Walt Disney World tells Boy Scouts to allow openly gay leaders or lose funding

posted at 6:41 pm on March 5, 2014 by Dustin Siggins

A few days ago, Disney World announced that unless Boy Scouts of America (BSA) changed its policy on openly homosexual scoutmasters – namely, they’re not allowed – by January 1, 2015, the organization would lose funding from Walt Disney.

The reason is simple – Disney says BSA violates the company’s non-discrimination policy:

Disney does not give money directly to the national organization or local BSA councils. However, through its VoluntEARS program, Disney allows employees to do volunteer work in exchange for cash donations to the charities of their choice.

Employees taking part in the VoluntEARS program will no longer be able to submit the funds to the Boy Scouts, the organization said. The new policy will not affect Walt Disney employees who volunteer with the Scouts, the company said.

….

According to Disney’s charitable giving guidelines, groups become ineligible to receive Disney funding if they “discriminate in the provision of services unlawfully or in a manner inconsistent with Disney’s policies on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, national origin, age, marital status, mental or physical ability, or sexual orientation.”

Kudos to the homosexual activist lobby, which has managed to scare Disney into making this move. As a private organization, Disney is of course entitled to withhold money from whatever organizations it chooses to, even if that decision is unwise.

However, this leads to a question: Will Disney also take money from Girl Scouts USA, which does not allow male scout leaders? Discrimination is discrimination, after all, and those men who want to lead girls on scouting trips should be given the same opportunity as women.

It’s a silly question, but so is Disney’s position that not allowing men who have sexual attractions to men to lead boys on scout trips is unfair discrimination.

Then again, this is the same company that is accused of sending money to Planned Parenthood, as well as hiding animal abuse that takes place during filming of its movies, so policies inconsistent with Disney’s official child-friendly corporate theme are hardly unusual.

Dustin Siggins is the Washington, D.C. Correspondent for Lifesitenews.com and formerly the primary blogger with Tea Party Patriots. He is a co-author of the forthcoming book, Bankrupt Legacy: The Future of the Debt-Paying Generation. His work has been published by numerous online and print publications, including USA Today, Roll Call, Hot Air, Huffington Post, Mediaite, and First Things.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Most will. The scouts will be no more very soon.
frank on March 5, 2014 at 11:02 PM
All across America gays read your comment and smiled.
hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:03 PM

Yes they are as it has been the end game all along. They just won’t admit it.

frank on March 5, 2014 at 11:11 PM

Hey maybe after you get openly gay scoutmasters and such they can get their troops to perform drag shows. If it’s good enough for the military in Okinawa then it should be good enough for the scouts.

Do I really need a sarc tag?

bbinfl on March 5, 2014 at 11:14 PM

Lanceman on March 5, 2014 at 11:06 PM

Rush always said that the ugly know who they are. As I’ve gotten older I’m less sure about that. :)

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 11:15 PM

Soon.. if you haven’t had gay sex then you will be called homophobic. Being straight will become a mental illness. It’ll be a sign you have issues. Your employer might demand psychological counseling. Because.. if it’s normal.. why haven’t you tried it?

JellyToast on March 5, 2014 at 7:01 PM

Why? Just because we stopped doing that to gay people?

lexhamfox on March 5, 2014 at 11:17 PM

Rush always said that the ugly know who they are. As I’ve gotten older I’m less sure about that. :)

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 11:15 PM

They do know who they are. All democrat voters are ugly, but not all ugly are democrat voters. There are those that just aren’t that mad at the world in spite of what nature did to them.

Lanceman on March 5, 2014 at 11:19 PM

It was innocent and edifying.

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:09 PM

Same here. This is wretched for me having been a Scout also. But it is what it is.

It is difficult to see these children outside stores selling cookies like the Girl Scouts or Boy Scouts with their raffles and popcorn sales. They have the world of good intentions in their little hearts but have no idea at their age what their organizations have come to represent. Especially the Girl Scouts.

I hate to tell them no so I try to exit the store in a manner to avoid them. If that’s not possible I answer their questions to the adults with them and give them a standard line, “I just can’t anymore.” They can take from that whatever it means to them.

