Boy Scouts to allow gay youths to join

[gracepoole]

You aren’t making any sense. You are dissenting from the clear teaching of the Church, but you claim that the burden of proof is on the Church to prove you wrong? Wow.

The burden of proof is on the Church to prove that homosexuality is inherently disordered. Yes.

 

[buffalo]

So, you are basically saying you are a heretic, but you are a loyal heretic?

:whacky:

 

[jwinch2]

You think those who disagreed with the Church on positions that It has since changed its views on were heretics?

Show us a place where the Church has changed her position on doctrine. Before you even start, don’t bring up Galileo, that was not doctrine. catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy

 

[rlg94086]

The burden of proof is on the Church to prove that homosexuality is inherently disordered. Yes.

The proof is laid out in many Church documents. Perhaps, you just aren’t personally convinced. That doesn’t mean the Church hasn’t proved it. You just prefer your personal judgment.

 

[OrangeOwl]

They will certainly try to experiment, so yes it increases the possibility. It will now just become another choice.

Just to be clear, I never said I supported having them in the same tent. I never even said that I support gays in the Boy Scouts.

I’m just trying to get to the crux of why gays in the Boy Scouts is supposed to be a bad thing, and why it’s not simply unjust discrimination (which we are called by the CCC to avoid).

So, again, the scenario of the separate tent. No one has answered exactly why this wouldn’t resolve all the problems. There’s a lot of talk about how it’s going to make them different than everyone else - but, face it, they will always be different and set apart.

Is the issue just about tent sharing?

Are we to support their complete alienation?

 

[rlg94086]

Show us a place where the Church has changed her position on doctrine. Before you even start, don’t bring up Galileo, that was not doctrine. catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy

BTW…I knew that, as well, but I figured I would play along vis-a-vis the heretic line of reasoning.

 

[RoseMary131]

And the Church has no interest in their salvation? The Church will just look the other way?

True Christian charity demands fraternal correction.

Where is allowing a boy who claims he is “gay” to join a Boy Scout Troop equal to having no interest in his salvation. He will be allowed to work on the same merit badges as a “straight boy”. None of the activities in BSA promote sexual activities - straight or gay.

Should the Church have a sign, “Boys who are Gay, Do not come to Religious Ed, Youth Group, Mass?”

Homosexual activities are wrong. Allowing a boy who claims he is “gay” to interact within social groups with other boys is not wrong or sinful.

 

[QuiteCatholic]

“Hey Catholics, when will you realize that homosexuality is normal and found in approximately 400 animal species, including humans? When will you realize that it cannot be cured, because it is not a disease, because it is normal? When will you realize that civil rights trump religion, since they affect all humans?”

As long as YOU realize we’re all called to live a chaste life style. As for you’re later post, God created man and woman to procreate the earth. Adam and Steve can’t do that. It’s against God’s plan.

 

[gracepoole]

You are making the dramatically self-absorbed assumption that you are right and the Church will change its position. There are plenty of heretics who disagreed with the Church on positions the Church has never waivered from.

I knew Galileo, and you are no Galileo.

Ah, so it’s self-absorbed. Here’s a sampling of other responses that are good go-to’s:

“You’re a dupe of the gay agenda.”

“You were never properly catechized.” (we’ve already seen a version of this one)

“You’re only interested in putting your own selfish desires first.”

“You’re not Catholic!” (can’t count the number of these in the thread)

Ultimately, I think I have a pretty good sense of how conservative Catholics view me. What I don’t understand is the lack of a twitching conscience experienced by people who claim that openly gay Boy Scouts shouldn’t be permitted.

 

[buffalo]

Just to be clear, I never said I supported having them in the same tent. I never even said that I support gays in the Boy Scouts.

I’m just trying to get to the crux of why gays in the Boy Scouts is supposed to be a bad thing, and why it’s not simply unjust discrimination (which we are called by the CCC to avoid).

So, again, the scenario of the separate tent. No one has answered exactly why this wouldn’t resolve all the problems. There’s a lot of talk about how it’s going to make them different than everyone else - but, face it, they will always be different and set apart.

Is the issue just about tent sharing?

Are we to support their complete alienation?

We are called to love them and guide them and to teach them how to fully express their masculine sexuality.

 

[buffalo]

Where is allowing a boy who claims he is “gay” to join a Boy Scout Troop equal to having no interest in his salvation. He will be allowed to work on the same merit badges as a “straight boy”. None of the activities in BSA promote sexual activities - straight or gay.

Should the Church have a sign, “Boys who are Gay, Do not come to Religious Ed, Youth Group, Mass?”

Homosexual activities are wrong. Allowing a boy who claims he is “gay” to interact within social groups with other boys is not wrong or sinful.

Then why does anyone need to express their sexual desires at all? And then why even ask?

 

[wynnejj]

You’re afraid that gay boys are going to turn non-gay boys into gays?

I was just joking because of the funny way that you phrased it. If I had concerns, though, it would not be for the non-gay boys. It would be for the SSA boys who want to remain celibate, but find their sexual proclivities a real trial.

 

[ccmnxc]

The burden of proof is on the Church to prove that homosexuality is inherently disordered. Yes.

There is no Biblical precedence given whatsoever for a homosexual marriage. Any sexual act outside of marriage is therefore, fornication, which is sinful.
Or there is Mark 10 6-12: “6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
Jesus outlines the paradigm of marriage. These examples aren’t even anti-homosexual, like one would find in Leviticus and Paul’s letters. All this on top of Sodom and Gomorrah.

