Bishop responds to Boy Scouts' decision on admission of homosexual members [CWN]

[fix]

Personally, I’d say “vapid” – but to each, their own.

I mean the arguments are quite clear once you into specific issues. My point is the tendency is to down play it.

 

[gilliam]

The only thing the new BSA policy does is take away the mandate that we kick a boy out or prevent him from joining only for the reason that he told us he has SSA. That’s it. The rest of who we accept in a unit stays the same as it is today.

Any advocacy is subject to discipline or removal by the unit, council or national. Social advocacy of any sort is not allowed in the Scouts. No wearing of political or social advocacy tee shirts that are outside of Scouting values are not allowed. Scouting values are what are in the Oath and Law. In other words you can wear a t-shirt of that praises God, Country or family or Scouting; that sort of thing. No other social or political advocacy is allowed. No pro-gay marriage t-shirt for example.

Units would be left on their own as far as how much they will let a boy tell another boy about what he feels. That is hard to regulate. But social advocacy of any sort is not allowed in the Scouts. We also don’t discuss sex in Scouting.

You cannot force a boy to tent with another boy now. That is not allowed and against youth protection policies. As is any sort of bullying or sexual harassment.

I would think a Catholic unit would look and act differently than a Unitarian unit would though.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

So the entire point of segregating males and females in Scouting is just because that is what was done in the past.

Is that a correct statement of your premise?

There would be no moral or modesty implications?

Venturing, being a spinoff of Exploring, kept many things intact from the progenitor organisation except where adjustments needed to be made. I believe the phrase is “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

Scouting isn’t a Catholic organisation, it doesn’t adhere to Catholic morality.

And the attraction to the same sex is to be? Overlooked? Ignored? Pretend it plays no role?

Gay men are still men.

 

[Brendan]

Any advocacy is subject to discipline or removal by the unit, council or national. Social advocacy of any sort is not allowed in the Scouts. No wearing of political or social advocacy tee shirts that are outside of Scouting values are not allowed. Scouting values are what are in the Oath and Law. In other words you can wear a t-shirt of that praises God, Country or family or Scouting; that sort of thing. No other social or political advocacy is allowed. No pro-gay marriage t-shirt for example…

And, as I mentioned earlier, this is also a great reason why our boys would be better off in another organization.

When our Archdiocese hosted a pro-life rally in front of an abortion clinic, the Knights were there, forming an honor guard while one of our aux bishops spoke, the American Heritage Girls were there in uniform passing out bottles of water and making sure everyone had a sign of some type.

But not a single boy in beige and olive drab.

I think you just made up my mind for me. BSA Scouting is just not the solution for our boys.

 

[gilliam]

And, as I mentioned earlier, this is also a great reason why our boys would be better off in another organization.

When our Archdiocese hosted a pro-life rally in front of an abortion clinic, the Knights were there, forming an honor guard while one of our aux bishops spoke, the American Heritage Girls were there in uniform passing out bottles of water and making sure everyone had a sign of some type.

But not a single boy in beige and olive drab.

I think you just made up my mind for me. BSA Scouting is just not the solution for our boys.

Yes, if you are into political or social advocacy and you want your youth adventure program to be a part of that, the BSA is probably not the organization for you.

Scouts can participate in flag ceremonies for, say a political rally, but cannot participate in the rally.

In the case you gave, the Scouts could have been involved in the honor guard, but not the rally itself.

Same for gay pride parades. The units will not be allowed to participate in those, even if your United Church of Christ participates.

 

[Brendan]

Yes, if you are into political or social advocacy and you want your youth adventure program to be a part of that, the BSA is probably not the organization for you.

Scouts can participate in flag ceremonies for, say a political rally, but cannot participate in the rally.

In the case you gave, the Scouts could have been involved in the honor guard, but not the rally itself.

I would say it is more moral advocacy, to promote the validity of the propositions of the Church, such as respect for life and respect for marriage.

I would want my boys to be able to do, as a group, what the Knights and other Catholic organizations go as a group. And when our bishops call for participation is such rallies, I would want my boys to respond to that call as a group.

 

[gilliam]

I would say it is more moral advocacy, to promote the validity of the propositions of the Church, such as respect for life and respect for marriage.

I would want my boys to be able to do, as a group, what the Knights and other Catholic organizations go as a group. And when our bishops call for participation is such rallies, I would want my boys to respond to that call as a group.

That’s fine. But none of this is news. It is how the organization has functioned for over 100 years. And you want it to function that way. The United Church of Christ would argue that a gay pride parade is moral advocacy too.

If you want a sectarian organization for your boys, then join a sectarian organization.

There are a lot of advantages in joining the Scouts and there is a lot of advantages to the Church for participating in Scouts. A good summary of the latter is presented by a So. Baptist in a column out last week:

An Open Letter to Southern Baptists from the BSA Religious Relationships Task Force

 

[Razanir]

The only thing the new BSA policy does is take away the mandate that we kick a boy out or prevent him from joining only for the reason that he told us he has SSA. That’s it. The rest of who we accept in a unit stays the same as it is today.