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:20 PM

The Scouts made the worst possible decision by going half way. They either should have stuck to their principles or caved entirely.

They managed to piss off those who supported them while making no friends among gay activist who demand complete submission.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:27 PM

The Scouts made the worst possible decision by going half way. They either should have stuck to their principles or caved entirely.

They managed to piss off those who supported them while making no friends among gay activist who demand complete submission.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:27 PM

Man, you always see a comment and think, wish that is what I’d actually said. Really, best comment of the tread.

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:28 PM

thread…

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:29 PM

The Scouts made the worst possible decision by going half way. They either should have stuck to their principles or caved entirely.

They managed to piss off those who supported them while making no friends among gay activist who demand complete submission.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:27 PM

The lawsuits are just beginning. This should be an object lesson for those watching.

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:30 PM

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 10:36 PM

.
I actually agree with a lot of this (here comes the qualifier :) ), but I’m not sure what you mean about promoting or flaunting their lifestyle. If you say you don’t want to see two women making out in public then I’ll agree with that, but then again I don’t want to see a heterosexual couple doing that either.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 11:05 PM

.
“Flaunting” would be exactly what you just described above, and I agree with you on the “hetero” flaunting as well.

“Promoting” would be ‘advertising’ (in multiple ways and means) that there’s nothing wrong with it.`
.
The on-the-job experiences I described in my preceding comment constitute examples of “tolerance”.
What the militant homosexuals are demanding, is no-holds-barred, total and complete “acceptance”, and to that I say “denied”.

listens2glenn on March 5, 2014 at 11:31 PM

Oh, and 29Victor check this:

An Open Letter to BSA Delegates: 10 Reasons to “Vote No” on the Resolution

1) The proposed BSA resolution is logically incoherent and morally and ethically inconsistent. Under the proposed change in policy, open homosexuality would be officially consistent with the Scouting code throughout a Boy Scout’s life until the moment he turns 18, when it suddenly becomes a problem. Under the policy when a 16- or 17-year-old “open and avowed” homosexual becomes an Eagle before his 18th birthday, right after he turns 18 he is removed from Scouting. No troop leader would want to put himself in the position of enforcing such an irrational rule. A de facto change in the rule against openly homosexual adult leaders would also occur almost immediately. This inconsistency between the membership policy of youth and adults will provoke a “non-discrimination lawsuit by gay-rights activists groups against the BSA in which the association rights established by the Supreme Court will no longer be available. (See #7 infra.)

2) Opening the Boy Scouts to boys who openly proclaim being sexually attracted to other boys and/or openly identify themselves as “gay” will inevitably create an increase of boy-on-boy sexual contact which will result in further public scandal to the BSA, not to mention the tragedy of countless boys who will experience sexual, physical and psychological abuse. BSA’s own Youth Protection videos indicate that “70% of abuse to boys is by teenagers”. Two-deep leadership will have to be at least three-deep for units with homosexual youth. The complexity of sleeping arrangements will create a myriad of social and liability challenges. Sexual awareness and harassment training will be required in all Scouting units. The leaders setting forth the proposed policy clearly did not have the safety and security of the boys in the BSA as their paramount concern.

3) The proposal forces and requires every chartered Scouting unit, regardless of religious convictions, to accept “open and avowed homosexual” boys in their program. The proposed resolution is much worse than the original idea for a local option where each troop would decide whether to allow open homosexuality in its unit. This proposal fails to respect or reverence the religious beliefs, values and theology of the vast majority of Christian churches which charter well over 70% of all Scouting units.

4) If the proposal is enacted, it will gut a major percentage of human capital in the BSA and utterly devastate the program financially, socially and legally. Of the faith based Scouting units, the vast majority of them are Latter-day Saints, Methodists, Catholics or Southern Baptists. Despite what denominations may decide for political reasons, the majority of local churches that charter Scout units will not be able to embrace this policy without violating their religious convictions. The BSA’s own “Voice of the Scout” surveys provide solid evidence that tens- and possibly hundreds of thousands of parents and Scouts will leave the program if the proposal is adopted. The financial impact from such a significant membership loss would be enormous. Camps will close, executives will be let go and properties will be sold off as a result of the vast loss of finances from major donors, private foundations and declining membership.

