro-glaad, LGBT folks seeking to destroy the BSA), what is your point? Per SCOTUS, the mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). The US Supreme Court also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court recognized the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. Further, the the First Amendment simply does not require that every member of a group agree on every issue in order for the group’s policy to be “expressive association.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). If you don’t agree with the BSA policy, why did you join and why do you stay? You are not being tolerant of all of us who have joined in reliance on this policy. Can you open your mind enough to see where we are coming from?

      • Well, my religious and personal beliefs have taught me that homosexual conduct is NOT inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law. Now your personal religion or feelings may disagree; but I feel, and have be taught through my faith, that one can be gay and have straight morals, live a clean life, do their duty to God, and be a good Scout and citizen. So why are we excluding them from the benefits of Scouting? I feel a policy that excludes homosexuals is inconsistent with the values of Scouting.

        You asked why I joined. Well when I joined this issue was not an issue (this was back before BSA v. Dale and before the BSA had a public policy on the issue). So why did I stay? As I learned in Scouting, if a Scout thinks a rule or law is unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner. I don’t want to abandon Scouting and see the program become lost to a closed-minded and intolerant,worldview. I want to work from within to stop this harmful policy of discrimination.

        I’m really trying to understand where you are coming from. You say you “joined in reliance on this policy,” how would the proposed change affect you?

      • Mark this is NOT about feelings (yours or mine). This is about protecting children, trying to live to a moral standard, common sense, traditional values, and the trust that the overwhelming majority of parents have put in the Scouting organization.

      • Well my moral standards, values, and common sense say that homosexuality is not wrong and that discriminating and excluding someone based on their sexual orientation is wrong. As a parent, I would hope that the Scouting organization would teach tolerance and acceptance.

        You say it’s about protecting children? And How are homosexuals a threat to my children?

      • And 75 years ago I’m sure there were people who said Scouting should exclude African Americans from joining Troops because “it is about protecting children, trying to live to a moral standard, common sense, traditional values, and the trust that the overwhelming majority of parents have put in the Scouting organization.”

        Times are a’changing, man. Better catch up.

      • Mark, when did you join? It was not an issue because of sodomy laws which have always been on the books and have not been eroded until recently (starting in the 70’s). The BSA policy was a reaction to this and the fall out from our declining moral standards in society. I presume you have always been aware of sodomy laws and the BSA’s clear positions on excluding practicing homosexuals the cases were all in the news in the 80’s why didn’t you leave in the 70’s and 80’s and why have you stayed? I (like most Scouters) join because of the timeless values which include being “morally straight” and “clean”. As you are aware, Scouting is one of the few (last) options for a wholesome experience where my sons and I can learn and live the timeless values of Scouting.
        Hope this helps.

      • I joined Scouting in the 1960s. But I guess I see where we differ here. I (like many other Scouters) think that someone can be a homosexual and still be “morally straight” and “clean.” I don’t see homosexuality as immoral and I don’t see how one’s sexual orientation conflicts with the ideals of Scouting. And I certainly don’t see how allowing homosexuals into the program would make the experience any less wholesome for my family.

      • Screen name Mark (and taking what you say at face value), in the 60’s every state in the nation has sodomy laws and homosexual acts were illegal. These laws have not been eroded until recently (starting in the 70′s). As you should be aware,the BSA policy was a reaction to this and the fall out from our declining moral standards in society. Based on your statements, I will presume you have always been aware of sodomy laws and the BSA’s clear positions on excluding practicing homosexuals.

        That being said, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and we can respectfully disagree with each other. I will however make a couple of relevant points.

        First, with respect to the actions of groups outside of the BSA…there is no place for threatening, bullying and intimidating corporate donors of the BSA by Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community who intentionally infiltrate an opposing organization with the intent to destroy it from within, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community to threaten, bully and intimidate members of an organization with different values to do something that spits in the face of their timeless values and does not reflect actions that its members want (yea, we understand that 100% of Scouters do not support the timeless values, but most do). The actions of these outside groups is indefensible and antithetical to our pluralistic values.


        Second, yes, we have some within our ranks that do not favor the current policy, however, they (like you) decided to join the BSA knowing what we are about and our timeless values. As a point in fact, millions of us in the Scouting movement are a part of this organization and have invested time and money because we like, agree with and desire to involve ourselves and sons in such a program that teaches and instills in them these timeless values. As such, the rights of those who seek to defend the institutional values are superior. Let me describe it this way. A certain development is built next to a dairy farm that has been operating for decades. A new home buyer knows of the dairy and elects to move into the neighborhood. After a while the home owner tells the dairy farmer that it needs to shut down because the home owner does not like the smell. Any idea what the dairy farmer and the law will say to the home owner? If you don’t like your decision, then leave and don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Hope this helps you better understand where Scouters who support the timeless values of Scouting are coming from. All the best my friend!

      • Well there are also millions of us in the Scouting movement that have invested time and money and want our sons to have a program that teaches and instills the proper values of tolerance, acceptance, and understanding. As such, we feel that excluding someone based on their sexual orientation is wrong and in conflict with the aims of the Scouting program. We don’t see excluding homosexuals as a “timeless” value or as the foundation of the aims and methods of the program; rather we see it as an “outdated” value. I hope this helps you better understand where Scouters who support the change are coming from.

  240. I have had all I can take of this endless babblings back and forth. Some of you people have way, way too much time on your hands. Some of you are radicals pushing the homosexual LBGT agenda and even involved in it. I have said several times this boils down to two beliefs systems.
    MORALITY AND IMMORALITY.
    But, you say who are we to judge and even the courts say they cannot rule on morality and yet that is exactly what they do. They do this by legislating from the bench all the way up to the Supreme Court and they have no legal basis to do so. Only Congress can legislate laws and all laws must conform to the Rule of Law and it must conform to the Constitution.

    Remember, behavior has consequences and this is whether you are religious or not so for your children’s sake and safety you must educate yourself with Trugh and facts, now emotional and endless conversation.

    So, this is to parents and others that are confused by all of this and want to know the Truth. Parents you have the right and the duty to be informed about this extremely important issue. Here is a site that is sponsored by the American College of Pediatricians called Facts About Youth. The first one is a copy of a letter that was mailed to every school superintendent in the country in 2010 warning about false information being taught in schools and the second is a site to Facts about Male Homosexual Behavior. There is a wealth of information including articles and pamphlets from the CDC on this site.
    Remember, the most imp0ortant issue about the BSA decision is an letting homosexual men who are openly homosexuals to become “leaders” of the Boy Scouts.
    Letter:

    http://factsaboutyouth.com/wp-content/uploads/Superintendent-LetterC_3.311.pdf

    Fact Sheet about Male Homosexuality:
    http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

    “Know The Truth And The Truth Will Make You Free”

    • Thank you Taylor for some fresh factual information. Maybe some of our irrational fears are well-founded after all.

      • Do you believe BSA National should force Christian teachings about morality on all Boy Scout troops around the country? How about forcing Jewish Scouts be OK with that? What about Buddhist Scouts? Scouting in the US in not a Christian organization, even if a large number of its members are. People seem to forget that. They are a non-sectarian organization in that they support all different religious views and the resulting diversity that comes from a different points of view.

      • texasaggie94, we in the Scouting community have no clue what you are talking about. No one is forcing anyone to do anything, and our values are clear. It is like walking into a vegetarian group and telling them you want to form meat eating chapters. Unreal and offensive! If you don’t support the timeless values of Scouting, go do your own thing and start you own group. As determined by SCOTUS “The general mission of the Boy Scouts is clear: “[T]o instill values in young people.” Ibid. The Boy Scouts seeks to instill these values by having its adult leaders spend time with the youth members, instructing and engaging them in activities like camping, archery, and fishing. During the time spent with the youth members, the scoutmasters and assistant scoutmasters inculcate them with the Boy Scouts’ values-both expressly and by example. It seems indisputable that an association that seeks to transmit such a system of values engages in expressive activity. See Roberts, supra, at 636. The BSA policy on homosexual acts has not changed. The simple fact is that Glaad, pro-GLTB and other Soros funded folks are seeking to force their morality on us. What are you talking about??

      • No, this is not like waling into a vegetarian club and telling them you want to form meat-eating chapters. It’s like walking to an organization based around building character, fostering citizenship and developing fitness in America’s youth and telling them that even though a majority of them are vegetarians you eat meat and would like to join, but you’re told no because some of their members feel meat-eating is wrong.

      • Jesse, your statement is not accurate.. as determined by SCOTUS “The general mission of the Boy Scouts is clear: “[T]o instill values in young people. The US Supreme Court also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The current policy protects the general mission of Scouting. I and millions of Scouters are part of Scouting because of this mission and policy. If you destroy the current policy, you change Scouting, and you destroy the general mission of the Boy Scouts. Again, it is like walking into a vegetarian group and telling them you want to form meat eating chapters. Unreal and offensive!

      • You see, many Scouts and Scouters (including those in at the national level) do not agree that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law.

        And unlike your hypothetical vegetarian group (a group that I would assume is founded and based around people’s diet), the BSA is not a group based around sex and sexuality, and so one’s sexual orientation should not be an issue in being able to be a part of it.

      • Jessica, no one claims that 100% of the Scouting community supports the timeless values of Scouting and its policy prohibiting active homosexuals from having an association with Scouting. That being said, let’s review the facts..
        First, per SCOTUS, the mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). SCOTUS also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000); and
        Second, the Court also recognized “the First Amendment simply does not require that EVERY member of a group agree on every issue in order for the group’s policy to be “expressive association.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000).
        Now, given these facts, let’s revisit my opinion and analogy…the BSA policy on homosexuals protects the general mission of Scouting (see above…this was decided by SCOTUS and is not debatable..we acknowledge that you seek to change the mission of Scouting)m and I and millions of Scouters are part of Scouting (meaning that is why we joined and paid money to join and invest in this program) because of this mission and policy. If the BSA policy on homosexuality is changed, you change Scouting, and you destroy the general mission of the Boy Scouts. I tell you again, it is like walking into a vegetarian group and telling them you want to form meat eating chapters. This is unreal and offensive to us, and this is how we feel about it. These are real feelings and the logic is correct. Does this help? In essence, we are saying LEAVE US ALONE AND STOP BULLYING US!

      • Just a point of clarification – The SCOTUS said that “The Boy Scouts asserts that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly those represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean,” and that the organization does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior. The Court gives deference to the Boy
        Scouts’ assertions regarding the nature of its expression…” Note that this is not the same as the SCOTUS “finding” these things – that is, the court is not agreeing or disagreeing with this interpretation of the Oath and Law, they are noting the BSA’s interpretation as it pertains to the case. The morality of homosexuality is not at issue in this case; the case is about whether the BSA can decide who can and cannot be a member of the organization.

      • EagleMom, you are correct that the issue before SCOTUS was not whether homosexuality was immoral. In deciding the issue of whether or not the BSA has the right to remove from its association a practicing homosexual leader, SCOUTUS did find (after looking at all of the evidence and BSA documents) that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. Hope this helps.

      • DantheScoutingman –
        Please remember that the scouting community is not of one mind about this proposed policy. Some good, moral Scouts, Scouters, and scouting families are for it, some against it, the Supreme Court case notwithstanding. We all want what we feel is best for the BSA, and the scouts they serve.

      • EagleMom, thank you for your comment, and yes, I want you to know that we realize that the Scouting community is not 100% behind the current policy. In order to have an honest conversation, however, it must be recognized (this is not an opinion and it is not up for debate) that the current policy is that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly those represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. In addition, we also realize that outside groups are working to influence the BSA Board and are seeking to shape opinion within the BSA. This is also a point that is not up for debate. http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late
        So far so good….are we ALL still on the same?

        I will add one further aspect that you should consider in better understanding why we are very disturbed about what is bring proposed. I pray this helps you….Consider the position of the dairy farmer in the below example..certain folks buy a home near a dairy farm (which family farm has been operating for decades). They then later demand that the dairy farm shut down because they don’t like the smell of the farm (this is called “coming to the nuisance” and the right of the dairy farmer is recognized). The reply from the dairy farmer is respectful but clear—you chose to move next to a dairy farm. If you don’t like living next to a dairy farm, sell your home. Can you see how we feel….those within the BSA that don’t like the current policy chose to join the BSA knowing full well what we are about and our timeless values. Timeless means that they don’t change to and fro by every wind of doctrine or idea–they are eternal unchanged evermore.

      • BSAS –
        –> I agree that the current BSA policy is based on the idea that homosexual conduct is not “morally straight”.
        –> I also agree that outside groups such as GLAAD are advocating for a change in this policy. I assume that other outside groups (such as the Family Research Council) are advocating that the policy stay the same.
        –> I also agree that those who buy property next to dairy farms have no right to complain about the smell (assuming it’s been there all along).
        –>I do see why BSA members who support the current policy are upset at the idea of change.
        –>I’ll even throw in that I think the BSA should be more open about considering this and other changes, and should solicit more input from members before making changes of all kinds.

        I don’t agree, though, that organizations shouldn’t change. Many, many people feel differently about homosexuality than they did in 2000, or in the ’90’s, or further back. Homosexual conduct was still illegal in many states when Lawrence v. Texas changed that in 2003. As gay people have gradually been welcomed into our communities, and people have gotten to know them, many people have changed their beliefs. The national conversation on this issue has changed significantly over the years. Who would have thought, back in 2000 when the BSA went to court, that the citizens of three states would vote to allow gay marriage? And yet, it happened in the last election, just twelve years after the Dale decision, and only 9 years after Lawrence.

        The country’s point of view on this issue is very different now than it was in 2000, including many in the BSA, and I think the BSA is right to revisit the issue and consider changing the policy so that scouting families who wish to welcome gay scouts into their troops can do so.

      • EagleMom, although we can respectfully disagree on the policy change, I sincerely want to thank you for acknowledging the distinction between fact and fiction (without this basis, no honest communication can occur) and for your efforts to try and understand the position of those in the Scouting community who support the current policy. Perhaps we can all unite in demanding that the Board slow down on this, show more transparency and listen to/poll the adult volunteers before taking any action to change this policy. I respectfully disagree and maintain that timeless values don’t change-they are eternal, unchanging and evermore, but I will throw this in..if (and I pray never) the majority of Scouters decide to abandon these timeless values, then I will not stand in the way and my family and I (and millions like us) will sadly leave Scouting. I am aware of the moral decline in our society (and am saddened as are millions like me), but you will find that the Scouting community is drawn to this program precisely for its strong moral and timeless values. It is a place of safe harbor in a sea of filth. Over the years, I have been a mentor to and have many seen inner city youth and children without fathers and/or good home environments grow into Eagle Scouts, give meaningful service to others and become great fathers and men of moral integrity. It has been a blessing to my sons and my family. I love the Scouting movement and its timeless values. I have seen how this program can bless all of our youth. To this end and in this spirit, can you Unite with us in calling for the Board to provide us with some transparency and listen to/poll its members before taking any policy change action? All the best and good night!

    • Taylor, you are very correct that we have radicals posting and pushing the homosexual LBGT agenda and even involved in it. Check out other posts with links to some of these radical sites and to see what these folks are up to…tip of the iceberg kind of stuff just so we get some small idea up what we are up against (that’s ok..we are Scouters and we are up for the fight!)….but once litigation commences on this, the discovery process will uncover conflicts of interests, breaches of fiduciary duty and undue influence on Scouting by outside groups adverse to Scouting and its timeless values. Most in the Scouting community are just trying to live a good life and take care of their families and have zero idea how well organized and funded these groups are. Thanks for the post.

      • BSA Scoutleader, Steve and others who are posting Truth; thanks.

        “Instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, 4 NOR TO PAY ATTENTION TO MYTHS AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES (profane, vain babblings), which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith. 5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion”
        1 Timothy 1:4-6

        Someone posted, “IGNORANCE BREEDS INTOLERANCE”; sorry you got it backwards INTOLERANCE BREEDS IGNORANCE. All of you on the left, liberals, progressive/socialist and LGBT supporters are the most intolerant people in this country.

        Double Standards, by all means no. There is only one Standard, one Truth and one Absolute and that is God’s Standard. That is what and why our great Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights Amendments were based on God’s Word primarily. This makes our Constitution under Gods Covenant Law and that is fact no matter how you want to spin it. Why do you think the left is trying to destroy it and calling it a “living” and outdated document? It is based on Principles and not modern liberalism and humanism which are many of your beliefs.

        The vast majority of the Founding Fathers all believed that, there can be no Liberty without Morality and Virtue. Of the signers of the 92% were strong Christians and some were ordained ministers. All of the main stream colleges i.e. Harvard, Yale etc were started as seminaries for the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

        OUR FIRST ARMY:
        “Rules and Articles, for the better Government of the Troops . . . of the united English Colonies of North America (1700’s)”

        “Morality in the Army
        Congress was apprehensive about the moral condition of the American army and navy and took steps to see that Christian morality prevailed in both organizations. In the Articles of War, seen below, governing the conduct of the Continental Army (seen above) (adopted, June 30, 1775; revised, September 20, 1776), Congress devoted three of the four articles in the first section to the religious nurture of the troops. Article 2 “earnestly recommended to all officers and soldiers to attend divine services.” Punishment was prescribed for those who behaved “indecently or irreverently” in churches, including courts-martial, fines and imprisonments. Chaplains who deserted their troops were to be court-martialed.”

        While the issue of homosexuals in the military has only recently become a point of great public controversy, it is not a new issue; it derives its roots from the time of the military’s inception. George Washington, the nation’s first Commander-in-Chief, held a strong opinion on this subject and gave a clear statement of his views on it in his general orders for March 14, 1778:

        “At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778), Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment [was] tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false accounts, [he was] found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and [we] do sentence him to be dismiss’d [from] the service with infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with abhorrence and detestation of such infamous crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of camp tomorrow morning by all the drummers and fifers in the Army never to return; The drummers and fifers [are] to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose.”
        General George Washington, First President of America
        General Washington held a clear understanding of the rules for order and discipline, and as the original Commander-in-Chief, he was the first not only to forbid, but even to punish, homosexuals in the military.

        “We are either a United people, or we are not.
        If the former, let us, in all matters of general concern act as a nation,
        which have national objects to promote, and a national character to support.
        If we are not, let us no longer act a farce by pretending to it.”
        President George Washington 1785 letter to James Madison

        ‘The God of Israel said…“He who rules over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.”
        2 Samuel 23:3
        ######

      • Thank you Taylor for your efforts to save Scouting. I (like most of us) work hard each day for a living and am trying very hard to raise a moral and good family. I am very proud of all of my four children (three of which are very involved in Scouting now). We will not loose this fight to save the BSA and its timeless values. From the extreme comments of some on this post, we see a complete rejection (by some) of the virtues of pluralism and tolerance. We are all disgusted to learn that outside groups are using improper pressure and bullying to seek to destroy Scouting from within. GET TO WORK AND FIGHT LIKE CRAZY OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR SO TO SAVE SCOUTING NOT JUST FOR THE BOYS IN YOUR CHARTER ORGANIZATION, BUT FOR ALL BOYS AND THE FUTURE OF SCOUTING! CALL, E-MAIL, FACEBOOK, TWITTER…SPEAK-UP! Tell the Board to not take ANY ACTION next week. THE pro Glaad, pro-LGBT and soros funded groups are organized, have all the media support and well funded, and they should be taken very seriously in what they are and have been doing to Scouting.

      • BSA Scoutleader, thanks for the comments and yes all need to really “Rally Round The Flag Boys”
        literally.
        “And knowing their thoughts He (Jesus) said to them, “Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself shall not stand.”
        Matt 12:25
        You are more aware than most re George Soros. He is one the most dangerous men today and as a billionaire he actively supports over 70 left wing socialist media group e.g. Media Matters. But, he is a newcomer compared to our so called great American foundations which began “revisionist history” and took over our educational system in 1909.
        Any thing published after 1913 must be suspect.

        WARNING: to all who corrupt and cause a child harm and to stumble in any way:
        Jesus said, “but whoever causes one of these little ones (children) who believe in Me to stumble, it is better for him that a heavy millstone be hung around his neck, and that he be drowned in the depth of the sea. “Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks!”
        Matt 18:6,7

        These are some of the most prominent original foundations:
        Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the primary mover.
        The Carnegie Corporation
        The Rockefeller Foundation
        The Ford Foundation
        The Guggenheim Foundation
        They pooled their financial resources to control education in America e.g. NEA and Council on Foreign Relations. Many more have joined this group since. Funny Sec Hillary Clinton gave her farewell speech last week from there. They are the the most dangerous. I have written documentation on all of this.

        You are also right, this is much bigger than just the BSA they are controlling the media and what is being taught in the schools. That is why parents must wake up and get involved and teach their children what is morally right.

        “Train Up A Child In The Way He Should Go, And even when he is old he will not depart from it.”
        Proverbs 22:6
        ######

      • So, the LGBT definition of ‘close minded’ = anyone who disagrees with them doesn’t believe in their agenda. Did you have a point?

  241. This is ridiculous. Just a short time ago the BSA was chastized when several former Scouts announced that they had been sexually assaulted by gay men who had been BSA leaders. So now they want the BSA to allow gay men to openly participate in Scouting. Which is it? Do they want us to protect the Scouts against abuse or do they want us to allow openly gay men to have authority over and camp out with the Scouts?

    What happened to “A Scout is Reverent”? It was Baden-Powell’s emphasis on reverence that led the Boy Scouts of America to adopt “A Scout is Reverent” as the twelfth point of the Scout Law. Some have said that obedience to the twelfth law will ensure that the other eleven have been obeyed as well. Here’s what the Scout Handbook says this law means: “A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.” God does not condone homosexuality. If the BSA allows homosexuals to participate in Scouting, then they need to go ahead and delete “A Scout is Reverent” from all BSA requirements and literature.

    The BSA has always relied upon the generosity and sponsorship of churches. The majority of BSA Troops are sponsored by Catholic, Lutheran and Southern Baptist churches. The Executive Committee needs to speak with the leadership of these churches to see if they intend to continue supporting the Troops if that means the inclusion of gays. Just imagine the devastating effect that would result if the Catholic Church mandated that no church is to sponsor a Scout Troop so long as the BSA

    I am curiousabout one thing, if the Executive Committee does approve gays to participate in BSA, how do they plan to modify the camping rules and adult Youth Protection Training to accommodate the admission of gays. Would each boy be required to sleep in their own tent? Would each Troop be required to have 2-deep heterosexual leadership present during each activity? Would they require openly gay adult leaders to be supervised by another adult leader at all times?

    If they approve the inclusion of gays, they might as well go ahead and open up the BSA to also include girls.

    • Please check your facts. These were homosexual assaults committed by straight men.

      If they had been gay men, they wouldn’t have been allowed in BSA.

    • I somehow inadvertently deleted part of my comment. The third to last paragraph was supposed to say “Just imagine the devastating effect that would result if the Catholic Church mandated that no church is to sponsor a Scout Troop so long as the BSA includes gays.”

  242. The whole lawsuits against the chartered organizations is red herring. No lawyer is going to sue a church for what they believe. There’s this little thing called the first amendment.

    And there seems to be a misunderstanding about the nature of most of the boy scout lawsuits. Most of the lawsuits that involve the scouts are against a government agency that is providing tax payer subsidized resources to the scouts. Why should taxpayers be subsidizing a private organization that has a restricted membership policy?

    • db, as one who has given many opinion letters to clients on risks of litigation, let me say this…counsel for charter organizations will not be giving the opinion that you proffer. Make no mistake, the BSA and charter organizations (and perhaps members of the the National Board in their individual capacities) will be sued (and for different causes of action I might add) if the current policy is changed.

  243. Wouldn’t a “first step” of this type of change be to add a policy that would allow an individual Charter to allow homosexual leaders into their units. Then after some time evaluate the impact and adoption before making a change that would impact all units nationwide?

    • From a legal point of view, I don’t think BSA can have one core belief for one set of chartering organizations, and a separate set of beliefs for the rest.

      Once BSA removes a core belief from one chartering organization, they can no longer claim it is a core belief, and so all chartering organizations would immediately be released from that core belief as well.

      Either BSA believes homosexuality is immoral or it doesn’t. It can’t half-believe one and half-believe the other.

      • But that’s in effect what they are doing. They are saying that different groups can decide the membership criteria for themselves – at least with respect to homosexuality. I’d have to imagine some criteria would be off-limits for membership criteria (e.g. skin color, race, long/short hair, financial status, nation of origin, etc.) but some criteria would be allowed (e.g. religion, sexual preference, “morality” (as defined by the religion), etc.). I guess the key is what is “core” – what are the remaining “core” criteria that the BSA would have remaining? No convicted felons (for particular crimes)? Really BSA membership requirements become morally equivalent to any organization that deals with children.

      • Right. BSA is moving sexuality from a core belief, to a one that chartering organizations can disagree about. Just like race, hair, nationality, religion, etc. is treated now.

        BSA is not considering removing any other core beliefs at this time. They are not considering changing their views about felonies.

        BSA’s core beliefs are nicely outlined in their national charter http://usscouts.org/aboutbsa/bsacharter.asp

      • Nice try, but not true when you wrongly say that “BSA is not considering removing any other core beliefs at this time.”

