Church asks boys scouts to leave.

[Chucktshoes]

I represent no one other than myself.

[luvmyberetta]

I find it amazing how people pick and choose which parts of the Bible support their views on certain subjects, while denying other parts.

 

I also find some of the statements made, whether they are in jest or not simply appalling.

 

I would ask everyone to remember that everything posted online is 'out there' forever.  As a forum dedicated to guns and gun related topics we as gun owners should represent ourselves in the best possible manner (especially in this political climate), even online.

 

I'm not saying you should not express your opinions / beliefs, but some of the comments left by members in this thread and the other related one have been downright foul.

 

Just a thought all.

 

I don't agree with a homosexual lifestyle, but wouldn't kick a kid out for being gay, but also don't think it should be an open issue. The Boy Scouts is a moral based organization that includes God & prayer in their activities, but doesn't push any particular religion or form of hatred toward others. What has made me upset is that they want people to be openly gay & make us say that it's alright. Next, they will want to ban prayer & the Pledge of Allegiance. I know kids have been in the troop that were gay & they were treated like everyone else. As long as it's not discussed & doesn't have an effect on the activities of the troop, I could care less. The reason I'm there is for the kids that have broken & abusive homes, get picked on in school, have social problems & need leadership. I've seen some truely hurt kids that needed the BSA & opening up discussions on whether they're gay or not shouldn't be part of the plan. There's a lot more to the BSA than camp fires & sleeping in tents.

[daddyo]

I even have gay and lesbian friends and think they should have the same rights as anyone else

 

There isn't one right that straight people have that gays don't, not even marriage:

 

http://carm.org/atheist-homosexual-marriage

Edited June 2, 2013 by daddyo

[56FordGuy]

I don't agree with a homosexual lifestyle...

 

What is the homosexual lifestyle? 

[Spiffy]

Now, I'm really scratching my head.

 

I was never a scout but I'd hazard a guess it has something to do with the oath......

[East_TN_Patriot]

They're doing it for the children, man! Do you expect them to sit back while all the queers sexually assault those innocent children at every gathering?

Of course, you realize that research has shown time and again that homosexual men are no more likely to assault children than anyone else.  In fact, the vast majority of child molesters identify as heterosexual in their lives and are commonly married.  Dozens of studies by psychologists, criminologists, and medical professionals have failed to show that there is any connection at all between homosexuality and child molestation.  Just because a man wants to engage in consensual sex with another man, there is no way that any honest person can extrapolate that to mean that they would want to force sex upon a child. 

I'd rather have a "queer" with a good heart lead my son's Scout troop than some bigoted jerk who doesn't respect what other people do in their private lives.  

[Spiffy]

A church is not a collection of sinners, it is a collection of FORMER sinners. Yes we all sin daily and you don't see too many people getting kicked out for shacking up or having more than 1 living wife/husband, or drinking or smoking but they are sins that current thought do not hold as "your born that way" . But if the church doctrine states that homosexuality is an immoral sin then it's a sin that you can't stop doing since you are "born that way".

 

 

Of course it wont really matter in a couple of years when Islam takes hold here and they kill all the gays and Christians since that seems to be what the PC crowd wants anyways.

[East_TN_Patriot]

As long as it's not discussed & doesn't have an effect on the activities of the troop, I could care less. 

I have known many gay men in my adult life, and only one ever discussed it to any significant degree.  It's not as if these people want to join the BSA and wear a dress.  The issue here is that many Scout leaders who did not discuss their sexuality and did not act inappropriately have been forced out of the organization simply based on their sexual orientation once it was discovered.

[Guest nra37922]

A church is not a collection of sinners, it is a collection of FORMER sinners. Yes we all sin daily and you don't see too many people getting kicked out for shacking up or having more than 1 living wife/husband, or drinking or smoking but they are sins that current thought do not hold as "your born that way" . But if the church doctrine states that homosexuality is an immoral sin then it's a sin that you can't stop doing since you are "born that way".

 

 

Of course it wont really matter in a couple of years when Islam takes hold here and they kill all the gays and Christians since that seems to be what the PC crowd wants anyways.

Start learning the Koran and if you can find a version in Spanish you'll be ahead of the curve.

 

But as far as the BSA goes, is there anything that is going to stop Gay Scouts from sharing a tent. or sleeping bag, and should there be?  If not then why not and if they can shouldn't then the BSA go truly coed thus affording the non-gay's the right to have their girlfriends with them with the same sleeping arraignments?