5) The Resolution robs parents of the sole authority to raise issues of sex and sexuality with their kids. Parents should have the exclusive right to raise issues about sex and sexuality with their children in their own time and in their own way, in the privacy of their homes; not brought up by other older boys around a campfire. Allowing open homosexuality would inject a sensitive and highly-charged political issue into the heart of the BSA, against the wishes of the vast majority of parents. Under the longstanding current policy, boys who have a same-sex attraction are not banned or removed from the program unless they act out in a manner that distracts from the mission of the BSA.

6) The proposed policy directly contradicts the BSA’s comprehensive 2010-2012 study which unanimously concluded last summer that prohibiting “open and avowed homosexuality” was “the absolute best policy” for the Boy Scouts. Only months after the BSA affirmed the policy that was clearly in the best interest of its boys, a handful of top BSA officials caved from the pressure and criticism they received from their own adult peers. What kind of message are we sending to young people when the adults trying to teach them to be “brave” cannot muster up the courage to stand up for the values that are clearly best for the BSA? Sadly, instead of looking out for what is best for the safety and security of the boys in the program, BSA’s top leadership was more concerned about what is popular in the polls taken outside the Scouting family. To try to undermine the results of the unanimous 2012 study, the 2013 Voice of the Scout national survey was a carefully crafted tool to persuade and “condition” those surveyed to the idea of openly gay BSA members.

7) The proposed resolution leaves Scouting units with no options or legal protection if they refuse to allow open homosexuality among the boys of their units. This proposed policy completely retreats from the principles hard-fought in the U.S. Supreme Court case BSA vs. Dale in 2000. The legal protection will be completely removed for both adults and youth members. Scout units which refuses to accept or abide by the new policy will either have their charter revoked by national BSA leadership or become fully exposed to legal attacks for alleged violations of nondiscrimination ordinances. Even though the proposed resolution would not apply to adults immediately, legal experts estimate the new rule will also extend to everyone in the BSA, including adults, within only a couple of years because of lawsuits that will be brought by gay-rights activists under state non-discrimination clauses around the country once a gay Boy Scout turns 18 and is removed from the program. The resolution is the first step in a two-step process in the whole program.

8) The effect of the phrase “sexual preference” in the BSA resolution could be used by LGBT activists to push for transgendered girls in the BSA. If a biological girl “prefers” acting out as a transgendered boy, she must also be allowed into any Boy Scout troop. In October of 2011 the Girl Scouts admitted a 7-year-old boy named Bobby Montoya into their program who preferred to be treated as a girl. Because the vague and undefined phrase “sexual preference” is used in the resolution, it opens the door and requires Scout units to accept any sexual preference expressed.

9) The “whereas” clauses in the resolution are symbolic and not part of the actual proposed policy. While the Resolution includes some positive “Whereas” clauses designed to take the edge off of the new membership policy language by advocating for some type of moral purity, “Whereas” clauses have never been binding in contract law or in the legal construction of a resolution. The only words that will become part of the official membership policy are the 141 words after “NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT…”

10) Top BSA leaders completely ignored the collective wisdom of rank-and-file Scouting family members when they proposed this resolution. Nationwide the BSA’s official “Voice of the Scout” survey shows respondents support the current policy by a supermajority of 61% to 34%. This survey also showed:

3 of the 4 major BSA Regions around the country collectively voted that they did not want to see a change in the policy.
72 percent of chartered organizations oppose this change and support the current policy.
64 percent of council and district volunteers oppose this change and support the current policy.
62 percent of unit leaders oppose this change and support the current policy.
61 percent of Boy Scout parents oppose this change and support the current policy.
50 percent of Cub Scout parents oppose this change and support the current policy.

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:31 PM

The Scouts made the worst possible decision by going half way. They either should have stuck to their principles or caved entirely.

They managed to piss off those who supported them while making no friends among gay activist who demand complete submission.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:27 PM

Man, you always see a comment and think, wish that is what I’d actually said. Really, best comment of the tread.