        This whole gay issue is an invention of the last 30 to 40 years and is being shoved on us by glaad, pro-LGBT and other Soros funded groups. The BSA made this policy to deal with the declining moral culture in the past 30 or 40 years and the BSA has never changed. 1978 position statement to the Boy Scouts’ Executive Committee, signed by Downing B. Jenks, the President of the Boy Scouts, and Harvey L. Price, the Chief Scout Executive, expresses the Boy Scouts’ “official position” with regard to “homosexuality and Scouting”:”Q. May an individual who openly declares himself to be a homosexual be a volunteer Scout leader?
        “A. No. The Boy Scouts of America is a private, membership organization and leadership therein is a privilege and not a right. We do not believe that homosexuality and leadership in Scouting are appropriate. We will continue to select only those who in our judgment meet our standards and qualifications for leadership.” App. 453-454.

        Further the 1993 position statement, reads, in part: “The Boy Scouts of America has always reflected the expectations that Scouting families have had for the organization. We do not believe that homosexuals provide a role model consistent with these expectations. Accordingly, we do not allow for the registration of avowed homosexuals as members or as leaders of the BSA.” Id., at 461.

        These beliefs were not just empty words (like many of the posts being put on this site by Glaad folks), the Boy Scouts publicly expressed its views with respect to homosexual conduct by its assertions tons of litigation… See Curran v. Mount Diablo Council of Boy Scouts of America, No. C-365529 (Cal. Super. Ct., July 25, 1991); 48 Cal. App. 4th 670, 29 Cal. Rptr. 2d 580 (1994); 17 Cal. 4th 670, 952 P.2d 218 (1998). The US Supreme Court said that we cannot doubt that the Boy Scouts sincerely holds this view. Let’s see..your opinion vs SCOUTS. A basic question for you? Which one is opinion and which is fact?

        Further SCOUTUS says… “the general mission of the Boy Scouts is clear: “[T]o instill values in young people.” Ibid. The Boy Scouts seeks to instill these values by having its adult leaders spend time with the youth members, instructing and engaging them in activities like camping, archery, and fishing. During the time spent with the youth members, the scoutmasters and assistant scoutmasters inculcate them with the Boy Scouts’ values-both expressly and by example. It seems indisputable that an association that seeks to transmit such a system of values engages in expressive activity. See Roberts, supra, at 636 (O’Connor, J., concurring) (“Even the training of outdoor survival skills or participation in community service might become expressive when the activity is intended to develop good morals, reverence, patriotism, and a desire for self-improvement”).”

        The impact of the proposed action will be to allow active homosexuals to be Scouters and it results in the position that homosexual acts are consistent with the timeless values of Scouting. The fact is that this is a MASSIVE departure from our core Scouting beliefs.

        Please stop with your delusion. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not the facts. Thanks.

      • I am aware of BSA’s 1978 position statement, and how it was repeated in the 1990 and the 2000 Supreme Court case.

        That is the only core belief BSA is considering changing at this time. That is what I said.

      • cwgmpls, Scouting is not a buffet where we pick and choose what timeless values we will keep. Values embodied in our Scout oath and law such as being “morally straight” and “clean” are not for sale and will not be removed or changed. This is a BIG deal and the Board cannot act with impunity on this. There will be real consequences.

      • Newsflash…..the timeless values of Scouting are not for sale and will not be compromised. I stand with the ultimate finder of fact (SCOTUS) and do not stand with those who would destroy the core values of Scouting in saying (by the way not my words, the legal conclusions of our highest court after reviewing all of the Scouting documents and not just the ones you think support your position) “the general mission of the Boy Scouts is clear: “[T]o instill values in young people.” Ibid. The Boy Scouts seeks to instill these values by having its adult leaders spend time with the youth members, instructing and engaging them in activities like camping, archery, and fishing. During the time spent with the youth members, the scoutmasters and assistant scoutmasters inculcate them with the Boy Scouts’ values-both expressly and by example. It seems indisputable that an association that seeks to transmit such a system of values engages in expressive activity.” See Roberts, supra, at 636 (O’Connor, J., concurring).

      • A change in policy would not be stating two diametrically opposed core beliefs on the issue. What they would be saying is that they don’t take any position at all in regards to the morality of homosexuality, and that that decision is to be made by individual chartering organizations.

      • beth, I say this with all due respect do you think Scouter are stupid? Homosexual acts are not “morally straight” and not “clean”. Allowing PRACTICING homosexuals to take on the Scout name places a moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle. Just as you would not ask the vegetarian club to condone meat eating, stay away from the timeless values of Scouting. I realize you don’t share these values, but if you have any degree of honesty, you cannot deny the logic of what is being said Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization?? We cannot wait to hear your answer.

      • I certainly don’t think Scouters are stupid. I am a Scouter. I have many friends that are Scouters. I don’t think they are stupid. You and I simply have different ideas about what morally straight means. There is nothing that you can say that will change my mind. I’m sure there is nothing that I can say that will change your mind. I would hope that you would focus on the friendly, courteous, kind part of the Scout Law and treat others with respect. Don’t forget the reverent part, which states that you respect the religious beliefs of others.

      • beth, thank you. I realize that you don’t like the current policy, but can you examine squarely the following from my post…allowing CO’s to set their own homosexual policies (which which policies depending on the CO will permit active homosexuals in Scouting) changes our existing policy on association and necessarily places a Scouting moral stamp of approval on this amoral lifestyle as engaged in by PRACTICING homosexuals. It would constitute a clear admission by BSA that a practicing homosexual’s live is consistent with the Scout law and oath. While, you may agree with this and like the result. You must admit, the legal result is a complete change (I would phrase this as a complete rejection) of the timeless values of Scouting and the meaning of “morally straight” and “clean”. This is like working to turn a vegetarian group into a group that eats meat. If you want to eat meat, join the meat eaters group don’t see to come in and take their name and program and money. It is not friendly, courteous or kind to seek to do this. Can we agree? If not, we all need to see clear logic why?? Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Are you willing to write your LGBT folks and post for days on (without it seems taking time to work) end telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization?? Please specifically answer my questions. I am very curious to see your answer. I ask it with the hope and prayer that you will open you heart and examine the soundness and correctness of the current BSA position even though you disagree with it.

      • Beth, what I am about to say, I do so with no intention to offend, but I am going to speak very open and honestly with you….we are still waiting for you to answer the specific question put to you. I respectfully ask that you (and others who seem to want to lecture about tolerance and kindness) consider not post anything more until you share your open and honest answer to this fair and valid question. It will be very revealing to all Scouters about what you (and other Glaad folks posting on our site) really think about tolerance, respect, kindness, etc. when the shoe is on the other foot……again, the ONLY way a pluralistic society works is for groups that disagree to respect the rights of others to exist, associate and express their views. This is the compromise. A hostile take-over of the timeless values of Scouting is not compromise, it is not honest, it is not reverent, it is not tolerant. It is WRONG, and we will not let this happen and we will hold to legal account anyone who tries to do so!

  244. Call your local Councils. Find out if BSA National has sought their input. You may be shocked at the answer. Councils from around the West (Utah, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Colorado, and Wyoming) are reporting that National has caught them off guard and they were not prepared for how fast the Executive Board is moving. A local paper in Utah ran a story quoting the Great Slat Lake Councils PR Dept saying the same thing. There are huge questions about liability, Advancement protocols, etc. that have been left hanging. Regardless of your position this is very very troubling. Ignoring those who will be put directly in the line of fire over corporate sponsors and those who are not registered volunteers is not good. Why is National moving so fast? Why have they cut off their lifeblood? Why are they being so secretive? Why have Councils and Districts deliberately cut out of the process? Whose agenda is really being followed? Regardless of your position on this issue there are too many questions that National has left unanswered.

    • Andrew,
      I can’t agree with you more. I have been asking some of these same questions and no one seems to answer with anything of real substance. They only answer with whether they think this upcoming decision is right or wrong.

      • You are lucky because when I called around today I did not even get an an answer on if the proposed policy was right or wrong.

      • The local council offices won’t answer any questions on this policy. I was talking about when I speak to individuals.

      • Yeah all I was told is how fast and off guard everyone was. Individuals around my area are mixed as you would expect. Many feel inclusion is good. My own son (Venture Scout) believes Scouting can benefit any boy willing to work hard and they should have the chance. When I press deeper with those who feel as my son does the answers get very sparse. Why? Because it deals with “morally straight” and “clean, reverent.” So much depends on personal belief, family values, faith, experiences in school and life, etc. Many of the individuals I talk to refer back to the Law and Oath. When pressed further the water gets even muddier because no one knows what happens with advancement, camping, legal liability, Unit and District policy and procedures, etc. Honestly there are those who say oh it will never happen, or that is just paranoia. No it is the reality that those of us on the ground deal with everyday. This is so much more than a policy change. The nuts and bolts cannot even be addressed because everyone is so caught up in morality, discrimination, right, wrong, inclusion, exclusion and on and on and on. For people like me on the ground serving at the District and Unit level with a CO that could very well be litigated against it is the nuts and bolts that matter. We can debate the Oath and Law all day but in the end if we all do not subscribe to each one in their entirety with one voice everything we are working for in the lives of these young men are meaningless. The mission of the BSA is to prepare young people to make moral and ethical decisions through their entire lives. I do not care about gay or straight, sex or abstinence, inclusion or exclusion. These are so subjective that there will never be common ground on any of it. We as adults better get our acts together because if we fail to give clear definitions of moral and ethical that apply equally to every group we will have a generation that will believe there are no consequences for anything they do. They will justify every behavior as moral and ethical. We owe a debt of honor to all those who built the BSA into an organization that really stands for something to figure out the nuts and bolts…Sorry I am rambling.

      • Well stated Andrew. I agree with your statement. I wish that others would be able to read this and respond with logical and thoughtful answers, rather than trying to evade the question or tell you why your opinion is wrong. Whatever choice is made there are huge implications that have consequences we are not ready for.

      • Andrew,

        You are not rambling and you touch on some good areas although we disagree on the moral significance of how bad and destructive homosexual acts are to people and their eternal progression. I am not going to attempt to change you views, but I expect BSA to retain the values it has always held out and that we have all invested so much into establishing.

        I have had several LONG conversations with my Scout executive and District Executive, and I can only tell you about the southern region and they were very much caught off guard by this move and are solidly (of course always a few odd voices) opposed to ANY change to our current policy of prohibiting any actively practicing and open homosexuals in Scouting. National is very much aware of these strong views. There are a lot of BSA executives worried about their jobs right now and rightly so. I hope that they will work to act to stop and delay any action on this next week. Those on the Board pushing this are being identified, and they MUST leave!

        What you describe is the product of a moral decline, well funded groups actively targeting the BSA, and Scouting trying to operate in a society with declining values. BSA is needed now more than ever. This gay issue is an invention of the last 30 to 40 years and is being shoved on us by Glaad, pro-LGBT and other Soros funded groups. Hard to believe how fast we have fallen. Our TV shows, music, movies are bombarding us (admittedly those who do not hold your views, but which VIEWS MUST BE RESPECTED AND YES TOLERATED) with homosexual filth. As God is my witness, I tell you it makes me SICK. These are my views and feelings, and I want to have none of my family exposed to this filth. This view by the way was accepted by almost everyone just 50 years ago…can you see the direction we are going? Now turning to the BSA, this is one of the last places where timeless values are learned and taught and now this filth is not respecting of our proud history and our tradition (NONE OF WHICH CAN OR SHOULD BE DENIED OR OVERLOOKED). The BSA made this homosexual policy to deal with the declining moral culture in the past 30 or 40 years and the BSA has never changed. In a 1978 position statement to the Boy Scouts’ Executive Committee, signed by Downing B. Jenks, the President of the Boy Scouts, and Harvey L. Price, the Chief Scout Executive, expresses the Boy Scouts’ “official position” with regard to “homosexuality and Scouting”:”Q. May an individual who openly declares himself to be a homosexual be a volunteer Scout leader?
        “A. No. The Boy Scouts of America is a private, membership organization and leadership therein is a privilege and not a right. We do not believe that homosexuality and leadership in Scouting are appropriate. We will continue to select only those who in our judgment meet our standards and qualifications for leadership.” App. 453-454.
        Further the 1993 position statement, reads, in part: “The Boy Scouts of America has always reflected the expectations that Scouting families have had for the organization. We do not believe that homosexuals provide a role model consistent with these expectations. Accordingly, we do not allow for the registration of avowed homosexuals as members or as leaders of the BSA.” Id., at 461.These beliefs were not just empty words (unlike many of the posts being put on this site by Glaad folks), the Boy Scouts have publicly expressed and defended its views in countless of lawsuits and in ultimately establishing its right to teach the timeless moral values of Scouting. The answer is simple, if you don’t agree with Scouting values, leave. A key value is that that homosexuals do NOT provide a role model consistent with the expectations of Scouting and our law and oath. I recognize that we can agree to disagree on this, but can you leave us the one place (of the few remaining places) where we can raise our future men of courage in these TRUE and timeless Scouting values.

        Can you imagine (if the shoe were on the other foot) what reaction we Scouters would get if we joined the LGBT and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight? Will you agree to spend hours on end and days and weeks of your time writing your LGBT folks and post for days on end (without it seems taking time to work) telling them to be more tolerant of the Scouters that are coming to join LGBT and who coming to bringing with them the Scout oath and law to change their organization?? If not, then perhaps you should look deep into your heart. We, as Scouters, STRONGLY reject this view of letting CO’s set their own polices on practicing homosexuals and are 100% consistent in our position, because we say that this is a free Country go and find another place that agrees with your lifestyle, but leave the BSA alone. As for our BSA house, we will serve and follow truth. Are we getting anywhere???? I cannot speak truth any more plainly than I have done with you and I pray that you open your mind and heart and really ponder what I am telling you even though we can agree that we come from different positions regarding the immorality of homosexual behavior. If we can all reconcile on this foundation, our world will be a better place. If not, so be it, and we will continue to fight on. All the best to you my friend and sorry for rambling.

      • “My own son (Venture Scout) believes Scouting can benefit any boy willing to work hard and they should have the chance.” (Quoted from Andrew’s post above.)

        Andrew, your son is very wise. I think he’s summed up the reason so many are advocating a change (rather than encouraging those who dislike the current policy to go elsewhere).

        I do believe that you are right to be concerned that the details of such a change need to be handled carefully and thoroughly. There’s a lot to think through and consider. The BSA is a big organization, run mainly by volunteers, which makes it very different than, for example, the military or a corporation. I’ve been a bit surprised to learn that despite being a membership-driven, volunteer-run organization, the BSA doesn’t seem to have any process for member participation in such decisions; I had not realized that before.

        I have put my trust in the goodness of all those involved with scouting. I hope it all can be handled with thoughtfulness, respect, and grace.

      • When you have glaad, pro-GLTB (whatever) and other Soros funded groups putting all kinds of pressure and working to putsh 1.4 million e-mails to the BSA on this. They are using media, facebook and twitter to drum of support. For starters…see, http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late. It smells very bad. We have several appointed members of the appointed Board who have conflicting interests. This action to move fast and in concert with Glaad and the left wing media
        to try and catch everyone off guard everyone gives us ZERO reason to trust what is happening. None of this reflects any thoughtfulness (to 100 plus years of timeless Scouting values), respect (for US volunteer Scout leaders ..meaning those posting who are actually Scouters…in considering our opinions). The way they are handling this certainly lacks any class. Can anyone give me on reason not to slow down and not take any action next week…unless you are working in the cover of darkness and seek to move before you are removed and significant opposition can be mounted. In view of all of the facts, you need to explain on what basis the majority of Scout volunteers who support the timeless values of Scouting can trust folks like James Turley, Randall Stephenson, and their buddies given all that is wrong with what is going on?
        http://www.glaad.org/blog/send-message-boy-scouts-its-too-late
        http://www.glaad.org/scoutsboard
        ps…please share with us whether you support outside groups seeking to take over, bully and influence the BSA? And, if not what you are doing to stop this..your answer will be very telling for the rest of us. pss. are you supportive of successful efforts of GLAAD and Scouts for Equality to pressure BSA corporate donors, including Intel Corporation, United Parcel Service, and Merck Foundation, to withhold funding until the Boy Scouts end its policy banning gay youth and parents? psss..are you a member of Glaad??

      • Please give a specific example of one CO that will likely be litigated against.

        If it does happen, I think it will be very, very rare. But I can’t say if I don’t know what example you are talking about.

      • If these people sued the BSA to try to gain acceptance, why would the not sue the CO’s. As far as examples, How about every Evangelical UCC church that does not subscribe to allowing gays? Their governing body has left it up to the individual congregations to make that decision, What about every church that does not have it in their bylaws that they specifically ban gays, but says the follow biblical teachings?

    • Does your reference also include, Romans 1, verses 27 and 28:

      27. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

      28. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

      These words are clear and give no room for misunderstanding as to what is being taught. The Glaad, pro-GLTB folks reject this truth and would seek to put anyone in jail who preaches or teaches these values (do your research and look at what they are posting and doing outside the US and what they are working to do within the US). It will be called “hate speech” and not protected by the first amendment and the media will give them cover all day long. Don’t doubt me on this. We are in real trouble. They are not content with a society that allows practicing homosexuals to live as they choose, they do not want compromise. They do not seek tolerance. They cram this filth on us in movies, TV shoes, media, music. 40 to 50 years ago, we had none of this…go out and look at the difference between The Andy Griffith show and the crap on TV now. We have unplugged our TV, and we are not going to unplug Scouting!!!! The fact is that they seek to force this perverted amoral way of thinking upon EVERYONE. And now they seek to do this with the BSA. I want to take all of us moral Scouters and join Glaad and tell them that they need to allow chapters that will preach that homosexuality is wrong and one who has same gender attraction should not act on these attractions and should work to live a “morally straight life” and be “clean”. This is exactly what these Glaad folks are pushing that our Board do next week! I have seen it posted time and time again here and everywhere that these Glaad folks post from their talking points….they tell us we who hold these timeless values that we need to be more rational, we need to become more enlightened, we need to better understand science, we need to be more tolerant. For them, it is always a one way street. It is never good enough for these folks to compromise and agree to respect OUR views on morality. Listen loud and clear Glaad folks and the rest of you…..we are enlightened, we are educated, we understand science and we reject amoral behavior. We always will and so wilthe BSA. If you don’t like what we stand for, LEAVE!!! I am going to call a spade a spade…we are at war with these extremist nut jobs!!! Why because, they are coming after us and our timeless values. If you love Scouting, then get of the fence and GET ACTIVE!! All that is need for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

  246. “The sport in Scouting is to find the good in every boy and develop it.”

    Lord Robert Baden-Powell

    Far from being the only quote of his, showing no qualification of any kind.

    I won’t engage anymore in this debate. At this point, I’ll wait and see what National says. I just thought that a quote of Lord BP’s would be a good way to walk away.

    • Charles, “The sport in Scouting is to find the good in every boy and develop it.” and Lord Robert Baden-Powell would tell you that the way we do this is through teaching and promoting the timeless values of Scouting. Young men who struggle with same gender attraction (and their future children if they apply these values) will be forever blessed by these timeless values including those of being “morally straight” and “clean”. If you love Scouting, then get of the fence and GET ACTIVE!! All that is need for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

  247. If the board members of the BSA can’t embrace the core values of Scouting I would encourage them them to step down. I am sure the BSA can find the money somewhere else.

    • Spot on Steve! These bad apples on the Board need to go and they can take their money and pro-Glaad, etc. folks with them. If you love Scouting, then get of the fence and GET ACTIVE!! Facebook, twitter, call and e-mail and call on the Board to delay any action on this..we demand transparency, accountability and honestly (we pray, it does not come to this, but also join the class action suit that will be filed if they try to change our policy and the timeless values of Scouting). All that is need for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

      • BSA Here is the names of two of those bad apples. These are the two members of the BSA national board, James Turley CEO of Ernst & Young, and Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T, are pressing the organization to amend their strict anti-gay membership and leadership policies to include homosexuals at all levels. Lets all google them and send a message of no support for their postion of allowing homosexuals into the BSA program. Tell them to take their money and resign from the Board. When money talks, values walk. Sincerely Trenton

      • Amen Trenton and spot on! Same clear message need to go to our Scout executives. Have been having long conversations with mine and we are getting some traction in the southern region. Also, after a class action gets filed. Legal options will be pursued to get them removed and to go after them for breaches of fiduciary duties owed to BSA. In the discovery process and given litigation hold requirements, we we learn more about the connection of these bad apples to Glaad and other pro-gay groups funded by George Soros. What is being proposed next week smells! The National Board is advised to slow down and think about what they are doing and the irreparable harm they will do to Scouting,

      • BSAScoutleader sorry about the website I tried to use the url and I to did not get through. I went to the website earlier and had no problem and was able to sign the petition with no problem try typing in JamesTurley, CEO of Ernst & Young, and Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T they have a list of websites chose the one that asked for removal, The should get you in Thanks Trenton

      • cwgmpls, are you asking serious question? The Scout oath and law provide our core Scouting values.

      • jim, does your question have any relevance on the issue at hand. For example, where in the Scout Oath and Law does it mention flag burning (In our long history of Scouting, we didn’t really start to see these types of horrible acts until the 60’s and like flag burning sodomy laws have only started to erode over the last 30 to 40 years)? Is flag burning consistent with the timeless values of Scouting? Does it run afoul of our timeless Duty to Country as Scouters? Consider Scouting’s proud tradition of honoring and properly retiring the flag.

        Now, putting the above example aside, let me get to the direct answer…SCOTUS concluded (as such it is a matter of fact and law) that (after looking at all of the facts and BSA documents/positions/statements) the “mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000). Further, the US Supreme Court also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean” and that the BSA does not want to promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000). The Court clearly recognized and upheld the BSA’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct. I realize that you do not agree with the timeless values of Scouting, but we do!

        The proposed policy change will destroy the legal underpinnings that resulted in the BSA being able to successfully protect and defend its expressive association message, and charter organizations that prohibit practicing homosexuals will be sued. The National Board is on notice of the irreparable damage that it will inflict on Scouting and its timeless values if it takes hasty and reckless action nest week. It is advised to govern its actions accordingly!

      • Right. And who is in position to interpret those values to create practical policies?

        Who stated in 1978 that “We do not believe that homosexuality and leadership in Scouting are appropriate.”?

        Who stated in 1991 that “We believe that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirement in the Scout Oath that a Scout be morally straight and in the Scout Law that a Scout be clean”?

        Who stated in 2000 that “BSA teaches that homosexual conduct is not morally straight”?

        None of those phrases are in the Scout oath and law. Those policy decisions are interpretations of the Scout oath and law made by the BSA national council.

        If BSA national council had authority to interpret the Scout oath and law in 1978, 1991, and in 2000, then certainly BSA national council has authority to interpret the Scout oath and law this week. We can’t take away that authority just because we disagree with them.

  248. This is quite enough folks! It is a good thing when people come on and leave a comment but this has degenerated into a handful of people insulting each other and recycling the same old tired arguments. The decision will be made next week by a group of people who have been entrusted to do so. You seem to forget that the program is for the youth and it is their program. I am an Eagle Scout and have been a volunteer for 29 years and regardless of the decision next week, will be right there in the trenches helping to give those young people the very best program that we can give them.

    • dansmith40, with all due respect, you have no legal or moral right to tell anyone “This is quite enough folks!” This type of intolerance, intimidation and disrespect is not acceptable. Candidly, you owe the Scouting community an apology.

      In addition, I will remind YOU that the proposed change is not about YOU. All of us in the Scouting community have made significant financial and time investments into our Program and we don’t need to hear someone tell us what they have invested (particularly as it cannot be verified). You seem to be implying that your investment (assuming what you say is true) is more valuable than ours. If so, your position is not defensible.

      Why did you join and why have you volunteered 29 years (assuming what you say is true) in Scouting? BSA is an organization that has a clear mission to instill values in young people and the position of the BSA is that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”.

      Your attitude reminds me of folks that buy a home near a dairy farm (which family farm has been operating for decades) and then sue the dairy farm seeking to shut it down because they don’t like the smell of the farm.

      Let me be respectfully direct, you came to us and you know what we are about and who we are. As such, you have no legal or moral basis to ask us to give up our timeless values.

      We will not sit down, and we will not shut up. When we see a few bad apples on the unelected Board who seek to effectuate a hostile take over of our program, and when we see outside groups and the media trying to bully and destroy the timeless values of Scouting, we are not going to permit this to occur. The Board is on notice to slow this down and not take any action next week!

  249. QUESTION: Many people here are saying that letting homosexuals into Scouting would essentially be like the BSA telling their children that being gay is ok (which is something against their Christian beliefs). So why aren’t you also upset about the BSA’s current policy of letting Jews and Muslims into Scouting, which is essentially the BSA telling your children that not believing in Jesus is ok (which is also something against your Christian beliefs)?

