G
gracepoole
Guest
Dr. Taffy already addressed this point. The act may be homosexual but the individual may not be.
- Status
A
Arizona_Mike
Guest
Why are you introducing the issue of who is “worse?” That shouldn’t even be a concern when discussing youth safety issues.
A
Arizona_Mike
Guest
That is such a clearly bizarre assertion that I honestly have no answer for it.
G
gracepoole
Guest
I have no problem with homosexual leaders being present, nor do I think it’s reasonable for others to panic about this issue. But for those who are panicking anyway, it seems beyond strange that this concern has just now risen to the surface. And if you’re panicking about gay men being in BSA, it would seem that you’d want to know openly who they are rather than pretending they don’t exist – particularly since you think many of them are bent on sexually abusing youth. If you think they’re out to abuse, it only seems reasonable that you’d want to know who they are. As I don’t think they’re out to abuse, it isn’t an issue for me.
G
gracepoole
Guest
You’ve done a good job of leading the way regarding bizarre assertions here so I understand that rationality may be confusing at this point.
G
gracepoole
Guest
Are you intentionally being obtuse? You and others have registered concern that homosexual leaders may sexually abuse youths in BSA. Others have noted that 1) this doesn’t and won’t happen at a greater rate than when heterosexual leaders are present, and 2) this doesn’t and won’t happen at a greater rate than it occurs in other organizations. Both of these points delegitimize your claims.
A
Arizona_Mike
Guest
Both our Lord and the apostles and the prophets and many saints and many Christian writers (cf. G.K. Chesterton and C.S. Lewis) mocked ideas that are clearly wrong. You will note that monkey1976 wasn’t mocking a person, he was mocking an idea - that it is proper that people should be identified by bizarre sexual preferences, and that somehow these paraphilias should be grouped together and given increasingly long and ponderous acronyms.
Mockery of evil and sinful and even heretical ideas is not uncharitable, Grace.
G
gracepoole
Guest
Oh, dear. Chesterton is not Christ. Thankfully.
Unfortunately, beliefs like those identified here drive gays and lesbians even further from the Church. And why shouldn’t they? Whenever Catholic concepts are mocked, it’s seen as persecution. But when those who identify as LGBT are mocked, it’s seen as charity. Good grief.
P
pnewton
Guest
Just to clarify, others have noted their belief this is true. I see an error in these studies being the way homosexuality is defined, the “No true Scotsman” thing. It might be that my reasoning is circular, but I know the redefinition of homosexuality is circular logic. In the end, statistics cannot really help too much, except to provide clues. If there is a correlation between the introduction of homosexual leaders and increase of child sexual abuse, then it is evidence, but only evidence, I am right.
A
Arizona_Mike
Guest
That argument is false because of the unique nature of the organizations in question.
Few other youth organizations combine social isolation in the outdoors, group dynamics, same-gender populations, and youth mentoring. The Catholic Church does not. Thus, arguments that “other” youth groups either have or have not experienced an equivalent level of homosexual assaults are irrelevant.
To your points, what evidence has been offered in this thread that would support your arguments 1) or 2), other than a blanket assertion?
We have seen instances within our own faith where a correlation between the removal or laicization of those who were credibly accused of homosexual acts against minors resulted in a substantial reduction in reports of homosexual acts, thanks to Pope Benedict - but that provides evidence that is contrary to your claims.
A
Arizona_Mike
Guest
No, nor did I say he, nor the apostles, nor the prophets, nor the saints, were. Why are you claiming I did?
Did I (or any other poster) mock a person who identifies as gay? Or did we mock a ridiculous concept? Even many gays mock the dubious use of acronyms to try to pigeonhole disparate paraphilias together. Why should gays be included with those who practice sadomasochism, as Wesleyan University does?
E
estesbob
Guest
I hate to be repetitive but one again we see the invoking of the " no true Scotsman" fallacy
A
at9009
Guest
But I also see the opposite almost being applied here. Not all homosexual/ssa people are attracted to pedastry yet so many act like they all are. THAT is uncharitable. I see rather than blame the abuse on the person, its attributed to the homosexua/ssa population because apparanetly that’s what they do. After all they already screwed up so how hard is to imagine there that screwed up. THAT is uncharitable.
