EO is just a fountain of information lol
Will the Boy Scouts be Obama's next target for destruction?
- Thread starter aristotle
- Start date
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
A deviant is one who deviates from the norm; a sexual deviant is one who does so in the area of sex, which would make him a pervert.
Actually, it does. Less than 3% of the population commits 40% of the molestations. And if sodomites ceased molesting tonight, it wouldn't change the fact--FACT--that they engage in unnatural, perverse, harmful, and unsanitary sex acts.
...
...and simultaneously a fact. Believe something that's right, and your belief is a fact.
Says who?
Actually, it doesn't. I've already pointed out that the majority of molestations are committed by heterosexuals. Add in repeat offenses and our skews the correlation between the numbers.
The broader, more traditional definition of sodomy includes all unnatural sex acts between any partners. Today, when one uses the term sodomite or sodomy, one is referring to the specific set of unnatural sex acts involved ingotry.
So, is oral sex between heterosexuals sodomy? What about oral sex between a Boy Scout and a Girl Scout. Are these acts considered sinful?
What is the norm where perversion is involved? What is your definition of perversion?
It's nice in this day and age to be able to stand up and cheer an organization that fights for its core values and principles in spite of opposition from the usual PC crowd and the mainstream media. Having spent quite a few years in the Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts and a couple more in the Explorers, it's easy to see why they insist on a zero tolerance policy towards gay members and especially homosexual leaders. For those who still don't understand this attitude I would suggest they google Jerry Sandusky.
Oh for Pete's sake Moot. Lol. Will you put the poking stick away
LOL.
OK, I can see the potential for confusion or it being taken out of context. I was asking Turtle if he and or his children were active in the boy scouts as members. Obviously I would be safe assuming Turtle would most likely be a scout leader.
Anyway He understood the Question.
A man in Murray named Sid Easley is a respected attorney and former district judge. He was (maybe still is, I'm not sure) on the school board. My mom was a legal secretary for several years and then became the Secretary to the Superintendent of the Murray Public Schools. In those positions she had many dealings with Sid Easley. It's a small town and everybody knows everybody. Because Sid knew I had been a Scout in the Dan Beard Council (an important one) and that I was a computer geek who had some some things for his office and for the School Board, I was asked to help do some research on the Boy Scouts as part of his efforts to have the National Scouting Museum reopened in Murray.
The original museum in New Brunswick was closed in 1979 for several reasons, and in 1981 Sid got the idea to bring it to Murray, and the Land Between the Lakes area, which seemed then and still seems today an ideal place for scouting, and for the museum. Scouting is very big here, what with the lakes (Kentucky Lake and Lake Barkley) and the Land Between the Lakes (LBL), which is a Merit Badge heaven. I did a lot, lot, lot of research, nearly two years worth. The Internet didn't exist then like it is now, so it was mostly old school research with some computer research added in. It was enough to write a book. The research and the many selfless efforts of others helped convince the National Council to reopen the museum in Murray. At the time the National headquarters was still in New Jersey.
The museum proper opened in 1986 on the campus of Murray State University, and was awesome. There was also a museum annex in the LBL which was also awesome. The number of visitors was predicted to be about 120,000 a year, and it averaged between 80,000 and 90,000 a year for many years, ten straight years of more than 80,000 annually. Some days there were as few as 50 visitors, but other days, especially in the summer, there were more than 1000 going through the museum. That's a lot of people for a town of 15,000 that's not even serviced by an Interstate.
But in 1997 or 1998 the National Council moved their headquarters to Irving, TX and wanted the museum once again at their headquarters. There was a lot of politics being played, and while the National Council didn't openly discourage visitors to the museum, they stopped actively promoting it as field trips for Scouts and their families. They wanted it in Irving. Once attendance dropped below 25,000 annually for two years in a row, that gave them the right to move it, which is exactly what they did. There were other factors involved, too, not the least of which was funding issues, as a portion of the museum was tax payer funded as part of the State University System, and the budget for it got cut considerably.