    • Bodhi, Scouting welcomes those that love and promote the timeless values of Scouting as embodied in the Scout oath and law so we have no clue what you are asking with the above. As confirmed by SCOTUS, the mission statement of the BSA is to “instill values in young people”, and a Scout vows to keep one’s self “physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640 (2000), this is a wonderful program for Jews, Muslims, Christians, etc. SCOTUS also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000).
      Given these facts, the BSA policy on homosexuals protects the general mission of Scouting, and I and millions of Scouters are part of Scouting (meaning that is why we joined and paid money to join and invest in this program) because of this mission and policy. If the BSA policy on homosexuality is changed, you change Scouting, and you destroy the general mission of the Boy Scouts. It is like walking into a vegetarian group and telling them you want to form meat eating chapters. This is unreal and offensive to us, and this is how we feel about it. These are real feelings and the logic is correct. Does this help? In essence, we are saying LEAVE US ALONE AND STOP BULLYING US!

      • Sorry, but as the parent of a Scout, I think the BSA’s interpretation of the terms “morally straight” and “clean”.is outdated and wrong. I hope the BSA revises their view and their policy.

      • Bodhi, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and we can respectfully disagree with each other. I will however make a couple of relevant points. First, with respect to the actions of groups outside of the BSA…there is no place for threatening, bullying and intimidating corporate donors of the BSA by Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community who intentionally infiltrate an opposing organization with the intent to destroy it from within, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community to threaten, bully and intimidate members of an organization with different values to do something that spits in the face of their timeless values and does not reflect actions that its members want (yea, we understand that 100% of Scouters do not support the timeless values, but most do). The actions of these outside groups is indefensible and antithetical to our pluralistic values.
        Second, yes, we have some within our ranks that do not favor the current policy, however, they decided to join the BSA knowing what we are about and our timeless values. As a point in fact, millions of us in the Scouting movement are a part of this organization and have invested time and money because we like, agree with and desire to involve ourselves and sons in such a program that teaches and instills in them these timeless values. As such, the rights of those who seek to defend the institutional values are superior. Let me describe it this way. A certain development is built next to a dairy farm that has been operating for decades. A new home buyer knows of the dairy and elects to move into the neighborhood. After a while the home owner tells the dairy farmer that it needs to shut down because the home owner does not like the smell. Any idea what the dairy farmer and the law will say to the home owner? If you don’t like your decision, then leave and don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Hope this helps you better understand where Scouters who support the timeless values of Scouting are coming from. All the best my friend!

      • I will agree with you that intimidating and pressure from outside groups should not be what guides the national board’s decision making.

        If I moved into a house by a dairy farm, I wouldn’t complain about the smell on my property (I bought it knowing the farm and the odor were there), but I certainly would complain if the company was polluting the air and the water, poisoning the milk, abusing the animals on their farm, or mistreating their workers.

        Excluding, discriminating, and stigmatizing homosexuality is a serious problem that affects not only the views and attitudes of those in the BSA but also those outside… the BSA is a leader in America, and I (and many others in the BSA) think they’ve lost their direction here and that their policy is harmful, unfounded, and wrong.

        Now I don’t know where you are from; but in my home troop and the other Scouting units around me, most parents, Scouts and Scouters do no oppose this proposed change – in fact they welcome it. They don’t see the BSA’s stance on homosexuality as a “timeless value” but rather as a “misguided view.”

        This policy is hurting us from moving forward and serving the youth of America. Just for example: my sons have a friend who won’t join Scouting because their parents (a gay couple) wouldn’t be welcomed into the organization. What a shame that this young man can’t benefit from Scouting and share the joys of the program with his family because of who they are. How is this what Scouting is about?

        I didn’t join Scouting, nor did I have my sons join, so we could shun or exclude those whose lifestyles may be different from ours. My troop is full of families of many different religions (Christians, Jews, Muslims, and more), different races, different economic backgrounds, different family structures, and different lifestyles… why are we making sexual orientation a barrier to entry? Why can’t my son be in a troop with a gay friend or be taught life skills from a gay leader?

        I understand many religions and individuals feel homosexuality is immoral. I do not feel this way. I understand that the BSA has asserted homosexuality is in conflict with the tenants of the oath and law,. But I think their interpretations and understandings are out-of-date, out-of-touch and should be reconsidered and revised. I hope they make the right decision and remove this arbitrary, harmful, hatefill and discriminatory ban.

      • Bodhi, beyond the obvious conclusion that BSA National should not be bullied by outside groups, my broader point is simple and clear.. the actions of these outside Glaad and other pro-LGBT groups is indefensible and antithetical to our pluralistic values. Next, Moving to the dairy farm example, your answer is revealing. It provides us in the larger Scouting community an insight into where this is going and why we must draw a clear line in the sand and not abandon or compromise our timeless values. Let’s explore…you view the BSA’s position that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) as being a “pollution.” You then assert that this gives you and others in the pro-Glaad community the right to shut down any group (dairy farm like the BSA) that teaches these timeless values. We are fully aware of the legal arguments that are made to circumvent our first amendment protections as they are being made now in the larger international community. Like pollution (as you call it), you and others in the pro-Glaad community view such timeless values and teachings as being “hate speech” and demand that all such speech be shut down (just like your dairy farm response) and not protected by the first amendment. In effect, you promote a zero tolerance policy for such teachings. Such teachings whether found in the BSA, other organizations, or in scripture will never be permitted by folks like you and others in the pro-Glaad community as it is viewed as being pollution or hate speech. I point this out not for your benefit, but I do so for the benefit of the larger Scouting community and members of the BSA National Board. WAKE UP FOLKS!!! UP IS NOW DOWN. BAD IS NOW GOOD AND GOOD IS NOW EVIL. These folks have a one way outlook on tolerance, and we cannot abandon the BSA and its clear, firm and eternal truth, being that homosexual acts are amoral and are not “morally straight” or “clean”.

      • ps, screen name (Bodhi and ESK), I (like most in the Scouting community who support the timeless values of Scouting) properly view homosexual acts as a pollution. Here is the difference between us and you in the pro-Glaad community, we (historically..perhaps we should be reconsidering our approach to pluralism) have not sought to shut down your dairy farm, we have not sought to infiltrate your dairy farm to change it, we have not sued organizations like Glaad to compel them to teach correct principles like homosexual acts are not “morally straight” and not “clean”. Your pollution is in our movies, TV shows, music, media, schools, etc., and we work very hard to protect our families from your pollution. We join organizations like Scouting to stay far away from this filth. Unlike you, we have been tolerant (to a fault) with your amoral message. As for your message to us that our moral views are a pollution and that well funded groups like Glaad will seek to destroy and shut these views down by any means possible including efforts to call sound, true and eternal principles as “hate speech”, we say this to you and those like you…..we will NEVER teach this pollution. We will NEVER accept your lie that disgusting homosexual acts are moral. We will DEFEND AND PROTECT OUR BOYS and our God given right to preach and teach correct principles. Your remarkable intolerance demands that I speak so openly with you!

      • Angie and Bodhi, yup Bodhi’s position is very ugly.

        Calling the BSA’s timeless values “pollution” such that the pro-Glaad community and any minority within the Scouting community can remove these timeless values is extreme.

        Bodhi acknowledges that the rights of those (within the BSA) who are defending the BSA’s institutional values are superior (in the example, certain development is built next to a dairy farm that has been operating for decades. A new home buyer knows of the dairy and elects to move into the neighborhood. After a while the home owner tells the dairy farmer that it needs to shut down because the home owner does not like the smell. Any idea what the dairy farmer and the law will say to the home owner? If you don’t like your decision, then leave and don’t let the door hit you on the way out). His only rationalization for not acknowledging the rights of the majority of Scouters who support the current policy is to say that such policies are “pollution” and that the BSA has no right to make such policies. This is not constant with the holding in BSA v. Dale

        Yes, this position is ugly, it destroys the underpinnings of First Amendment rights of association. It is also extreme and intolerant.

        While the BSA recognizes the speech and association rights of groups like Glaad, such groups do not afford us the same respect. Our timeless values are called “hate speech” and “pollution.” Angie and Bodhi, yours is an extreme zero tolerance policy, and yes it is ugly.

        The larger Scouting community and members of the BSA National Board are wide awake to what is really going on here.

      • Ok, I don’t know where you’re from or who you interact with within Scouting. But where I live a majority of Scouters do NOT support the current policy. These aren’t activists from outside groups – these are scouters in the program. Now (full disclosure) I live in a fairly progressive state (same-sex marriage is legal here; we are represented by an openly gay congressmember; the principal of my son’s school is openly gay; the associate pastor of the church that charter’s our troop is gay). and I’ve found that almost all Scout leaders and parents that I talk with at council and district events do not support the current ban of homosexuals (I even know of a couple packs and troops that have looked the other way, “fly under the radar” and have let gays in their units).

        This whole attitude of exclusion and stigmatization of a person based on sexual orientation is a “pollution” to our society… it’s based on an ignorance of sexuality and sexual orientation and on an intolerant view of other’s beliefs, values, and lifestyles. It breeds hate and, even worse, self-hate. Of course the BSA has every legal right to make an exclusionary policy; but it has a moral obligation to do what’s right for the youth and for the country they serve.

        You keep citing the justification that the BSA used in 2000 to defend it’s policy in “BSA v. Dale”… well, frankly, the view and interpretation of the oath and law is outdated and wrong;. and that is what needs to be addressed by the national office and overturned by the national office. And that’s what I (and many others) hope the executive board votes to changes in the coming week.

      • Screen name (Bodhi), can you be more specific about what majority of Scouters are you talking about and where (and facts beyond anecdotal and alleged conversations)? I am very much aware that my council and the entire Southern region is overwhelmingly not supportive of any policy change (further, such change violates the policies and core values of our largest BSA charter organizations/partners which will cause a mass exodus), and I am hearing similar complaints for other regions. Is it your position that the majority of Scouters favor the policy change? If so, please proffer your facts. If not, what is your point (no one asserts that 100% of Scouters support the current policy).

        If you are advocating that the Board not take any action until we have such facts, I suspect that such decision by the Board to slow this down and talk to its volunteer members about this would be wise. Are you pushing for this?

        Now let’s return to your “pollution” position as it is very telling.

        First, in your prior post you acknowledge that the rights of those (within the BSA) who are defending the BSA’s policy are superior (recall, in the example, certain development is built next to a dairy farm that has been operating for decades. A new home buyer knows of the dairy and elects to move into the neighborhood. After a while the home owner tells the dairy farmer that it needs to shut down because the home owner does not like the smell. Any idea what the dairy farmer and the law will say to the home owner? If you don’t like your decision, then leave and don’t let the door hit you on the way out).

        Second, your only rationalization for not acknowledging the superior rights of the majority of Scouters who support the current policy is to say that such policies are “pollution” and as such, the BSA has no right to make such policies. This is extreme, and it is not constant with the holding in BSA v. Dale which tells us that (as a matter of law and fact) the BSA’s policy to exclude practicing homosexuals is lawful and does not constitute discrimination, and further that the BSA’s right to exclude practicing homosexuals is protected by the first amendment. As such, the current policy is not pollution. It is lawful and needed to protect our mission and children. We who are in the majority and support and defend its timeless values (like the dairy farmer) have superior rights to those who joined the BSA and have moved in and no are complaining about the policy that existed at the time they joined. Our clear answer (just the the example of the dairy farmer) to you and others who don’t like the current policy is leave if you don’t like the BSA values that existed when you joined and have always existed.

      • BSASL –

        We must remember that we live in a country where beliefs and culture are vastly different in some areas than in others.

        I believe that you are probably correct that the majority of Scouts and Scouters in “red states” (the south and the middle of the country) may be against this policy.

        However, as several posters here have stated, those of us in “blue states” – the northeast (New England, NY, NJ, MD, DE, PA), California, and the Pacific Northwest – believe that the majority of Scouts and Scouters in our area would be very much for the proposed policy. We live in an area where gay teens are fully integrated into our communities. They are our kids’ friends at school (even Catholic school), in sports, at community activities, in church, and even in scouts. In many of our states, gay marriage is legal; in Maryland, Maine, and Washington state same-sex marriage won more than 50% of the popular vote in 2012. (It’s also legal in D.C., VT, NY, MA, CT, and NH, with many neighboring states recognizing these marriages.) It feels very wrong – sinful even – to us to exclude these kids (most of whom, at scouting age, are celibate anyway and thus not sinners even in the eyes of Catholics and other churches) from scouts.

        There’s no way to prove this without surveying Scouts and Scouters. But please give those of us in “blue states” the benefit of the doubt that the majority of folks here have strong moral beliefs *against* the current policy.

        Please think on this a bit. The BSA has to serve Scouts across our country. They must respect troops who have strong moral beliefs on both sides of this issue. They are trying to create a policy whereby neither group has to compromise their moral beliefs on this issue in order to be a part of the BSA. This policy isn’t perfect, mostly because troops have to blend at the higher levels of the organization. I’d be open to suggestions as to other ways the situation could be handled with respect for both groups.

      • EagleMom, a good starting for is for us to rally behind the following from The Great Salt Lake Council of the BSA “We believe that any decision that strikes at the core of our 103-year history merits full input from all stakeholders in deliberation and discussion,”
        After we have input from all stakeholders (including adult volunteers, CO’s and paid executives) in DELIBERATION and DISCUSSION we will be better positioned to consider the benefits of the current policy and whether any policy change I needed. Can we all compromise on this approach?

      • db, the proposal is to rally behind the following from The Great Salt Lake Council of the BSA “We believe that any decision that strikes at the core of our 103-year history merits full input from all stakeholders in deliberation and discussion,” Can all reasonable minds agree that hasty action to do anything this week is a very bad idea, can we all on both sides of the issue compromise on this approach that can take several months and as much time as is needed?
        After we have input from all stakeholders (including adult volunteers, CO’s and paid executives) in real DELIBERATION and DISCUSSION we will be better positioned to consider the benefits of the current policy and whether any policy change is needed.

      • So your idea of compromise is to wait? Then what? The folks who are against change will be against it in the future. The folks who are for change will still be for change. The only thing postponing a decision will do is to further erode the BSA brand and alienate more people and more sponsors. I don’t have a problem with waiting. But it won’t solve anything and will do more damage.

      • db, yes, no change should be considered until we have input from all stakeholders (including adult volunteers, CO’s and paid executives) in real DELIBERATION and DISCUSSION so we will be better positioned to consider the benefits of the current policy and whether any policy change is needed.

      • 100 years ago there were many Americans who would say separating blacks from whites was a “timeless value” … things changes.

      • Hello screen name EagleScoutKyle (and whoever is behind the screen name) seriously, do the pro-Glaad folks sit around thinking-up this kind of stuff to post. Now, turning to my comment, your post has no direct bearing on the proposed policy change, and let’s be clear on the facts, per BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) it is NOT DISCRIMINATION and it is not unlawful for the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals from the BSA. It is called our protected First Amendment right, and it is consistent with BSA’s timeless values as evidenced by our oath and law. With all due respect, please comment on the policy change being considered (apples), not oranges.

      • BSAScoutleader, please note that you speak for yourself and no one else. I for one live in the Washington, DC area any some agree with you and some don’t. My main concern is that this issue comes down to Religious beliefs. Since, that is generally what this is, the policy should be left up to the chartering organization. Many of our chartering organizations are Churches, Synagogues, Mosques, Schools and so forth who may not agree with what you believe. I frankly want the opportunity to simply follow my relgious beliefs, which in my case forbids discrimination in any form. If you don’t agree that’s your issue not mine. And by the way, I have read the Dale case. The actual opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States and it simply said that because the BSA did not get any
        Federal Funding that it could set it’s own membership policies. Nothing more, nothing less.

      • Screen name (bill stewart), with all due respect, my comment to screen name ESK about BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) is 100% factual (your inference that a fact constitutes speaking for oneself is simply absurd).

        Let’s recap the decision in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) and let me quote from the case:

        First, the court addressed the Boy Scouts’ claims (along with another claim that I will not mention here) that application of the public accommodations law violated the BSA’s federal constitutional rights “to associate for the purpose of engaging in protected speech.’ ” 160 N. J. 562, 605, 734 A. 2d 1196, 1219 (1999) (quoting Board of Directors of Rotary Int’l v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537, 544 (1987)).

        Second, in order to determine whether the BSA is protected by the First Amendment’s expressive associational right, SCOTUS needed to determine whether the BSA engages in “expressive association. Further, because this was a First Amendment case where the ultimate conclusions of law are virtually inseparable from findings of fact, the Court was obligated to independently review the factual record to ensure that the state court’s judgment does not unlawfully intrude on free expression. SCOTUS sided with the BSA’s position that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.”

        Third, the Court found that Boy Scouts engage in expressive activity and that the general mission of the Boy Scouts is clear: “[T]o instill values in young people.” Ibid. The Court determined that the BSA seeks to instill these values by having its adult leaders spend time with the youth members.

        Fourth, given the finding that the Boy Scouts engage in expressive activity, the Court needed to determine whether the forced inclusion of Dale (a practicing homosexual) as an assistant scoutmaster would significantly affect the Boy Scouts’ ability to advocate public or private viewpoints. On this issue, the Court said “This inquiry necessarily requires us first to explore, to a limited extent, the nature of the Boy Scouts’ view of homosexuality.”

        Fifth, the Court rejected the findings of The New Jersey Supreme Court which State Court had “determined that the Boy Scouts’ ability to disseminate its message was not significantly affected by the forced inclusion of Dale as an assistant scoutmaster because of the following findings: Boy Scout members do not associate for the purpose of disseminating the belief that homosexuality is immoral; Boy Scouts discourages its leaders from disseminating any views on sexual issues; and Boy Scouts includes sponsors and members who subscribe to different views in respect of homosexuality.” 160 N. J., at 612, 734 A. 2d, at 1223.” In rejecting the State Court’s findings of fact SCOTUS found as follows (I am quoting from the case):
        “We disagree with the New Jersey Supreme Court’s conclusion drawn from these findings.” SCOTUS also said…”Here, WE HAVE FOUND that the Boy Scouts believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values it seeks to instill in its youth members; it will not “promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.”

        Any questions my friend?

      • I don’t know why you keep posting the same message over and over again. The BSA has been disingenuous in court cases. The lawyers adopt whatever legal strategy that is required to win their case. For example, in ’92 and ’94, the BSA argued it was a religious organization. “Although Boy Scouts of America is not a religious sect, it is religious, and, while the local council is not a house of worship like a church or a synagogue, it is a religious organization.” Then the BSA tried to backtrack on this in the Barnes-Wallace case. The BSA lawyers will adopt whatever viewpoint is necessary to win a court case. Most of us who are involved in scouting would never think of scouts as a religious organization. We go to church. We know what religion is and what church is. And scouting is not that. We simply want to hike and camp and have fun in the outdoors. There are certainly religions that have adopted scouting as part of their RE program. That’s great. I realize you truly believe the court’s decision in the Dale case to uphold the BSA’s membership criteria should be the law of the land and should stand in perpetuity. However, the executive board is free to decide this without paying the least bit of attention to what the Supreme Court said a decade ago.

      • db, what is your point? Do you dispute any of the following facts that are relevant to the current policy being considered and the lawfulness of the current policy (if so, please state your reasoning.):
        1. FACT – Per BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) it is NOT DISCRIMINATION and it is not unlawful for the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals from the BSA;
        2. FACT — the court agreed with the BSA (along with another claim that I will not mention here) that attempts to apply anti-discrimination public accommodations law violated the BSA’s federal constitutional rights “to associate for the purpose of engaging in protected speech.’ ” 160 N. J. 562, 605, 734 A. 2d 1196, 1219 (1999) (quoting Board of Directors of Rotary Int’l v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537, 544 (1987)).
        3. FACT — because this was a First Amendment case where the ultimate conclusions of law are virtually inseparable from findings of fact, the Court was obligated to independently review the factual record to ensure that the state court’s judgment does not unlawfully intrude on free expression. SCOTUS sided with the BSA’s position that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.”
        4. FACT — given the finding that the Boy Scouts engage in expressive activity, the Court needed to determine whether the forced inclusion of Dale (a practicing homosexual) as an assistant scoutmaster would significantly affect the Boy Scouts’ ability to advocate public or private viewpoints. On this issue, the Court said “This inquiry necessarily requires us first to explore, to a limited extent, the nature of the Boy Scouts’ view of homosexuality.”
        5. FACT – the Court rejected the findings of The New Jersey Supreme Court which State Court had “determined that the Boy Scouts’ ability to disseminate its message was not significantly affected by the forced inclusion of Dale as an assistant scoutmaster because of the following findings: Boy Scout members do not associate for the purpose of disseminating the belief that homosexuality is immoral; Boy Scouts discourages its leaders from disseminating any views on sexual issues; and Boy Scouts includes sponsors and members who subscribe to different views in respect of homosexuality.” 160 N. J., at 612, 734 A. 2d, at 1223.” In rejecting the State Court’s findings of fact SCOTUS found as follows (I am quoting from the case):
        “We disagree with the New Jersey Supreme Court’s conclusion drawn from these findings.” SCOTUS also said…”Here, WE HAVE FOUND that the Boy Scouts believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values it seeks to instill in its youth members; it will not “promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.”

      • >>>>”1. FACT – Per BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) it is NOT DISCRIMINATION and it is not unlawful for the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals from the BSA;”

        I disagree. The court found that the discrimination is NOT ILLEGAL, not that it is not discrimination.

        >>>>”2. FACT — the court agreed with the BSA (along with another claim that I will not mention here) that attempts to apply anti-discrimination public accommodations law violated the BSA’s federal constitutional rights “to associate for the purpose of engaging in protected speech.’ ””

        This I agree with.

        >>”3. FACT — because this was a First Amendment case where the ultimate conclusions of law are virtually inseparable from findings of fact, the Court was obligated to independently review the factual record to ensure that the state court’s judgment does not unlawfully intrude on free expression. SCOTUS sided with the BSA’s position that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.””

        This, I completely disagree with. The court did not take a stand one way or another on whether “morally straight” and “clean” had anything to do with homosexuality. They merely acknowledged that the BSA asserted it did.

        >>>>”4. FACT — given the finding that the Boy Scouts engage in expressive activity, the Court needed to determine whether the forced inclusion of Dale (a practicing homosexual) as an assistant scoutmaster would significantly affect the Boy Scouts’ ability to advocate public or private viewpoints. On this issue, the Court said “This inquiry necessarily requires us first to explore, to a limited extent, the nature of the Boy Scouts’ view of homosexuality.””

        At no time did the BSA or the Court consider Dale’s sexual BEHAVIOR or ACTIONS. We do not know whether he was “PRACTICING” or not. The case was brought because Dale was described as gay (that is, attracted to those of the same sex) in a newspaper article having nothing to do with his involvement in scouts.

        >>>>>”5. FACT – the Court rejected the findings of The New Jersey Supreme Court which State Court had “determined that the Boy Scouts’ ability to disseminate its message was not significantly affected by the forced inclusion of Dale as an assistant scoutmaster because of the following findings: Boy Scout members do not associate for the purpose of disseminating the belief that homosexuality is immoral; Boy Scouts discourages its leaders from disseminating any views on sexual issues; and Boy Scouts includes sponsors and members who subscribe to different views in respect of homosexuality.” 160 N. J., at 612, 734 A. 2d, at 1223.” In rejecting the State Court’s findings of fact SCOTUS found as follows (I am quoting from the case):
        “We disagree with the New Jersey Supreme Court’s conclusion drawn from these findings.” SCOTUS also said…”Here, WE HAVE FOUND that the Boy Scouts believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values it seeks to instill in its youth members; it will not “promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.”

        I agree with this, but do not see the relevance to the current issue.

      • EagleMom,

        My point #3 is as follows:
        3. FACT — because this was a First Amendment case where the ultimate conclusions of law are virtually inseparable from findings of fact, the Court was obligated to independently review the factual record to ensure that the state court’s judgment does not unlawfully intrude on free expression. SCOTUS sided with the BSA’s position that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.”

        Your comment: “The court did not take a stand one way or another on whether “morally straight” and “clean” had anything to do with homosexuality. They merely acknowledged that the BSA asserted it did.”

        Again, the Court sided with the BSA’s position that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.” I agree that the Court was not guided by its OWN views on whether the teachings of the BSA on homosexual conduct are right or wrong as this was not the issue before the Court. However, the Court did agree with the BSA and disagreed with Dale in finding that the BSA’s position is that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.”

      • EAGLE MOM,
        My point #1:
        >>>>”1. FACT – Per BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) it is NOT DISCRIMINATION and it is not unlawful for the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals from the BSA;”

        Your response: I disagree. The court found that the discrimination is NOT ILLEGAL, not that it is not discrimination.

        The facts are as follows: The SCOTUS did not find that the BSA policy discriminates. SCOTUS found at the BSA policy was legal and protected. Dale (like you) asserted that the policy was discriminatory under the NJ public accommodation laws. The Court, however, rejected this and found that the BSA’s actions were proper and protected by the first amendment, and that such first amendment rights prohibit the application of such public accommodation laws to the BSA.

        I will also add the following as it is helpful to se how SCOTUS considers some of the same tired arguments made by pro-Glaad folks to bully the BSA into a policy change…”Justice Stevens’ dissent [adding my comment now… like certain of you posting] makes much of its observation that the public perception of homosexuality in this country has changed. See post, at 37—39. Indeed, it appears that homosexuality has gained greater societal acceptance. See ibid. But this is scarcely an argument for denying First Amendment protection to those who refuse to accept these views. The First Amendment protects expression, be it of the popular variety or not. And the fact that an idea may be embraced and advocated by increasing numbers of people is all the more reason to protect the First Amendment rights of those who wish to voice a different view.” The foregoing are the views of SCOTUS as quoted above.

