Boy Scouts Expected to End Ban on Gay Leaders

[frobert]

Thank you, MIke. Apparently to some, no number of examples will stop them from being apologists for pedophiles who are obviously homosexuals.

First, no one is apologizing for pedophiles. Mike through out a few names of known homosexuals and a few known gay activists and a fringe organization which has nothing to do with gay rights. If he and you believe that is representative of the majority of gays then nothing I or anyone else can say will lessen your anger. You are entitled to all the pleasure or pain or whatever you derive from the anger.

Have a great life…

 

[SWolf]

We* are* called to be charitable, Grace, but God did create us with a sense of humor, and we should be able to recognize the absurdity of such designations when we see them. At any rate, these kind of increasingly portmanteau acronyms are widely used within the gay community and academia as official terms. Wesleyan University uses the official designator LGBTTQQFAGPBDSM for “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, flexual, asexual, gender-****, polyamorous, bondage/discipline, dominance/submission, and sadism/masochism,” per Wikipedia. If they use them and insist others do, why shouldn’t we?

The terms LGBTTQQIAAP (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, ally, panssexual) and QUILTBAG (queer and questioning, intersex, lesbian, transgender and two-spirit, bisexual, asexual and ally, and gay and genderqueer) are also commonly used, we learn from Wiki. People who self-identify as members of one of those groups apparently frequently fight over the order of precedence.

It is impossible to take groups seriously when they regress into self-parody.

 

[SWolf]

Given that Cubs feed Scouts, and Cubs show the greatest decline here, it seems like Scouts will end up very small indeed.

Luckily, there are many alternatives.

 

[DrTaffy]

You’ve created an idiosyncratic definition of homosexuality that fits your purposes but is not in accordance with common usage or medico-legal terminology…

Oh yes it is. “Medico-legal terminology” is very careful to distinguish between those who abuse children of the same sex and those attracted to adults of the same sex because they are very different things. Many of those who sexually abuse children of the same sex as them are attracted to adults of the opposite sex and repulsed by the idea of sex with adults of the same sex.

A sex act with someone of the same sex is a homosexual act, by definition.

The act, yes, the person no. When a Catholic priest abuses a Catholic boy, does that make child abuse a Catholic act?

As we are dealing with important topics here (the safety of youth), it will help us if we use precise terminology.

Exactly. So why are you trying to confuse the issue by conflating attraction between consenting adults with child abuse? As soon as you use different terms for the two your alleged ‘correlation’ vanishes.

It is exactly this kind of word game being used to tar gays that convinces people that orthodox Catholics don’t just disagree with homosexual behaviour, but that you actually hate gays. Then up pops another story about a Catholic priest raping boys and being protected by the Church.

In reality, only a tiny fraction of boy molesters, at most equivalent to the average proportion of homosexuals in the general population, show any interest in other adult men.

Multiple. Well known fact. Any serious attempt at research would have shown you this. But since you ask, again, one example:
Jenny, C., Roesler, T. A., & Poyer, K. L. (1994). Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? Pediatrics, 94(1), 41-44.

The molester was a gay or lesbian adult in fewer than 1% of cases in which an adult molester could be identified – only 2 of the 269 cases.

No. The studies I cited (and others) show that 1/3 of the child molestations are committed by homosexuals, a number that is far out of proportion to their incidence in the population. That is called a “strong correlation.”

A) You seem not to understand what is meant by ‘correlation’
B) All you showed was that 1/3 of the child molestations took place between members of the same sex, not that the perpetrator was homosexual in the commonly understood sense.

Why do you feel that a phobic response to homosexuals is correlated to child abuse? Do you have any kind of a source for that?

The Jay report, for example. To cite just one.

I consider calumny a sin,

So stop doing it?

 

[signit]

I get that molestation was/is a problem and I don’t think most parents will want to send their sons into the woods with known homosexuals (actually, they don’t trust anyone these days), but for me, the larger is issue is that I cannot square this rule change with either the Catholic faith, or the ideals of Scouting as expressed in the scout oath and law. I see no way out of this except by creating formally Catholic scouting units.

I might take a stance on this when I see something from the USCCB.

The Catholic Scouting committee (admittedly not the USCCB) seems to suggest that Catholics should not leave the BSA at this time.

 

[gracepoole]

Are you trying to be ironic or are you serious, Grace?