Anyway, because I was so intimately involved in so much of the research, I can wax poetic about Scouting and its history. Well, maybe not poetic, but I sure can wax about it.
But because I know the history so well, and was a Cub Scout and a Boy Scout myself for 12 years of my life, it chaps my butt when I read things in places like the San Francisco Chronicle that the Boy Scouts are "maintaining their indefensible policy" of excluding gays, because it's quite defensible. Despite the Boy Scouts being founded at a time when the Progressive Movement was at its strongest in America, it was not founded to be a progressive, liberal organization. It was founded to give young men the training they need in character, citizenship, mental and physical fitness, as well as to develop personal religious values, learn the principles of American heritage and government, in order to become successful adults and leaders.
The progressive Movement was in response to the rapid modernization brought on by large corporations, railroads, manufacturing, and most importantly many families moving from the farms into larger cities. The Scouts was formed out of concern that that young men, the leaders of the future, were no longer learning patriotism, individualism and the values of leadership and citizenship. The early Boy Scouts had a big todo with the Labor Unions, for example, because of Scouting's emphasis on being loyal to an employer. The Scouts bent, but didn't quite buckle, and changed their Oath and Law to satisfy big unions, who were quite powerful at that time. Out of the Progressive Movement the YMCA was an early promoter of reforms for young men with a focus on social welfare and and programs of mental, physical, social and religious development. So it's no surprise that the founding of the Boy Scouts was connected to the YMCA.
The Boy Scouts of America is not primarily a religious organization by any stretch, even Troops which are exclusively Jewish, Muslim or Christian. They are Christian-based, because that's how they were founded, but they were founded on religious values, and not necessarily the values of any particular religion. It's the values of religious teachings that is important, because those are the values which enable young men to become successful members and leaders in society as adults. They absolutely will not discriminate on the basis of religion or creed, except that you have to have or develop some kind of religious values, and agnostic doesn't count. Neither does anything that goes against those religious values, such as homosexuality, or stealing, or lying, or a whole host of other things. Just because gays want in, and they want in really, really badly, doesn't mean they should be allowed in, anymore than a thief or a liar is gonna be let in.
I read the other day where someone said that the exclusion of gays by the Boy Scouts is a breach of "to help other people at all times". Unbelievable. Waaaa waaaa waaaa.
Just a couple of added notes, since this isn't a very long post already. No, I don't have kids, and I'm not a Scout Leader.
The notion that homosexuals tend to be a higher percentage of child molesters is purely a myth, and is not backed up by any credible studies whatsoever. In fact, most child molesters truly have no adult sexual orientation, because they are only attracted to children, regardless of gender. The truth is pedophilia is a separate orientation from homosexuality and heterosexuality, and that the vast majority of molesters who target boys have either no interest in mature males and are thus not homosexual at all, or are heterosexual men who are attracted to the feminine characteristics of young boys and it's hard to truly classify them as heterosexual, either.
Members of disliked minority groups are often stereotyped as representing a danger to the majority's most vulnerable members. For example, Jews in the Middle Ages were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Black men in the United States were often lynched after being falsely accused of raping White women. In a similar fashion, gay people have often been portrayed as a threat to children. In all three of those examples, the assertions were incorrect. Homosexuals will try to tell you that 1 in 10 people are homosexual. It's actually between 1 and 2 percent. They inflate the numbers to gain legitimacy and wider acceptance. The same holds true to those who hate gay people, and inflate the numbers of the percentage of gays who molest children. Of course, homosexuals blame heterosexuals with inflated numbers as being the most common child molester.
