I have no idea how this organization got my email address. It was directed to my dad (who is not religious, homophobic or really a "traditional family" type as he raised his 2 daughters on his own). It was from the Family Research Council basically urging me to ask the Boy Scouts to not abandon their "timeless values". It linked to a form email you could send. I think I may tweek it a bit to serve MY agenda, that of equal rights. Here's the email they want me to send:
Thank you for making the Boy Scouts of America an organization with the conviction, honor, and character that serves as a model for every American.
As you're aware, a new proposal indicates that the Boy Scouts of America may revoke the longstanding policy of safeguarding Scouts by restricting homosexuals from holding leadership positions over boys. For decades, your national organization has kept the interest of the boys it serves as the focus of all its actions. No matter what, the Boy Scouts of America could be counted upon to do the right thing and not yield to any social pressure, and has thus far stood strong.
Please do not jeopardize the safety and moral integrity of Scouting in the interest of social activism. The proposal to relegate the decision on homosexual leaders to local chartered organizations sends the wrong signal from the national body: that political correctness ultimately triumphs over character.
Please retain the current long-held and time-tested policy regarding homosexual leadership and membership. America stands with you. Lead the way. Please stand strong.
Thank you, and God bless you.
That thought process, that NOT having homosexual leaders is somehow protecting these kids? With the rampant sexual abuse that goes on there?
There are no words that accurately conveys how much I despise people that think like the person who wrote that email. ::runs to eat Girl Scout cookies:
I think that the Boy Scouts are very regulated. There are rules about who can sleep together in tents (age wise), there are rules about showering. The boy scouts don't want to be sued. Allowing gay leaders opens a can of worms that it doesn't seem like they want to open.
I think that the Boy Scouts are very regulated. There are rules about who can sleep together in tents (age wise), there are rules about showering. The boy scouts don't want to be sued. Allowing gay leaders opens a can of worms that it doesn't seem like they want to open.
I think that the Boy Scouts are very regulated. There are rules about who can sleep together in tents (age wise), there are rules about showering. The boy scouts don't want to be sued. Allowing gay leaders opens a can of worms that it doesn't seem like they want to open.
No it doesn't. There are gay teachers, gay coaches, gay church youth leaders, and I don't think there is any evidence that they are more likely to molest young boys. It's hateful attitudes like yours that vilify men who want to be positive role models for children. Not all gay men are predators, but the FRC sure has convinced you otherwise.
I think that the Boy Scouts are very regulated. There are rules about who can sleep together in tents (age wise), there are rules about showering. The boy scouts don't want to be sued. Allowing gay leaders opens a can of worms that it doesn't seem like they want to open.
No it doesn't. There are gay teachers, gay coaches, gay church youth leaders, and I don't think there is any evidence that they are more likely to molest young boys. It's hateful attitudes like yours that vilify men who want to be positive role models for children. Not all gay men are predators, but the FRC sure has convinced you otherwise.
exactly.
I'll add that I went to the Cub Scout intro meeting last year. They had pretty strict rules for camping etc where parents/relative had to come/share a tent (at least with the cubs).
I think that the Boy Scouts are very regulated. There are rules about who can sleep together in tents (age wise), there are rules about showering. The boy scouts don't want to be sued. Allowing gay leaders opens a can of worms that it doesn't seem like they want to open.
No it doesn't. There are gay teachers, gay coaches, gay church youth leaders, and I don't think there is any evidence that they are more likely to molest young boys. It's hateful attitudes like yours that vilify men who want to be positive role models for children. Not all gay men are predators, but the FRC sure has convinced you otherwise.
I am simply saying that the Boy Scouts have many rules in place to protect themselves from lawsuits. Not just protecting against the gays, but also against the straights, adults, women. Many types of people.
No it doesn't. There are gay teachers, gay coaches, gay church youth leaders, and I don't think there is any evidence that they are more likely to molest young boys. It's hateful attitudes like yours that vilify men who want to be positive role models for children. Not all gay men are predators, but the FRC sure has convinced you otherwise.
I am simply saying that the Boy Scouts have many rules in place to protect themselves from lawsuits. Not just protecting against the gays, but also against the straights, adults, women. Many types of people.
Ok, but the Boy Scouts aren't banning all adults. They're banning gays specifically. If you're trying to argue that their rules protect the scouts from misconduct by adults in general, why would there continue to be a ban on gay troop leaders?
I think that the Boy Scouts are very regulated. There are rules about who can sleep together in tents (age wise), there are rules about showering. The boy scouts don't want to be sued. Allowing gay leaders opens a can of worms that it doesn't seem like they want to open.
What can of worms would that be?
It opens them up to another whole range of lawsuits.