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:28 PM

It’s like the scouts are the Republicans or something…

Lanceman on March 5, 2014 at 11:33 PM

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:27 PM

The lawsuits are just beginning. This should be an object lesson for those watching.

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:30 PM

Yep. It’s genius because it works in almost every venue they attack. The bottom line is once they allowed gay scouts, leaders would have to follow. How could you deny a former scout to be a leader once grown. The only question is if they cave even before than.

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:34 PM

62 percent of unit leaders oppose this change and support the current policy.
61 percent of Boy Scout parents oppose this change and support the current policy.
50 percent of Cub Scout parents oppose this change and support the current policy.

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:31 PM

Wow, watch those numbers drop. The media and school systems at work.

WryTrvllr on March 5, 2014 at 11:38 PM

Man, you always see a comment and think, wish that is what I’d actually said. Really, best comment of the tread.

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:28 PM

Thanks. The Scouts broke my heart. Being a Scout has always meant doing what you know to be right even when it’s difficult – even if it costs you everything.

Now their leadership has show that to be a lie.

I don’t care half as much about them having to deal with gay young men sleeping in the same tent as I care that Scout leadership has set a new example for every Scout alive – If the pressure is great enough, buckle. Give in. Sell out to stay alive.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:38 PM

The lawsuits are just beginning. This should be an object lesson for those watching.

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:30 PM

Yep. And who is going to back them now? Who is going to stand in their corner during these lawsuits? And, once they fold and allow gay leaders who in their right mind will allow their kid to be a Scout?

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:31 PM

Holy smokes. So it was just the leadership that changed the policy? I know a couple of great, old denominations who have slit their wrists the same way.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:43 PM

Yep. It’s genius because it works in almost every venue they attack. The bottom line is once they allowed gay scouts, leaders would have to follow. How could you deny a former scout to be a leader once grown. The only question is if they cave even before than.

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:34 PM

Yeah, but who is going to allow their kid to go on an overnighter with a gay leader? I’m not saying that all gay men are pedophiles, but would Girl Scouts allow their girls to go off on camping trips with male leaders? (Of course if they did I’m sure they would help pay for the resulting abortion)

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:45 PM

Holy smokes. So it was just the leadership that changed the policy? I know a couple of great, old denominations who have slit their wrists the same way.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:43 PM

The decision was made at the top and the bullying from the large corporate sponsors was heavy. AT&T and ExxonMobil mainly. Now that Disney is in on the BSA bullying trope, things should disintegrate quicker. Like I said earlier, to hell with it, the homos bought it, let them own it. The moral and upright will reorganize to fight elsewhere.

Murphy9 on March 5, 2014 at 11:48 PM

http://geopolicraticus.wordpress.com/2009/04/28/quantifying-biological-success/

Look, no judgment calls here. But how many of these definitions do you fill?

WryTrvllr on March 5, 2014 at 11:51 PM

Why? Just because we stopped doing that to gay people?

lexhamfox on March 5, 2014 at 11:17 PM

sorry, that was for you

WryTrvllr on March 5, 2014 at 11:52 PM

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:45 PM

Scout Oath

On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

Scout Law

A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly,
courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty,
brave, clean, and reverent.

For the life of me, I cannot understand how any adult leader in Scouting became confused about what their organization stood for and what it was founded on. We were led in this at the beginning of every meeting by the adult leader..

It was no different pushing to allow atheists to join scouting. There was never any great desire to have their children affiliated with the organization, but there has always been a great desire for them to destroy religion. Rather than just starting a similar organization that was not faith based, they cried that access was Constitutional and it started dying from that moment on. The Boy Scouts gave them the best fight though. I give them that.

hawkdriver on March 5, 2014 at 11:57 PM

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Darwinian_fitness

I realize it’s all semantics, but it almost makes you a different species, in which case the relationship would be defined as……

WryTrvllr on March 6, 2014 at 12:02 AM

test

WryTrvllr on March 6, 2014 at 12:03 AM

but would Girl Scouts allow their girls to go off on camping trips with male leaders? (Of course if they did I’m sure they would help pay for the resulting abortion)

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:45 PM

No they wouldn’t. They would pressure and shame the girl into getting the abortion, but they wouldn’t shell out any money for her. Did you forget the kind of people we’re talking about here? They want everyone else to pay for things.

