Boy Scouts reviewing Ban on Gays ...

[LA Ute]

Think again... those BSA badges are expensive. Su, just buy some cheap used ones off ebay or something. e.g. here is a whole set for $4...



http://www.ebay.com/itm/Boy-Scout-Ra...#ht_500wt_1189

Probably true. Besides, at the Scout Shop SU would have to produce evidence that he really earned the badges.

[Northwestcoug]

Our council is trying to come up with a policy that will allow us to be gay-friendly and still not get kicked out of the BSA. Seems to me that ought to be possible.

What I've never understood is why this even comes up. I've had kids in my troops over the years who seemed to be gay and later came out, but while they were in the troop it wasn't an issue. In most Scout troops leaders are not talking about their sexual orientation or conduct around the boys, and the boys don't talk about such matters - not around the campfire, at least. Most 12-16 year old boys are not sexually active anyway. So I don't see a problem with gay scouts or gay leaders, as long as they're not acting out. Hetero leaders and Scouts, as well as gay leaders and Scouts, should be booted if they are acting out sexually or talking about sexual matters with the boys. That's how it seems to me, anyway.

Don't ask, don't tell, eh?

[RobinFinderson]

To the BSA:

I return my second class rank and fishing merit badge (I don't have them any longer but please expunge my records). I wish I had made Eagle so I could resign from that. I will not hold awards from a bigoted organization.

This was x-tra funny.

[Goatnapper'96]

To the BSA:

I return my second class rank and fishing merit badge (I don't have them any longer but please expunge my records). I wish I had made Eagle so I could resign from that. I will not hold awards from a bigoted organization.

This is one of the funniest things ever posted here.

[LA Ute]

Don't ask, don't tell, eh?

I'll bet that has in effect been the policy in BSA councils all over the USA for years now. Can you think of any setting in which adult Scout leaders would or should be talking with the boys in their troop about sexual practices? I'd extend that to Girls Scouts too. My point is that the subject never comes up in leader interactions with boys, and I don't think it should.

[Northwestcoug]

I'll bet that has in effect been the policy in BSA councils all over the USA for years now. Can you think of any setting in which adult Scout leaders would or should be talking with the boys in their troop about sexual practices? I'd extend that to Girls Scouts too. My point is that the subject never comes up in leader interactions with boys, and I don't think it should.

I don't think there's too many people who want adult leaders quizzing youth about sexuality. From my point of view, they want kids to feel comfortable and open about who they are, and not have to hide it to stay in an organization.

[LA Ute]

I don't think there's too many people who want adult leaders quizzing youth about sexuality. From my point of view, they want kids to feel comfortable and open about who they are, and not have to hide it to stay in an organization.

Of course not. I am not talking about "quizzing" youth about sexuality. I'm talking about what leaders tell the boys about themselves. It seems to me it would be a very rare circumstance (to say the least) when an adult Scout leader would appropriately be saying anything to the boys in his or her troop about the leader's sexual orientation or practices, whether he or she is gay or straight. How would that come up?

I'm trying to explain why I don't think gay leaders should be a big issue. Adult leaders, gay or straight, just need to behave appropriately. A straight leader who share details of his sex life with the boys in his troop ought to be canned, just as a gay leader who does so should.

[PaloAltoCougar]

This is one of the funniest things ever posted here.

Agreed. The Fishing merit badge reference was especially nice. One imagines the dismay this will evoke at BSA HQ.

[TripletDaddy]

Of course not. I am not talking about "quizzing" youth about sexuality. I'm talking about what leaders tell the boys about themselves. It seems to me it would be a very rare circumstance (to say the least) when an adult Scout leader would appropriately be saying anything to the boys in his or her troop about the leader's sexual orientation or practices, whether he or she is gay or straight. How would that come up?

I'm trying to explain why I don't think gay leaders should be a big issue. Adult leaders, gay or straight, just need to behave appropriately. A straight leader who share details of his sex life with the boys in his troop ought to be canned, just as a gay leader who does so should.