Imagine a parent that is against this proposed policy, or a teenager. They could claim, fact or not, that there were inappropriate things going on in the tents or in the showers, and sue the heck out of BSA. The same thing could happen to a woman or to an older boy and a younger boy. But there are rules in place to hopefully prevent this from happening.
It opens them up to another whole range of lawsuits.
Imagine a parent that is against this proposed policy, or a teenager. They could claim, fact or not, that there were inappropriate things going on in the tents or in the showers, and sue the heck out of BSA. The same thing could happen to a woman or to an older boy and a younger boy. But there are rules in place to hopefully prevent this from happening.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
the Girl Scouts are completely inclusive and no can of worms has been opened that I'm aware of.
the scenario you are describing could happen whether or not they allow gay members and leaders. what you are saying is completely without merit.
It opens them up to another whole range of lawsuits.
Imagine a parent that is against this proposed policy, or a teenager. They could claim, fact or not, that there were inappropriate things going on in the tents or in the showers, and sue the heck out of BSA. The same thing could happen to a woman or to an older boy and a younger boy. But there are rules in place to hopefully prevent this from happening.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
the Girl Scouts are completely inclusive and no can of worms has been opened that I'm aware of.
the scenario you are describing could happen whether or not they allow gay members and leaders. what you are saying is completely without merit.
You don't think people would look twice at a dad sharing a tent with a friend of his daughter? I would.
You don't think people would look twice at a dad sharing a tent with a friend of his daughter? I would.
I don't even know what you are saying here.
If the Girl Scouts were camping and a dad went along and shared a tent with his daughter and her friend. Don't you think people would give that a second look? I know I would.
If the Girl Scouts were camping and a dad went along and shared a tent with his daughter and her friend. Don't you think people would give that a second look? I know I would.
I went on 2 camping trips the 1 year I was a GS. One was father/daughter one was mother/daughter. BOTH times the parents slept in separate tents from the kids.
If the Girl Scouts were camping and a dad went along and shared a tent with his daughter and her friend. Don't you think people would give that a second look? I know I would.
I think you have issues. And I don't really see what this has to do with the Boy Scout's discriminatory policies.
But for the sake of argument, no, if I had a daughter I would not have a problem with her sleeping in a tent with her friend and her friend's dad as long as I knew the dad. Call me crazy, but I don't think every adult male is a Lester the Molester.
If the Girl Scouts were camping and a dad went along and shared a tent with his daughter and her friend. Don't you think people would give that a second look? I know I would.
I think you have issues. And I don't really see what this has to do with the Boy Scout's discriminatory policies.
But for the sake of argument, no, if I had a daughter I would not have a problem with her sleeping in a tent with her friend and her friend's dad as long as I knew the dad. Call me crazy, but I don't think every adult male is a Lester the Molester.
Prohibiting gay Scouts has not protected the BSA in anyway, as it is currently facing investigation over a sex abuse cover up of epic proportions. The BSA sex abuse scandal hasn't received nearly as much press as the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal has, but it's definitely of a severity that warrants mentioning the two together.
This morning on NPR, I heard someone from a Texas "family values" interest group bemoaning that the Boy Scouts should not change their policies due to pressure from "corporate America" and "homosexual activists." He cited the fact that the BSA had won a SCOTUS case. I wanted to throw things. Yes, SCOTUS ruled that the Scouts don't have to include gay members and leaders. But that doesn't change the rights of individuals and organizations to stop financially supporting BSA in light of discriminatory policies.
Ugh what drives me nuts about Boy Scouts (and Soozy) is that they seem to think gay men like all things male. No. Gay men like adult men. Gay women like adult women. Pedophiles like children. There is no correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia.
Ugh what drives me nuts about Boy Scouts (and Soozy) is that they seem to think gay men like all things male. No. Gay men like adult men. Gay women like adult women. Pedophiles like children. There is no correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia.
I think that the Boy Scouts are very regulated. There are rules about who can sleep together in tents (age wise), there are rules about showering. The boy scouts don't want to be sued. Allowing gay leaders opens a can of worms that it doesn't seem like they want to open.
This is not at all what it's about.
To the letter in the OP- this is not a "long standing" tradition. When my husband was growing up in Scouts, it was well known that there were gay men in the organization. It just wasn't talked about- kind of DADT- but everyone quietly accepted it. This was south Texas, so I imagine troops in bluer states didn't even keep it under the rug. This move to making it an institutionalized policy is being pushed primarily by the Mormon church.
This morning on NPR, I heard someone from a Texas "family values" interest group bemoaning that the Boy Scouts should not change their policies due to pressure from "corporate America" and "homosexual activists." He cited the fact that the BSA had won a SCOTUS case. I wanted to throw things. Yes, SCOTUS ruled that the Scouts don't have to include gay members and leaders. But that doesn't change the rights of individuals and organizations to stop financially supporting BSA in light of discriminatory policies.