Sterling Holobyte on March 6, 2014 at 12:06 AM

Thanks. The Scouts broke my heart. Being a Scout has always meant doing what you know to be right even when it’s difficult – even if it costs you everything.

Now their leadership has show that to be a lie.

I don’t care half as much about them having to deal with gay young men sleeping in the same tent as I care that Scout leadership has set a new example for every Scout alive – If the pressure is great enough, buckle. Give in. Sell out to stay alive.

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:38 PM

One could argue that’s exactly what they did.

alchemist19 on March 6, 2014 at 12:07 AM

So Disney was bullied by homosexual groups, and now Disney is bullying the Boy Scouts. See how that works?! So much for “anti-bullying” programs and campaigns.

Sterling Holobyte on March 6, 2014 at 12:08 AM

semantic

WryTrvllr on March 6, 2014 at 12:09 AM

species

WryTrvllr on March 6, 2014 at 12:09 AM

well, 0 for 2, not sure why.

WryTrvllr on March 6, 2014 at 12:09 AM

One could argue that’s exactly what they did.

alchemist19 on March 6, 2014 at 12:07 AM

Wrong is never right.

No matter what the world tells you or how mixed up it has become.

I am so glad I was a scout in the 70′s before all this P.C. crap started happening.

Sterling Holobyte on March 6, 2014 at 12:11 AM

Disney has a P/E of 22 and a dividend yield of 1.04%.

This stock is a little rich right now. Might be time to sell.

Bill C on March 6, 2014 at 12:21 AM

One could argue that’s exactly what they did.

alchemist19 on March 6, 2014 at 12:07 AM

——————

That’s funny. Hound and blackmail an organization for years until they cave and then pretend that they changed their policy because they felt it was a moral imperative.

“What? No Mrs. Cravits, Billy wanted me to have his lunch money. He said he didn’t want it anymore. He gave up lunch for Lent.”

29Victor on March 6, 2014 at 12:26 AM

When I was a kid in the 1960s, Disneyland and Scouting were wholesome, all-American cultural institutions.

The left has succeeded in pitting them against each other, as they have done with so much else that is traditional American.

DrDeano on March 6, 2014 at 1:40 AM

Gays = baby-killing?

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 7:11 PM

Well, they’re sure not baby-producing!

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 6, 2014 at 1:48 AM

1. I’d bet gays support abortion at a much higher percentage than the general population.

2. I’d bet that per-capita they give more time and money to abortion rights groups including PP.

You know you’re a pretty rare person in the gay crowd.

CWchangedhisNicagain on March 5, 2014 at 7:58 PM

1. Probably true, because homosexuals tend to be more liberal than the general population. Probably still not as high a percentage as single men who want unbridled sex without fear of a baby.

2. Probably true, for the same reason as #1

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 6, 2014 at 1:58 AM

Wrong is never right.

No matter what the world tells you or how mixed up it has become.

I am so glad I was a scout in the 70′s before all this P.C. crap started happening.

Sterling Holobyte on March 6, 2014 at 12:11 AM

Very true. But when the question comes “Are we right that this is wrong?” and the answer is “No,” then things have to change.

alchemist19 on March 6, 2014 at 2:11 AM

iamsaved on March 5, 2014 at 8:31 PM

They changed their policy regarding homosexuals but not regarding pedophiles, unless I missed something. The Venn Diagram of “homosexuals” and “pedophiles” does have some overlap but it’s not that the former implies the latter.

And we haven’t even gotten to the heterosexual pedophiles yet.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 8:42 PM

A gift for understatement. Up to one-third of child molesting is by men against boys. Yet a google search will quickly turn up all kinds of links calling it a myth that homosexuals are more likely to be child molesters. One might wonder how they can make such a claim.

Well, it’s all in the definitions. They define pedophiles as people who are sexually attracted to children, and distinguish them from homosexuals who are sexually attracted to adults of the same sex.

But that’s begging the question. In effect, they’re defining homosexuals as non-pedophiles, so it’s no wonder they claim there’s little or no overlap.