      • Hello BSAScoutleader (and whoever is behind the screen name). To introduce myself, my name is Kyle Davis, I am an Eagle Scout (class of 2003) from Troop 227 (Baltimore, MD). I grew up in the Scouting program (from Tiger Cubs to Venturing). And I currently work as a unit leader for an inner-city troop as part of the Scout-reach program.

        Now, turning to your comment, the current policy is DISCRIMINATION, while it may not be unlawful for the BSA to exclude homosexuals, it does not make it the correct thing to do. I don’t recall views on sexual orientation being part of the foundation of the BSA program nor is it part of the “timeless values” I was taught in the program. However pre-judging and excluding someone simply because of who they are (whether it’s based on the color of their skin or their sexual orientation) is not part of the “timeless values” I learned in oath and law, nor is it what the BSA should be standing for. It’s time for change!

      • Hello screen name EagleScoutKyle, an opinion contrary to fact is a delusion. SCOTUS considered the argument (as you proffer) that the current policy is discrimination under NJ anti-discrimination laws and found that it is not. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000).

        Let’s be clear, the current policy is not discrimination and it is not unlawful for the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals from the BSA. We are a private organization and we are entitled to follow and promote our oath and law. It is called our protected First Amendment right, and it is consistent with BSA’s timeless values as evidenced by our oath and law. If you have decided to abandon the values of Scouting and the values that existed in Scouting when you joined then, you have lot’s of options. For the rest of us, Scouting is one of the few places where we can raise our boys in the timeless values of Scouting and we will not let others take away and destroy our investment. It is called theft to force the majority of us to accept your rejection of our oath and law.

      • let’s see “DantheScoutingman” ( what ever your real name is ), so now you attack an Eagle Scout who had been in Scouting for years and is giving back to Scouting? Really? attacking an Eagle Scout? Kyle speaks his mind and sounds like a mature young adult that our youth should aspire to, and you attack him.

        It seems in this “conversation” there are clear lines of tolerance and intolerance. Anyone who disagrees with you, BSA( whoever that really is) and a few others, must leave.

        Scouting is inclusive, not exclusive.

        You hang your hat on the Supreme Court case. So, every Supreme Court case is correct? Japanese internment camps?, separate but equal?, Rove v Wade? , Obamacare? flag burning? Or is it, just the one case you like and the rest are wrong?

        Scouting i sfor our youth, not us parents. It is for Kyle and the 2.8 million youth in scouting.

      • I don’t think you know the meaning of some words. Let’s be clear. The current BSA membership policy is discrimination. And, at the same time, the current policy is lawful. Just because it is lawful doesn’t mean it is not discriminatory.

      • David, my post to screen name (EagleScout Kyle) was factual and no offense was intended. I provided an honest assessment of how I and other Scouters feel when we are being asked to abandon our Scouting values. Most eagle scouts support the timeless values of Scouting and no one ever claims that 100% do. Putting this aside, an opinion contrary to fact is a delusion. SCOTUS considered the argument (as you proffer) that the current policy is discrimination under NJ anti-discrimination laws and found that it is not. See, BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000).

        Also, the current policy is not discrimination and it is not unlawful for the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals from the BSA. We are a private organization and we are entitled to follow and promote our oath and law. It is called our protected First Amendment right, and it is consistent with BSA’s timeless values as evidenced by our oath and law.

      • Who is “we”? Scouting is for our youth, not us parents.

        Kyle, as an Eagle Scout, stated his position and you cut him down, like all others who disagree with your a few others point if view. Kyle represents the youth that Scouting is for. Scouting is for boys. I volunteer countless hours as a Scoutmaster for the youth. We need to respect Kyle and his fellow Eagles, the OA members and all youth in scouting.

      • db, David, MartaMaria and EagleScoutKyle,..please help us see what you call “discrimination” vs. what SCOTUS deems to be the BSA’s first amendment rights of association….”if a male heterosexual seeks to join Glaad and compel them to open a high school chapter to teach the timeless values of Scouting and that homosexual acts are not “morally straight” or “clean” and that those with same gender attractions can overcome this and have happy heterosexual relations, will you also say that Glaad’s rejection of such proposal is “legal discrimination?”

      • From Dictionary.com:
        dis·crim·i·na·tion [dih-skrim-uh-ney-shuhn]
        noun
        … treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit:

        The BSA is treating gay people based on the group to which they belong (the group of people who are gay) rather than on their individual merit (whether they are living a moral life based on their church’s religious beliefs).

        This is particularly the case when the BSA makes no distinction between *having* same-sex attraction and *acting* on it.

        In addition, the BSA discriminates when they make a distinction in favor of scouts who have immoral heterosexual sex outside of marriage and against scouts who have homosexual sex outside of marriage.

      • EagleeMom, you are misstating current policy. The current policy does not in a blanket way impact anyone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts AND commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law including the current policy. I am not aware of a single case of such, and to date, none has been documented on any of the posts. As such, your view of discrimination is extreme and would significantly burden and restrict the BSA from protecting its expressive association. You and those in the pro-Glaad community can take your bullying and labels elsewhere. Our rights to express timeless values will not be silenced by such offensive and false labels.

      • Danthescoutingman – You said that I have misstated the current policy.

        But the BSA said in 2012, “…we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals…” Someone who is struggling with same gender attraction (that is, someone who is homosexual), and who is open about it, would therefore not be welcome in the BSA.

        Examples:

        — In 1990, James Dale, assistant Scoutmaster in NJ, attended a seminar on the health needs of lesbian and gay teenagers, where he was interviewed. An account of the interview was published and in a local newspaper and Dale was quoted as stating he was gay. BSA officials read the interview and expelled Dale from his position.

        –Two years ago, Denise Steele, who had been an assistant Scoutleader in her son’s troop for several years, was picked up at from a camping trip by her partner. Another assistant Scoutmaster made it an issue and Steele had to step down.

        In neither of these cases did anyone in the BSA seem to ask about the person’s actual sexual behavior before kicking them out – simply being openly gay was enough.

      • EagleMom, again you misstate BSA policy, and your conclusion rests on your view of “open”, “avowed” and “homosexual” and its enforcement. The current policy does not in a blanket way impact anyone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts, commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law including being “morally straight” and “clean”. As support form the correct view of the current policy, I proffer that not a single case of such as described above has been excluded from the BSA. I have ask you for any examples of the contrary and to date, no such case has been documented on any of the posts. With the amount of time you and those in the pro-Glaad community spend researching issue and blogging, you could point to hundreds or perhaps thousands. But, none such exist. Of course the BSA has the right to remove folks who hold themselves out as gay and preach and teach against our core values and the mission of our program. Not to do so would be irresponsible.
        As such, your view of discrimination is extreme and would significantly burden and restrict the BSA from protecting its expressive association. Let me be very clear on this point…our rights to express timeless values will not be silenced by such offensive and false labels.

      • BSAScoutleader is like a broken record here with meat-eaters in vegetarian groups, people moving next to dairy farms, defending so-called “timeless values” established in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000), saying that not agreeing with his worldview is BULLYING and saying that excluding gays is NOT DISCRIMINATION, and asking to consider (apples), not oranges.

        Stop repeating yourself! We can all read your previous arguments. AND GET SOME NEW MATERIAL!

      • Screen name (Marta Maria), BSAScoutleader and many others who have contributed thoughtful and logical reasons to support the current policy are to be congratulated for such excellent and well reasoned posts. While I recognize that you and other pro-Glaad folks disagree, your personal attacks evidence your desperation and are not welcome or helpful.

      • BSALeader, you say the BSA’s policy is not discrimination?!?! Look up the definition of the word “discrimination”:

        “Discrimination (noun) – the prejudicial or distinguishing treatment of an individual based on their actual or perceived membership in a certain group or category, such as their age, ethnicity, gender/sex, national origin, sexual orientation, religion, skin color, or other characteristics.”

        The BSA is giving different treatment to people who are homosexuals solely based on their sexual orientation. That is, by definition, discrimination!

        Now the BSA is a private organization, and as such the courts have ruled the the BSA is free to set membership standards and discriminate however they want. So the current policy it is legal discrimination, but it is still discrimination.

      • Screen name (websters) (btwn, I love the humor in your screen name), BSALeader is 100% correct in his position and read of BSA v Dale. SCOTUS actually applied test for what can be properly called discrimination under NJ public accommodation law. Is was precisely, the NJ public accommodation laws that were used to try and stop the BSA from prohibiting practicing homosexuals from association with the BSA. The Court found that the BSA’s actions were proper and protected by the first amendment, and thus, could not and do not violate such anti-discrimination laws. Just curious and based on your odd standard..if I as a male heterosexual seek to join Glaad and force them to open a high school chapter to teach the timeless values of Scouting and that homosexual acts are not “morally straight” or “clean” and that those with same gender attractions can overcome this and have happy heterosexual relations, will you also say that Glaad’s rejection of my membership is legal discrimination? Looking forward to your response.

      • Danthescoutingman –
        You asked, “if I as a male heterosexual seek to join Glaad [the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation] and force them to open a high school chapter to teach the timeless values of Scouting and that homosexual acts are not “morally straight” or “clean” and that those with same gender attractions can overcome this and have happy heterosexual relations, will you also say that Glaad’s rejection of my membership is legal discrimination? Looking forward to your response.”

        –>GLAAD, like the BSA, can accept or reject members using whatever criteria they see fit. If they chose to reject your membership, they would be within their legal rights to do so, just as the BSA is within its legal rights to reject members who are openly homosexual. The BSA fought to clarify that right, and GLAAD and other organizations can also take advantage of it.

        –>Whether you are a member or not, you are free to try to persuade GLAAD to teach that homosexual acts are immoral and can be overcome. You are free to do this through petitions, letter-writing campaigns, letters to the board, and all of the other peaceful ways that Americans can use to advocate for change. I doubt such advocacy would be effective, as it would be contrary to the personal experience of most GLADD members, but you are free to try, and if you were able to convince enough members, or even just key board members, GLADD might indeed change.

        In the same way, those both within and without scouting can advocate for the BSA to change the current policy. These rights are part of our shared American values, and part of what makes America great.

      • My friends: this conversation has been going on for days, and is now down to essentially one person (BSAS/DantheScoutingMan) and a few of his allies, and a few of us trying to talk reason into him/them. I’d like to suggest that we stop trying to convince those who will not listen and instead focus on the good we can do by reaching out to those who CAN listen to reason and compassion. We will never be able to convince everyone. No big change every happens without a small group (sometimes a big group) of people objecting and refusing to change. Sometimes those people stick around and keep their opinions to themselves, sometimes they fight back (a la bullying, physical attacks,etc.) and sometimes they leave. I have no idea how it will go with some of the people on this list but it doesn’t matter. They are only a few people, they are not Everyone. God bless all of you and keep fighting the good fight!

      • I agree. There is no reasoning with “bsaleader” “danthescoutingman” or whatever his name really is ( I am just thankful my scouts will hopefully not be in contact with him)

        So “bsaleader””danthescoutingman” who are you and where are you so I can warn my scouts to steer way clear if you and your ideas.

      • You’re absolutely correct, Angie. This has gone beyond bordering on the absurd. It’s exhausting really.

      • EagleMom,
        In follow-up to .. “if I as a male heterosexual seek to join Glaad [the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation] and force them to open a high school chapter to teach the timeless values of Scouting and that homosexual acts are not “morally straight” or “clean” and that those with same gender attractions can overcome this and have happy heterosexual relations, will you also say that Glaad’s rejection of my membership is legal discrimination? Looking forward to your response.”

        You said:
        –>GLAAD, like the BSA, can accept or reject members using whatever criteria they see fit. If they chose to reject your membership, they would be within their legal rights to do so, just as the BSA is within its legal rights to reject members who are openly homosexual. The BSA fought to clarify that right, and GLAAD and other organizations can also take advantage of it.
        I agree, but you did not answer the question…Would you bully and label efforts by Glaad to exclude such heterosexual as being “discrimination” as others on this post have sought to do in reverse regarding BSA’s non-blanket policy. I like you recognize both the rights of groups like Glaad and the BSA to accept or reject members based on their mission.

        Again, all of you Pro-Glaad intolerant bullies, stop with the labels and stop throwing around the word discrimination all of the time. The BSA is a private organization and has the right to have its own core values and set its own membership policies. As you said, this is what makes America great. I am very glad (not glaad) to see some sanity return to this posting site.

      • screen name (Angie) your insults and intolerance are way out of line. You owe everyone who has taken time to post and who expresses an opinion different from you an apology (I took time off work today and away from my family to express my opinion and others are also making sacrifices> Why do we do this, because this issue is that important to us). Don’t you and your pro-Glaad folks presume to speak for the majority of Scouters who deeply value the timeless values of Scouting and who are able to defend Scouting from bullies who make comments like you. The current policy is fair and works and it protects the timeless values of Scouting.

      • DantheScoutingman –

        You asked: “if I as a male heterosexual seek to join Glaad [the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation] and force them to open a high school chapter to teach the timeless values of Scouting and that homosexual acts are not “morally straight” or “clean” and that those with same gender attractions can overcome this and have happy heterosexual relations, will you also say that Glaad’s rejection of my membership is legal discrimination? Looking forward to your response.” “Would you bully and label efforts by Glaad to exclude such heterosexual as being “discrimination” as others on this post have sought to do in reverse regarding BSA’s non-blanket policy.”

        First, it’s important to understand that the word “discrimination” is not always used negatively. For example, a dance company might decide to only hire tall dancers, because they look better on stage. The company would be discriminating against short people. However, there is no value judgement involved – they aren’t saying short people are bad, just that they aren’t right for the role When I say that a particular policy is “discrimination”, it doesn’t mean I’m against it, or criticizing it. I’m just describing it.

        If GLADD decided to exclude heterosexuals as members simply because they are heterosexual, then that would clearly be discrimination against heterosexuals. (For the record, GLADD, and the other large LGBT organizations I’m aware of, do not do this.) It would be legal and within their rights to do so, as they, like the BSA, are a private organization and can accept or reject members using whatever criteria they choose.

        If, on the other hand, GLADD decided to exclude those who wanted to join the organization specifically to, in some way, force it to teach that “those with same gender attractions can overcome this and have happy heterosexual relations”, this is a more complex scenario. I think in this case excluding people who specifically join in order to undermine an organization’s core mission (rather than those who join agreeing with most of the mission, and wanting in good faith to be part of the organization, but who may advocate from within to change a small aspect of the mission) would not be discrimination – the people would be excluded due to disagreement with the core mission rather than due to membership in a particular group (e.g. heterosexuals).

        I think the difference between you and I is how we see homosexuality in relation to the core mission of scouting. For you, homosexuality seems to be fundamentally inconsistent with scouting’s core mission. For me, homosexuality has nothing to do with the mission. I don’t think we will be able to convince each other to change our minds on this fundamental point. However, it has been very interesting to listen to each other and to thereby gain a much more nuanced understanding of each of our concerns about the proposed policy. If others in scouting can have conversations like this one, I think it will go a long way towards understanding and respecting each other’s views, even if we still disagree, so that we can all work together for the Scouts the BSA serves.

      • EagleMom,

        I will address your comments to my 5 points as follows (as you agree with my points 2 and 5 I will proffer no further comment on these as the facts speak for themselves.):
        Regarding point #4……your statement is as follows…
        “At no time did the BSA or the Court consider Dale’s sexual BEHAVIOR or ACTIONS. We do not know whether he was “PRACTICING” or not. The case was brought because Dale was described as gay (that is, attracted to those of the same sex) in a newspaper article having nothing to do with his involvement in scouts.”

        This is false. The following is a quote from SCOTUS “But here Dale, by his own admission, is one of a group of gay Scouts who have “become leaders in their community and are open and honest about their sexual orientation.” App. 11. Dale was the copresident of a gay and lesbian organization at college and remains a gay rights activist. Dale’s presence in the Boy Scouts would, at the very least, force the organization to send a message, both to the youth members and the world, that the Boy Scouts accepts homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.”

        Further, the fact that Dale was homosexual and promoted such as being In the brief filed by the BSA, I will quote the following “Dale registered as an assistant scoutmaster for his trop after his youth membership expired. since leaving for college Dale had very little involvement with his Scouting or the Troop as an adult leader. After going to college, Dale came to regard himself as homosexual, came to believe that homosexual conduct is not immoral, and “became very involved in gay rights issues and maintained a high profile on campus. He became co-president of the Rutgers Lesbian/Gay Alliance in his sophomore year. The newspaper published a picture of Dale and an interview with Dale as a gay activist describing the needs of homosexual teens for gay role models. Adult leaders saw the article and forwarded it to the Council. Dale proclaimed on TV “yes, I am gay, and I am very proud of who I am.”

        Any further questions on #4?

      • Dan, the passages you have quoted make it absolutely clear that Dale was openly gay. I agree with you on that point.

        However, it does not at all address the question of whether Dale was celibate or not. You seem to be assuming that he was not, however I haven’t seen any evidence that this was the case, or that the BSA considered his celibacy or lack thereof in their decision to expel him.

        Compare this to teens Scouts who are heterosexual – the BSA does not inquire as to their celibacy or lack thereof, and it does not expel scouts who disclose that they are not.

        Again, the BSA stated in 2012, “…we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals…”
        This statement makes it clear that merely being open about his sexual preference can make a scout ineligible for membership.

      • EagleMom, in the BSA v. Dale case, glad we can stipulate that Dale was openly gay. Now, can we also stipulate that he rejected the oath and law and his commitment to be “morally straight” and “clean” as defined by the BSA.
        For purposes of this second question.. note the following..
        “Dale came to regard himself as homosexual, came to believe that homosexual conduct is not immoral, and “became very involved in gay rights issues and maintained a high profile on campus. He became co-president of the Rutgers Lesbian/Gay Alliance in his sophomore year. The newspaper published a picture of Dale and an interview with Dale as a gay activist describing the needs of homosexual teens for gay role models.”
        Next, can you acknowledge that Dale (a college sophomore and co-president of the Gay club that works to promote values contrary to that of Scouting) did not take any action to clarify any reasonable conclusion given his statements and actions by saying that I merely have same gender attraction, I should not have been a gay community activist, but I am not acting on it, I reject what I have done and I stand my my Scout oath and law that I now fully support. Again, Dale and any other cases that I have heard of do not involve in any way anyone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts, commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law. I cannot think of a single case in the latter category where someone has run afoul of the BSA’s membership requirement.

      • I don’t see any actions by Dale from what you cite that are immoral. You give no examples of him being not morally straight. To be morally straight means “To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs.” You give no example of Dale breaking the vow of being morally straight.

      • screen names dp and EagleMom, this is getting absurd, and we are wasting each others time. Of course the BSA has the right to remove folks who hold themselves out as gay and preach and teach against our core values and the mission of our program. That is what happened in BSA v. Dale. Not to do so would be irresponsible. Again, we don’t ask folks at each pack/troop meeting if they are having sex. This is absurd. We teach our Scouts to be “morally straight” and “clean”. Openly gay scouts who reject the position of the BSA that homosexual acts are not consistent with our timeless values cannot enjoy our association. It is that simple. Dale was not a case of (and I am not aware of any other cases) anyone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts, commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law. I cannot think of a single case in the latter category where someone has run afoul of the BSA’s membership requirement. I am done with rehashing the same issues with you. We are going in circles.

        When all is said and done, Scouters (not the pro-Glaad folks who are seeking to shape our opinion to reject our timeless values and destroy Scouting) can look at all of the posts and then decide to either support the timeless values of Scouting or not. As for me and my house, we support the current policy 100%!

      • There is a huge difference between being black and being gay — one doesn’t choose to be black.

      • Educate yourself.

        Three main studies are cited by “gay rights” activists in support of their argument2—Hamer’s X-chromosome research,3 LeVay’s study of the hypothalamus,4 and Bailey and Pillard’s study of identical twins who were homosexuals.5 In all three cases, the researchers had a vested interest in obtaining a certain outcome because they were homosexuals themselves. More importantly, their studies did not stand up to scientific scrutiny by other researchers. Also, “the media typically do not explain the methodological flaws in these studies, and they typically oversimplify the results.”6 There is no reliable evidence to date that homosexual behaviour is determined by a person’s genes.

      • And when did you choose to be straight? This question has been repeatedly asked on this forum, but I have yet to see it answered once.

      • ScoutMommaX3, you BSASL, Dan, Trenton Spears are to be commended for putting up such a great fight against such a well organized and funded at group of activists.

      • Scout Momma – when did you choose to be right handed? Scientists don’t understand why some people are right handed and a minority are left handed. They have some theories. But they don’t know why for sure. You can train yourself to use your right hand. A teacher hitting your left hand every time you try to write with it will certainly help you “choose” to be right handed.

      • LGBT’s & their activist love that question to try to ‘pigeon hole’ those who do not share their point of view. But I’ll say this I have never felt an attraction to a person of the same sex, nor have I ever been ‘confused’ about my sexual orientation. I knew from birth instinctively that the way of nature is male & female together – the (scientific) natural order of a species is to ‘mate’ for survival, otherwise the species would die off. I have yet to see two natural born females in a gay relationship create a baby (or two natural born men) without using artificial assistance of some kind. I have also not seen in all of history where being heterosexual had to be debated over to prove it is not ‘wrong’. There is a natural order to things and if being gay was natural there would be no fight – it would have always been accepted and ‘normal’ and okay.

      • I will certainly concede that same sex coupled can’t have children on their own.

        And yes, people who support gay equality do use that question often. Because it makes sense. If you just naturally felt an attraction to boys when you hit puberty, don’t you think it’s possible that people who are gay just naturally felt an attraction to members of the same sex when they hit puberty? How are they to be expected to change their feelings? Their feelings are as natural to them as yours are to you.

        SMX3, I certainly do appreciate an honest exchange. 🙂

      • einhard can support his statement with research and you can point to differing research, but this post has no direct bearing on the proposed policy change, and let’s be clear on the facts, per BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000) it is NOT DISCRIMINATION and it is not unlawful for the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals from the BSA. It is called our protected First Amendment right, and it is consistent with BSA’s timeless values as evidenced by our oath and law. With all due respect, please comment on the policy change being considered (apples), not oranges.

      • Yes, the Supreme Court upheld BSA’s right to assert its freedom of association. This freedom of association applies to freedom to associate with gays, as well, if the national council decides that being gay is not a violation of the Scout Oath and Law.

      • What are you talking about? Of course it is discrimination. The BSA discriminates. The court said the BSA was a private organization and is free to discriminate all it wants. It said the BSA wasn’t a public accommodation that must abide by the state statutes that prohibit discrimination. Therefore – go ahead and discriminate. Apparently you don’t like the word. But please recognize exactly what this is.

      • BSASL –

        With all due respect, I think you are wrong on this point. The Supreme Court did not say that the BSA’s current policy is not discrimination – it clearly is discrimination.

        What it said was that the discrimination was not illegal, because the BSA is a private organization whose activities don’t fall under “public accommodations”. I know the legal mumbo-jumbo is tricky, hair-splitting stuff, but we should be careful to understand the fine points of this very important decision, as it may impact the legal status of the current policy proposal.

      • EagleMom, you are incorrect in your statement to BSASL that SCOTUS did not make an inquiry into whether the current BSA policy constitutes discrimination under the NJ public accommodation law. The NJ public accommodation laws that were used to try and stop the BSA from prohibiting practicing homosexuals from association with the BSA are anti-discrimination laws. The Court found that the BSA’s actions were proper and protected by the first amendment, and thus, could not and do not violate such anti-discrimination laws. Hope this helps..

      • Then why did you join? I guess I can’t understand you (and all the others) that say you don’t agree with BSA policy but yet you signed up, you joined, of your own free will. BSA did not ‘hide’ their position on this issue.

        Our family (speaking just for my family now) looks at each opportunity available to our children and examine it with ‘a fine tooth comb’ to see what are the policies/values of the group, who do they associate with/support, does it align with our family values. If they don’t meet our standards we don’t join the group. I am well aware of what ‘society’ thinks and deems ‘appropriate’, but it does not however mean I need to subject MY children to it as ‘acceptable’. We simply do not compromise our morals and values based on what society thinks. That is religion and Christianity aside, it’s on principle, to stand for something, have integrity so when people meet you they know they can trust you because your word means something. That is what it means to not be a hypocrite – definition of HYPOCRITE 1: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion 2: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings – if you joined a group with a clear stance and you didn’t agree with it (or want to change it) then this is you.

      • Well, SMX3, you are clearly a superior parent to every other person that has posted on this blog. Congratulations. You win the internet.

      • You’re welcome. It made me laugh, but I still feel like banging my head against the wall. I truly believe that the people posting here are good concerned scouters and citizens. On both sides of the argument. Well… most of them. *sigh.* I suppose at this point, we just wait and see what happens.

        When it comes down to it, I just don’t see how what someone else does in their bedroom with another consenting adult affects any other person. Live and let live.

        Best to you, SMX3.

      • Do you have any idea what Evangelical Lutherans, Episcopals, Moravians, Presbyterians, Quakers, Waldensians, and Buddhist think of homosexuality???? They think it’s a-okay!