Edited June 2, 2013 by nra37922

[maroonandwhite]

A church is not a collection of sinners, it is a collection of FORMER sinners. Yes we all sin daily and you don't see too many people getting kicked out for shacking up or having more than 1 living wife/husband, or drinking or smoking but they are sins that current thought do not hold as "your born that way" . But if the church doctrine states that homosexuality is an immoral sin then it's a sin that you can't stop doing since you are "born that way".
 
 
Of course it wont really matter in a couple of years when Islam takes hold here and they kill all the gays and Christians since that seems to be what the PC crowd wants anyways.

I agree with this to some degree. There have been people in my church that have done things that make you question their orientation but as many of you have said the church shouldn't be judge mental of this. Homosexuality is a sin just as stealing,lying,etc. A church should be there to provide support and offer prayer for any sinner.

Now on the flip side of this. A church is also a sanctuary for believers that needs to be protected to a certain degree from outside sin. If a guy shows up in a dress with full makeup and a poodle then I would think that should be addressed. Us adults are equipped to handle stuff that we may run into like this but children are a little more impressionable. I will make my beliefs known if an opportunity arises but will also be respectful of others beliefs while staying available if they would like to talk about my beliefs.

[leroy]

This "gay scout" thing is another accommodation to the "balkanization" of america by those who hate the system and intend to re-write the immutable laws.  The Boy Scouts (...and others, some of them churches...) have chosen to accomodate the whims of pop culture; the current whim is "...its ok to blab and brag about your sexuality and orientation....".  I think this move is probably the death knell to the current Boy Scout organization.  

 

I think the issue of the BSA and the church is an "apples and oranges" thing.  Heres why:  The BSA is a private, benelovent institution that teaches self-reliance and morality (... check the scout oath out here:

Scout Oath (or Promise)

 

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.

 

 

  The "rub" here is two fold.  The first is the definition of "morality".  The "old definition" called homosexuality a perversion; hardly a morally straight condition.  The "new definition"; applied in the military and in other sectors today by our political masters , is "...its ok to be homosexual....; its simply a lifestyle choice....".

 

What you have here is a re-definition of morality (...endorsed by government and other interest groups eg: "...group morality...) that changes the "old definition".  "Evolution as some would say.  I wuz a boy scout myself many years ago; and i simply dont remember the issue of sexual orientation comming up as part of the "Boy Scout Way".  The reason; homosexual behavior (...as well as promiscuitous behavior...)  was considered immoral behavior that no polite society talked about; and the Boy Scouts and their supporters well understood it to be so.  There may have been those in the ranks of the BSA that were "gay" and some were probably "promiscuitous", but they were quiet.  I think that was exacly has they should have been. 

 

This current move is nothing more than the destruction of an organization that has done much good as a sacrifice to the "god of tolerance".   In this country we are busily killing off any semblance of "biblical morality" as somehow "intolerant".  This is simply the product of the "jhadist" who whant to change the immutable rules.  "GLT" jhadism is simply the latest iteration.  My guess is that the BSA has been murdered at the hands of the jhadists and the accomodators to pop culture.

 

As to the church thing (...taking a stand against certain behaviors and organizations...).  It should be understood that the church is a "house of prayer" and a "haven for the lost sinner" and a non-judgmental place where the Gospel Message can be heard and accepted if the affected soul wants to be accepted into the Family of God.  God calls the lost to Salvation.  That means everybody; saint, sinner, jhadist, gay boy scouts, gay non-scouts, everybody;.... period.... .   That means that the door should be open as to salvation.  Scripture teaches (...and i believe them...) that God loves the sinner and hates the sin.   That means that all who are willing are welcome.  The correctly constituted "church" should operate on that model.  This is the "greatest outreach" of the church and the fullfillment of the "Great Commission". 

 

There are some qualifications however.  The plain reading of scripture defines immorality in brutally plain terms.  That means that there has to be some inward changes made to the "immoral lifestyle" and the church has the duty to obey the principles of scripture.  Viewed in that light, alone, the church has the right to "turn out" individuals and organizations who do not share the values and principles that the church is founded on.

 

So this thing cuts both ways; the church is a "home for sinners"; but it also has a duty to  to abide by those principles outlined in scripture.

 

Thhis whole thing (...in my view...) has murdered the presently constituted BSA, put the church on the spot in some locations, and has given the enemies of God great occasion to blaspheme Him no matter which side of this arguement ya come down on.  The real loosers in this "rewriting of the immutable laws" are society in general, and the Boy Scouts specifically.

 

Thats how i see things this mornin.