And if you think that’s just paranoia, read this link: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/09/18/903178/-Gays-are-pedophiles-No-Here-s-the-proof , where they explain that pedophiles are a different kind of creature altogether, and therefore a man who molests a boy is not actually a homosexual. Or, as they put it:

First it is not activists who “like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation” from homosexual orientation. It is very serious social scientists who have studied the subject closely who differentiate homosexual orientation from pedophilia — even when acts of pedophilia are homosexual in nature.

For a slightly more straightforward treatment of the subject, see: http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=is02e3

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 6, 2014 at 2:28 AM

This link is exceptionally good at reviewing some of the studies that purport to prove no links between homosexuality and pedophilia:

http://rethinkingtheology.com/2012/10/22/links-between-homosexuality-and-pedophilia/

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 6, 2014 at 2:37 AM

Surrender Boy Scouts! Give in! You’ve got nothing to lose. (And see how well it worked for the Catholic Church!)

olesparkie on March 6, 2014 at 4:13 AM

Boy scouts, girl scouts. These used to be respectable organizations.

No more.

So no money for them from me. No more cookies for pro-baby killers, no more donations to the boys who like boys scouts.

Not simply because I don’t agree with the lifestyle of gay folk, that’s just my opinion and their right to do whatever in their own time and space….but the scouts…no. That’s not what the scouts used to be about, and it shouldn’t be about that leftist CRAP.

Liberals destroy everything. I think it’s about time we start destroying liberals.

Diluculo on March 6, 2014 at 4:33 AM

This kinda reminds me of what the US Chamber of Crony Capitalism is doing to the Geriatric Old Progressives. You will support Amnesty, and the NFL did to Arizona. Never mind that this could affect support, do as we tell you. Someone needs to tell the Kronies that they will follow their principles so butt out, but they will cave

Brock Robamney on March 6, 2014 at 5:40 AM

First the BSA caves to the Rainbow. What a shame that BSA may be worried about the Mouse now.

Being a scout leader involves having to deal with the dynamics of boys interacting with other boys, and some of that interaction involves physical aggression between the boys. Now, there’s all that to deal with, plus the dynamic of physical intimacy (Will a scout leader now really allow a known homosexual kid to be in the same tent as a straight kid? Or two known homosexual kids in the same tent?)

Now the pressure is to allow known homosexual adult leaders into the mix. How likely is such a leader to intervene when two boys are smooching in the woods?

I wonder how it will play out when the first boy contracts AIDS from a BSA campout.

oakland on March 6, 2014 at 6:41 AM

Just as we are watching the destruction of the institution of marriage in this country, we are also watching the destruction of the fine, traditional organization of the Boy Scouts of America.
The trend is to suppress and to destroy institutions that involve distinctions – especially those involving distinctions on the basis of sex. Look for, in the very near future, to sponsors of BSA to pull their support on the basis of the “B”.

oakland on March 6, 2014 at 6:57 AM

Sterling Holobyte on March 6, 2014 at 12:11 AM

Very true. But when the question comes “Are we right that this is wrong?” and the answer is “No,” then things have to change.

alchemist19 on March 6, 2014 at 2:11 AM

You’re talking abstracts. Let me qualify wrong. It would be wrong for a male who is by his nature or choice gay, to be put in charge of young men who he might be attracted to. I would no more allow a gay male over or several night supervision of a son, than I would allow a heterosexual male my supervision of a daughter.

What is your point in even arguing this anymore? The gay community has succeeded is ruining scouts. Sit back and gloat over our comments.

hawkdriver on March 6, 2014 at 7:01 AM

alchemist19 on March 6, 2014 at 2:11 AM

You’re a freak.

CWchangedhisNicagain on March 6, 2014 at 7:08 AM

gloat over our comments.

hawkdriver on March 6, 2014 at 7:01 AM

Understand that Alchemist DOES NOT care what this will lead to…in fact bases on his weird obsession he fantasizes about. This one is truly perverted.

