BSA has always been a revered institution. This decision indicates that scouting leadership no longer possesses the moral conviction to stand firm in the moral relativism that our culture is saturated with. This is truly a sad time for scouting and is a further indication that our culture as a whole is in decline. Those engrained in promoting immorality in our society are further emboldened to ramp up their destructive agenda and will not be satisfied until every revered institution we have has lost its moral authority.
John W. RedelfsJune 1, 2013
If normal boys are not allowed to meet and camp with girls at Church outings, boys attracted to the same sex should not be allowed to meet and camp with other boys because it encourages inappropriate behavior, not just attraction. Duh!
davidMay 29, 2013
I'd like to know why the Boy Scouts felt compelled to make such a change in the first place? It does nothing to advance their position. I believe this is the beginning to the end of the organization. Those promoting the gay agenda are encouraged by their progress and won't be satisfied until they have gay leaders in Scouting. Those who have supported scouting will now look sideways at scouting wondering like me if this is just the first step toward becoming another politically correct organization that gives into whatever special interest group applies pressure from the outside to them.
Rex WhitmerMay 29, 2013
Having been a boy scout and a scout leader as well as the father of several sons whom have acheived Eagle rank I would kike to make this observation. I have never observed a scout who was same sex inclined; however I have been aware of several leaders who were and the results were disasterous to the boys and the family of the scouter. Even in our listless society of today, even a man who preys on young men will be remembered and commented upon for many years to come. While Homosexually oriented persons do not recieve the same treatment they once did, I'm sure that those whom might do so will find a great deal of opposition to that man continuing to live in that area. The BSA are not doing themselves a favor with this act, Donations will drop as will young men seeking membership.
RichardMay 28, 2013
The Scouts claimed five million members so, based on the growth of population, they should have about nine million today. But today they claim just under three million. So the 1950s takeover by right wing extremists has by this time cost them two out of three potential members, and many of the members they do have no doubt would prefer to have the Scouts ban all gays. So they may indeed experience a large loss of members, and I have no idea whether they will continue to be a leader among youth groups.
In any case, a very large number of Scout troops are sponsored by Mormon, Roman Catholic or Methodist churches. All these agree it is wrong to exclude members who have a gay orientation from church or from anything else. Gay sex is another matter, and the Scouts still advise against that for members. Since all Scouts are 17 or younger, such conduct is illegal in at least most states, and it hardly seems unreasonable for the Scouts to advise members to obey the law.
The key phrase is "advise." If Scout leaders have evidence members are having sex illegally, they should be notifying the police, even if that angers members and parents. They have no right to cover up a crime and conduct their own investigations as sexual conduct vigilantes.
jbryantMay 28, 2013
I don't know what the BSA thought it was going to gain by this decision. It won't satisfy the Gay rights groups. They will keep hammering the BSA for acceptance of adult gay leaders. It has alienated a large group of existing sponsors who may leave the organization causing a major schism. It makes the adult gay leader ban harder to defend. And all this to accompdate a hand full of boys who want to make a public declaration of their homosexuality and also be scouts? With this decision it will only be a matter of time before the BSA is forced to accept gay adult leaders, and that will be the end of scouting in its present form; then you'll see a mass exodus. The BSA has lost much more than it gained in the decision. It has sown the seed of its demise.
CoralMay 28, 2013
Leann...The opposition to the change are not making a stand on "righteous indignation" but biblical principle on not accepting the sin...whether it be hetero or homosexual. It's not something that they choose to live with and unlike the actions of the homosexual advocacy groups, they choose to produce an organization that will fit their needs now that the BSA does not.
John BowersMay 28, 2013
So, a boy openly advocating the gay lifestyle is accepted into a scout troupe with full standing. At some future point, the boy will inevitably be confronted with religious conversations even the offering of simple prayer. As much conversation in Christian/religious based groups often deals with morality, will this then open the troop/leaders to accusations of "hate speech" and or charges of homophobia"? And what are the legal/politically correct implications of this? Will this not then open up sincere, dedicated scout leaders and the scouting organization to further accusations of abuse, and christian bullying from news organizations, and scorn from political and civic leaders, who have long abandoned any sense of moral reasoning and conscience all to common in the de- facto warfare declared on those who's only wish is to affirm the moral basis for organized society and to pass these values onto their children?
There is far more at stake than the simple problem of individuals with homosexual inclinations being accepted into the scouting organization, as a gesture of tolerance.
Tragically for the church and for the future of scouting, I fear the fires of hatred being fanned against innocent christian groups have just had gasoline poured on the flames. Trying to split the difference between inclinations actual behavior will not work. The genuine, loving cooperative efforts between scout leaders, parents and children in the deadly serious business of child rearing into responsible, morally restrained adults had just received a major if not fatal blow, as far as scouting is concerned.