Because homosexuals are only 1-2% of the population, the math dictates that any homosexuals that molest children will result in a far higher percentage within that community than it could possibly be within the community of heterosexuals. All of the impressive research data out there about child molestation and homosexuality being strongly correlated isn't necessarily fabricated, because the statistics are what they are, but it is skewed and highly flawed in making conclusions when considering that there are far less homosexuals out there in the general population than heterosexuals. But if you break it down properly, the percentages of heterosexuals and homosexuals who molest children are about the same. The problem comes when a pedophile, which is an orientation unto itself, molests a child of the same sex, and gets lumped in with homosexuals.
People who prey on children to satisfy their sexually deviant needs are complex and diverse, having a propensity to gravitate towards young, impressionable, easy to manipulate youths. They don't get off on adults because they lack social skills, fail miserably to circumnavigate in society, and can't relate to their own age groups. These people can be Scoutmasters, regardless of whether they are gay or straight.
The notion that eliminating or preventing gay Scout leaders will result in children not being molested is a logical fallacy in the extreme, and the Boy Scouts of America doesn't subscribe to such nonsense. That's not the issue at all. Homosexuals aren't excluded from Scouting because they might have homosexual sex with other Scouts or molest children, they are excluded because they can't reconcile their thoughts and deeds with the Scout Oath and Scout Law. It's really that simple.
The original museum in New Brunswick was closed in 1979 for several reasons, and in 1981 Sid got the idea to bring it to Murray, and the Land Between the Lakes area, which seemed then and still seems today an ideal place for scouting, and for the museum. Scouting is very big here, what with the lakes (Kentucky Lake and Lake Barkley) and the Land Between the Lakes (LBL), which is a Merit Badge heaven. I did a lot, lot, lot of research, nearly two years worth. The Internet didn't exist then like it is now, so it was mostly old school research with some computer research added in. It was enough to write a book. The research and the many selfless efforts of others helped convince the National Council to reopen the museum in Murray. At the time the National headquarters was still in New Jersey.
The museum proper opened in 1986 on the campus of Murray State University, and was awesome. There was also a museum annex in the LBL which was also awesome. The number of visitors was predicted to be about 120,000 a year, and it averaged between 80,000 and 90,000 a year for many years, ten straight years of more than 80,000 annually. Some days there were as few as 50 visitors, but other days, especially in the summer, there were more than 1000 going through the museum. That's a lot of people for a town of 15,000 that's not even serviced by an Interstate.
But in 1997 or 1998 the National Council moved their headquarters to Irving, TX and wanted the museum once again at their headquarters. There was a lot of politics being played, and while the National Council didn't openly discourage visitors to the museum, they stopped actively promoting it as field trips for Scouts and their families. They wanted it in Irving. Once attendance dropped below 25,000 annually for two years in a row, that gave them the right to move it, which is exactly what they did. There were other factors involved, too, not the least of which was funding issues, as a portion of the museum was tax payer funded as part of the State University System, and the budget for it got cut considerably.
Anyway, because I was so intimately involved in so much of the research, I can wax poetic about Scouting and its history. Well, maybe not poetic, but I sure can wax about it.
But because I know the history so well, and was a Cub Scout and a Boy Scout myself for 12 years of my life, it chaps my butt when I read things in places like the San Francisco Chronicle that the Boy Scouts are "maintaining their indefensible policy" of excluding gays, because it's quite defensible. Despite the Boy Scouts being founded at a time when the Progressive Movement was at its strongest in America, it was not founded to be a progressive, liberal organization. It was founded to give young men the training they need in character, citizenship, mental and physical fitness, as well as to develop personal religious values, learn the principles of American heritage and government, in order to become successful adults and leaders.
The progressive Movement was in response to the rapid modernization brought on by large corporations, railroads, manufacturing, and most importantly many families moving from the farms into larger cities. The Scouts was formed out of concern that that young men, the leaders of the future, were no longer learning patriotism, individualism and the values of leadership and citizenship. The early Boy Scouts had a big todo with the Labor Unions, for example, because of Scouting's emphasis on being loyal to an employer. The Scouts bent, but didn't quite buckle, and changed their Oath and Law to satisfy big unions, who were quite powerful at that time. Out of the Progressive Movement the YMCA was an early promoter of reforms for young men with a focus on social welfare and and programs of mental, physical, social and religious development. So it's no surprise that the founding of the Boy Scouts was connected to the YMCA.