CWchangedhisNicagain on March 6, 2014 at 7:09 AM

My take on this, without getting into all my other (negative) opinions about homosexuality, is this:

Would it be ok to have a heterosexual man spend the week out in the woods with two or more girl scouts? Wouldn’t that be inappropriate? Wouldn’t wise parents wisely demand a change of plans?

If that is the case, why would it be wise to have a homosexual man spend the week out in the woods with two or more boy scouts? It’s just as inappropriate. Yet if parents and others object, they are considered “homophobic.”

RockinRickOwen on March 6, 2014 at 7:11 AM

Let the gays scout leaders form their own troops and see how many parents sign up their boys for them. Go for it! Let the gay scout leaders try to compete. Liberals don’t sign up their sons for Boy Scouts anyway.

My son is a scout and the Troop is run out of our church. The reason we joined his troop versus other troops was because the leadership was a group of truly fine, dedicated fathers.

monalisa on March 6, 2014 at 7:31 AM

Why would any children’s/young adult organization want money from an organization founded by a pedophile?

el hombre on March 6, 2014 at 8:29 AM

I only want to ask one question. Remember how many altar boys have been molested by gay priests? There seems to be an amazing incidence of pederasty in the catholic priesthood that everyone wants to ignore.

What I the probability the same thing will happen with gay scoutmasters? Are we supposed to accept this ill not happen? How exactly would gay scoutmasters be different from gay priests?

dogsoldier on March 6, 2014 at 8:44 AM

29Victor on March 5, 2014 at 11:27 PM

Exactly.

Disney was off my list ages ago because of some of the crap they were doing (including lots of money dumped into the DCMA).This just adds to it.

GWB on March 6, 2014 at 8:50 AM

You’re talking abstracts. Let me qualify wrong. It would be wrong for a male who is by his nature or choice gay, to be put in charge of young men who he might be attracted to. I would no more allow a gay male over or several night supervision of a son, than I would allow a heterosexual male my supervision of a daughter.

What is your point in even arguing this anymore? The gay community has succeeded is ruining scouts. Sit back and gloat over our comments.

hawkdriver on March 6, 2014 at 7:01 AM

It’s a red herring anyway. The Scouts didn’t change because they felt a “wrong had become right” or whatever, they buckled because of massive pressure from a few very powerful outside groups and government. The same reason Disney did years ago and many organizations still do.

Now people like alchemist19 want to pretend that these organizations changed their policies because they suddenly had an epiphany, ignoring the decades of unrelenting pressure.

There’s a pretty good chance this is all going to backfire some day because gay activists don’t know when to quit. They’ve gone from wanting proper protections to now forcing not only acceptance but participation. And one day they will have pushed too far.

29Victor on March 6, 2014 at 8:54 AM

There’s a pretty good chance this is all going to backfire some day because gay activists don’t know when to quit. They’ve gone from wanting proper protections to now forcing not only acceptance but participation. And one day they will have pushed too far.

29Victor on March 6, 2014 at 8:54 AM

Well said.

hawkdriver on March 6, 2014 at 9:02 AM

What I the probability the same thing will happen with gay scoutmasters? Are we supposed to accept this ill not happen? How exactly would gay scoutmasters be different from gay priests?

dogsoldier on March 6, 2014 at 8:44 AM

I think that’s part of the agenda. Leftists hate scouting to begin with. Scouting seeks to develop “the man within” through a highly varied program of challenges and setting high expectations with adult support, in a God-oriented environment. Done right, what you get out of all this are real men. Leftists hate real men.

Using this strategy, they weaken the BSA by bullying organizations out of funding it while it’s “anti-gay” and after it becomes enlightened with gay leaders, the leftists will shift focus to chhild molestation, which happens to be a problem in the BSA, just as it is in other youth organizations and in public schools.

Pretty good strategy to strip our youth of their potential manhood.

Cricket624 on March 6, 2014 at 10:22 AM

I think that’s part of the agenda. Leftists hate scouting to begin with. Scouting seeks to develop “the man within” through a highly varied program of challenges and setting high expectations with adult support, in a God-oriented environment. Done right, what you get out of all this are real men. Leftists hate real men.