      • That is wrong. For example, the Presbyterian Church in America firmly believes that homosexuality is wrong. Similarly the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church believes likewise. MANY churches are have split on this issue to the point of forming differing subgroups within their denominations! This is a seriously divisive issue among many religions.

        You need to so some research and study before making such a blanket statement. Check out the wiki page referenced by @Source below. Maybe that will help you think beyond “stage one” of this issue.

      • Beth says:
        When it comes down to it, I just don’t see how what someone else does in their bedroom with another consenting adult affects any other person. Live and let live.

        That is so revealing of your misunderstanding of the issue. Don’t you see that the issue is not one of private activity. The issue is that those desiring this change insist that the issue be not simply “out of the bedroom” but rather shoved forcibly into every corner of the world! Keep it in the bedroom and leave Scouting alone then all will be well. Go live elsewhere and let Scouring live as it is!!!

      • No. I don’t misunderstand the issue. I do understand that if the BSA removed their policy altogether, there would be absolutely no necessity to discuss it. People aren’t asking to discuss their sex lives in scouts. They just want to be scouts. I’m terribly sorry for you if you think that someone that just wishes for the simple right to exist is attempting to force themselves into your corner of the world.

      • No beth, you don’t understand. If you did you would respect our point of view, the CURRENT point of view of Scouting, and drop this insistence on openly gay people in leadership and membership.

        It is as if you are insisting on playing loud music in the library, claiming there is no problem with loud music. I’m sure there are some people in the library who have no problem with loud music and many who love music. But the point is that loud music is not appropriate in the library, the rules of the library prohibit it, and those that want loud music need to go elsewhere.

      • On the contrary, I do respect that you have every right to believe as you do. Just as I have every right to disagree with you. I am also a member in good standing of the BSA, and in fact I’m a dedicated scouter. Why do you feel as though the BSA belongs more to you, and those that think like you do than it does to me and those that think as I do? The executive board brought it up. It wasn’t me. We will see later this week what they think on the matter. It will be up to each of us individually to decide what we do at that point, with the policy changed or unchanged.

        A Scout is Obedient.
        A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobeying them.

        I think the rule is unfair. Changing it in an orderly manner is perfectly consistent with the Scout Law.

      • I just read the majority decision and cannot find your citation that “…SCOTUS also found that ”homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms “morally straight” and “clean”…”

        But rather in Section II:
        “The Boy Scouts asserts that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.””

        The opinion’s closing paragraph:
        “We are not, as we must not be, guided by our views of whether the Boy Scouts’ teachings with respect to homosexual conduct are right or wrong; public or judicial disapproval of a tenet of an organization’s expression does not justify the State’s effort to compel the organization to accept members where such acceptance would derogate from the organization’s expressive message.”

      • Thank you for researching that and clearing it up. BSAScoutleader is misrepresenting many things in this conversation and this is just one more example.

      • Angie, I proffer the following with all due respect…you will need to be more specific regarding your false, personal attack and slanderous statement about BSAScoutleader. Further, you will need to support your empty words as your failure to do so reflects poorly on you. May I further remind you that a Scout is honest, courteous and kind. Finally, you are not entitled to your own opinion about the holding in BSA v. Dale, 530 US 640. (2000).

      • I actually gave you a thumb’s up on that just because it was so funny. You take everything to such an extreme… you are misrepresenting things all over this board… such as that LGBT people are trying to “destroy” BSA. It’s completely illogical, but I suppose you are entitled to your opinion.

        What I was directly referencing was what Joseph cleared up. SCOTUS said that *Scouts perceive* homosexuality as going against their Oath and values. They did not say that it was SCOTUS’ opinion that homosexuality goes against the Oath and values. You portrayed it as if SCOTUS was saying homosexuality goes against BSA morals, and that’s not what it said. So, a misrepresentation. I appreciate Joseph for looking it up and getting the precise wording.

      • Angie if BSAScoutleader is wrong about the LGBT trying to “destroy” BSA than why are the fighting so hard to change it. Why not just go and start their own new group and leave BSA alone.

      • Ah, you see “change” as “destroy.” That is very telling. I suppose it feels like destruction to you, and for that I am sorry. But that is not what these people “want.” If you separate your feelings about what is happening from their intent, it will be clearer to you. I’m sorry this is hard for you. But change happens. Best wishes.

      • Joseph, you are aware that the Court’s finding in BSA v. Dale (that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms morally straight and clean) does not constitute a finding by the Court on the issue of whether or not homosexual acts are right or wrong…the latter was not before the Court.
        Now, let us turn to BSA v. Dale:
        First, the court addressed the Boy Scouts’ claims (along with another claim that I will not mention here) that application of the public accommodations law violated the BSA’s federal constitutional rights “to associate for the purpose of engaging in protected speech.’ ” 160 N. J. 562, 605, 734 A. 2d 1196, 1219 (1999) (quoting Board of Directors of Rotary Int’l v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537, 544 (1987)).
        Second, in order to determine whether the BSA is protected by the First Amendment’s expressive associational right, SCOTUS needed to determine whether the BSA engages in “expressive association. Further, because this was a First Amendment case where the ultimate conclusions of law are virtually inseparable from findings of fact, the Court was obligated to independently review the factual record to ensure that the state court’s judgment does not unlawfully intrude on free expression. SCOTUS sided with the BSA’s position that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.”
        Third, the Court found that Boy Scouts engage in expressive activity and that the general mission of the Boy Scouts is clear: “[T]o instill values in young people.” Ibid. The Court determined that the BSA seeks to instill these values by having its adult leaders spend time with the youth members.
        Fourth, given the finding that the Boy Scouts engage in expressive activity, the Court needed to determine whether the forced inclusion of Dale (a practicing homosexual) as an assistant scoutmaster would significantly affect the Boy Scouts’ ability to advocate public or private viewpoints. On this issue, the Court said “This inquiry necessarily requires us first to explore, to a limited extent, the nature of the Boy Scouts’ view of homosexuality.”
        Fifth, the Court rejected the findings of The New Jersey Supreme Court which State Court had “determined that the Boy Scouts’ ability to disseminate its message was not significantly affected by the forced inclusion of Dale as an assistant scoutmaster because of the following findings: Boy Scout members do not associate for the purpose of disseminating the belief that homosexuality is immoral; Boy Scouts discourages its leaders from disseminating any views on sexual issues; and Boy Scouts includes sponsors and members who subscribe to different views in respect of homosexuality.” 160 N. J., at 612, 734 A. 2d, at 1223.” In rejecting the State Court’s findings of fact SCOTUS found as follows (I am quoting from the case):
        “We disagree with the New Jersey Supreme Court’s conclusion drawn from these findings.” SCOTUS also said…”Here, WE HAVE FOUND that the Boy Scouts believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values it seeks to instill in its youth members; it will not “promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.” Hope this helps…

      • Thank you Joseph, for clarifying that. It’s certainly a little different than what we’ve been seeing it represented as here.

      • beth, Angie, and Joseph, your lack of honestly is amazing and clear to all reading your post. You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. Let’s review, in response to Joseph’s post at 7:02pm today (which I assume is the post you are referring to), see my post of 7:55pm.

        To recap my post of 7:55pm,

        First, SCOTUS made a factual finding agreeing with the BSA’s position (as asserted by the BSA in the lawsuit) that “homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly with the values represented by the terms “morally straight” and “clean.” Quoting SCOTUS Here, WE HAVE FOUND that the Boy Scouts believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values it seeks to instill in its youth members; it will not “promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior.

        Second, when SCOTUS said “We are not, as we must not be, guided by our views of whether the Boy Scouts’ teachings with respect to homosexual conduct are right or wrong; public or judicial disapproval of a tenet of an organization’s expression does not justify the State’s effort to compel the organization to accept members where such acceptance would derogate from the organization’s expressive message,” all SCOTUS is saying is that SCOTUS’s finding that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values of the Scout oath and law and particularly the terms morally straight and clean does NOT also constitute a finding by the Court on the issue of whether or not homosexual acts are right or wrong. The latter issue was not before the Court and had nothing to do with the clear right of the BSA to exclude practicing homosexuals.

        beth, Angie, and Joseph, any questions? By the way Angie, feel free to click on the attached http://www.glaad.org/scouts/tellbsa
        documenting outside efforts and pressure by Glaad to destroy the timeless values of Scouting. At your direction, I can give more links and more information about other efforts. Hope this helps and all the best!

      • Your definition of bullying is very self-serving and upside-down. People have a right to push for things they believe in, and they have a right to use leverage they have to fight for what’s right. It’s the same thing the BSA has been doing for years to keep them OUT. Pushing kids out just for being gay IS bullying!

      • Angie, please do explain as you further reveal your extremism (we could have a lot of fun drawing parallels to your approach to opinions of others and the approach of Muslim extremists). We in the Scouting community recognize that you have a right your opinion and I am not going to try and change yours. However, let me be direct with you….you and your pro-Glaad friends have NO right to label our opinion and timeless values as hate speech or pollution. Let me also add the following:
        There is no place for threatening, bullying and intimidating corporate donors of the BSA by Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community.
        There is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community who intentionally infiltrate an opposing organization with the intent to destroy it from within.
        There is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community to threaten, bully and intimidate members of an organization with different values to do something that spits in the face of their timeless values and does not reflect actions that its members want (yea, we understand that 100% of Scouters do not support the timeless values, but most do).
        The actions of these outside groups is indefensible and antithetical to our pluralistic values. Finally, forcing and seeking to impose your opinion on the majority of Scouters IS BULLYING AND WE WILL NOT CAVE IN TO THIS KIND OF INTOLERANCE!
        BSA Board members better be listening loudly and clearly to its adult volunteer members.

      • !!!! LOL. So disagreeing with you makes me akin to a Muslim extremist??? Who is the extremist here? Oh, BSAS, you make it too easy. Please show where I used the words “pollution” or “hate speech.” And please explain how “pluralistic” means denying pluralism.

      • Angie, please honestly share with us your views on what constitutes bullying (and also whether the below acts foster pluralism):
        1. Do you support threatening, bullying and intimidating corporate donors of the BSA by Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community?
        2. Do you support intentionally infiltrating an opposing organization with the intent to destroy it from within?
        3. Do you support the efforts of Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community to threaten, bully and intimidate members of an organization with different values to do something that does not reflect what the majority of its members want (yea, we understand that 100% of Scouters do not support the timeless values, but most do)?
        4. Do you agree that an organization should change its core values and policy based on objections from a minority of its members (for example, if we put this issue to a vote, would you accept the will of the majority of the members of the BSA?)
        To be clear on where we stand …seeking to forcefully impose your opinion (and a minority opinion within the Scouting community) on the majority of Scouters is bullying, and with all due respect, we will not cave in to this kind of intolerance towards our timeless values.

      • ps…can you also comment on:
        1. Are you merely referring to love and support for those who have certain tendencies and choose not to act on them and who are committed to seeking after and living a moral life; or
        2. Are you advocating for the BSA to support and condone amoral and disgusting homosexual acts by Scouts and Scout leaders? and
        3. If it is #2 above, do see such disgusting acts as being consistent with the timeless values of Scouting?
        If your answers to questions #2 and #3 above are “yes”, then with all due respect and love…Scouting is not the place for you or your boys.Scouting cannot condone amoral homosexual acts.
        Further, the following question is a good one and would be helpful to us in seeking how you view tolerance, inclusion and respect: how do you feel about Scouters who “joined LGBT chapters at our schools and told them that they were intolerant of our Scouting values like being “morally straight” and “clean” and told them that they need to change their policy to allow LGBT chapters to form that have the ability to set their own policy on homosexuality to include chapters that teach that homosexual acts are immoral and that those who have same gender attraction should not act on such attractions and should be morally straight?” Your thoughts on this are very helpful to better understand your views on tolerance, inclusion and respect.

      • I’m curious as to what “timeless values” means to you since that seems to be the crux of your argument against any change. A century ago women could not vote. Jim Crow laws were the law of the land. BSA troops were segregated. Would a return to the “timeless values” of America circa 1910 please you?

        “Timeless values” was a slogan that the marketing firm Fleishman-Hillard invented for the BSA to help sell our product. You cling to it as if it means something. It’s like clinging to “Have a Coke and a Smile!”

      • 1.Writing letters, making phone calls, and circulating petitions is not threatening, is not bullying, and is not intimidating. These peaceful methods are part of a great American tradition of speaking our mind when we feel something should be changed.

        2. I have seen absolutely no evidence of anyone joining the BSA in order to be in a position to create change on this issue. And while you feel changes would destroy the BSA, those advocating for these changes feel they would strengthen the BSA. No one here wants to destroy scouting. We just differ in what we feel is the best way to help it thrive in the future.

        3. Again, without a survey, we have no idea how many scouting families prefer change and how many support the current “no open gays” policy. And it most likely differs dramatically in “blue states” vs. “red states”. Also, see #1.

        4. I think that ideally an organization such as BSA would try to craft a compromise solution that would take into account the concerns of both sides, because both are rooted in strongly-held religious beliefs – something the BSA tries to respect.

      • I agree with you on all points, EagleMom. I truly believe the BSA is attempting to craft a compromise solution that respects the beliefs of everyone in our diverse society.

      • beth, there already IS a COMPROMISE! it is implicit “dont ask dont tell”! But that significant compromise by BSA and all those who believe in the legal exclusion of gays is not sufficient for the homosexual community and their supporters. Even though it has allowed for homosexuals to successfully participate in Scouting over the years, this is not acceptable by the community.

        There is no further compromise possible without turning this to exclude those who believe in the rules established by BSA for 100+ years. This proposal is not a compromise to us. It no longer allows us or our children to participate with the expectation that homosexuals will not be promoting their lifestyle in BSA. Yes, stating that you are gay promotes that lifestyle – there is no way around it.

        Where is the compromise in this proposal? That some COs can chose to exclude gays? But that is not valid. Scouting has never been limited to the unit. All of Scouting involves activities beyond the unit.

        THIS has reached THE TIPPING POINT. That is what you and those supporting this proposal do not understand or acknowledge or want to accept. There is no tolerance of the traditional, legal point of view in this proposal. Accepting this proposal requires the acceptance that the gay lifestyle is worthy. This PROPOSAL IS NOT COMPROMISE NOR IS IT TOLERANT. BSA has compromised and has been tolerant – IT IS TIME TO STAND FIRM.

      • A majority of Americans, over 56%, consider homosexuality “morally acceptable,” while only 39% view it as “morally wrong.”

        Now this is the Boy Scouts OF AMERICA… shouldn’t the organization reflect the views and values of the country it is serving?

        The BSA established it’s current interpretation of the Scout Oath and Law to defend the exclusion of homosexuals way back in 2000 (BSA v. Dale). It was developed with a 1990’s outlook. But a lot has changed since then. In 2000, public acceptance of homosexual behavior was under 35%. The overall public understanding of homosexuality was misguided. We were ignorant.

        The BSA needs to get with the times and adapt to the nation it’s serving or else they will soon find themselves in the history books.

        (Data source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/147785/Support-Legal-Gay-Relations-Hits-New-High.aspx)

      • CubmasterJoe, actually the BSA with its timeless values is uniquely poised as the premier values organization for families desperately searching for a safe and moral program for their boys. I see nothing but growth assuming BSA national stays the course.

      • DantheScoutingman & BSAScoutleader, you guys have to understand if you can’t use the phrase timeless values any longer because it’s unacceptable and Highly offensive language to those gay activists that are on this board.

      • Sadly, the BSA is not experiencing growth. I found this in an article:

        “…since Dale, Boy Scout rolls have dropped 3.8 percent. Cub Scout numbers have dropped by a staggering 13.8 percent—a decrease that likely foreshadows a similar drop among older Scouts in a few years time. But the reduced public support has perhaps had a more direct effect: One Portland BSA employee attributed a 10 percent drop in his Council’s enrollment after the city forbid recruitment during school hours. Meanwhile, with corporate sponsors and local United Way affiliates cutting funds to BSA Councils, hiring has slowed…”

      • BSAScoutLeader, I respect and understand your opinion on this topic. However, I believe that is move is important to the Scouting movement. Last year, Fr. Richard T. Lawrence, a priest at St. Vincent de Paul church (Catholic), gave a sermon supporting same-sex marriage.

        As you mentioned, this all boils down to what is “morally straight”. Morally straight is generally based on ones faith which is characterized by ones religious institution. So, if the religious institution supports homosexuality and is an approved chartering organization, I do not see what National should have a policy prohibiting their moral beliefs.

        I have noticed that everyone that opposes this move relates it to their personal beliefs, which makes sense, we are talking about morals. Hinduism is on the fence on their stance on homosexuality. They are recognized as a BSA religion. So, what is going to happen if as an institution they believe that “loving everyone” literally means everyone.

        I realize that there are a lot of “ifs”, but I support our National Council and if they approve the policy, then my Unit will support it. I do not think that it is a case of “bullying”, it sounds like a good way to expand the scope of the Scouting mission while still maintaining a chartered organizations definition of “morally straight”.

  250. All Scouters: Well according to James Turley it is almost a done deal. This shows that James Turley has made his choice and is not waiting for the vote next week on Wednesday February 6th is this the kind of Board members that Scouting deserves. Is this what we have to look forward to. Shame on you the National Board for allowing Board members to broadcast their vote prior to the meeting. I hope that at the meeting the board members will stand and hold their right hand to the square in the scout sign and repeat the Scout Oath and Law and then sit down and vote with thier concience in a vote that could distroy 103 years of hard work to make the BSA the best it can be. Please type in James Turley CEO of Ernst& Young and you will find this infomation.
    Sincerely, Trenton Spears
    Here is what is going on on the James Turley website. Please read.

    What wonderful, heart-warming news!!
    BE PREPARED for some changes, Boy Scouts of America!
    The CEO of Ernst & Young James Turley – a prominent figure on the Board of Directors of the Boy Scouts of America organization – released an official statement IN FAVOR of lifting the gay scout/scout leader ban!!!!!
    Turley expressed:
    “Ernst & Young is proud to have such a strong record in LGBT inclusiveness. As CEO, I know that having an inclusive culture produces the best results, is the right thing for our people and makes us a better organization. My experience has led me to believe that an inclusive environment is important throughout our society and I am proud to be a leader on this issue. I support the meaningful work of the Boy Scouts in preparing young people for adventure, leadership, learning and service, however the membership policy is not one I would personally endorse. As I have done in leading Ernst & Young to being a most inclusive organization, I intend to continue to work from within the BSA Board to actively encourage dialogue and sustainable progress.”

    • Trenton, let not your heart fail, Turley is posturing. The Boy Scouts issued a joint statement from the two top leaders, National President Wayne Perry and Chief Scout Executive Robert Mazzuca…”The Boy Scouts of America respects the opinions of our board members and are thankful for their leadership,” the statement said. “While we have supporters and board members with different viewpoints on this issue, and who may choose a different direction for their organizations, we believe that good people can personally disagree on this topic and still work together.” The BSA has also issued a statement saying the review was merely routine procedure, and there were no plans to change the membership policy. Trust me now is the time to fight and this is not a done deal. Keep up the good fight with facebook, twitter and e-mail and get your troops, pack, districts and councils fired up!

      • BSA Scoutleader When I made the statement about James Turley I wanted to make sure that the Scouters in the BSA know how out of touch the National has become. When they allow members like James Turley CEO of Ernst &Young and Randall Stephenson CEO of ATT&T who is slated to be the head of the National Board in 2014 to lead the BSA in the future. James Turley could not wait till next week to vote he has already made up his mind to lift the ban and is trying to influence people to agree with him. By the way Randall is a Silver Buffalo winner I wonder why? Was it his huge donations from AT&T . BSAScouter I will fight to the bitter end to defend the honor of the BSA in any menu and any place. This is why I use my real name to let people know I am a long time dedicated to the Values that the Boy Scouts never left . Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • Thank you, Mr. Spears! I agree completely with you and pray for your words and leadership. Can you tell me how the board members are “elected”? I have never seen anything on when or who to vote for. Sounds to us like the board is loaded with a liberal agenda and left-wing followers.

      • K Hendricks I know for sure that one way to get on the Board you need lots of money both James Turley and Randell Stephenson are wealthy and CEO’S of large corperations that donate huge amounts of money to the BSA. They also are huge supporters of the LBGT and other homosexual organizations in their corperations. The BSA always talks of conflicts of interest and yet they allow these board members to be on the board.The normal way is to be a long term great leader with vision and long standing commitments to make the BSA the place for our youth of America to learn values and develop character seems that we are a little short of board members that support these great attributes. Reguardless of the outcome of Wednesdays vote we have some work to do in removing some bad apples on the Board. There is a petition to remove James Turley and Randall Stephenson from the board. Randell is slated for the president of the Board in 2014. Type in James Turley and Randell Stephenson removal
        and it will give you the website to sign the petition. Thanks for your support. Trenton

      • Dan, this is what the pro-Glaad folks want Scouters like you to think, but we in the BSA will not stand for this. Evil will prevail, only if good men do nothing. The below is part of a post from Trenton,”Go to the Grassfire website and send a message to the National BSA Board that you do not support the pending lifting the ban on homosexual members in the BSA. Homosexual activists are aggressively targeting the Boy Scouts of America attempting to strong-arm them into amending their membership policies to include gays. The Boy Scouts of America has a long-standing policy of not admitting homosexuals believing it would be a distraction to the mission of the Scouts. In fact, they write in their membership policy “same-sex attraction should be introduced and discussed outside of its program with parents, caregivers, or spiritual advisers at the appropriate time and in the right setting.”
        I have just signed a national petition supporting the BSA’s right to set their own policies and govern as they see fit, and am urging BSA officials to stand firm against this latest attack by pro-homosexual activists.
        http://www.grassfire.com/252/petition.asp?PID=38175808&NID=1
        In response to a massive petition delivery by pro-homosexual activists said to include 275,000 citizens, Grassfire Nation officials are moving to counter this effort by mobilizing at least as many who support the Scouts. They will deliver petitions to the BSA headquarters as they reach their goal.
        Sincerely, Trenton Spears”

  251. To all my ‘solider’ scout friends fighting to preserve TRUE christian values, another Catholic friend of ours sent me this link when she heard about what is happening to BSA – be prepared – it will freak you out how accurate this prediction is and how it applies to what we are fighting right now.

    http://www.thewarningsecondcoming.com/many-of-you-will-deny-me-by-accepting-these-wicked-new-laws/

    Go with God my friends and know that God will sustain those of us who stay true to Him. As much as we love scouts and will be sadden if this institution falls victim to the proposed evil next week, Many of us will be able to hold our heads high know we did not compromise our values or His.

    “As for me and my house we WILL serve the Lord” -Joshua 24:15

    God bless!!

    • As a Christian myself, I can say that the narrow-minded God you are describing doesn’t sound like the one I worship. If you think God is opposed to homosexuality, then don’t be a homosexual. It doesn’t mean you have to exclude them like they are less than beloved children of the God you allegedly worship.

      Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself!

      • Angie I am putting you on the spot. Do you believe that homosexuality is a sin ? If you don’t you are saying I believe that God exist but he has no core values just love for all his children. If love was all there was to religion it would be saying that his Prophets, Disciples and Ministers teachings are irrelevant how we live our lives. God has revealed that he loves the sinner but hates the sin that means God is a God of love and also a God of judgement for his children if not he would no longer be God. Sincerely. Trenton Spears.

      • Trenton, I have no problem being put on the spot, and I’m glad you asked. First of all, you are making some faulty assumptions.

        1. You are taking one value (homosexuality) and assuming that it encompasses all values. Not so. There are many values listed in the Bible and questioning one does not mean that all the others are thrown out. That’s like saying that people who get divorced no longer are Christians or no longer believe in standards because they have violated one of them.

        2. You are assuming that if one believes homosexuality to be a sin that one must ostracize and socially punish homosexuals or at the very least avoid them. The Bible doesn’t tell us to do this… at least, no more than it tells us to punish other sinners: “Right now I am telling you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler.” (1Cor. 5:11). Yikes! Note that that passage is talking about ostracizing Christians, not people who are not Christian and commit these sins, and it also mentions sexual immorality such as heterosexuals would commit. The vast majority of discussion of sexual morality in the Bible is about heterosexual sin. And, goodness, who among us isn’t guilty at least sometimes of those other sins? We don’t even kick such people out of our churches (which is what Paul was talking about), let alone out of a *secular* organization like BSA.

        3. You are singling out homosexuality as worse than other sins. There is no indication in the Bible that God views it as worse.

        What the Bible DOES tell us to do is to love the sinner, to have a heart of love and not fear, and to judge not lest we be judged. We are to ignore the speck in someone else’s eye and look for the plank in our own.

        The church singles out homosexuality for a variety of reasons, most of which are totally hypocritical: it’s not a sin most of us will engage in, so it’s “OK” to totally condemn it. Doing so makes us feel holier and minimizes our own sins. Furthermore, if you are heterosexual, you will find homosexual activity repulsive. That’s just natural. Because it *feels* so wrong, and the Bible mentions it a handful of times (again, MUCH, MUCH less than it mentions other sins), it’s easy to say that this is somehow a deep conviction from God that it is wrong. In reality, it is simple bias disguised as righteousness. I think God wants nothing to do with sentiments like that.