Here’s the database the L.A. Times compiled regarding the decades of instances of sexual abuse of minors by adult leaders.

spreadsheets.latimes.com/boyscouts-cases/

But the question is how this compares with sexual abuse of minors in other institutions, like schools, sporting activities, etc. Otherwise we’re no better than those who claimed the Church’s sex abuse problem was bigger than the average elsewhere (and of course it wasn’t).

 

[gracepoole]

I get that molestation was/is a problem and I don’t think most parents will want to send their sons into the woods with known homosexuals (actually, they don’t trust anyone these days), but for me, the larger is issue is that I cannot square this rule change with either the Catholic faith, or the ideals of Scouting as expressed in the scout oath and law. I see no way out of this except by creating formally Catholic scouting units.

Why? There’s nothing anti-Catholic about simply identifying as homosexual.

 

[gilliam]

A leading bishop in Catholic scouting says Catholics should continue to be involved in the Boy Scouts and work to ensure good youth outreach and consistency with Church teaching in response to a national policy change that allows gay leaders.

“We’re willing to see how this policy can work and how we can remain consistent with our Catholic teaching and continue to charter troops with the Boy Scouts of America. We think we can do that,” Bishop Robert Guglielmone of Charleston told CNA July 28.

Bishop Guglielmone is a former chaplain for Catholic scouts worldwide, and an executive board member of the National Catholic Committee on Scouting. The committee advises the Boy Scouts of America and works to strengthen the relationship between the Church and the scouting organization.

“Perhaps our approach as a Church should be one [of] cautious optimism, hoping that we will be able to use the programs of the Boy Scouts of America for our youth ministry, but that we would be able to do so in a way that is consistent with the teachings of the Church,” the bishop explained.

patheos.com/blogs/catholicnews/2015/07/bishop-advises-cautious-optimism-for-a-catholic-future-in-boy-scouts-2/

 

[gracepoole]

The analysis the BSA commissioned from Prof. Janet Warren from the University of Virginia (who also works with the FBI’s NCAVC) looked at 829 of those offenders within scouting.

Although the collection of data was not always consistent (and it should be remembered that the files were an attempt to maintain a national database to prevent pederasts from re-applying, which was a good purpose), some useful trends emerge:

99.9% of the offenders were male. Only 1.1% of the victims were female. (The gender of the victim is missing from 25.7% of the file but can reasonably be concluded to be male.) These were almost entirely homosexual/pederastic offenses.

Despite the popular conception that most “pedophiles” are married and maintain an outwardly heterosexual lifestyle, the majority of offenders were unmarried men - 553 were single (66.7%) versus 237 married (28.6%) (4.7% had that data missing from the files).

200 (24.1%) had children, but in 628 (75.8%) cases there were no indication they had children.

21.1% attempted to re-register after being denied registration as adult leaders.

A majority (58.6%) had been arrested for a sex crime (either at the time of the offense or prior). Given that homosexual acts in general, as well as sexual offenses against a child, were felony offenses at the time in America when the files were kept, it seems probable that many of these offenses were homosexual in nature, or were the sort of ancillary offenses that were frequently used by vice officers to charge homosexual offenders (public indecency, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, exhibitionism, etc.).

As I previously noted with pederasts, they have multiple victims. 64.1% of the cases involved multiple victims. Only 30.4% involved a single (known) victim.

So most of those who were offenders in the BSA were male? Shocking.

And once again there is no distinction here between homosexuals, pedophiles, and pederasts. As Dr. Taffy noted earlier, it’s quite convenient statistically to identify any male who abuses a male youth as homosexual.

 

[estesbob]

So most of those who were offenders in the BSA were male? Shocking.

And once again there is no distinction here between homosexuals, pedophiles, and pederasts. As Dr. Taffy noted earlier, it’s quite convenient statistically to identify any male who abuses a male youth as homosexual.

Because everybody knows no “true homosexual” Would abuse a child

 

[gracepoole]

It is when such mockery is pointing out the ludicrousness of “identifying” as a specific sexual behavior.

Are you seriously claiming that mockery can be charitable? Good luck with that.

We* are* called to be charitable, Grace, but God did create us with a sense of humor, and we should be able to recognize the absurdity of such designations when we see them. At any rate, these kind of increasingly portmanteau acronyms are widely used within the gay community and academia as official terms. Wesleyan University uses the official designator LGBTTQQFAGPBDSM for “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, flexual, asexual, gender-****, polyamorous, bondage/discipline, dominance/submission, and sadism/masochism,” per Wikipedia. If they use them and insist others do, why shouldn’t we?