Cricket624 on March 6, 2014 at 10:22 AM

The left also hates anyone having anything that someone else doesn’t have. They call that “inequality.” They want to make sure that everyone is the same – even if that “sameness” is empty and miserable.

So if allowing gays into Scouts destroys Scouts they don’t really care. They’re the spoiled little brat who knocks the lollypop out of the other kid’s hand. They don’t really care if they get candy, just as long as no one else does either.

29Victor on March 6, 2014 at 10:41 AM

I only want to ask one question. Remember how many altar boys have been molested by gay priests? There seems to be an amazing incidence of pederasty in the catholic priesthood that everyone wants to ignore.

What I the probability the same thing will happen with gay scoutmasters? Are we supposed to accept this ill not happen? How exactly would gay scoutmasters be different from gay priests?

dogsoldier on March 6, 2014 at 8:44 AM

This is the key issue that people want to ignore, because it’s considered offensive. But look at the statistics on child molestation. The percentage of girls molested by heterosexual males pales in comparison to the percentage of boys molested by homosexual males. Homosexuals are a tiny minority of the population, yet statistically they commit the vast majority of child molestations.

Sorry if it hurts folks precious feelings, but yes homosexuality is associated with a much higher instance of pedophilia. That’s why we see high instances of gay priests molesting boys but not straight priests molesting girls. When straight priests get caught in sexual relationships, it’s with adult women. When gay priests get caught in sexual relationships, it’s with young boys.

Homosexuality and pedophilia are both mental disorders, and both are closely related. It’s time we started treating them as such.

Shump on March 6, 2014 at 10:45 AM

The bottom line here is you have to be very, very vigilant nowadays if you have children. The threats are varied.

crankyoldlady on March 5, 2014 at 8:26 PM

+1000

bazil9 on March 6, 2014 at 10:59 AM

29Victor – One more thing about scouts for them to hate is that we let kids win and we let them lose. When we have a Pinewood Derby, the first thing we do is show the scouts the number of trophies we have for them and let them point out that there are more scouts in the room than trophies. Some will win and some will lose. The important thing is to Do Your Best.

All the scouts will get activity patches which we issue for every event – even ones that are not competitive – to add to their brag vests. But our kids learn how to dust off a defeat and give their personal best the next time around.

The adults guide and support. This year we had one boy whose car didn’t make it to the finish line. Two of us quickly pulled it and speed tuned it between heats. It still didn’t win, but it crossed the finish line in the final three heats and the family was happy.

Scouting is a meritocracy, with compassion and support.

Cricket624 on March 6, 2014 at 11:00 AM

To me, it’s really simple:

Do we want people who are so deeply confused about something as simple as the basics of biology teaching our kids??

!@#$%$ NO!!!

landlines on March 6, 2014 at 12:29 PM

One additional thought:

BSA may already have sanctioned gay leaders. In Cub Scout packs, Webelos are expected to demonstrate leadership to the Bears, Wolves and Tigers. As a pack leader, I go to troops for Boy Scouts to serve as Den Chiefs, providing leadership and assistance to the adult Den Leader. Since scouting allows gay Boy Scouts, a gay scout – one that is going through the testosterone bath of adolesence – might serve as a Den Chief to Webelos and Cubs.

How does a pack leader handle that one?

Cricket624 on March 6, 2014 at 12:32 PM

One additional thought:

BSA may already have sanctioned gay leaders. In Cub Scout packs, Webelos are expected to demonstrate leadership to the Bears, Wolves and Tigers. As a pack leader, I go to troops for Boy Scouts to serve as Den Chiefs, providing leadership and assistance to the adult Den Leader. Since scouting allows gay Boy Scouts, a gay scout – one that is going through the testosterone bath of adolesence – might serve as a Den Chief to Webelos and Cubs.

How does a pack leader handle that one?

Cricket624 on March 6, 2014 at 12:32 PM

You will be called a racist, bigot, homophobe and be sued personally by the gay mafia for interfering in their target rich environment.

The rise of homosexuality in our society is a judgment.

Murphy9 on March 6, 2014 at 3:54 PM

For the record, the president of Walt Disney World is openly gay.

Colony14 on March 6, 2014 at 8:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4