        Any actions which hurt his beloved children are wrong. Punishing people just because of their sexuality is wrong and grieves God, I believe. If you believe homosexuality is a sin, all that means is that if you find yourself to be homosexual, you have to wrestle with what to do about it. It doesn’t tell you how you should treat homosexuals, especially those who aren’t Christian. What do I believe? It’s irrelevant. I’ve already given you all the reasons you need to see why the overarching principle of Christian love and humility is more important than elevating one tiny portion of Scripture to Most Important status, which is what many Christians these days do with homosexuality. Christians are not to take scripture out of context, nor are we to be legalistic. I feel both of those are happening with regard to homosexuality.

      • Angie Do you believe Homosexuality in the eyes of God and most Christains is a sin? You said you don’t mind being put on the spot. If you refuse to answer then you have some doubts. Trenton

      • Trenton, what does it matter whether I have doubts or not? What do you think about all the other things I said?

      • Exactly – Love the sinner, HATE the sin! (that is what is meant by ‘love thy neighbor as thyself’) And yes God made it clear to us through scripture that homosexuality is a sin. Those so called ‘religions’ that feel differently have ‘man made’ changes not changes instructed by God. Scripture says “Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever.” But thanks for tryin’ Angie. God bless you and have mercy on your soul!

      • Loving the sinner does not mean accepting it. There is a clear definition of what constitutes sin against the Lord. We can love people who are in sin and we should, as Christians, but the Bible also tells us to turn from sin, do not look upon it.

      • Please see my comments below encompassing all of sin and tell me how you plan to avoid looking upon the sins listed below (especially if they are ones you yourself commit, as I’m sure they are).

      • Angie the subject is homosexuality in Scouting and I never mentioned any other sin and I consider any sin to be an obstacle to the sinner in the eyes of God. Jesus Christ is our advocate with our Father God himself and through the attonement Jesus has already paid the price for our sin this is why I honor him and want to live by his teaching. Angie you can try to twist things all you want and make statements that at best are mudding the waters. But if you cannot as a Christian answer the question do you believe that homosexuality is a sin or not then you have avoided all that you have learned as a Christian. Jesus said I am the way and the life. Angie that is enough for me. Trenton Spears

      • Trenton, no sin lives in isolation. *I* mentioned other sins because if the discussion is excluding someone because of “sin,” then all sins need to be on the table. I’m not sure how quoting the Bible *in context* and discussing the 10 commandments is “twisting” things and “muddying the waters”… perhaps it just feels that way to you because you want to remain fixated on homosexuality, and don’t like information that suggests your focus is wrong?

      • Angie Please just answer the question do you believe that homosexuality is a sin. A simple yes or no. I declare before God and everyone on this website that homosexuality is a sin. Trenton

      • Well, ScoutMommaX3, God bless you and have mercy on your soul as well. I wasn’t talking about other religions, I was talking about Christianity, although in the context of Scouts, it is not just Christian views that matter. I agree that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever. As such, we need to make sure we look at God’s priorities. The two greatest commandments Jesus gave us were to love the Lord our God and to love our neighbor as ourselves. No exceptions. Next in line of priority would be the 10 commandments, none of which mention homosexuality. Next you should probably look at the sins described most often in the Bible. Homosexuality isn’t anywhere near the top. And Jesus himself never mentions homosexuality. Furthermore, the Bible doesn’t tell us to shun homosexuals, nor does it single out homosexuality as uniquely deserving of punishment. So giving it special treatment as you are doing is nothing less than taking things out of context or assigning man-made emphasis to His words.

        One thing the Bible does talk about at great length (it’s the chief crime the very righteous Pharisees were always accused of by Jesus) is hypocrisy. In order to not be a hypocrite, if you are willing to take a stand against homosexuals in Scouts or anywhere else, are you also willing to take a stand against: idolaters, the greedy, the envious, gossips, drunkards, gluttons, liars, etc.? What steps are you taking to make sure THOSE people are not allowed in Scouts. I eagerly await your answer.

      • Maybe you should learn Christianity before you claim to know it. Here’s a site to help you out.

        http://bible.org/article/homosexuality-christian-perspective

        (here are a few highlights for you from the site in case you don’t go do the research yourself…)
        Q. How does one determine if the practice of homosexuality is right or wrong?
        That depends upon who is answering the question. The Christian point of view is based solely upon the Bible, the divinely inspired Word of God. A truly Christian standard of ethics is the conduct of divine revelation, not of statistical research nor of public opinion. For the Christian, the Bible is the final authority for both belief and behaviour.

        Homosexuality must be accepted for what God says it is– sin. Some homosexuals will attempt to circumvent the plain teaching of the Bible with the reply that they are the way God made them.1 There is not the slightest bit of evidence in Scripture to support this false concept. God never created man with a so-called “homosexual need.” No baby is born a homosexual. Every baby is born male or female. In every place the Bible refers to homosexuality, the emphasis is upon the perversion of sexuality. The practicing homosexual is guilty of “leaving the natural use of the woman” (Romans 1:27), meaning that his behaviour is “against nature” as in the case of the lesbian (Romans 1:26). Inasmuch as homosexuality is opposed to the regular law and order of nature, the genetic concept must be ruled out completely. If homosexuality were a genetic problem, there would be little hope for the homosexual simply because there is no way that the genes in a person can be changed.

        —“In order to not be a hypocrite, if you are willing to take a stand against homosexuals in Scouts or anywhere else, are you also willing to take a stand against: idolaters, the greedy, the envious, gossips, drunkards, gluttons, liars, etc.?”

        Yes, I am. One because that is part of my faith and two because BSA works to maintain standards against such behaviors. Especially in our unit – I will not speak for anyone else’s but maybe if it is a problem where you scout it should be addressed. I really do not feel any of the above have a place in scouting or in my families core values. Does that mean we (me included) are perfect – of course not. But that is why we strive to be our best to live according to scripture and repent when/if we slip. Homosexuals are welcomed in the Catholic and LDS churches if they are not living an ACTIVE gay lifestyle and are looking to repent and live a more Godly life. (so please don’t try to use them as an example against me) Oh and Jesus broke bread with the sinners, prostitutes and tax collectors not to join/become one of the but to minister to them and convert them.

        Our scouts stand each week in front of their peers and recite the Oath and Law and promise to do their duty to God, to be honest and trustworthy, etc. We strive to keep all our scouts true to their words. When they are not (and it is found out) we work with them on proper scout behavior. Anyone who has been/is/or wants to be a scout or leader under the current policy and is actively gay is obviously NOT honest or trustworthy as they are in clear violation of the policy/views of BSA. The stance of BSA has been no secret, especially since the 1990’s, so who’s the hypocrite there? We are a private organization and as such can maintain our rights to ‘exclude’ those who do not align with our standards. So now they want to take away the rights of those who oppose them for their own gain. That is hateful and bullying. They have options to start a scouting organization that wants/welcomes them or start a new organization. So really we are not taking their so called rights away – we are NOT their only option. They are merely looking to seek and destroy any group/organization that strictly supports traditional values and does not agree with them and their agenda – I would have to say they (and those that claim to support them) are the hypocrites.

      • ScoutMomma, I don’t really think there’s any need to insult me for not knowing Christianity, is there? I have given ample discussion to the Bible and the priorities of God as they appear in the Bible. Yet you pull up a website that simply says that homosexuality is condemned by God in the Bible. How is this news? And how does this undo anything I said? It doesn’t.

        If you are truly barring people who exhibit those other sins from Scouts, then Scouts would have no members, yourself included. So I suggest you rethink what you have said. I also hope that you are kicking out all divorced parents as well as single parents, since they are also violating God’s code, right?

        The Bible doesn’t claim that homosexuality is inborn, neither does it claim that it is a “choice.” In fact, it makes no claim on the origin of it. Science however, has rather definitively determined that it is inborn.

        Homosexuality, like ALL ISSUES IN THE BIBLE, must be taken in context and now blown out of proportion. You are blowing it out of proportion. Surely, since you fancy yourself a bible expert, you know that. RIGHT??

        People advocating for including homosexuals are not trying to destroy anything. It may feel that way to you because you don’t like it, but that’s not a fact. Nobody wants to destroy a group they want to join.

      • Sorry if you feel ‘insulted’ but you were the one that claimed you were speaking of ‘Christianity’ not religion – so I just gave you a site (one of many with the same things to say) with the Christian viewpoint and NOT a specific religion.

        “And how is that news” well apparently you didn’t read your whole bible where you can find…”I am the truth” (John 14:6). In our Lord’s high priestly prayer for His own He prayed, “Sanctify them through Thy truth: Thy Word is truth” (John 17:17). In Romans 1:26-31 twenty-three punishable sins are listed with homosexuality leading the list. (Apparently that is news to you)

        Our Lord said, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15). We are obligated to take the gospel to all. I do not have experience w/divorcees & single parents in our troop that are not active Christians, and working on their own lives w/counsel from the Lord and their respective churches. And we absolutely enjoy sharing the gospel with each other. (Are the LBGT doing the same? Are they planning to? Not the ones looking to force a private organization to change and accept their selfish, deviant lifestyles.)

        You can feel free to address me again once you’ve actually read the information on the site (or any christian site) and how they view homosexuality. Find me proof that shows I’m wrong, and I don’t mean ‘man made’ rules, show me DIVINE proof. As for your so called ‘scientific’ proof: Three main studies are cited by “gay rights” activists in support of their argument2—Hamer’s X-chromosome research,3 LeVay’s study of the hypothalamus,4 and Bailey and Pillard’s study of identical twins who were homosexuals.5 In all three cases, the researchers had a vested interest in obtaining a certain outcome because they were homosexuals themselves. More importantly, their studies did not stand up to scientific scrutiny by other researchers. Also, “the media typically do not explain the methodological flaws in these studies, and they typically oversimplify the results.”6 There is no reliable evidence to date that homosexual behaviour is determined by a person’s genes.

        But hey, if you can, then get back to me once you’ve learned something. Otherwise I fear you have nothing of value to say to me in regards to this matter.

      • SMX3, you demonstrate convincingly that that the timeless values of Scouting are consistent with Christian scriptural teachings and that you are educated and well informed. What is very troubling and dangerous to the foundation of pluralistic society are pro-Glaad folks (like we have seen posting on this site) who call your sacred beliefs pollution and hate speech and who seek to bully you and everyone (BSA included) who holds different and correct values. Attached is a link to a story about the new “Gay Domestic Terrorism” occurring because of such extremist positions.
        http://americansfortruth.com/2011/10/15/breaking-brick-throwing-vandals-attack-aftah-banquet-host-christian-liberty-academy/
        Once you view the timeless values of Scouting such as being “morally straight” and “clean” as being pollution as Bodhi (and other pro-Glaad folks who are posting on this site) does, you then take the position that such teachings and positions must be eradicated and stopped as they pollute the minds of future generations. WE BETTER WAKE UP FOLKS! GET OFF THE SIDELINE AND DON’T TOLERATE THIS TYPE OF BULLYING AND INTIMIDATION!

      • SMX3, look….. I can see that you want to focus exclusively on homosexuality and not open your heart to the other things I said. You continue to suggest that in failing to share your intense focus that I am not a Christian. I’m OK with that. I don’t need to prove my faith to you. All I can do is pray for you, and that I will. God bless!

      • Angie You talk of hypocrisy you can’t even take a stand on whether homosexuality is a sin or not. I find your comments far off the subject and ducking the issue of homosexuality that is the main subject of this forum whether to lift the ban on homosexuals or not. This is the issue and the purpose of this present forum. Most commentors are not talking about any other sin you seem to be have the need to change the subject and like I stated before muddy the waters. You are a moral coward and have the gall to talk about hypocrisy. In the days of Jesus when he was on trial for Apostasy the disciple Peter was asked three times if he knew Jesus Christ and Peter denied him three times Angie for the third time of my asking do you believe that homosexuality is a sin. Trenton

      • You can forget using logic or facts here…they need not apply. 90% plus of the pro-gay people on this blog ARE in fact practicing LGBT lifestyles and/or are activists of such groups (i.e. Glaad).

      • I didn’t answer the question because I didn’t want to get into an argument based on what I believe, because it isn’t relevant to the issue about Scouts. I don’t think it’s anyone’s business on forums to ask such personal questions and I find they usually lead in directions that are not helpful on either side. If you somehow feel that incriminates me in some way on something (not sure what?), then you are welcome to feel that way.

      • Angie When people comment on this forum they have a responsibility to be honest and base their opinions on truth. Some throw out comments that they have little knowledge about and try to influence opinions that simply are not true. Angie you have every right to not answer a question but you do need to back up your statements. Clearly the subject is about homosexuality and scouting. Clearly we all have a responsibility to debate with open minds and hearts. Your comments would have more credibility if you would give honest and stick the issue comments. I have a deep commitment to the teachings of Jesus Christ I know he is the Savior of the world and I am never afraid to stand up for the values that he has died for. If a person cannot stand up for their beliefs then the any issue is lost and soon mute. Jesus knows and I know that homosexualty is a sin except there is away to overcome this sin the attonement of Jesus Christ and the process of repenting it has worked for over 2000 yrs. and it will always work till the day of the return of him who has redeemed us. The sin of Homosexuality will never pass the bar of Jehovah and should be of great concern to those who practice the sin. I have been a Scoutmaster for many years and have always counciled my boys to look for the truth and when they do never be afraid to stand up for their convictions. Always obey the Scout Law and Oath. Angie these scouts have the right to stand proud for their honesty and integrity. This is the mission of the BSA. This is what scouting is all about. Lifting the ban on homosexuals would clearly be the most divisive change in the history of the BSA. Trenton Spears.

      • Trenton, God bless you my brother in Christ. I feel you are being very swayed by some ugly things and there is nothing I can do about that other than pray. Best wishes to you.

      • Angie I am 76 years old and joined the Boy Scouts 1949 I have been a faithful member of the LDS Church and a 30 yr. member of the BSA. I will never be swayed by the doctrines of men or in your case women. Angie you have no ideal what sway’s my thoughts and no right to call them ugly because you certainly don’t know. I am swayed by the teachings of Jesus Christ if you want to call the Saviors teachings ugly that is your problem. I am swayed by the values of the BSA if you want to call them ugly again that is your problem. Like I said in a earlier statement Angie be honest and stick to the issue please be careful what you pray for you might receive an answer you may not like.Trenton Spears

      • Angie, not trying to be argumentative (and there is no right or wrong answer regarding how you form your opinion), but I am now curious how do you are reconcile your stated Christian belief with the express words of God as revealed in scripture? The law (rightly so) in construing the intent of parties to a contract, gives deference to the specific over the general. How do you reconcile your general statement about God’s love with his very clear and specific statements about the abomination called homosexuality (I have seen others do so in clear terms like God loves the sinner, but hates the sin). Please note that I truly respect your right to your own opinion (as long at is does not conflict with clear fact–in which case such opinion would best case be incorrect and in the worst instance a lie perhaps to yourself and others). We are all looking forward to hearing from you on this question.

      • Well said BSA Scoutleader. I am glad (with one a) to see you are still carrying the flag for traditional Scouting.

      • BSAS, please reread what I wrote. I discussed the specifics of homosexuality in context, which is how they should be viewed. I did not say they didn’t exist. God have us two greatest commandments: to love the Lord your God and to love your neighbor as yourself. General. Everything else flows down from those, so those should be top priority.

        Listen, I realize you people want to pin me down on homosexuality because it is most important in your minds. What you’re not understanding is that I’m saying there is no evidence that *it is foremost in God’s mind*, and, in fact, that there’s plenty of evidence that it isn’t. In excluding homosexuals from secular activities, you are going above and beyond what scripture tells us to do… you are adding to the Bible.

        I also realize what I’m saying is falling on deaf ears. And that’s OK. I’m glad I said it, because it needs to be said. God’s love needs to be discussed amply whenever the occasion arises. And biases and blind spots need to be challenged. I wish you the best.

    • My Scout troop is not Christian. BSA National, by imposing your Christian teachings on my troop, is violating the 12th point of the Scout Law: “A Scout is Reverent… He respects the beliefs of others.”

      • screen name cwgmpls (assuming your stated facts), if your troop does not support the policy, you don’t need to re-charter.

      • I said my troop was not Christian. Christian arguments supporting BSA policy mean nothing to us. And when BSA policy starts contradicting the religious teachings of our families, then BSA is violating its own policy on religious principles.

      • screen name cwgmpls (assuming your stated facts), same statement applies…..if your troop does not support the policy, you don’t need to re-charter. The Scout oath and law apply to all CO’ and Scouters and if you find that such timeless values contradict your views, you are free to leave. Hope this helps…

  252. / Yo, Bryan. Wonderful blog. Seen this web item? I ran across it not long ago. /

    Jesus stated in Luke 17 that just before His return to earth as Judge, two big “crazes” will happen worldwide at the same time: (1) insane violence (“days of Noah”), and (2) outrageous sexual perversion (“days of Lot” – see Gen. 19). Aren’t beheadings, cannibalism, and school shootings violent? And what’s more perverted than a mob trying to rape LITERAL angels (see Gen. 19 again)?! So, America, keep spitting on God but you’d better duck when He spits back!! (PS – For a bigger enchilada, Google “when DIVERSITY becomes PERVERSITY.”)

  253. Does anyone have real information as to why this issue just came up, so soon after the recent decision not to change standards?
    And why the secrecy leading up to this? With very little, if any, input from the field?
    Why the rush?

    • Because people don’t want to donate to an organization that discriminates. Sponsors started pulling out fast after the BSA reaffirmed their policy on homosexuals.

      The BSA has also been getting a lot of flak in the media for their discriminatory policies, and thousands of former Eagle Scouts have returned their Eagles in protest of those policies.

      • I wonder how many will return in protest of the change should it happen? I know the talk in our home right now is will we let our boys finish their eagles if BSA cowers to the pressures of the LGBT agenda. One son is literally in the middle of his project and the other two are set to start this spring. I pray BSA stands its ground!

      • SMX3 – I know you will think very carefully about whether to let your boys finish their Eagles if this policy changes. Making Eagle is an accomplishment that lasts a lifetime. It can affect college admission, job applications, military enlistment – and all of these can affect your boys’ families down the road. This policy may change again in a year or two, if the pendulum of public opinion sways the other way. But a boy only has until they are 18 to make Eagle. Talk as a family, take it day by day, pray. Your local troop most likely won’t change. You can decide to keep your money at the troop level, and withdraw support from FOS and other higher-level donations or activities. I understand your concerns about a policy you believe is rooted in evil. But if your boys are of Eagle-ish age, rooted in their family’s moral values, and focused at the troop level, I believe you can have some confidence that they will be OK, regardless of the policy. They have loving parents who can help them deal with any issues that may arise. I would hate to see a boy lose the opportunity to make Eagle.

      • EagleMom, SMX3 is spot on and millions of us will leave BSA as the policy change will result in a re-branding of our organization by hostile take-over. We will have anything to do with the title of “Eagle” because its meaning and value will have been hijacked. I realize that for some, the timeless values of Scouting don’t mean a whole lot, but you really need to understand that for us who love the values of Scouting and understand the mission of Scouting, it means everything. I am cautiously optimistic about the BSA retaining its current policy and know that after this conversation and consideration on the wisdom of the current policy that all Scouters will work to uphold and defend out oath and law.

      • To clarify my post above, “We will want NOTHING to do with the title of “Eagle” because its meaning and value will have been lost and hijacked.”

      • Those who have reached the rank of Eagle have worked long and hard, over many years. They have earned merit badges, held leadership positions in their troops, and spent many, many hours proposing, organizing, executing their Eagle project.

        I have the utmost respect for anyone who has earned this rank. That respect has absolutely nothing to do with whether the person’s troop is open to gay scouts now, or whether their troop will be open to gay scouts in the future.

      • Where is the traditional values of strength we teach our scouts? We are not sails in the wind to be blown any direction. We are to be a guiding beacon, our eyes focused on the mission and values that have lasted 103 (almost) years.

      • K Hendricks, super post and spot on my brother and fellow Scouter! Our timeless values are timeless, eternal, never changing and evermore. With all of the cultural pollution being pushed upon us, the opportunity for growth in the BSA as it retains its timeless values (and as most other organizations and institutions cave) is unlimited. We are seeing huge numbers of increases in our Cub and Scouting programs including minority and disadvantaged youth craving for the timeless values of Scouting. It is fast becoming one of the only places in town for families who seek a moral and wonderful program for their boys!

      • If the timeless values were “eternal, never changing and evermore” from the inception of Scouting, women would not currently be allowed to be leaders in Scouting. The values of an organization change as its membership changes and as society changes and evolves. The particular values underlying this conversation are contentious, particularly because some of the beliefs around them are rooted in religion, which people take very seriously. Not every religion in Scouting holds those same sets of values however. Given that, I’m not sure how to argue that there is one set of “values” in the Scouting program, but more a shared set of values that may or may not include any one particular value that an individual holds important to them.

      • texasaggie94, we are referring to our timeless values in the Scout oath and law. I am not aware of any such change to these and am not aware of anything prohibiting the issue you describe. We are fully aware however of what “morally straight” and “clean” as recognized by SCOTUS mean. Further, please comment on the proposed rule which is what is being considered.

      • AndyM., loss of corporate donors and bad media is all being orchestrated by the well funded Glaad, pro-LBGT and other George Soros funded folks. Let me know if you want to spitulate to this fact or if I need to give you some more back-up on this (your call, happy to help as long are you are not ever learning, but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth).
        Putting what you say aide and stipulating that the BSA has lost and will lose corporate donors by not giving into the bullying and also stipulating that the media is pro-homosexual agenda and that the BSA will not get lots of good media play for sticking to its values….let’s establish the following foundational principles:
        First, there is no place for threatening, bullying and intimidating corporate donors of the BSA by Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community.
        Second, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community who intentionally infiltrate an opposing organization with the intent to destroy it from within.
        Third, there is no place for Glaad, and other organizations in the LGBT community to threaten, bully and intimidate members of an organization with different values to do something that spits in the face of their timeless values and does not reflect actions that its members want (yea, we understand that 100% of Scouters do not support the timeless values, but most do).
        The actions of these outside groups is indefensible and antithetical to our pluralistic values.
        Finally, forcing and seeking to impose your opinion (and a minority opinion within the Scouting community) on the majority of Scouters IS BULLYING AND WE WILL NOT CAVE IN TO THIS KIND OF INTOLERANCE! If the Board caves, millions of Scouters will leave along with their charter organizations, and the BSA will become bankrupt from all of the lawsuits it will face including class action suits from members who have been duped into putting $ into supporting the timeless values of Scouting. The path is clear, the BSA keeps its policy and maintains an almost a monopoly position as the premier organization for families looking for timeless, traditional and eternal values! The growth potential of this market is limitless as everyone else caves to BULLIES!

      • You’re right. Donations are down. Hardly a reason to jettison core values. It’s time for the BSA to adopt a policy that it will not accept donations from any person, corporation or organization that does not affirm Scouting’s core values as expressed in the oath and law.

        And let’s talk about those returned Eagle Scout decorations. I am an Eagle Scout, who still proudly possesses his Eagle decoration. At every meeting, camp out, summer camp, retreat — in short, at every Scout gathering — I recited the Scout Oath and Law. I represented to my peers, my leaders and my community that I believed the values set-out in those statements. I affirmed that at my Eagle Court of Honor.

        I don’t see how someone gets to be an Eagle Scout, having recited this pledge hundreds of times, then suddenly “realizes” that he does not accept of believe some (or all ) of those core values, and thinks they should be changed. If you continued in the program and accepted the Eagle rank after deciding that you disagreed with the Oath and Law, then you are a liar and a hypocrite. If you came to that realization after completing the program, then I can only surmise that you really didn’t learn anything while you were participating. Either way, it takes a great deal of chutzpah to think that you have some right to demand that the BSA alter itself to conform to your views.

    • Name one time when a national council decision was not made in secret. In fact, this one-week warning that a decision would be made is more open than I have ever seen the national council. Scouts and their families have now had ample opportunity to make phone calls and send e-mails to express their input. Far more than I have seen with previous national council deliberations.

  254. BSA is a franchiser and the BSA Charter, Bylaws and Rules & Regulations have no sexual preference membership restriction. The National Council should not withhold the commissioning of a Scouter approved by a Chartered Organization because of sexual preference.
    A Chartered Organization has the right and should not appoint a Scouter if his/her sexual preference is objectionable. But they have no right to impose their stance to another Organization. Being gay is not a crime and different religions have varying views.
    Anecdotally… the best District Executive and at least two of our better Scoutmasters came out of the closet after their terms. And unfortunately years ago the hetero man I thought was one of the best Scoutmasters went to jail as a pedophile.

    • Screen name Joseph, BSA has invested billions in branding and any change in the current policy will irreparably harm and destroy its branding, the timeless values of Scouting and those who have invested in this program. Class action lawsuits are being prepared against the BSA and will be filed if anything is done to harm the brand. I strongly suspect that Board members will make the right decision on this as they have done in the past. We get it that you and the pro-Glaad folks don’t like the BSA brand and that you want to change it, but this is a private organization and we are entitled to retain our timeless values.