Being "morally straight"always meant, according to the oath, doing one's best to be morally straight in mind and body. not just one or the other.
Lynda CramerMay 28, 2013
The author states that boys who aren't acting on their sexual tendency are still allowed under the old policy to get their rank advancement they have earned. NOT SO. I have heard of boys who have done nothing more than accept this part of themselves who are then banned from all scout activities and advancement. So this change was needed FOR THEM. And yes in the church people were making those judgments. To feel something is not to sin. To act on it is. Yes that includes thoughts but mostly this is talking about actions. Our boys are SUPPOSED to be chaste whatever they feel.
Doug McLawsMay 28, 2013
How to destroy the Boy Scouts:
Step 1: Get them to "compromise a little bite." Results, many conservatives leave.
Step 2: Since there are less conservatives - push more immorality. Results, even more conservatives leave.
Step 3: Push for full liberal adgenda items. Results, all conservatives leave. (Which is pretty much everyone who were originally in it.)
Goal Accomplished: BSA destroyed.
ShareeMay 28, 2013
I think all boys should be allowed in scouting, regardless of their sexual preference. As long as they are still required to have strong moral values, what difference does it make? A gay boy can be chaste just as easily as a straight boy. The same goes for scout leaders. I know the LDS Church allows gay men to be leaders, as long as they are worthy, so i think the scouts should also allow gay leaders, as long as they remain morally clean.
David HallMay 28, 2013
I remember a year ago when Joel Osteen was interviewed on Fox News Sunday and declared that he believes being gay is a sin. A lot of evangelicals believe that. But no, being gay is a condition - sin is what you do. Even some members of the Church have a problem making that distinction. A loving God does not condemn us for who we are, as long as we are striving to become what He wants us to become. If you are gay you can still be chaste. I support the Boy Scouts in their decision, though I recognize they will have problems with it.
leannMay 28, 2013
It is unfortunate that we cannot just be loving and try to help allof Gods children through this mortal journey. Instead we stand on "righteous indignation" as grounds to be judgemental and discriminatory. Why does everyone always make the leap that Homosexuals are not living the law of Chastity? Do you think all straight boys are?
Comments | Return to Story
RobertJune 3, 2013
BSA has always been a revered institution. This decision indicates that scouting leadership no longer possesses the moral conviction to stand firm in the moral relativism that our culture is saturated with. This is truly a sad time for scouting and is a further indication that our culture as a whole is in decline. Those engrained in promoting immorality in our society are further emboldened to ramp up their destructive agenda and will not be satisfied until every revered institution we have has lost its moral authority.
John W. RedelfsJune 1, 2013
If normal boys are not allowed to meet and camp with girls at Church outings, boys attracted to the same sex should not be allowed to meet and camp with other boys because it encourages inappropriate behavior, not just attraction. Duh!
davidMay 29, 2013
I'd like to know why the Boy Scouts felt compelled to make such a change in the first place? It does nothing to advance their position. I believe this is the beginning to the end of the organization. Those promoting the gay agenda are encouraged by their progress and won't be satisfied until they have gay leaders in Scouting. Those who have supported scouting will now look sideways at scouting wondering like me if this is just the first step toward becoming another politically correct organization that gives into whatever special interest group applies pressure from the outside to them.
Rex WhitmerMay 29, 2013
Having been a boy scout and a scout leader as well as the father of several sons whom have acheived Eagle rank I would kike to make this observation. I have never observed a scout who was same sex inclined; however I have been aware of several leaders who were and the results were disasterous to the boys and the family of the scouter. Even in our listless society of today, even a man who preys on young men will be remembered and commented upon for many years to come. While Homosexually oriented persons do not recieve the same treatment they once did, I'm sure that those whom might do so will find a great deal of opposition to that man continuing to live in that area. The BSA are not doing themselves a favor with this act, Donations will drop as will young men seeking membership.