 

[buffalo]

Ah, so it’s self-absorbed. Here’s a sampling of other responses that are good go-to’s:

“You’re a dupe of the gay agenda.”

“You were never properly catechized.” (we’ve already seen a version of this one)

“You’re only interested in putting your own selfish desires first.”

“You’re not Catholic!” (can’t count the number of these in the thread)

Ultimately, I think I have a pretty good sense of how conservative Catholics view me. What I don’t understand is the lack of a twitching conscience experienced by people who claim that openly gay Boy Scouts shouldn’t be permitted.

Perhaps you will share what exaclty is meant by an openly gay Boy Scout. Let us start with “gay”.

 

[meltzerboy]

I figured that where this is leading. I do wonder if children should be treated with “kid-gloves” as it were. This is after all about allowing gay scouts, not gay team leaders.

So would everyone be cool with it if the gay kids slept in their own tents? Should gay kids not be allowed in schools because of gym class and public showers?

Obviously, part of me is being glib. … But where do you draw the line?

Absolutely gay students should not be allowed in schools, and neither should gay teachers. Both of them exert evil influences on innocent straight students. Good point.

I would go further and state that gay scout leaders should not be discriminated against either. (I’m NOT talking about men who have pedophilia.) Adult gay men probably have more sexual self-control than gay teenagers anyway. I don’t think the admission of one group can be justified without admitting the other. This might be the next battle waged against UNJUST discrimination.

 

[buffalo]

Ah, so it’s self-absorbed. Here’s a sampling of other responses that are good go-to’s:

“You’re a dupe of the gay agenda.”

“You were never properly catechized.” (we’ve already seen a version of this one)

“You’re only interested in putting your own selfish desires first.”

“You’re not Catholic!” (can’t count the number of these in the thread)

Ultimately, I think I have a pretty good sense of how conservative Catholics view me. What I don’t understand is the lack of a twitching conscience experienced by people who claim that openly gay Boy Scouts shouldn’t be permitted.

Do you believe there is a gay agenda?

 

[buffalo]

I would go further and state that gay scout leaders should not be discriminated against either. (I’m NOT talking about men who have pedophilia.) Adult gay men probably have more sexual self-control than gay teenagers anyway. I don’t think the admission of one group can be justified without admitting the other. This might be the next battle waged against UNJUST discrimination.

What??? Promiscuity is rampant in the homosexual community.

Most abuse is homosexual men on younger males.

 

[gracepoole]

Do you believe there is a gay agenda?

Don’t you mean “gay” agenda?

And no, of course not.

 

[buffalo]

Absolutely gay students should not be allowed in schools, and neither should gay teachers. Both of them exert evil influences on innocent straight students. Good point.

I would go further and state that gay scout leaders should not be discriminated against either. (I’m NOT talking about men who have pedophilia.) Adult gay men probably have more sexual self-control than gay teenagers anyway. I don’t think the admission of one group can be justified without admitting the other. This might be the next battle waged against UNJUST discrimination.

We discriminate against actions every single day. Society could not function if these judgements were not made.

 

[buffalo]

Don’t you mean “gay” agenda?

And no, of course not.

Unmasking the “gay” agenda

Below are two of the central demands put forth by homosexual activists in their “1972 Gay Rights Platform”:

• "Repeal all laws governing the age of sexual consent." (This should send a chill down the spine of any parent. It would legally allow pedophiles, and homosexuals who were so inclined, to access your children and teens for their own predatory sexual gratification — so long as those children “consented” to having sex.)
• "Repeal all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit." (Once marriage is redefined, there can be no logical or ethical objection to any conceivable “marriage” combination, including polygamous “marriages.” By watering down marriage, “gay” activists and like-minded politicos [usually activist judges] remove this foundational institution’s intrinsic value.)
  
  Here are just a few of the demands the homosexual lobby put forth during the 1987 (Homosexual) “March on Washington”:
• "The government should provide protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, public accommodations and education just as protection is provided on race, creed, color, sex, or national origin." ([ENDA] This would force all religious business owners, landlords and schools to abandon — under penalty of law — sincerely held and constitutionally protected religious beliefs and adopt a view of sexual morality that runs entirely counter to central teachings of every major world religion.)
• "Anti-homophobic curriculum in the schools." (Translation: pro-homosexual, government-mandated indoctrination. This is already occurring in thousands of public schools throughout America. Children are being force-fed the absurd notion that male-male anal sodomy is a perfectly acceptable, “alternative” sexual “orientation.” This calculated propaganda continues to expand, despite the fact that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has acknowledged that such behaviors place participants at extremely high risk for dangerous and often deadly infectious disease.)
• "The government should ensure all public education programs include programs designed to combat lesbian/gay prejudice. … Institutions that discriminate against lesbian and gay people should be denied tax-exempt status and federal funding." (This means churches, religious schools and religious businesses. Some jurisdictions, such as the state of New Jersey, have already begun removing tax-exempt status from church related ministries that refuse to provide “commitment ceremonies” to homosexuals.)
• "Public and private institutions should support parenting by lesbian or gay couples." (This is now being mandated in many states such as California and Massachusetts. In Massachusetts, Catholic Charities’ adoption service was recently forced to close down because it refused to assign children to homosexuals for adoption.)

need more???