Sure, because homosexuals can only talk about their boyfriend/domestic partner in a sexual way. If there is a court of honor or other family gathering and a gay scout leader brings his companion, they will probably turn it into something sexual. If there is a pinewood derby and all the families come to watch, the scoutmaster will probably have to do everything in his power to refrain from talking about sex in front of the kids with his domestic partner. If there is a father sons campout and two dads in the family, there will probably be a lot of sex in the tent. I can't imagine scenarios in which a homosexual might make known his homosexuality outside of a sexual context.

Like I said, you started out strong, then crashed and burned. But I still think you are making slow progress.

[Northwestcoug]

Sure, because homosexuals can only talk about their boyfriend/domestic partner in a sexual way. If there is a court of honor or other family gathering and a gay scout leader brings his companion, they will probably turn it into something sexual. If there is a pinewood derby and all the families come to watch, the scoutmaster will probably have to do everything in his power to refrain from talking about sex in front of the kids with his domestic partner. If there is a father sons campout and two dads in the family, there will probably be a lot of sex in the tent. I can't imagine scenarios in which a homosexual might make known his homosexuality outside of a sexual context.

Like I said, you started out strong, then crashed and burned. But I still think you are making slow progress.

[LA Ute]

I am sure DDD appreciates the applause, but do you have a serious response to my questions?

[TripletDaddy]

LA Ute can't think of many ways by which a scout leader's orientation would come up, save the scout leader talk directly and/or explicitly about sexual behavior.

[LA Ute]

I've always taken he position that sexual orientation is irrelevant to Scouting. The problem is that there are influential voices on both sides of the issue that want to make it relevant. The Boy Scouts represent mainstream Americana - motherhood, apple pie, etc. For gay life to receive Scouting's imprimatur would be a significant development. Both sides know this, hence the intensity of the battle, which is about anything but Scouting. We ought to be able to work this out, but that will require compromise on both sides. Just my opinion.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I've always taken he position that sexual orientations is irrelevant to Scouting. *The problem is that there are influential voices on both sides of the issue that want to make it relevant.

The BSA makes it relevant by banning gay leaders. Not sure where you are going with this point. Gays aren't asking for a gay sex merit badge for crying out loud.

*The Boy Scouts represent mainstream Americana - motherhood, apple pie, etc. *For gay life to receive Scouting's imprimatur would be a significant development. *Both sides know this, hence the intensity of the battle, which is about anything but Scouting. *We ought to be able to work this out, but that will require compromise on both sides. *Just my opinion.

That's an interesting point. What kind of compromise would be expected of the gay scouts and leaders? All they are asking for now is inclusion/non-discrimination. Period.

[Tim]

I've always taken he position that sexual orientations is irrelevant to Scouting. *The problem is that there are influential voices on both sides of the issue that want to make it relevant. *The Boy Scouts represent mainstream Americana - motherhood, apple pie, etc. *For gay life to receive Scouting's imprimatur would be a significant development. *Both sides know this, hence the intensity of the battle, which is about anything but Scouting. *We ought to be able to work this out, but that will require compromise on both sides. *Just my opinion.

What would a reasonable compromise be in your mind? If you were the person invited to propose the compromise, what would you bring to the table? I can imagine, for example, a compromise that says that the following:

* Homosexuals can serve as adult leaders in Scout troops as long as they don't discuss matters of sexuality with other adult leaders nor with the Scouts themselves. No advocacy for certain lifestyles, only a focus on Scouting activities and the qualities found in the Boy Scout Law.

* Scouts who are homosexuals can participate in Scouting so long as they don't discuss matters of sexuality with other Scouts nor with their adult leaders, and instead only focus on Scouting activities and in developing the qualities found in the Boy Scout Law.

That's a completely neutral compromise that removes sexuality from the Scouting equation altogether. Only... that's actually the position espoused by pretty much everyone opposed to the current policy of the BSA. You mention a need for compromise but one side is already at the compromise position. That's what makes the position of those who support the current policy seem so disingenuous.

I understand that the BSA is a private organization and can do whatever they want and hire whoever they blah blah blah, but this is no longer a question of what they can do but of what they should do. If they're afraid of losing support of organizations like the Church then they need to be more transparent about that whole equation, because even though the Church administration might suggest that they're out of the BSA if homosexuals are openly allowed, I can't imagine many members of the Church who wouldn't support the "compromise" I listed above.