Any advocacy is subject to discipline or removal by the unit, council or national. Social advocacy of any sort is not allowed in the Scouts. No wearing of political or social advocacy tee shirts that are outside of Scouting values are not allowed. Scouting values are what are in the Oath and Law. In other words you can wear a t-shirt of that praises God, Country or family or Scouting; that sort of thing. No other social or political advocacy is allowed. No pro-gay marriage t-shirt for example.

Units would be left on their own as far as how much they will let a boy tell another boy about what he feels. That is hard to regulate. But social advocacy of any sort is not allowed in the Scouts. We also don’t discuss sex in Scouting.

You cannot force a boy to tent with another boy now. That is not allowed and against youth protection policies. As is any sort of bullying or sexual harassment.

I would think a Catholic unit would look and act differently than a Unitarian unit would though.

 

[wavejim]

Fr. Lappe’s Response to the New Boy Scouts
starofthesea.net/index.php/our-parish/blog/626-fr-lappes-response-to-new-boy-scouts

Thank you for posting. I wish I lived closer to Bremerton to attend mass.

 

[dcs]

I’m going to briefly come out of my leave from this forum to second the Federation of North-American Explorers (FNE) as an alternative to the Boy Scouts of America (BSA). As has been mentioned, the FNE is the U.S. branch of the FSE (Federation of Scouts of Europe), and thus it has its own history and well-established program. It should also be noted that the FSE in Europe has both Protestant and Catholic members (see Wikipedia), and thus, this program is expressly Christian without requiring its members to be Catholic. This makes it a viable alternative for most everyone who has been displaced by the BSA.

Everyone who would like to see the FSE evaluated for expansion as a replacement for the BSA should email the “On My Honor” committee at contact@onmyhonor.net. OMH is an organization, sponsored by the National Christian Foundation, that is working to build a replacement program for the BSA. Critically, this committee organized the protest of the BSA resolution, and so it consists of and is followed by all of the displaced BSA members who are looking for an alternative. We would all be well served by the OMH committee adopting FNE/FSE as its replacement program for the BSA. In your email please be sure to mention the joint Catholic/Protestant heritage of the FSE, so they do not dismiss this option due to their Protestant membership.

The Federation of North-American Explorers (FNE), as well as the organization of which it is a member association, the Union Internationale des Guides et Scouts d’Europe - Fédération Scoutisme Européen (UIGSE-FSE), is fundamentally a Catholic organization with a Catholic identity. In fact the UIGSE-FSE is an international association of the faithful of Pontifical right under the Pontifical Council for the Laity. This is not to say that we don’t have members of other Christian confessions, we do, but our character is Catholic.

Hope this helps.

 

[Dawnia]

Connecticut Boy Scout Council Will Allow Gays

Here’s an interesting development.

The Boy Scouts of America’s Connecticut Yankee Council, which covers dozens of Connecticut towns, is breaking with the national organization and will now allow openly gay people to join.

 

[gilliam]

Connecticut Boy Scout Council Will Allow Gays

Here’s an interesting development.

Not gay adults they aren’t. No council has been given a waver on the policy. They can make all the statements they want, but when push comes to shove, national will not approve it.

 

[wavejim]

Connecticut Boy Scout Council Will Allow Gays

Here’s an interesting development.

The BSA is so finished. Slippery slope meet Connecticut.

 

[Brendan]

Not gay adults they aren’t. No council has been given a waver on the policy. They can make all the statements they want, but when push comes to shove, national will not approve it.

It will be interesting to see what kind of ‘teeth’ National puts behind it’s response. And that, I imagine, will depend a lot on how much Connecticut Yankee Council pushes back.

I’d have to go to two hands to count the number of points of the Scout Law that Connecticut Yankee just violated And that is presuming that they showered this morning, otherwise, I’d have to go to toes too

 

[Sonic]

Actually, you’re wrong. While, yes, SSA is disordered, it is not inherently sinful. Just like with heterosexual attraction, if you don’t entertain sinful thoughts and don’t commit any sinful acts, you haven’t sinned. It’s a different vice, and like any other person, should strive to avoid giving into sin. The big difference (beyond the fact that it’s disordered) is that celibacy is the only option, as opposed to marriage.

Unfortunately, this is all academic compared to the stark reality that it is very hard for even heterosexuals to remain celibate in this world let alone live a moral lifestyle guided by their Catholic faith (much more so than in the past). It’s those immoral influences that come from outside that are not benevolent to an individual. If a person does not entertain sinful thoughts and doesn’t commit any sinful acts, then they are either the Virgin Mary or already a saint in Heaven.

 

[Dawnia]

Not gay adults they aren’t. No council has been given a waver on the policy. They can make all the statements they want, but when push comes to shove, national will not approve it.

I think how National handles this may just determine BSA’s future. If they don’t put their foot down hard, I expect a lot more people will bail.

 

[fix]

Gay men are still men.

As I asked the attraction is to be ignored? Pretend it does not matter in certain situations? Would they hold true for male and female bathrooms?