The terms LGBTTQQIAAP (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, ally, panssexual) and QUILTBAG (queer and questioning, intersex, lesbian, transgender and two-spirit, bisexual, asexual and ally, and gay and genderqueer) are also commonly used, we learn from Wiki. People who self-identify as members of one of those groups apparently frequently fight over the order of precedence.

When those you’re targeting don’t find humor in your “jokes,” your charitable nature is lost. Don’t get me wrong – I’d expect little else here. But it’s flatly disingenuous to disguise one’s mockery as charity.

 

[Monkey1976]

And once again there is no distinction here between homosexuals, pedophiles, and pederasts. As Dr. Taffy noted earlier, it’s quite convenient statistically to identify any male who abuses a male youth as homosexual.

This again begs the question: While the line for pedophilia is clear, exactly where is the line between pederasty and homosexuality? Is it age of consent? If so, exactly how does an arbitrary legal demarcation point affect an individual’s sexual orientation?

 

[josie_L]

So let’s all pretend that gay men, who have no children of their own, (thus, none of the boys are theirs!) are NO MORE LIKELY than anyone else to commit acts of perversion against young boys. Profiling is just good common sense. I wish that your version of reality was real, but I would not risk my own son to test it.

You’re not getting my point, there are already gay leaders (more than likely always has been) in the Boy Scouts, only now you’re more likely to know who they are (because the ban has been lifted). In a sense, we are better off knowing, don’t you think?

 

[gracepoole]

You’re not getting my point, there are already gay leaders (more than likely always has been) in the Boy Scouts, only now you’re more likely to know who they are (because the ban has been lifted). In a sense, we are better off knowing, don’t you think?

Thank you. This is at least the second time this has been noted in this thread.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

But the question is how this compares with sexual abuse of minors in other institutions, like schools, sporting activities, etc. Otherwise we’re no better than those who claimed the Church’s sex abuse problem was bigger than the average elsewhere (and of course it wasn’t).

Why is that an issue? Even one instance of molestation is unacceptable.

If we stay on point in the discussion and avoid being side-tracked into discussions of which group is more culpable, the issue that you raised was where was the evidence of prior homosexual acts against boys in scouting, and I provided you the data.

If you ask for data and then dismiss it when it is provided, why even ask for it?

The analysis of the files to which I linked earlier and which the BSA maintains on its website compares the reports to incidences in other organizations, for what it’s worth.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

As Dr. Taffy noted earlier, it’s quite convenient statistically to identify any male who abuses a male youth as homosexual.

Any male who has sexual contact with another male, youth or not, is either a homosexual or a bisexual. If they are bisexual, they are committing a homosexual act. Why is that difficult to understand, unless you are creating a new definition of what a homosexual act is? It may or may not be “convenient,” but it is true.

 

[estesbob]

Thank you. This is at least the second time this has been noted in this thread.

I find this rather confusing. on one hand we are told that these leaders are no greater risk than any other leader, on the other hand we are told this new policy is good because it lets us now who the homosexual leaders are. So they are not any bigger risk but we need to know who they are???

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I find this rather confusing. on one hand we are told that these leaders are no greater risk than any other leader, on the other hand we are told this new policy is good because it lets us now who the homosexual leaders are. So they are not any bigger risk but we need to know who they are???

Exactly. There is an implicit acknowledgement by JosieL and Gracepoole in those arguments and a recognition that there is an increased risk factor in the presence of homosexual males in a youth group.

 

[gracepoole]

Why is that an issue? Even one instance of molestation is unacceptable.

Of course one instance is too many. But the point is that sexual abuse occurs everywhere. There hasn’t been evidence provided that demonstrates that it occurs at a greater rate in BSA, or that it will occur at a larger rate in this organization in the future. Any why should it? Again, there have been gay leaders in BSA all along.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

This again begs the question: While the line for pedophilia is clear, exactly where is the line between pederasty and homosexuality? Is it age of consent? If so, exactly how does an arbitrary legal demarcation point affect an individual’s sexual orientation?

Very true. Complex human behavior, such as sexual preference, is not usually bound by an arbitrary date. If one 35 year old male wishes to have sex with another male who is aged 18 years and 1 day, and another wishes to have sex with a male who is one day shy of his 18th birthday, is the first man a “pedophile” and the second isn’t?

Both would probably be considered pederasts in the common usage of the term, if they were significantly older than the victim.