Gays in the Boy Scouts: US child militant organization should follow trend says chief

I personally believe gayness is a part of nature. After the initial shock and surprise, man has found many animals expressing their love in various directions. I have previously said that if little animals don't do it, that it is not natural. Well... It appears they do... And now the US militant organization of child military scout volunteers, might accept that children can be gay too...

Let them not feel that they are outcasts from popular society.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...uts-board-member-opposes-anti-gay-policy?lite

A Boy Scouts of America board member said a policy that bans gay scouts and leaders is not one he would “personally endorse” and he was working within the organization to “encourage dialogue” on it, the latest comments in a debate(*)over the group’s membership rules.

James Turley, global chairman and CEO of consulting and tax firm Ernst & Young, said late Tuesday that his experience had led him “to believe that an inclusive environment” was “important throughout our society.”
“I support the meaningful work of the Boy Scouts in preparing young people for adventure, leadership, learning and service, however the membership policy is not one I would personally endorse,” he said in a statement first reported by CNBC. “ … I intend to continue to work from within the BSA Board to actively encourage dialogue and sustainable progress.”

His comments came after Jennifer Tyrrell, who was ousted from her post as a Tiger Cubs’ den leader in April because she is a lesbian, launched an online petition calling for the BSA board members like Turley, who head companies committed to gay rights, to speak out on the issue.
But another CEO and chairman named in the petition, AT&T’s Randall Stephenson, did not go as far as Turley.

 

Not going to happen. Why would the Boy Scouts stop discriminating when they've won pretty much every legal challenge they've faced?

Maybe if the organization can be wrested from the hands of the Mormons, but I rather doubt it even then.

I was in the Scouts (though I never made it up to the level of Boy Scout, dropped out as a Webelo). Back then, it wasn't so much a religious organization.

 

Why would they even care if someone was gay? Let the best people for the job do it.

 

I would absolutely agree with you, if there was "don't ask, don't tell" policy... worked for the army, until liberals demanded more equality. And why would anyone publicize their sexual inclinations while being in the boyscouts? Beats me...

 

The Boy Scouts are not militant.

buy a dictionary.

 

Because it doesn't matter if you're gay or not.

 

The Boy Scouts have been dealing with lawsuits from abuse coverups and losing in court. There was recently one case in Oregon. Maybe they are rethinking their stance.

 

Scout is a military term.

Regardless... I do know that the term does not define the organization's actual behaviour.

If I thought as such I would be delusioned as to whether the United States is a democratic republic comprised of people with a freedom of speech, conservatives and liberals that declare legitimate wars and do not torture prisoners of war.

However I know that in America these words do not mean what they say.

 

Its ironic that you are comparing homosexuals with animals.

Your right, they are very similar.

 

Worked for whom?

DADT was a terrible policy that required servicemember not merely to stay silent (a bad enough double standard since heterosexual servicemembers faced no such requirement), but forced them to actively hide their orientation and even lie about it. Do you have any notion what this involves? It's not just stuff like not talking about it. It's having to completely 'sanitize' your entire life to prevent anyone from accidentally finding out. You can't even be seen in public with your partner - something as simple as shopping for groceries together could get you thrown out if someone sees the two of you together and reports it.

Heteros really have no clue what it's like to be forced to live a completely closeted life. There is nothing comparable in their experience. It's demeaning.

 

So now instead your going to force heterosexuals to witness things they find repulsive?

Your logic is laughable. Its ok if you offend them but its not ok if they offend you.

How hypocritical.

 

A couple shopping together is repulsive if they're both of the same sex?

Strawman. I did not say or imply any such thing. No one has any obligation to refrain from offending others by simply living their lives with equal freedom and openness.

Also, you do not speak for all heterosexuals, but only yourself. Perhaps it's news to you, but not everyone who is heterosexual is offended by the existence of same-sex couples.

Why do you think it's fine to be offensive to homosexuals but believe that they should actively hide who they are to keep from offending you?

Seems like your'e the one with the hypocritical double standard.

 

This is what happens when you let homosexuals express themselves. They take it overboard and put everyone's lives in danger. What kind of idiot is gonna raise a queer flag in the middle of a combat zone?

 

Because these people assume that if you are gay, you must be a pedophile.

 

I take it heterosexuals are just incapable, or just too stupid to either close their eyes or look away?

 

What kind of idiot makes sweeping generalizations about an entire demographic?

Oh, and you're ignored henceforth. I will be spending my time on more worthy opponents.

 

Odd ain't it.

 

Imagine how repulsive it is for gay to see heterosexual people holding and kissing eachother in public.

But you don't care as long as you are not the one being offended.

This is very interesting for me, because I was not accepting or understanding of the gay until I became familiar with the good and humerous work on television.

Probably the same is true for many people... What you do not like is what is in your own imagination, really, but when you find 1 very good example you will like them, such as an own family member, childhood friend, or famed television personality.

 

They do - they're bigoted. Check this out:

[video=youtube;ndoP1YW72Zk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndoP1YW72Zk[/video]

 

Any part in particular you want me to look at?

 

That was very interesting.

I watched the entire film.

 

Or the pro-homo people could just start their own organization and allow whoever they want. This is what people do in a free country. Notice how this differs from forcing other people's private groups to adopt your standards. This is exactly why people don't like the gay crowd. It doesn't even have as much to do with their orientation as it does with how pushy they are about making everyone change everything to make them happy.

 

Exactly. Pretty soon they are going to demand that Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny have gay versions also because its discrimination if we don't do it.

How about starting your own gay holiday and getting your own (*)(*)(*)(*) mascot.

 

The whole thing is basically dedicated to the Scouts discriminating against gays, so.. Up to you if you like Penn & Teller and want to learn about that or not!

 

um im hetero sexual im not offended by some 1 being gay far as i can tell offending is fine double standards and exclusion is not