  255. Without getting into the discussion of which side is right. I would like to know details on how this change would be implemented. And leaving it at the CO level is not an acceptable answer. What will be the wording on the new policy? Will their be legal protection for CO’s and leaders if that unit is not all inclusive? What about those units that feel so strongly on either side, they do not want to be at the same activities?
    Again, please reply only if you can provide information. I do not want to hear your opinion on if this is right or wrong. And please refrain from replying if you want to argue your point that leaving it at the CO level is acceptable. This is a national organization, we need to know how to make it work at a national level.

    • The entire process is lacking in transparency and the poor way that things are being this is very frustrating to say the least. Does anyone in the Scouting community now have any clearer idea why this issue is even coming up again (as it was just considered several months ago and rejected), why the rush on this and what has changed since the last time this was rejected several months ago? Seems like membership is being kept in the dark on these issues and we are still not getting any transparency and holding these closed door meetings don’t help either. Turley and Stephenson need to be fired for the poor job they have done in handling this mess!

      • DantheScoutingman, wow on target! Any rule change would strike at the core of our 103-year history merits full input from all stakeholders in DELIBERATION and DISCUSSION and no rational person can assert that we are anywhere close to achieving this with just being able to call and e-mail for the past few days. The reckless acts of certain extreme members of the national committee are threatening to destroy Scouting. They need to slow down, listen to and talk to the stakeholders!

      • BSA’s public policy regarding gays is not 103 years old. It is 22 years old. And there was not input from all stakeholders the last time it was changed as well.

      • cwgmpls, again we have already covered this with you (please don’t reinvent misleading comments)…up until recent history every state in the nation has sodomy laws and homosexual acts were illegal. These laws have not been eroded until recently (starting in the 70′s). As such, the BSA’s values of being “morally straight” and “clean” have always and historically been understood to not promote or support homosexual acts. As you are well aware, the BSA policy was a necessary reaction to this and the fall out from our declining moral standards in society and confirmed our commitment to the timeless values in our oath and law. Further, BSAScoutleader had a super post…”For example, where in the Scout Oath and Law does it mention flag burning (In our long history of Scouting, we didn’t really start to see these types of horrible acts until the 60′s and like flag burning sodomy laws have only started to erode over the last 30 to 40 years)? Is flag burning consistent with the timeless values of Scouting? Does it run afoul of our timeless Duty to Country as Scouters? The obvious answer is yes when considering Scouting’s proud tradition of honoring and properly retiring the flag”

    • Brad, while I support the proposed policy, I share your concerns that:
      –Stakeholders apparently were not given a chance to provide input or concerns,
      –Details of the proposed policy, specifically how interaction between gay-friendly and non-open troops at the higher levels (summer camp, etc.) will be handled,
      –Legal considerations that may arise from the dual-approach policy,
      –Opportunities available for scouts in areas where no suitable troop is available (Lone Scout?),
      –Training available to Scouters on this sensitive issue.
      I, like many here, am interested to hear more from the BSA as to how these details would be handled. The details will determine the success (or lack therof) of the implementation of the proposed policy.

    • We won’t know any details until a decision is announced. But why is leaving it at the CO level not an acceptable answer?

      We already leave it at the CO level
      – whether to admit woman leaders
      – whether to impose specific religious requirements
      – whether to admit leaders of a specific race
      – whether to admit leaders of a specific ethnicity

      I’m sure there are units that don’t want to enter into activities with units that have black leaders, or woman leaders, or Muslim leaders. They find a way to politely decline invitations to participate with those units.

      How would leaving the decision about whether or not to admit gays at the CO level be any different?

      • cwgmpls, the answers to why the proposed rule change is not acceptable is posted all over this site. Yet you and others in the pro-Glaad community don’t seem to want to respect our timeless values. Members of the Scouting community have been very clear that any such action will destroy the timeless values of Scouting and the meaning of our oath and law. Homosexual acts are not “morally straight” and not “clean” and never will be! Clear enough?

      • In 1986, BSA national stated that a women does not meet the qualifications that boys between the ages of 10-17 need in a role model. When did this timeless value change?

      • BSAScoutleader is correct..”Homosexual acts are not “morally straight” and not “clean” and never will be.” Your post has no bearing on this and no bearing on any timeless value that I can find in our Scout oat and law. Kindly keep your posts limited to the policy change being considered.

      • cwgmpls, again we have already covered this with you (please don’t reinvent misleading comments)…up until recent history every state in the nation has sodomy laws and homosexual acts were illegal. These laws have not been eroded until recently (starting in the 70′s). As you are well aware, the BSA policy was a reaction to this and the fall out from our declining moral standards in society and confirmed our commitment to the timeless values in our oath and law. Further, BSAScoutleader had a super post…”For example, where in the Scout Oath and Law does it mention flag burning (In our long history of Scouting, we didn’t really start to see these types of horrible acts until the 60′s and like flag burning sodomy laws have only started to erode over the last 30 to 40 years)? Is flag burning consistent with the timeless values of Scouting? Does it run afoul of our timeless Duty to Country as Scouters? The obvious answer is yes when considering Scouting’s proud tradition of honoring and properly retiring the flag”

      • if you want to make the U S Supreme Court your moral compass, the Court has upheld flag burning on several occasions. But, maybe some Court decisions are to be followed , but not others . The Supreme Court also upheld “separate but equal” for eduaction and the internment camps for Japanese Americans in WWII.

        Do you agree with Rose v Wade, or was that decision wrong?

      • Flag burning is consistent with BSA’s timeless value of freedom, expressed in the First Amendment. BSA went to the Supreme Court to defend its rights guaranteed under the First Amendment. Flag burning becomes inconsistent with BSA’s values when BSA national says it is. But no sooner.

      • David and cwgmpls, this is becoming absurd. You now advocate for the BSA to support flag burning? Seriously, have you stepped off planet earth?
        First, David SCOTUS is not Scouting’s moral compass. Our moral compass is the Scout oath and law, and it appears that you have lost yours and perhaps a lot more than this; and
        Second, SCOTUS upheld our rights of association as protected by the First Amendment. The same rights that allow groups like Glaad to form. My point in referencing SCOTUS is to state the law of the land and to tell you as a factual matter that the current BSA policy is both lawful, constitutionally protected, and not discriminatory under the law. The examples you cite have zero to do with the policy change.
        cwgmpls, flag burning runs afoul of our timeless Duty to Country as Scouters and is offensive when considering Scouting’s proud tradition of honoring and properly retiring the flag. Further, like homosexual acts, flag burning is not expressly mentioned in our oath and law. However, with folks like you who seek to destroy our timeless values, I concede that perhaps a future policy may be needed to confirm that we exclude Scouts who do such things to our flag and who violate our oath and law including “Duty to Country” and BSA’s proud tradition of respect of flag. You both are revealing a lot about yourselves.

      • I do not think BSA should support flag burning. Flag burning can either be condemned, or permitted, depending on how you read the Scout Oath and Law. Since flag burning is not mentioned in the Scout oath and Law, it is up to the national council to decide. Same with gays.

      • cwgmpls, this exchange demonstrates the value of these types of posts and you clearly illustrate the dangers of the path you would have BSA National go down. While I respect your right to your own opinion, we are going to have to agree to disagree on your willingness to reject the current policy. I like most in the Scouting community would be horrified to see our Scouts burning the US flag or marching in a gay pride parade. This is not representative of Scouting and our mission. Some folks outside of Scouting choose to do so and they have a constitutionally protected right to do so, but as a private organization, not in Scouting. Such acts violate our oath and law and timeless values.

      • I assume when you say “homosexual act”, you mean child molestation. Can a heteosexual commit child molestation? If not, so under your definition, anyone committing a “homosexual act” ( I assume on boys) is a homosexual , including Jerry Dandusky, Catholic Priests and all of the men in the perversion files?

      • cwgmpls, being “morally straight” and “clean” covers it. Again, we are talking about the rule excluding practicing homosexuals.

      • You are talking about the rule excluding practicing homosexuals. BSA excludes all of them. Please read BSA’s policy.

      • cwgmpls, I have read the policy and simply don’t read it the way you do. To my point, can you point to a single example of where it was ever applied to someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts and commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law and where such Scout has been removed? I can think of none. As such, my read of the policy is consistent with its application. Are you following this logic?

      • Dan, millions of people read the policy the way cwgmpls and I read it. No gays. period. End of story. If you’re gay, and anyone knows you are gay, you are asked to leave. No matter how chaste or not you are. Let me ask you the same question: please name one gay person who is a member of the BSA.

      • Are you privy to the name of every person that has ever been excluded from the BSA and the reason(s) for which they were excluded? Right. Neither am I. Or anyone else that has posted here. The policy says no gays. What that means is, no gays. You are making things up.

      • db and cwgmpls, if your understanding of current policy is correct, I would imagine that you can point to hundreds or thousands of cases that reflect your understanding of current policy. With regard to what I have stated, can you point to a single example of where it was ever applied to someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts and commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law and where such Scout has been removed? I can think of none.

      • I’ve already pointed it out Dan. The folks who have been kicked out have been kicked out because they said they were gay. No one stopped to ask if they “active” or “abstaining” or what their particular sexual practices might be. They were kicked out because of who they professed to be.

      • db, nope they were kicked out because the held them selves as gay scouts, reject our oath and law and are working to change our core values. None involve anyone who has same gender attraction, is not acting on this, does not hold themselves out to be gay and working to reject our oath and law. Still waiting for one single example of any of this going on under the current policy and to date you have proffered none! Of course, we are going to ask the former group to leave the BSA. If we don’t, they destroy our mission and oath and law. What is so difficult for you to grasp here?

      • The BSA caved on this after much social pressure as well and it was wrong. I was a den leader when my boys were in cub scouts because no leader – male or female – was willing to take on a den. I either took on the task or my boys would not be able to participate. When my boys became scouts, I stepped back completely because I believe women should not be in leadership roles in boy scouting. As a female – regardless of my mom status – I can never teach my boys to be men. Never. So many women have had to become leaders in scouting because so many men are not. The reason is mostly because of not enough time. Therein lie our societal values & priorities- or lack thereof. We place more time away from our kids and families now than in any other time in our history and then we wonder what has happened to our society.

      • Isn’t it great that BSA’s chartering organization structure allows each unit to set its own rules with regard to women in leadership positions? I’m so glad BSA’s structure was able to accommodate your strongly-held beliefs.

      • I didn’t want to argue the point of leaving it at the CO level, because this is a national decision. What support can the CO and it’s leaders expect from national when this goes through?
        I am not looking for an argument as I stated before. I am only looking for information. I understand the CO will make the decision to admit members and leaders, but what is national going to do to ensure units that do accept gays and units that don’t can both be served by this national organization.

      • What support can a CO expect from national if they don’t want to allow women as leaders? Or if they don’t want to allow blacks as leaders? Or Muslims as leaders?

        Probably the same support will be available from national for COs that want to exclude gays.

      • cwgmpls, again apples and oranges and zero to do with the proposed policy change regarding prohibiting practicing homosexuals from associating with the BSA .

      • The question was what support a CO can expect from national if the CO doesn’t want to allow gays. If national decides that teaching about gays is no longer a core value of BSA, then I expect it will be the same support that COs get from national about any other issue that is not a core teaching of BSA. None.

      • cwgmpls, it is not that “morally straight” and “clean” somehow leave our oath and law. You redefine these terms and the policy change would turn our core values on their head, it would change the mission of the BSA and the BSA would now be forced to concede that homosexual acts are compatible with the timeless values of Scouting such as being “morally straight” and “clean” as per our oath and law. As such the legal underpinnings, to our first amendment right to exclude practicing homosexuals from BSA program will be legally challenged and lost. Since Glaad and others lost in 2000, they have been working to destroy us from within and the policy change will do just that. None of it is good!

      • I don’t know what support a CO can expect and I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask. I am asking that if the changes go through and my CO and unit do not allow gays is there any support from national? Can I be litigated against as a leader? Those are my questions.

      • Hi Brad – we don’t know the answer to your question. If your unit is chartered by a church that has strict tenets against homosexuality, and your CO does not accept an “avowed homosexual” as a member, I can not imagine anyone suing the church. If however you are chartered by a PTA or by the Rotary Club, I could see there being an issue if there were a blanket policy by your unit to prohibit membership to gays because the PTA and the Rotary Club themselves are open to everyone.

      • If your troop is chartered by the PTA, Rotary Club, or a church that does not teach against gays, your troop is violating your CO’s policies already.

      • The church that sponsors us is part of a denomination that has no unified policy on gays, they leave it up to the congregation. That stance may leave them open to litigation. While I can’t imagine anyone suing a church, I also didn’t think I would see someone sue the BSA.

      • So write up a statement that says ““our troop teaches that homosexual conduct is not morally straight”

        It worked for BSA national. It will work for you too.

      • Does your CO have any teaching regarding homosexuality? If they do, then you are safe.

        If they don’t, all you have to do is publish a statement like “our troop teaches that homosexual conduct is not morally straight”. It worked for national, it will work for your troop too.

        Nobody will litigate you over a question that was already settled by the Supreme Court.

    • I want to thank those of you that responded without arguing your side. From what I gather no one has any information on these changes. I honestly hoped that all CO’s and leaders would have access to these changes before a decision is announced publicly, but that will not be the case. The purpose of my post was not to argue but to see what details anyone knew. I am tired of arguing and it is not accomplishing anything.

      • Brad W. , putting aside our differences on the current policy, the following statement to the press sums up best the frustration that most of us have with how this is being handled … “We believe that any decision that strikes at the core of our 103-year history merits full input from all stakeholders in deliberation and discussion,” The Great Salt Lake Council of the Boy Scouts of America

      • Everyone assumes that there was not deliberation and discussion on this topic because it was not publicized and/or because they were not consulted. From the letter I received from my council executive based on the teleconference last Friday they had with the National Key 3, I got the distinct impression that there had been some significant, detailed research and discussion on the policy at National. And before everyone jumps up and down and says again that “we weren’t included”, keep in mind that National does not have to and is not obligated to seek any input on policy or other program changes from the membership. If you have questions about that, I suggest you read the Bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America, Article III, Section 1 – Authority of the Executive Board – Clause 1. “The Executive Board shall, in accordance with the provisions of its Charter and these Bylaws, be the governing body of the Corporation, manage its affairs, elect its officers, and be the final reviewing authority with respect to all matters whatsoever which may arise at any level within the Scouting movement, which in its judgment should be reviewed.”

        Now should they include input from everyone? Probably on such a contentious issue. The conversations now, however, are so partisan and (in some cases) downright rude and hateful, I don’t think that National will even be able to sort through them all to get every angle and viewpoint. Just look at this blog and imagine this as a microcosm for what National is getting via the Scouting.org feedback form.

        Just seeing Scouters berate, belittle, bully and otherwise act so far outside the Scout Oath in *the conversations about the issue* makes me sad. I just hope that none of our Scouts ever read this blog to see how some of their adult leaders really act when faced with controversy.

      • Why does the Executive Board need to review anything? Don’t they have a book of “timeless values” that they can just look stuff up in when a question comes up?

        If they don’t, maybe someone here can lend them a copy?

      • Based on what Scout executives are universally saying, everyone was caught off guard by the news that broke last week. This is further reinforced by statements over the weekend by The Great Salt Lake Council and others, “We believe that any decision that strikes at the core of our 103-year history merits full input from all stakeholders in deliberation and discussion” This is a process that will take months of input and deliberations with ALL stakeholders and much legal review to see if anything is broken with the current policy. A call for simple transparency and input from all stakeholders is the prudent and correct course.

      • We have all had a voice and some have been more rational and thoughtful than others. National needs to poll registered adult members of the Boy Scouts. Get feedback from the District Key 3’s. Touch base with all of the Council Executives. Ask what the CO’s have to say. All of the ready fire aim business needs to stop. While the organizations that work for the LGBT Community are free to offer their advice the only opinions that really matter are those of registered members.

      • cwgmpls, not sure how you can honestly take my comments that “everyone was caught off guard by the news that broke last week” and “a call for simple transparency and input from all stakeholders is the prudent and correct course” and end up with “funny hearing you complain that you haven’t had a voice.” Do you disagree with my points? If so, please explain and kindly avoid misstating my points. I am grateful for this site for input to be given on why the current policy works. However, a few individuals posting on a website hardly constitutes full input from all stakeholders in deliberation and discussion. This process will take months and will require a deep and full understanding of the benefits of the current policy and the legal and moral dangers of any change.

      • My point is that people keep saying this *should* take time and there *should* be “months of input and deliberations” but that’s now the organization is setup and not how it has ever (that I have ever heard) operated. The Executive Board is well within its obligations to the Scouting organization to make a decision now, next week, next month or next year. They do not have to *by the Scouting bylaws* (which govern the organization) do any of that. People may not like that the board can, but they have always been able to. This isn’t new and the process isn’t violating any principles of the organization. There DOES NOT have to be any transparency in the decision, whether you, I or anyone else likes it or not. They can make a decision tomorrow on whether the uniform pants are now blue jeans or to abolish neckerchiefs without any input from the membership. This is how they are setup to operate and they are charged with executing (or delegating to committees) all policies. Whether they should is another topic. We just know that there has not been public discussion at the Council level.

      • exasaggie94, no offense intended, but you take a very dogmatic approach to leadership. This in not something small like a new merit badge or a program tweak. This is creating a firestorm within the BSA and all can see that the way this whole thing has been handled is a big mess. The folks driving this will need to be FIRED. Not involving stakeholders was a big mistake and any effort to ram a change down when a majority of stakeholders strongly oppose such change will destroy Scouting. If a change happens this week lawsuits will be flying on all sides. Such action would be reckless.

  256. Without getting into the issue of why the proposed policy change is wrong and how it will irreparably damage Scouting, we are now several days past the announcement regarding the proposal being considered by the BSA national executive council and the council is meeting starting today and through Wednesday in Irving, Texas. Does anyone in the Scouting community now have any clearer idea why this issue is even coming up again (as it was just considered several months ago and rejected), why the rush on this and what has changed since the last time this was rejected several months ago? Seems like membership is being kept in the dark on these issues and we are still not getting any transparency.

    • The following statement to the press is excellent… “We believe that any decision that strikes at the core of our 103-year history merits full input from all stakeholders in deliberation and discussion,” The Great Salt Lake Council of the Boy Scouts of America said in a statement.

      It highlights the need for transparency and input from all stakeholders, especially our committed and hard working adult volunteers. It is shameful that certain elements within the national executive council kept scouting professionals in the dark on this and that they are doing the same to 1 million plus BSA volunteers. We are still being kept in the dark. This is very troubling indeed, and those on the national executive committee who are not involving the stakeholders and who are responsible for this lack of transparency should be removed from the Board.

      • The following is what I sent to the BSA at http://www.scouting.org/ContactUs.aspx …please speak up….

        I, my three sons (one is a life Scout and my youngest is a bobcat), and the members of my Pack will leave Scouting if the policy on not admitting practicing homosexuals changes.

        The entire process is lacking in transparency, and the poor way that things are being handled by the national committee is very frustrating to us in the Scouting community to say the least.

        We still have no idea why this issue is even coming up again (as it was just considered several months ago and rejected), why the rush to take action on this and what has changed since the last time this was rejected several months ago?

        We are vital stakeholders, and we need to know why we are being kept in the dark on these proposed changes and why no one asked us for our input. Holding these closed door meetings starting today does not help with the transparency problems.

        Turley and Stephenson and others on the committee supporting them need to be fired for their public statements (before the meeting) and the very poor job that they and others have been doing in handling this absolute mess!

    • Christianity, as expressed by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the largest Lutheran body in the U.S. The ELCA began officially allowing blessings of same-sex couples in August, 2009.

      • “Can anyone name a religion that requires reverence to God that also embraces homosexuality?” United Church of Christ. Moravian. Presbyterian USA. Unity. Quakers. Disciples of Christ. Reformed Church. Then there are varying degrees of acceptance and incorporation into church life and by local congregations: United Methodist, Episcopal, Evangelical Lutheran. Even the LDS and Roman Catholic are of the mind “love the sinner, hate the sin” and allow gays to be members of the church. Remember: the LDS church and the Catholic church allow gays to be members of the church. The BSA membership rule is “hate the sin, hate the sinner” and anyone who is gay is not allowed. Period. Apparently the some folks here believe that there is some BSA “don’t ask don’t tell” rule which allows gays, but there is no such official policy. And I don’t find that to be a compelling argument. If it were a rule it would break the Scout Law: Trustworthy.

      • Churches who claim to practice Christianity cannot also embrace homosexuality, so although they may practice some doctrine, it most certainly is not Christianity, which means to be a follower of Christ and his teachings. What other major religions – not churches gone astray from Christianity – embraces homosexuality? None. “Churches”, “religions” or groups who do are simply practicing their own smorgasbord religion (the kind where you just pick over the doctrine you like, disregard the others).

      • CWGMPLS: “as expressed by the ELCA” = gospel? Anyone can make up their own rules. My point is that anything not rooted in Christ’s teachings as written in the bible is by definition not Christianity. One can call it anything they want, just not Christianity.

      • Okay, that was a trick question. I know you can’t list Christ’s teachings about homosexuality, because Jesus never talks about homosexuality in the Bible.

      • The quotes in the Bible regarding the fact that homosexuality is an abomination to God have been quoted in these discussions already.

    • Lynn, your point that homosexual acts are not embraced by most Christian denominations is noted and stipulated to. It is unfortunate that some have compromised biblical teachings based on outside pressure.

      • cwgmpls, this has already been covered in these posts, and yes, we all can see that you don’t like the answer, but here it is again… members of the Scouting community have been very clear that any such action will destroy the timeless values of Scouting and the meaning of our oath and law. Homosexual acts are not “morally straight” and not “clean” and never will be! We have little sympathy for CO’s or folks who come into the BSA knowing its position and then ask the majority of us to reject our timeless values to accommodate their minority view. It is a free Country, if you don’t like our timeless values, then don’t renew your charter agreement.

      • cwgmpls, my above comment was a response to YOUR question, “Why should Christian denominations that disagree with BSA be excluded from full participation in Scouting?” Were you asking a question? Typically a “?” at the end of a sentence indicates that a question is being asked. Hope you find my answer to be helpful.

      • BSA’s timeless values are very clear that BSA “Does not define what constitutes belief in God or the practice of religion.” BSA policy does not permit religious teachings which contradict the teachings of my family and church.

      • cwgmpls, yea the BSA will not tell us to be Jew, Baptist, Catholic, Mormon, etc. It will, however, retain its oath and law which tell us that homosexual acts are not “morally straight’ and not “clean”. Hope this helps…

      • Denominations of the Christian faith who accept homosexuality are not followers of Christ. This isn’t an opinion. It is fact. To be a Christian, one has to be a follower of Christ and his teachings. Clearly, homosexuality isn’t one of them. The churches you note have all taken a tangent path away from Christianity to their own redefined “religion”.

      • I fully accept gays and gay marriage. And I fully believe everything Jesus Christ ever taught about homosexuality.

        But your and my opinion about who is Christian and who is not is irrelevant. BSA is quite clear that it “Does not define what constitutes belief in God or the practice of religion.”

    • The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints:

      “Members of the Church who have same-sex attractions, but don’t act on them, can continue to enjoy full fellowship in the church, which includes holding the priesthood”.

      • cwgmpls…yea we have already covered this fully on these posts (go back and do some reading on prior posts in case you forgot)…this is nothing new and in line with almost all Christian churches. More directly, it is 100% consistent with current BSA policy which prohibits practicing homosexuals from being associated with Scouting. LDS policy is the same.

      • No, BSA policy excludes any open gay person, whether he is celibate or not. Current BSA policy is more restrictive that LDS policy. LDS policy permits any celebrate gay person to be a full member.

      • Nope, like the BSA, and as far as I am aware, the LDS church and most Christian denominations will not allow practicing homosexuals and also reserve the right to exclude any member from preaching that homosexual acts are “morally straight” and “clean.” If someone struggling with same gender attraction commits to and lives the Scout oath and law, again, no prohibition.

      • Dan: That is not the BSA membership rule. There are no exceptions to the BSA membership rule. If you are a minister of a church who happens to be gay? Sorry, you can’t be a member. If you are a celibate lesbian? Nope. Sorry, no admittance. Because you are an “avowed homosexual”.

        You’re just making stuff up about the BSA because your learning that many churches follow the teachings of Christ are more loving and forgiving than the BSA.

      • db, if the minister is teaching that homosexual acts are “morally straight” and “clean” and if he is a practicing homosexual, BSA policy says he is out. Again, until you can point to a single example of where someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law has been removed, it is you (and I say this respectfully) that are making stuff up. Waiting for your example….

      • BSA policy bars anyone who “openly declares himself to be a homosexual”, whether he commits homosexual acts or not. A person who “openly declares himself to be a homosexual” can be a member of the LDS church. Nobody inquired about Dale’s sexual behavior when he was banned from BSA. His public acknowledgement that he was gay is all that was necessary to ban him from membership.

      • cwgmpls, what does “homosexual” mean? Do you define this as someone who merely has same gender attraction or practicing? Is it someone who promotes homosexual acts or someone who acknowledges that such acts are morally wrong? Now to my point, can you point to a single example of where someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts and commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law has been removed? I can think of none.