So, the homosexual/ssa person is apparently only okay if they hide their attractions well and no one suspects they’re attracted others of the same sex. Otherwise it seems some just view them as a potential child abuser. What a very welcoming and charitable environment.
D
Dawnia
Guest
But, how does one make that determination without doing so based solely on self-reporting? Last I checked, there is objective test to determine someone’s orientation. One could simply lie about their orientation and no one would know the difference.
J
josie_L
Guest
Whooa, that’s not what I said or was attempting to proclaim, what I am saying is that for those of YOU who are CONCERNED, than wouldn’t this be a good thing, i.e., to know who is gay as opposed to it being hush-hushed, and therefore giving you a false sense of security??
p.s. I have never denied that men who abuse male minors are not homosexual nor have I denied that homosexuals abuse more than heterosexual men, however, I am trying to be fair and rational in my approach in that even in our own Church we have homosexual priests (have we banned them, although some should be), but no one here I believe would prevent their children from going to Church or being part of a Church function simply because we have gay priests.
J
josie_L
Guest
I understand what you’re saying and I understand what estesbob and Arizona mike is trying to say, there needs to be a balance between protecting our children and being charitable towards others of SSA persuasion, because like you pointed out, many are not susceptible to pederasty.
S
SilverLight
Guest
This is true and it’s hard to tell just by looking at someone also.But, how does one make that determination without doing so based solely on self-reporting? Last I checked, there is objective test to determine someone’s orientation. One could simply lie about their orientation and no one would know the difference.
F
frobert
Guest
Perhaps not so bizarre to those who have studied the Kinsey Report and similar reports.
According to your opinion of what of comprises a sexual orientation you would classify 46% of the male population as bisexual.
Do you agree that 46% is significant?
I know you are skeptical and will want to debunk the Kinsey Report, here is a good place to begin.Were Kinsey’s studies debunked?
J
josie_L
Guest
Kinsey was an immoral monster, so please don’t attempt to use his “studies” as sound science.
A
Arizona_Mike
Guest
Fair enough and I apologize for mischaracterizing what you said.
Whether someone is open about being attracted to other males or whether someone is concealing their sexual interest in other males does not mean the risk is fully mitigated because someone acknowledges that yearning.
To my knowledge, Pope Benedict ended the practice of admitting candidates with an admitted same-sex attraction into seminaries, and that policy continues. The seminaries are to conduct in-depth interviews on this issue and do background interviews on candidates to determine if this has been an issue. Those who were admitted under the old policy remain, but are expected to live a celibate life. Obviously, that policy caused problems. More than a few priests have complained about those priests with a SSA going to gay bars, forming alliances with others who feel the same way and forming alliances, etc.
If a priest acknowledged having a SSA, would I be comfortable allowing my teenage son to go with him on a weekend campout, even if there were other priests whom I knew and trusted, and all the parties agreed to abide by the Catholic Church’s own version of the leadership in depth rule? No. I wouldn’t be cruel about it, but no.
The unique circumstances of the BSA, which includes access to boys in isolated locations for long periods of time makes the comparisons less than analogous.
As I have said before, we must weigh the risks and benefits of depriving admittedly homosexual men access to teenage boys in the environment of the BSA.
RISKS: A boy may be molested, possibly scarring him for life, impacting his conception of self, causing him to abandon scouting and other youth movements, possibly the dissolution of the troop, probable lawsuits against the scouter and the other adults involved. The victimizer was allowed to be placed in an occasion of sin, which is also the fault of those who authorized the policy.
BENEFITS: The homosexual scouter feels enhanced self-esteem and may be a good mentor to some scouts.
It is difficult to understand why the Benefit in this case wold outweigh the Risk, Our primary goal in this case is not to protect homosexual men from all loss of self-esteem or feelings of stigmatization, it is to protect children. We should consider our primary obligation in this case to be protecting youth, as Jesus commanded in Matthew 18:6.
- Status