 

leroy

Edited June 2, 2013 by leroy

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I have known many gay men in my adult life, and only one ever discussed it to any significant degree.  It's not as if these people want to join the BSA and wear a dress.  The issue here is that many Scout leaders who did not discuss their sexuality and did not act inappropriately have been forced out of the organization simply based on their sexual orientation once it was discovered.

As have I, but I have my doubts that there are that many gays who really want to join the Boy Scouts in its previous

form. They had to change it and force it to revisit it's own religious beliefs so they could.

 

I still maintain the decision was more based on a political doctrine that debases religion from society and makes the

organization less desirable for those who are or were current members.

[mav]

I have often found it amazing how the supposedly "tolerant" people are actually some of the most intolerant people on the planet.  Here we have a small church, which I would be willing to bet that close to 100% of their congregation disapprove the BSA's decision on homosexuals, stand on their principles.  At one time in this country, people who were unwavering on their principles/convictions were respected.  Today, it is totally different.  If your view or belief is not in sync with the latest pop culture, you are mocked, ridiculed, demonized, and if you are of a certain political affiliation, you are targeted by the IRS.  I guess in reality those that cry tolerance are really only tolerant if you accept their viewpoint.

[TMF]

I have often found it amazing how the supposedly "tolerant" people are actually some of the most intolerant people on the planet. Here we have a small church, which I would be willing to bet that close to 100% of their congregation disapprove the BSA's decision on homosexuals, stand on their principles. At one time in this country, people who were unwavering on their principles/convictions were respected. Today, it is totally different. If your view or belief is not in sync with the latest pop culture, you are mocked, ridiculed, demonized, and if you are of a certain political affiliation, you are targeted by the IRS. I guess in reality those that cry tolerance are really only tolerant if you accept their viewpoint.

It goes both ways. I empathize with both sides of the issue and see many of the arguments made by the most vocal on either side as ridiculous. If folks really believed in "live and let live" in regard to this issue there would be zero conflict.

[RobertNashville]

Not to the heterosexual male that has to be his bunk-mate or tent-mate at camp.

 

Listen, I have no problems working, playing or socializing with gays or lesbians. I even have gay and lesbian friends and think they should have the same rights as anyone else, but private groups should also have rights to exclude based on certain issues and this is one of them. The reason is that there are just certain situations where it just becomes uncomfortable for heterosexuals. The same can be said for the situation with women in certain combat units...there will be situations that cause men and women both to be uncomfortable or to do or not do things that they would not do or would do around just other men or other women in combat situations. Let's just face it, sex is a very private and sensitive issue for most people and homosexuals in the Boy Scouts flies in the face of those sensitivities and many church doctrines. :hiding:

Of course the BSA has the right to exclude - the BSA chose not to do so.

Regardless of they hype, no one forced the BSA to change its policy; a policy that was actually, adopted rather recently in its history. Certainly, pressure was brought to bear on the BSA, pressure form specific special interest groups as well as practicalities (meaning corporate sponsors, other organizations, etc) who would no longer support the BSA if it maintained its no gay boys policy. However, it WAS the BAS (and a majority of its membership) who DECIDED to change.

 

Some have claimed that with the policy change, the BSA has violated some closely held traditional moral value and/or core religious belief yet a review of the BSA's own documents and statements of principles doesn't bear that out. Moreover, if this moral principle against homosexual boys was truly some core value of the BSA then why change?  A person's or an organization's "core values" are pretty meaningless and I would suggest, never really a core value at all, if we succumb to pressure to abandon them.

 

This isn't about sex in the BSA as there should never be ANY sexual activity allowed or tolerated in the BSA in the first place regardless of whether it's same sex or opposite sex. This is about one group's feelings about homosexuality vs another groups feelings and the BSA in the middle of it.

[RobertNashville]

A church is not a collection of sinners, it is a collection of FORMER sinners. Yes we all sin daily and you don't see too many people getting kicked out for shacking up or having more than 1 living wife/husband, or drinking or smoking but they are sins that current thought do not hold as "your born that way" . But if the church doctrine states that homosexuality is an immoral sin then it's a sin that you can't stop doing since you are "born that way".

 

 

Of course it wont really matter in a couple of years when Islam takes hold here and they kill all the gays and Christians since that seems to be what the PC crowd wants anyways.

 

I don't give a damn about "church doctrine"...I do care about what actual scripture says and "born that way" or not I see nothing in scripture that calls same sex attraction a sin any more than opposite sex attraction is a sin...I see it calling certain sex acts (including some preformed by heterosexuals) as sinful.