      • cwgmpls, still waiting to hear from you…..what does “homosexual” mean? Do you define this as someone who merely has same gender attraction or practicing? Is it someone who promotes homosexual acts or someone who acknowledges that such acts are morally wrong? Now to my point, can you point to a single example of where someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts and commits to, fully support, promote and live the Scout oath and law has been removed? I can think of none.

      • The only test BSA has is whether or not you call yourself “homosexual”. If you call yourself homosexual, then you meet BSA’s definition of homosexual.

      • cwgmpls, again, I am not aware of anyone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts and commits to, fully supports, promotes and lives the Scout oath and law that has been removed. Please stop making up problems with the current policy that simply don’t exist.

      • beth, Scouters are saying that we support the current policy which works. Can you point to a single example of where someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts and commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law has been removed? I can think of none.

      • You are making up BSA policy Can you point to a policy statement that states that an open homosexual, who “does not engage in homosexual acts and fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law” is allowed to be a member of BSA?

        BSA policy is very clear. “we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals” BSA Press release, 2012

        This is in contrast to the LDS church, which does allow open, celebate homosexuals to be members.

      • cwgmpls and db, what does “homosexual” mean? Do you define this as someone who merely has same gender attraction or practicing? What does “open” or “avowed” mean? Is it someone who promotes homosexual acts or someone who acknowledges that such acts are morally wrong? Now to my point, can you point to a single example of where someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts and commits to, fully supports and lives the Scout oath and law has been removed? Be specific and provide verifiable support for us all to see. Otherwise, stop making up problems with the current policy that simply don’t exist. The current policy works just fine. The proposed change undermines BSA v. Dale and opens us up WIDE to lawsuits!

      • db, regarding your definition…mere same-ex attraction alone has not excluded anyone that I am aware of from the BSA.

      • Well, one of the earliest examples is James Dale and one of the most recent is Jennifer Tyrell. No one asked whether they were “practicing homosexuals”. And I do not know the names of everyone who has been kicked out of scouting because they are gay. Plus there’s just the blanket prohibition, there is no nuance like you wish there was. So no one who is gay is going to join, whether they are celibate or sterile or practicing or a good dancer and a lousy singer or whatever, because the policy is if you’re gay you’re out. Period. Regardless of your wishful thinking otherwise.

      • db, we are still waiting…James Dale and Jennifer Tyrell are not examples of someone who is struggling with same gender attraction, but does not engage in homosexual acts AND commits to, fully support and live the Scout oath and law. They are promoting its destruction. Still waiting…again, the current rule is working just fine.

      • Who says they are practicing or if they are celibate? Do you have security cameras that we don’t know about? There was never any discussion about their sexual practices, simply their sexual preference. And as others have pointed out, and as I have pointed out, there are heterosexuals that engage in sodomy. So I assume that those folks also do not meet your definition of living by the scout oath and law. The BSA has never to my knowledge revoked the membership of any heterosexual sodomites.

      • db, when the rule is enforced it is because they do and they seek push immoral ideas that violate out oath and law on other Scouters. No such question is asked on the membership application or otherwise. Hope this helps….

      • Neither Dale nor Terrell ever discussed any ideas on sexuality with scouts. Dale was outed when someone read an interview with him in a local newspaper. Terrell is simply a loving and caring mom who happens to be a lesbian. Their mere existence on the planet earth was the problem the BSA had, not anything they did while in the context of scouting.

      • Again, in neither case do we have Scouts who merely struggle with same gender attraction, but do not engage in homosexual acts and commit to, fully support and live the Scout oath and law. Similar to the facts in Dale they belong to the organization, but don’t support the current policy and are working to change it.

  258. It seems that Units that already have bylaws that state that they are Chartered by, for example, a Christian church or organization and that explain that Leaders in the Unit must be Christians in good standing with the church, would really not need to change anything, locally, if the BSA makes this National change – their standards for leadership would not be changed. The impact locally would be minimal or non-existent, other than some explanation/education.

    • That is right. And if it is not clearly stated in the bylaws of the Chartering Organization, the troop can publish is simple statement that states: “This troop teaches that homosexual conduct is not morally straight”.

      The precedent set by BSA’s Supreme Court case would protect that troop from any litigation.

      • cwgmpls, this false and an example of why the practice of unlicensed practice of law is a bad thing.The proposed change undermines BSA v. Dale and opens us up WIDE to lawsuits!

      • I am not practicing law. I am quoting the Supreme Court’s majority decision in favor of BSA. Please explain how it is wrong.

      • cwgmpls, when you say “The precedent set by BSA’s Supreme Court case would protect that troop from any litigation.” you are making a legal opinion. Please give us your legal rationale to support your legal opinion. Can’t wait to see it…

      • Please read Rehnquist’s majority opinion in BSA v. Dale. He lays it out quite nicely. It is not my opinion, it is the opinion of the Supreme Court.

        This is a nice summary:

        “The First Amendment simply does not require that every member of a group agree on every issue in order for the group’s policy to be “expressive association.” The Boy Scouts takes an official position with respect to homosexual conduct, and that is sufficient for First Amendment purposes…. The Boy Scouts has a First Amendment right to choose to send one message but not the other. The fact that the organization does not trumpet its views from the housetops, or that it tolerates dissent within
        its ranks, does not mean that its views receive no First Amendment protection.”

        One official statement from your troop is all that is needed to legally exclude gays. Even if nobody in your troop agrees, and you never talk about it again.

      • cwgmpls, yea I am very familiar with BSA v. Dale. The BSA’s official position has been, currently is and was in BSA v. Dale that homosexual acts are not compatible with the timeless values of Scouting such as being “morally straight” and “clean” as per our oath and law. SCOTUS recognized that our first amendment rights of association allow us to exclude those who violate these timeless values and seek to destroy the mission of our association. The policy change would turn this on its head, it would change the mission of the BSA and the BSA would now be forced to concede that homosexual acts are compatible with the timeless values of Scouting such as being “morally straight” and “clean” as per our oath and law. As such the legal underpinnings, to our first amendment right to exclude practicing homosexuals from BSA program will be legally challenged and lost. Since Glaad and others lost in 2000, they have been working to destroy us from within and the policy change will do just that. Any member of the national board who does not understand this risk is breaching the fiduciary duty that they owe to the organization.

      • The court was very clear that all you need to establish the values of your organization is one public statement. If the troop makes one public statement that says they believe gays are immoral, they can legally exclude any gays they want, for as long as they want.

        If this were not true, BSA would have no legal basis to exclude gays today. It is the exact argument that was used to defend BSA’s right to exclude gays.

      • cwgmpls, again, this false and an example of why the practice of unlicensed practice of law is a bad thing. The proposed change undermines BSA v. Dale and opens us up WIDE to lawsuits. The BSA as the franchisor (if you will) will be changing the mission of the BSA, and the BSA would now be forced to concede that homosexual acts are compatible with the timeless values of Scouting such as being “morally straight” and “clean” as per our oath and law. As such the legal underpinnings, to the BSA’s first amendment right to allow its CO’s (franchisees) to exclude practicing homosexuals from BSA program will be legally challenged. You are either niave or deceptive in continuing to falsely assert that Glaad and other wont’ be suing given any policy change. This is what they do!

      • As long as the exclusion of gays is expressed in the CO’s mission, it doesn’t matter what BSA’s mission statement is. Same with exclusion of women. Troops have a legal right to make “no women leaders” rule if they want to, if agrees with the values of their CO. This simply moves the rule from the BSA to the CO. But it doesn’t mean the CO can’t maintain their own rules.

      • cwgmpls, that is an incorrect legal opinion. Lawsuits will be flying on both sides if the policy changes.

      • It is not my opinion. It is Rehnquist’s. I am quoting his words directly. If you don’t agree with it, take it up with him.

      • cwgmpls, the proposed change in policy has never been considered by SCOTUS. As such, SCOTUS was not referring to the new policy in upholding the current policy. Seriously, stay away from giving legal opinions.

      • First off, its not just “your” organization, but mine too. Just because you believe differently or interpret differently, I don’t accept that you have any right to tell me that I don’t belong in Scouting or that I should leave if I don’t agree with you or that somehow me believing differently than you makes me somehow less of a Scouter than you. I only note that because when I read your responses, they keep using words like “our oath and law” and talking about the “they” generically that want to see clarification/changes. Scouting is “my” organization as well and I refuse to allow someone to attempt to ostracize me for believing something different. So while I will happily debate your and respectfully disagree with you, I would never treat you like you are treating others. The Scout Law I tells me I should be courteous.

        The other point I wanted to make is while the BSA may have done or said anything in the court cases, previous statements, etc., they still have a right to change that policy at any time for any reason. As a private organization, they can do that. If they do, then poof – the previous legal cases to some degree likely become moot going forward with respect to this issue but IANAL.

      • screen name (texasaggie94), with all due respect to your first point (and assuming at face value what you say), look you joined the BSA and with it at weekly meetings give your oath and law. Unlike, you (and based on your own statements) I (and the majority of Scouters) actually support and believe in our oath and law. The BSA has been very clear that homosexual acts are not consistent with our oath and law and it has consistently invested hundreds of thousands of our dollars to defend and protect our oath and law. Why then did you join? Your decision to join knowing what BSA is and what it stands for, puts your interest behind the rest of us who join and have invested in the BSA because we (unlike you and the other pro-Glaad folks who stalk this site day and night) actually love and support our timeless values. Your inability to grasp this concept is astounding, intolerant and not courteous of our views and significant financial and time investment.

        We can stipulate that there is a risk of some action this week, but any such action to change the current policy will not be done without legal consequence. Any policy change will result in lawsuits being filed on all sides and would be very unwise indeed.

      • Not really – I wouldn’t expect a Unit chartered by a church to have to write a statement itemizing all the conduct that would be considered immoral (lying, stealing, sexual immorality, hatred, discord, fits of rage, drunkenness, selfish ambition etc. – none of these are “morally straight” according to the Bible (and words of Christ BTW)). The Charter Org is ultimately responsible for approving and removing leaders and members. They could take on the same standards and beliefs as the Charter with regards to leaders and members.

      • I agree. If a person does not meet the CO’s qualifications for a leader, the troop has no obligation to accept them as a leader.

        It is only if a CO’s qualifications are unclear. Say, a Methodist church, where some congregations permit gays, and some don’t. If the CO’s position regarding gays is unclear, the unit may want to adopt its own position statement with regard to gays. Which it has every right of free speech to do.

      • A Scout is Brave.
        A Scout can face danger although he is afraid. He has the courage to stand for what he thinks is right even if others laugh at him or threaten him.

        Let the lawsuits fly then. We should do what is right, even if it means getting sued.

  259. I’m not particularly religious,…I believe in a higher power. My problem is and always has been with activists.

    Normal adjusted people do not want to spend a bunch of time feeling like they have to affirm someone’s sexual behavior or be forced to take a stand on something sexual publicly, regardless of what it is. Why is it the gay agenda is actively FORCING the entire planet to deal with it their lifestyle?
    In my opinion, this is some deep rooted psychological desire that stems from their own inability to feel secure in their behavior. The idea that they are openly attacking a children’s organization to condone ADULT behavior gives great credence to the idea that there is a severe issue with social adjustment within the LGBT sub culture. If homosexual men consider heterosexual institutions to be an obstacle to their interaction with children, what does that really say about them?

    The BSA changes…I will likely bow out and abandon the Scouts. Again, the ones who preach and demand “tolerance” show they are the true intolerant ones with differing opinions.

    • So why not BSA state they having nothing to do with sex.

      BSA should dump the current policy that they “teach that homosexual conduct is immoral”, and should just tell boys to follow the teachings of their parents and clergy.

      That way we can all get along and we don’t have to affirm anything about sexuality or be forced to take any stand at all.

      • cwgmpls, our oath and law are not for sale and a Scout seeks to be “morally straight” and “clean”

        Based on your prior posts, permitting Scouts to burn the US flag and march in gay pride parades is not getting along. This turn’s the program on its head and along with it the billions we have invested in it.

      • They weren’t advocating that scouts should burn flags nor march in gay pride parades. The whole flag burning thing was an example of what is legal, but that doesn’t make it right. Just like the way the BSA discriminates. It’s legal. But it’s not right.

      • db, nope. cwgmpls, is in his posts from today is clearly pointing out the policy change will take us down this path and that CO’s can decide how they want to handle these issue. My point to cwgmpls and those in the pro-Glaad community pushing for this is this… my family and I will have not part of permitting Scouts to burn the US flag and march in gay pride parades. This is not getting along, and it turn’s the program on its head and along with it the billions we have invested in it.

      • Dan, you and others trying to defend the BSA from being carjacked are to be commended for standing for what’s right. Should this happen, I will be pulling my two boys out of the BSA on the same day. Thank you for your efforts thank…you for trying to save the BSA!

      • Your desire to engage in character assassination rather than discuss the issue is the main problem with many aspects of BSA right now. I won’t be responding to your posts any more.

    • Jon-in-PA, your reasoning is correct and thanks for your love and service in upholding the timeless values of Scouting. Please be sure you e-mail the National office and share with your fellow scouters, district and council your feelings and also ask them to get involved. I can tell you our message regarding the wisdom of our policy and the mission of Scouting is being heard!

  260. It may be time to turn this thread off. Looks like the points and counter points have looped back around on themselves.

    • For those who do not know this is a paper out of Ogden Utah. You can also read a similar story in the Salt Lake Tribune and the Provo Daily Herald. Basically they take the position that any change needs to involve local Councils, Districts, and registered parents before any change in policy occurs. They take no position on the policy only arguing for inclusion in the decision making process.

      • Bingo! Thanks Andrew, the way this whole thing has been handled is a big mess and the folks driving this will need to be FIRED. Not involving stakeholders was a big mistake and any effort to ram a change down when a majority of stakeholders strongly oppose such change will destroy Scouting.

    • There you go….exactly as I stated. Parents being activists. I don’t like these rules, change them to accomodate ME!

      Bottom line, there are people out there who DESPISE the BSA for sticking to their guns all these years. The one organization that they (so far) have been unable to pollute with their philosophy. The one organization left with some values. They absoulutely will NOT tolerate the existance of such an organization. WE are the enemy, WE are discriminatory, WE are the bigots. We want to be left alone, but they cannot tolerate our existance and use the terms of hate against us.

      Why not form your own organization and with whatever rules you want? NO… let’s destroy someone else’s group.

      I am not going down without a fight.

  262. A question to those of you who are against changing the membership policy: if on Wednesday it is announced that the new policy (aka one that allows charter organizations to admit homosexuals into their Scouting units) is adopted by the BSA, what will you do? Will you leave Scouting? Will you stay?

    • If the national board changes the policy this week it will destroy scouting and you will see a mass exodus of Scouters and the CO’s. I hope that once the wisdom of the current policy is confirmed, those few who reject our timeless values leave and find an immoral organization that they can enjoy together.

      • ps…after all of the lawsuits that get filed on both sides in the event of a policy change, there won’t be much left of Scouting. That being said, we are confident that national board will see the wisdom of the current policy.

      • So, DantheScoutingman, you somewhat avoided my question. I didn’t ask what others will do, I asked what you will do. Will you leave Scouting if the policy is changed?

      • I realize this was directed at another however I will answer your question. I will wait for direction from my CO on my legal liability if any for enforcing my CO’s membership decisions, and what the exact interpretation of the Scout Oath and Scout Law is going to be for our Unit Cubs through Ventures as we continue to recruit. This will be critical so I know how to apply it equally to every Scout in Eagle Boards, Scoutmaster Conferences, and all other advancement boards as required in the 2011 Guide To Advancement. If my CO is unable to provide these answers I cannot risk my families well being and I will have to walk away. Anyone who has experiences with the LGBT Community’s brigade of lawyers will tell you they do not care about guilt or innocence. They will bankrupt a person in the pursuit of their agenda. I realize that might not be a popular position and I know there are those idealistic and naive enough to believe lawsuits are only filed for cause but that is sadly not the case. Every win build precedent for the next lawsuit. Regardless of what anyone believes I cannot risk it I do not have the money and ultimately this is how the LGBT lawyers bully good people into walking away.

      • Andrew –

        While I am in favor of the proposed policy, I do think you are right that the BSA needs to be able to advise COs as to how to write their membership policy, and how to implement it, so as to be clearly within the law. They also need to commit to backing up any CO that has legal difficulties as a result of its membership policy, so long as the policy (and the implementation thereof) is in line with the BSA’s guidelines.

        There are other legitimate concerns – training for those who will be working with multiple troops with diverse policies, for example.

        I am optimistic that these concerns will be handled well by the BSA, because I’d hate to lose any good Scouts or Scouters over this policy.

        Andrew, I think your “watch and wait” approach is a wise one.

  263. What other group of sinners take pride in their sin category and expect us to accept them? Do adulterers, thieves, slanderers, murderers, liars? I don’t know of any category of sin that has chosen to call itself righteous and expects others to accept them with and because of their sin. This is insane.

    • We’re not all Christians. So the sin of your Bible is not a sin in my religion. My religion believes in the dignity and worth of every human being, not just some humans. But the BSA is open to all religions. If the BSA isn’t going to honor all religious traditions, then they should rename themselves the Evangelical Christian Scouts of America.

      • The ECSA. You’ve just given DtSM/BSASL the name for his new organization that he incorporates later this week after the BSA changes their policy. 🙂

        Truly not trying to be snarky. I just feel I need some levity.

    • Homosexuality is not a sin… at least not in my religion (which is a Christian denomination). So your argument doesn’t make sense to me.

      Homosexuals are not taking pride in a “sin,” they are taking pride in who they are and how God made them.

      • db and Marcus, point in fact…the BSA is not open to homosexual acts that are not “morally straight” or “clean”. Practicing homosexuals choose to who violate and belittle our Scout oath and law are welcome to leave!

      • God did not ‘make’ anyone gay, as for the called ‘scientific’ proof: Three main studies are cited by “gay rights” activists in support of their argument2—Hamer’s X-chromosome research,3 LeVay’s study of the hypothalamus,4 and Bailey and Pillard’s study of identical twins who were homosexuals.5 In all three cases, the researchers had a vested interest in obtaining a certain outcome because they were homosexuals themselves. More importantly, their studies did not stand up to scientific scrutiny by other researchers. Also, “the media typically do not explain the methodological flaws in these studies, and they typically oversimplify the results.”6 There is no reliable evidence to date that homosexual behaviour is determined by a person’s genes.

      • SMX3 – The gay teens and adults who have shared their stories and struggles with me have all believed that being gay is not something they chose. I have seen the pain in their eyes – the fear that they could lose friends and family and even God if they are honest and open about their struggles. Perhaps that is why I am so passionate that these kids can benefit from all that Scouting has to offer, and that our communities and churches need to embrace and support these hurting people. My own son has thrived in Scouting; I think that any boy who is willing to put in the work should have the opportunity to do the same.

      • Why would anyone willingly “choose” that type of fear and pain? Ostracism… If they could choose to be straight, why on earth wouldn’t they?

        I absolutely agree with you, EagleMom. Boys who are struggling with their realization that they are gay… Trying to come to terms with it… Coming out to their friends and family… They NEED scouting. They are so often rejected and ridiculed. A safe place for them to belong, like scouting, can literally save lives that may otherwise be lost to suicide. I think we need to have compassion for others and strive to understand them and the struggles they face. Turning out backs on them is, well, just not Christian.

      • OK. What a specific denomination teaches, whether it calls itself Christian or not, is not really relevant. The BSA has established what the values of Scouting are, and what the Law and Oath mean in that context. The BSA is on record as stating that honosexuality is inconsistent with a Scout’s duty to keep himself morally straight. Thus ends the story.

        And Marcus, homosexualilty is sin. No matter what your particular denomination may want to teach, and regardless of whether it calls itself Christian or not. Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, nothing more. The behavior has been declared sinful since God gave Moses the Law. Jesus himself said that he did not come to change the Law, but to fulfill it, and that “not a jot or tittle” of it would pass away. Finally, the Apostle Paul discussed homosexuality on more than one occasion, never approvingly. I suppose your denominational leaders can argue that Paul was incorrect in his writings. However, when it comes to deciding whom is more likely to be in sync with God’s thoughts, I’m going with Paul over the post- modern rationalizations of modern American denominationalists.

      • A Scout is Reverent.
        A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. HE RESPECTS THE BELIEFS OF OTHERS.

        See, that’s the thing. The BSA doesn’t endorse any particular religion. YOU may believe that homosexuality is a sin. Many don’t believe that. Even within Christianity. OK, so in your opinion, they may be wrong. They still have the right to it. You may disagree with my beliefs, I may disagree with yours. We both have the right to believe them.

      • You are stating you religious beliefs as fact! Scouting is multi-faith and while you have the right to state your opinion, that is all it is.I personally don’t really care what it says in your holy book. Just because you believe in somehting does not make it fact – or true!

  264. First, what part of moral teaching don’t you understand? Homosexuality is wrong, just as lying, stealing, murder…. It is one part of the “politically correct” tripe that is weakening our country every day, whether on local, state or national level. Leaving Scouting would be just cowardly as leaving the country when the “wrong person” is elected.
    Scouting stands for values that have been part of the value system that made this country the leader in the world for so long, a position that we are not so slowly loosing today. Look at ancient Greece and Rome.
    I have people ask why I am still in Scouting years after my Eagle Scout sons are gone. As a Scout leader working now with boys in inner city and subsidized housing I see every week how important it is to maintain the values of the Scout Oath and Law. If we continue to accept the values Hollywood and Washington present to this generation as we have for the past few, then the path that our(my) country will travel will lead us to a lesser place in this world.
    Be courageous Scout leaders, citizens, stand up for the “old” values.

  265. Last Sunday was Scout Sunday at the Lutheran Church of the Good Shepherd and at many other houses of worship across the country. Young men in khaki uniforms and merit badge sashes helped our ushers with bulletins and the collection basket, and we publicly thanked our troop leaders for their great work.

    The only remarkable aspect of that picture is that Good Shepherd is not just the sponsor of a Boy Scout troop and a Cub Scout pack but also an inclusive congregation — a faith community that gladly includes anyone regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. We celebrated our first same-gender marriage in December after voters in Washington State backed marriage equality. We are part of a denomination that allows congregations to call gay and lesbian pastors.

    Reconciling these facets of our congregational personality can create a paradox. For a congregation to be truly inclusive, it needs to be able to welcome everyone, even those who don’t want to welcome everyone. While some people question our affiliation with the Boy Scouts of America, many of our strongest LGBT advocates see our troop sponsorship as an opportunity to demonstrate that welcome to the scouts and their parents.

    Don’t think that we accept the anti-gay policy of scouting’s national organization, because we believe it diminishes the scouting program that we cherish. No matter how hard we work at the troop level to be inclusive, the national policy will push some families away. Since scouting is part of our ministry to youth, the national policy hurts our congregation. We’ll gladly take scouting warts and all, but we look forward to the day when our troop can express as generous a welcome to LGBT families as our congregation does.

    Indeed it is hard to imagine how the national policy could actually be applied in a community that respects gays and lesbians. Are we really supposed to tell an elementary principal that he can’t be an assistant scoutmaster because of his sexual orientation? Do we exclude “avowed homosexuals” whose only vow is one of marriage, sanctioned by the state and performed by a Lutheran pastor? Do we really tell a lesbian married couple that only one mom should attend the troop meetings?

    The national policy needs to change, but it need not come at the expense of other faith communities with other beliefs. Last Sunday was Scout Sunday at the Mormon church too. It is important that scouting work for many faiths, and in fact it does. Indeed, with the notable exception of the policy toward gays, scouting has been incredibly successful at encouraging a spiritual dimension of youth without endorsing any particular faith or denomination.

    The national scouting leaders have proposed to accommodate these differences by letting individual unit sponsors make their own decisions about whether to include LBGT people as troop volunteers and whether to include gay boys as scouts. This approach respects the range of conscience-bound views held by scouting families.

    The Lutheran church followed a similar “local option” path in 2009 when it changed its policy toward LGBT clergy. The ELCA did not compel every congregation to accept gay or lesbian clergy, but it allowed a congregation to make that decision for itself based on where it saw God leading them. The ELCA recognized that the sexual orientation of their clergy was not a core matter of faith for the denomination.

    A local option approach for scouting puts the sexual orientation issue where it belongs. It is not a core value of scouting. The leaders of our scout troop are emphatic in saying that they don’t want to be an anti-gay troop or a gay-friendly troop; they want to provide the best of scouting to all the boys and their families. For some sponsoring organizations, sexual orientation may be fundamental. For Good Shepherd Lutheran and many other congregations, scouting best serves our mission to youth when it respects our welcome of all people.

  266. Is it just me or are MANY of the posts here ones that are NOT modeling respectful behavior to our Scouts? No matter what your personal beliefs are, when did it become ok in Scouting to condemn others for their beliefs?

    Can we PLEASE stop the personal attacks, and (as many of the kids in my Troop are calling the feedback they are reading here) the “I’m a better Christian than you are because my hate speech is longer” contest? I was shocked by hearing them call it that – but have to admit that their take on this, a simple as it sounds, does have a kernel of truth when you step back from it.

    When did it become ok to act this way toward one another?

3 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Boy Scouts of America to reconsider national membership policy – Scouting the Fox!
  2. ScoutLinks Jan-2013 « Rikki's Scouting Resources
  3. Today’s Links February 2, 2013 | New York OA Trader

Comments are closed.