The Boy Scouts of America is not primarily a religious organization by any stretch, even Troops which are exclusively Jewish, Muslim or Christian. They are Christian-based, because that's how they were founded, but they were founded on religious values, and not necessarily the values of any particular religion. It's the values of religious teachings that is important, because those are the values which enable young men to become successful members and leaders in society as adults. They absolutely will not discriminate on the basis of religion or creed, except that you have to have or develop some kind of religious values, and agnostic doesn't count. Neither does anything that goes against those religious values, such as homosexuality, or stealing, or lying, or a whole host of other things. Just because gays want in, and they want in really, really badly, doesn't mean they should be allowed in, anymore than a thief or a liar is gonna be let in.
I read the other day where someone said that the exclusion of gays by the Boy Scouts is a breach of "to help other people at all times". Unbelievable. Waaaa waaaa waaaa.
Just a couple of added notes, since this isn't a very long post already. No, I don't have kids, and I'm not a Scout Leader.
The notion that homosexuals tend to be a higher percentage of child molesters is purely a myth, and is not backed up by any credible studies whatsoever. In fact, most child molesters truly have no adult sexual orientation, because they are only attracted to children, regardless of gender. The truth is pedophilia is a separate orientation from homosexuality and heterosexuality, and that the vast majority of molesters who target boys have either no interest in mature males and are thus not homosexual at all, or are heterosexual men who are attracted to the feminine characteristics of young boys and it's hard to truly classify them as heterosexual, either.
Members of disliked minority groups are often stereotyped as representing a danger to the majority's most vulnerable members. For example, Jews in the Middle Ages were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Black men in the United States were often lynched after being falsely accused of raping White women. In a similar fashion, gay people have often been portrayed as a threat to children. In all three of those examples, the assertions were incorrect. Homosexuals will try to tell you that 1 in 10 people are homosexual. It's actually between 1 and 2 percent. They inflate the numbers to gain legitimacy and wider acceptance. The same holds true to those who hate gay people, and inflate the numbers of the percentage of gays who molest children. Of course, homosexuals blame heterosexuals with inflated numbers as being the most common child molester.
Because homosexuals are only 1-2% of the population, the math dictates that any homosexuals that molest children will result in a far higher percentage within that community than it could possibly be within the community of heterosexuals. All of the impressive research data out there about child molestation and homosexuality being strongly correlated isn't necessarily fabricated, because the statistics are what they are, but it is skewed and highly flawed in making conclusions when considering that there are far less homosexuals out there in the general population than heterosexuals. But if you break it down properly, the percentages of heterosexuals and homosexuals who molest children are about the same. The problem comes when a pedophile, which is an orientation unto itself, molests a child of the same sex, and gets lumped in with homosexuals.
People who prey on children to satisfy their sexually deviant needs are complex and diverse, having a propensity to gravitate towards young, impressionable, easy to manipulate youths. They don't get off on adults because they lack social skills, fail miserably to circumnavigate in society, and can't relate to their own age groups. These people can be Scoutmasters, regardless of whether they are gay or straight.
The notion that eliminating or preventing gay Scout leaders will result in children not being molested is a logical fallacy in the extreme, and the Boy Scouts of America doesn't subscribe to such nonsense. That's not the issue at all. Homosexuals aren't excluded from Scouting because they might have homosexual sex with other Scouts or molest children, they are excluded because they can't reconcile their thoughts and deeds with the Scout Oath and Scout Law. It's really that simple.