RichardMay 28, 2013
The Scouts claimed five million members so, based on the growth of population, they should have about nine million today. But today they claim just under three million. So the 1950s takeover by right wing extremists has by this time cost them two out of three potential members, and many of the members they do have no doubt would prefer to have the Scouts ban all gays. So they may indeed experience a large loss of members, and I have no idea whether they will continue to be a leader among youth groups. In any case, a very large number of Scout troops are sponsored by Mormon, Roman Catholic or Methodist churches. All these agree it is wrong to exclude members who have a gay orientation from church or from anything else. Gay sex is another matter, and the Scouts still advise against that for members. Since all Scouts are 17 or younger, such conduct is illegal in at least most states, and it hardly seems unreasonable for the Scouts to advise members to obey the law. The key phrase is "advise." If Scout leaders have evidence members are having sex illegally, they should be notifying the police, even if that angers members and parents. They have no right to cover up a crime and conduct their own investigations as sexual conduct vigilantes.
jbryantMay 28, 2013
I don't know what the BSA thought it was going to gain by this decision. It won't satisfy the Gay rights groups. They will keep hammering the BSA for acceptance of adult gay leaders. It has alienated a large group of existing sponsors who may leave the organization causing a major schism. It makes the adult gay leader ban harder to defend. And all this to accompdate a hand full of boys who want to make a public declaration of their homosexuality and also be scouts? With this decision it will only be a matter of time before the BSA is forced to accept gay adult leaders, and that will be the end of scouting in its present form; then you'll see a mass exodus. The BSA has lost much more than it gained in the decision. It has sown the seed of its demise.
CoralMay 28, 2013
Leann...The opposition to the change are not making a stand on "righteous indignation" but biblical principle on not accepting the sin...whether it be hetero or homosexual. It's not something that they choose to live with and unlike the actions of the homosexual advocacy groups, they choose to produce an organization that will fit their needs now that the BSA does not.
John BowersMay 28, 2013
So, a boy openly advocating the gay lifestyle is accepted into a scout troupe with full standing. At some future point, the boy will inevitably be confronted with religious conversations even the offering of simple prayer. As much conversation in Christian/religious based groups often deals with morality, will this then open the troop/leaders to accusations of "hate speech" and or charges of homophobia"? And what are the legal/politically correct implications of this? Will this not then open up sincere, dedicated scout leaders and the scouting organization to further accusations of abuse, and christian bullying from news organizations, and scorn from political and civic leaders, who have long abandoned any sense of moral reasoning and conscience all to common in the de- facto warfare declared on those who's only wish is to affirm the moral basis for organized society and to pass these values onto their children? There is far more at stake than the simple problem of individuals with homosexual inclinations being accepted into the scouting organization, as a gesture of tolerance. Tragically for the church and for the future of scouting, I fear the fires of hatred being fanned against innocent christian groups have just had gasoline poured on the flames. Trying to split the difference between inclinations actual behavior will not work. The genuine, loving cooperative efforts between scout leaders, parents and children in the deadly serious business of child rearing into responsible, morally restrained adults had just received a major if not fatal blow, as far as scouting is concerned. Being "morally straight"always meant, according to the oath, doing one's best to be morally straight in mind and body. not just one or the other.
Lynda CramerMay 28, 2013
The author states that boys who aren't acting on their sexual tendency are still allowed under the old policy to get their rank advancement they have earned. NOT SO. I have heard of boys who have done nothing more than accept this part of themselves who are then banned from all scout activities and advancement. So this change was needed FOR THEM. And yes in the church people were making those judgments. To feel something is not to sin. To act on it is. Yes that includes thoughts but mostly this is talking about actions. Our boys are SUPPOSED to be chaste whatever they feel.
Doug McLawsMay 28, 2013
How to destroy the Boy Scouts: Step 1: Get them to "compromise a little bite." Results, many conservatives leave. Step 2: Since there are less conservatives - push more immorality. Results, even more conservatives leave. Step 3: Push for full liberal adgenda items. Results, all conservatives leave. (Which is pretty much everyone who were originally in it.) Goal Accomplished: BSA destroyed.
ShareeMay 28, 2013
I think all boys should be allowed in scouting, regardless of their sexual preference. As long as they are still required to have strong moral values, what difference does it make? A gay boy can be chaste just as easily as a straight boy. The same goes for scout leaders. I know the LDS Church allows gay men to be leaders, as long as they are worthy, so i think the scouts should also allow gay leaders, as long as they remain morally clean.
David HallMay 28, 2013
I remember a year ago when Joel Osteen was interviewed on Fox News Sunday and declared that he believes being gay is a sin. A lot of evangelicals believe that. But no, being gay is a condition - sin is what you do. Even some members of the Church have a problem making that distinction. A loving God does not condemn us for who we are, as long as we are striving to become what He wants us to become. If you are gay you can still be chaste. I support the Boy Scouts in their decision, though I recognize they will have problems with it.
leannMay 28, 2013
It is unfortunate that we cannot just be loving and try to help allof Gods children through this mortal journey. Instead we stand on "righteous indignation" as grounds to be judgemental and discriminatory. Why does everyone always make the leap that Homosexuals are not living the law of Chastity? Do you think all straight boys are?
ADD A COMMENT