[RobertNashville]

There isn't one right that straight people have that gays don't, not even marriage:

 

http://carm.org/atheist-homosexual-marriage

Of course there are.  There are fewer now than 20 years ago but to deny that differences in rights exist is to chose to be uninformed.

 

One simple example...a homosexual couple that has been together for decades; one of the couple is suddenly taken ill and in intensive care.  Without an immediate family member to give "permission" or a hospital staffer willing to break the rules, the partner will have a hell of time getting in to see their partner. There are most certainly inheritance/financial/tax and other similar and significant difference between heterosexual and homosexual partners (even heterosexual partners that never actually married each other).

 

While many of the rights and privileges of "marriage" can be either duplicated or simulated through legal contracts, etc...much of the dichotomy between the two is a result of government inserting itself into the process; something that in my opinion, the government has no place inserting itself in the first place.

[The Average Joe]

The bylaws of the BSA do not accespt homosexuals....okay, they changed that.
BUT, it doesn't mean that everyone else has to (i.e. the church and those dropping out of the BSA) fall in line with it.

 

Just think that if the NRA or 2nd Amendment Foundation started backing a gun control bill just how many would drop out of those oganizations and stop sending funds.

 

The BSA has done an about face on a principle they were founded on and followed for over 100 years.

Anyone wanting to drop out or cut off their flow of money to them has the right... and my respect.

 

I don't wont my kids hanging around with that lifestyle (homosexuality) and growing up to think it's okay.

Tolerate it, but don't support it.

 

My Prediction:

There will be another oganization (call it what you will) rise from this that follows traditional values like the BSA did when they started.
It will be the conservative version of the BSA and the original BSA will continue on or drop by the wayside....my prediction.

[Joseg]

Fellas, I'm a lesbian (like any male) and to be honest, if people get butt hurt because a institution doesn't want to participate in their silly games, you know what, move along and find your own damn group of like minded individuals. This isn't just about Christians, gays, BSA, it's something in general that is happening across the board here in the USA. People need to start growing thick skins, don't like a comment, deal with it. The PC crowd has turned majority of the US into pussies.. 

 

People criticize institutions and make them look evil using the media, but what they are doing is just, they don't want to participate in the social experiment and have every right not to. BSA chose their bed and not they need to sleep in it.  

[RobertNashville]

The BSA has done an about face on a principle they were founded on and followed for over 100 years. will continue on or drop by the wayside....my prediction.

Well, no, actually they didn't. The policy they changed wasn't adopted until about 1980; at least for someone my age that's pretty recent history.

How anyone feels about the change is completely up to them. At the same time, I would suggest that it would best to make sure we have our facts correct about the BSA's history before we go making claims about it. ;)

[mav]

It goes both ways. I empathize with both sides of the issue and see many of the arguments made by the most vocal on either side as ridiculous. If folks really believed in "live and let live" in regard to this issue there would be zero conflict.

 

You are correct, it does go both ways.  However, this situation is not applicable.  An individual or group of individuals didn't like the original BSA policy, so through government and media influence they attacked BSA and coerced them into changing their policy.  Now that the BSA has changed their policy, some individuals and organizations have left or they have decided to no longer associate themselves with the BSA.  What is now happening to them?  They are being attacked for standing behind their prinicples.  It is easy to see which side has been the aggressor.

[RichardR]

Well from reading some of the coments about this issue on leftist forums such as Huffington Post & Democratic Underground they (the left) are not finished pushing/slandering/intimidating/suing the BSA & BSA sponsers until the BSA allows "openly gay adult leaders" to participate in scouting.

[daddyo]

What also bothers me about this is that I will now have to qualify my time as a leader and my son's Eagle award as "pre-gay". I suppose that will make it me a bigot, though. Ah, what the hell.

[wewoapsiak]

What also bothers me about this is that I will now have to qualify my time as a leader and my son's Eagle award as "pre-gay". I suppose that will make it me a bigot, though. Ah, what the hell.

Why would you do that? Why couldn't you simply state that you're a proud father of an eagle scout and you were happy to help him along the way. Does the fact that the BSA changed their policies cheapen the hard work and dedication it takes to become an eagle scout?

This doesn't make sense to me. It's like saying, "Well I was a Catholic before the pope said that Atheists can get into heaven", or "I was in the military before DADT was repealed."

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[daddyo]

Does the fact that the BSA changed their policies cheapen the hard work and dedication it takes to become an eagle scout?

 

 

For me, yes, it does.