 

[Kathy_Lynch]

Maybe this has been posted above, it’s coming in so fast I can’t keep up. But are we all so naïve as to trust the BSA on standing ground “now” on this issue? Really? When they said they wouldn’t budge on this before and now they have! Next is Gay leaders, Atheists removing God from scouts, leader training in gay-diversity so we can teach our boys how to be inclusive and requirements for badges which are pro-gay agenda. How can anyone not see all this is coming? Have any of you been to the fb pages or websites of the pro-gay people? They are so motivated, they have all kinds of plans to already sue within a year for gay leaders! I don’t understand how we can all sit here and think it’s all that will happen and we will all be ok and nothing more will change and now we can evangelize from the inside…

 

[NeedImprovement]

. . . Just something we may wish to keep in mind while dealing with the deceptively subtle sophistry of the homosexual lobby / gay activists :

Of these three linked articles . . .

• The OP - Bishop responds to Boy Scouts’ decision on admission of homosexual members
• To God and My Country: Why We’re Not Quitting Scouts
• Fr. Lappe’s Response to New Boy Scouts

. . . none of them use the terminology “sexual orientation.” Any good Catholic or Christian would do well to avoid using it too.

Even if one does not have enough time to read Dr. Scott Lively’s entire, precise and thorough exposé DECIPHERING ‘GAY’ WORD-SPEAK AND LANGUAGE OF CONFUSION , if we really wish to begin to have an idea of the demon we’re dealing with, it would be highly beneficial to click the link and scroll about one third of the way down the page to the subtitled section, “Sexual Orientation” .

It illustrates exactly what we are conceding (even unwittingly) the moment we accept to use the term “sexual orientation” anywhere where the truth is desired.

Several excerpts from the pertinent section:

**DECIPHERING ‘GAY’ WORD-SPEAK AND LANGUAGE OF CONFUSION **

**Sexual Orientation **

“Sexual orientation” is a highly ambiguous term loaded with hidden false assumptions.

An “orientation” describes the perspective of a subject toward an object. A sexual orientation therefore describes a person (subject) by the object toward which they are sexually attracted: a homosexual is someone oriented toward someone of the same sex, a bisexual toward both sexes, a pedophile toward children, a sado-masochist toward giving or receiving pain, etc…

By definition, there are an unlimited number of potential sexual orientations. The “gay” movement, however, arbitrarily recognizes only four orientations: heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and transgendered (i.e. transvestites and transsexuals). Why? Because to recognize other orientations – pedophilia, for example – would draw attention to the importance of distinguishing between orientation and conduct, when a major purpose of sexual orientation theory is to legitimize and protect homosexual conduct by obscuring this distinction.

This is most clearly seen in anti-discrimination policies that include sexual orientation. Government and corporate policy makers include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination policies in order to protect freedom of thought and speech on the basis of the claim that sexual orientation is nothing more than a state of mind. Americans rightfully cherish the First Amendment right to think and speak freely. The practical effect of such policies, however, is to legitimize and protect any sexual conduct associated with an orientation. For example, under such policies a landlord is expected to rent to homosexuals even if they admit they intend to commit sodomy on the property and this is his sole reason for wanting to deny their application.

. . . In summary, sexual orientation is a term that is used by “gay” activists to deceive both policy makers and the public about the nature of homosexuality. It frames the debate about homosexuality in such a way that the average person is tricked into accepting “gay” presuppositions without challenge. This is even true of those people who continue to oppose the homosexuals’ political goals. Once the presuppositions have been accepted, especially when they become “law” in anti-discrimination policies, resistance to rest of the “gay” agenda becomes much more difficult. The only effective strategy is to reject and refute the false assumptions of sexual orientation and re-frame the issues on a truthful foundation. Sexual orientation must be exposed for what it is: a nonsensical theory about sexuality invented by “gay” political strategists to serve their own selfish interests at the expense of the welfare of society as a whole.

 

[Kathy_Lynch]

The decision by the BSA is puzzling. Instead of standing firm at a time when everyone was allowed to participate as long as they abided by the moral code of the BSA, they decided to let gay youth openly identify themselves by their temptations. Can you imagine, the outrage if a 15 year old identified himself as a pedophile (non practicing of course, but having a sexual attraction to children)? I don’t care how outraged anyone gets about this comparison, because it is a valid point.

Using pedophile as a way to show similarities will get you nowhere. But if everyone would take the above statement and insert “pyromaniac” or “drug addict”, we might be able to see that rationalizing homosexuality by saying “just so long as they don’t act on it” is really still endangering our children. We would watch a self-proclaimed alcoholic boy like a hawk and the minute he drank at a meeting/campout/ect, he’d be gone. But in the meantime, alcoholics (drug addicts, pyromaniacs, etc) don’t find the need to constant try to justify their behavior to anyone who will listen! They don’t try to change the world into thinking, and we don’t say “sure, we understand, you were born that way and we want you to be happy and self-fulfilled, so here - have a drink!”.

Allowing self-proclaimed gay boys into the scouts is dangerous for other boys on many levels, including them thinking gay is ok because all us leaders are so supportive of the new gay boy scout.

Everyone needs to stop fooling themselves into thinking A. that this is it and B. that this is ok!!!