It is refreshing to see Scouting hold fast to their founding principles in spite of tremendous public pressure to alter their core beliefs. It must annoy Obama and like-minded social engineers to no end. Gay and lesbian groups have managed in many cities to prevent Scouting from using any public venue, such as a library, school grounds or public park for Scouting activities. It is fascinating that the KKK can easily get a permit to hold a parade or public protest, but Boy Scouts aren't allowed to hold Scouting activities in many public facilities. Scouting families pay taxes, too.
The mish-mash confluence of being quasi-faith based and upholding virtues seen as exclusionary to some leaves Scouting as a pinata ripe for beating by the reactionary Left. Tremendous and unrelenting pressure to change will be brought to bear. Is Scouting one of the last bastions of traditional values?
The mish-mash confluence of being quasi-faith based and upholding virtues seen as exclusionary to some leaves Scouting as a pinata ripe for beating by the reactionary Left. Tremendous and unrelenting pressure to change will be brought to bear. Is Scouting one of the last bastions of traditional values?
In this political climate, a lot of people would probably be dumbfounded to learn that the Honorary President of the Boy Scouts of America is Barack Obama.
But that shouldn't come as a surprise, since every president since BSA's founding as held that honor.
It's amazing how many of the US Presidents of the last 100 years have been involved in Scouting, either as a Cub Scout of Boy Scout, a Scout leaders, or had sons in the Scouts. One president, Roosevelt, was even an active Scout leader at the time he was elected. Kennedy was the first Scout elected president, and Ford was the first Eagle Scout. Ever since the first National Scout Jamboree, the president has visited and addressed the Troops at the event, held every four years. Well, except Obama - he sent a videotape. He's a busy man.
Romney is on record supporting gays in the Boy Scouts, but also feels the BSA should decide what it wants to do on the issue.
But that shouldn't come as a surprise, since every president since BSA's founding as held that honor.
It's amazing how many of the US Presidents of the last 100 years have been involved in Scouting, either as a Cub Scout of Boy Scout, a Scout leaders, or had sons in the Scouts. One president, Roosevelt, was even an active Scout leader at the time he was elected. Kennedy was the first Scout elected president, and Ford was the first Eagle Scout. Ever since the first National Scout Jamboree, the president has visited and addressed the Troops at the event, held every four years. Well, except Obama - he sent a videotape. He's a busy man.
Romney is on record supporting gays in the Boy Scouts, but also feels the BSA should decide what it wants to do on the issue.
It just stands to reason that Obama would NOT attend the Jamboree. It would be embarrassing for him. He would be surrounded by cub scouts and boy scouts. MOST of those boys would be more of a man at their age than Obama will EVER be.
The other reason Obama will not go is that there are just not enough potential votes there.
Kids who are in scouting, generally speaking, have parents who care about them. They are not as likely to end up as Obama bums and their parents are more likely to EARN their way in life. Neither of which bodes well for Obama. He depends on needy, dependent people to be elected.
The other reason Obama will not go is that there are just not enough potential votes there.
Kids who are in scouting, generally speaking, have parents who care about them. They are not as likely to end up as Obama bums and their parents are more likely to EARN their way in life. Neither of which bodes well for Obama. He depends on needy, dependent people to be elected.
The main thing about this is that they are afraid that the 'Gay' leader and or another scout will try and make all others into their way and lifestyle. I do know a few people of different sexual oreintation, and they do not try and change me. Also this also applies to and thing including religion and beleifes.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
Romney on both sides of an issue? I gotta lay down.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
Tapatalk doesn't have a LIKE button, but consider your post "liked." In fact, if there were an award for best post in a thread, that paragraph would be the winner, right there.
No, wait, maybe that para is the winner...
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
I before E, dude.
No, the issue is two-fold:
gotry is immoral and therefore sodomites cannot be good role models for the boys, and cannot honestly take the scout oaths. Second, children must be protected from sexual deviants.
paullud
Veteran Expediter
He is just saying that he feels personally that gays should be allowed in but legally he knows it should be left to the BSA. That is EXACTLY what I want from a politician, a politician that doesn't let personal feelings get in the way and follows the law.
Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums