toldailytopic: Should the Boy Scouts of America lift the gay ban and allow homosexual

[Silent Hunter]

The BSA (founded upon Christian values) should not be forced by anyone to accept homosexuals as leaders of their young boys.

Yet, like the military, they've probably been there all along without anyone's knowledge or objection . . . :think:.

 

[gcthomas]

Yet, like the military, they've probably been there all along without anyone's knowledge or objection . . . :think:.

Right. And if the BSA allow homosexual leaders, it will be the result of an internal vote and internal decision. There can be no 'forced' as LKMom uses the word.

 

[Silent Hunter]

Right. And if the BSA allow homosexual leaders, it will be the result of an internal vote and internal decision. There can be no 'forced' as LKMom uses the word.

Well . . . as long as they aren't "forced" to have homosexual leaders. But it's ok if they are there in subterfuge . . . :liberals:.

 

[quip]

Right. And if the BSA allow homosexual leaders, it will be the result of an internal vote and internal decision. There can be no 'forced' as LKMom uses the word.

"forced" can mean different things here, some I agree with others I would tend to side with LK on. For example, if the BSA were "forced" to have gay scout leaders via a government mandate...which might be entitled Effeminate-action. :chuckle:

 

[LKmommy]

Sorry, I must have got confused when you wrote:

.. and when I said that you must know that homosexuals are not generally attracted to children, you wrote:

Easy mistake to make, when you strongly implied that homosexuals are attracted to boys.

If you will clearly state that you don't think that homosexuals are more attracted to boys than heterosexuals are attracted to children of the opposite sex, then I will happily withdraw the accusation of gross distortion.

GC you made this connection. YOU are confusing my words, making assumptions and leaps that I did not make.

Let me clarify clearly for you. I do not condone of men attracted to men being around little boys. Little boys turn into men. Do I want little boys to become gay? No, I don't. Clearly I dont think we agree.

Do I think "gayness" rubs off? You have your opinion and I have mine. Mine is that to be tolerant and accepting on another's deviant and immoral behaviors MAY lead to them thinking it is OK. It is not ok in my world or in any "Christian based" organization. Get it? I have seen research that does not show strong links for homo pedophiles perping against boys, however I do NOT trust just "any research" and that is ONE study of a "sample".

I think this information will come in time after discclosures are made. Not everyone discloses their abuse GC. I am happy if you can yours (if you had any).

I ask plainly, what do know about being violated sexually by a man OR a woman as a child? Do you know the confusion, the guilt, the inward pain they hold? I do not know every child's pain but I can surely imagine.

 

[LKmommy]

Right. And if the BSA allow homosexual leaders, it will be the result of an internal vote and internal decision. There can be no 'forced' as LKMom uses the word.

Yes when outside groups with an agenda come to another organization and demand to be recognized or "let in", I call that a "force".

 

[gcthomas]

GC you made this connection. YOU are confusing my words, making assumptions and leaps that I did not make.

Let me clarify clearly for you. I do not condone of men attracted to men being around little boys. Little boys turn into men. Do I want little boys to become gay? No, I don't. Clearly I dont think we agree.

Do I think "gayness" rubs off? You have your opinion and I have mine. Mine is that to be tolerant and accepting on another's deviant and immoral behaviors MAY lead to them thinking it is OK. It is not ok in my world or in any "Christian based" organization. Get it? I have seen research that does not show strong links for homo pedophiles perping against boys, however I do NOT trust just "any research" and that is ONE study of a "sample".

Thank you, that's clearer now.

The research is stronger than just your one sample. It is consistent that homosexuals are not a special risk for boys. In fact, many homosexuals have more of a maternal instinct that makes them good carers. Also, it is certain that homosexuality is a fundamental requiring of their sexuality, not a lack of moral reasoning. It is not possible to turn a boy into a homosexual if they are not wired that way.

I think this information will come in time after discclosures are made. Not everyone discloses their abuse GC. I am happy if you can yours (if you had any).

I ask plainly, what do know about being violated sexually by a man OR a woman as a child? Do you know the confusion, the guilt, the inward pain they hold? I do not know every child's pain but I can surely imagine.

I work with children, and many have come from awful households. I am quite aware of the trauma that abuse causes, and that most abuse happens in the home and is perpetrated by family members.

Transferring that fear onto an innocent group is unwarranted.

 

[Granite]

Yes when outside groups with an agenda come to another organization and demand to be recognized or "let in", I call that a "force".

Quite true, and that's generally how great social changes and steps forward are made. Unfortunately it's in the nature of bigots to dig in their heels and resist all attempts at willing, self-reform. They need to have their hand forced.

 

[LKmommy]

GC you made this connection. YOU are confusing my words, making assumptions and leaps that I did not make.

Let me clarify clearly for you. I do not condone of men attracted to men being around little boys. Little boys turn into men. Do I want little boys to become gay? No, I don't. Clearly I dont think we agree.

Do I think "gayness" rubs off? You have your opinion and I have mine. Mine is that to be tolerant and accepting on another's deviant and immoral behaviors MAY lead to them thinking it is OK. It is not ok in my world or in any "Christian based" organization. Get it? I have seen research that does not show strong links for homo pedophiles perping against boys, however I do NOT trust just "any research" and that is ONE study of a "sample". [\quote]
Thank you, that's clearer now.

The research is stronger than just your one sample. It is consistent that homosexuals are not a special risk for boys. In fact, many homosexuals have more of a maternal instinct that makes them good carers. Also, it is certain that homosexuality is a fundamental requiring of their sexuality, not a lack of moral reasoning. It is not possible to turn a boy into a homosexual if they are not wired that way.



I work with children, and many have come from awful households. I am quite aware of the trauma that abuse causes, and that most abuse happens in the home and is perpetrated by family members.

Transferring that fear onto an innocent group is unwarranted.

Child abuse investigator 15 years. I dont believe everything I read. To save but one child....

 

[LKmommy]

Quite true, and that's generally how great social changes and steps forward are made. Unfortunately it's in the nature of bigots to dig in their heels and resist all attempts at willing, self-reform. They need to have their hand forced.

So homosexuality is what you consider a "great social change"? I disagree.

 

[gcthomas]

Child abuse investigator 15 years. I dont believe everything I read. To save but one child....

Anything at all can be justified by that approach. It isn't a good argument if millions of people have to suffer loss of freedom for your unfounded fear.

 

[LKmommy]

Anything at all can be justified by that approach. It isn't a good argument if millions of people have to suffer loss of freedom for your unfounded fear.

I am talking about CHILDREN, the BSA, and other organizations that work closely with children.

YOU and the "millions" are adults. Put your big boy britches on and stop promoting the sexual deviances of others.

 

[LKmommy]

Anything at all can be justified by that approach. It isn't a good argument if millions of people have to suffer loss of freedom for your unfounded fear.

What "unfounded fear" is that? Oh, the hidden and secretive sexual abuse trysts of adults who worry about "their deviant rights to be deviant". I don't support it. I have to cook dinner. I am done with this topic. Carry on without or around me GC.

 

[Granite]

So homosexuality is what you consider a "great social change"? I disagree.

Acceptance of other people is a great step forward. Regardless of what stiff-necked bigots like yourself think. Fortunately, you're on the losing side of history. You people always are.

Always.

 

[chrysostom]

Acceptance of other people is a great step forward.

when are you going to accept us?

 

[Dialogos]

Acceptance of other people is a great step forward. Regardless of what stiff-necked bigots like yourself think. Fortunately, you're on the losing side of history. You people always are.

Always.

I always find it somewhat amusing when atheists try to claim moral high ground.

If an atheist paradigm is to be accepted, there is no more reason to accept homosexuals than there is to reject them.

In the absence of any genuine moral truth, atheists become pragmatists when it comes to issues of morality, jumping on whatever band wagon they deem most likely to finish first.

That's why true social reformers have always been men and women of conviction rather than men and women whose basic philosophy necessitates not having any.

 

[Granite]

I always find it somewhat amusing when atheists try to claim moral high ground.

I'm sure you do. Christians usually have a peculiar sense of humor.

If an atheist paradigm is to be accepted, there is no more reason to accept homosexuals than there is to reject them.

:rotfl:

Define, please. Ya know. Since every non-believer is exactly alike and we all believe the same thing.

In the absence of any genuine moral truth, atheists become pragmatists when it comes to issues of morality, jumping on whatever band wagon they deem most likely to finish first.

See above. Yep. Monolithic, that's what we skeptics are.

That's why true social reformers have always been men and women of conviction rather than men and women whose basic philosophy necessitates not having any.

...because it's impossible to have convictions unless you're a Christian.

 

[Dialogos]

Define, please. Ya know. Since every non-believer is exactly alike and we all believe the same thing.

There is a difference between a non-believer and an atheist, your profile describes you as the latter.

Do you believe there is a God or don't you?

 

[Granite]

There is a difference between a non-believer and an atheist, your profile describes you as the latter.

Do you believe there is a God or don't you?

No, I don't. We can get back on track now any time you like.:cheers:

 

[Dialogos]

No, I don't. We can get back on track now any time you like.:cheers:

We're on track.

You don't believe in God, likely because you can't substantiate from any direct evidence (that would convince you) that any god exists.

In the same way, you can't substantiate from any direct evidence that there are any moral absolutes that would make "inclusion" or "acceptance" or "tolerance" anything more than a societal construct that just so happens to represent the existing cultural zeitgeist. As such, your philosophical convictions are merely a reflection of the direction that the cultural wind is blowing.

What convictions do atheists have? Whatever convictions are most popular to have at any given time.

In order to make substantive change you actually have to believe in something.