(I have a link here for popcorn sales, details are at the end of the post)
So I had an interesting conversation the other day. My son is in the Cub Scouts and we have been selling popcorn in the neighborhood (*you can order, too, if you want! You can even order popcorn to be sent to the troops!!) and for the most part people have been excited to share their experiences and to help out. Cute 8 year old face with an adorable speech, and in complete Class A uniform, he's hard to resist. We even had an Eagle Scouts dad pass on his sons old aluminum frame backpack he'd used during camping.
But not everyone is okay with the Scouts. We had an older gentleman tell us that, though he supports the idea of scouting, he could not support the Boy Scouts themselves as they allow homosexuals to be members. It was obvious nothing I was going to say would change his mind, but it's been something that has been bothering me since. I figured if I put it out here I could get it out of my mind. See, the problem I have with that argument is that there seems to be an assumption that gay members would have a dramatic impact on Scouting, but also assumes the reverse isn't true. What I mean is, the assumption seems to be that allowing homosexuals in scouting would bring gay culture into the program and negatively influence the boys. Boys will learn to be men, somehow and from someone. Excluding them from the Boy Scouts only limits where they can go to learn how to be men, and leaves a much more disturbing community for them to go to, the gay community.
I'll be honest, the hard-core gay community bothers me. Not because of their bedroom activities but because of their aggressiveness in pushing their lifestyle. Certain areas and certain "parades" in San Francisco are notorious for their brazen and disturbing behavior. What is better, then? To have boys and men feel that they are not accepted in Scouting and to look for a place they are accepted and to end up in some version of the gay community? Scouting teaches boys to be patriotic, the leftist world of the gay community teaches socialism. The Scouts promotes self-reliance and team work, the gay community promotes victim-hood. Which do we want to foster in the next generation, gay or straight?
While I appreciate that this man has his beliefs on religion and abnormal behavior, the fact is Scouting is there to build capable, responsible men. As for the adults, these boys need men in their lives who can demonstrate moral behavior and self-reliance regardless of who their significant other is. The Scouts has a very thorough program in place to minimize any inappropriate behavior, including making sure no child sleeps in a tent with an adult not his parent and a clear no one-on-one contact rule. So, again, the abuse of years past came not from gay members but from men who were willing to destroy children. I will not make the case that the two are the same. These men were looking for victims, and openly gay leaders simply want to help children grow.
Can they be one in the same? Sure. I'm sure many abusers were gay, but that is not causality. Nor was it this man's point. His point was they were gay. Period. Being gay is unacceptable, and so because the Scouts allow a sinning member in their ranks he was unsupportive. I hate to tell you all, but I'm a sinner. I would hope that wouldn't stop you from supporting an organization that helps boys become helpful members of society.
So what do you all think? Am I completely off base? Do some of you have the same issue as he, and can you help me understand why? I just want these men and boys to be a part of an organization trying to make America better, and not part of a community trying to destroy it one bakery at a time.
~The DO
*(As stated above, we have popcorn if you would like to support the Scouts. For full disclosure, 70% percent goes to local Scouting and part does go to my son to help pay for activities like camping and supplies. The BSA also has an option to buy popcorn they will send to the troops, if that is more your style. If you are interested here is the link.
POPCORN
Thank you so much for you support!!)
17 comments:
You're not off-base; giving the Scouts a well-vetted leader to follow will help them learn about becoming men in modern society. There are far worse examples they could follow.
Sir, there are sins and yes we are all sinners. But not all sins rise to the level of being classified as abominations. A list of such is found in Leviticus 18. God is speaking to the men in this chapter as seen in verse 5 and the VERY specific reference to homosexuality is found in verse 22 and it's directly tied to the word "abomination" in that verse.
No not all homosexuals are child molesters, but if you read the chapter here it is among a special types of activities that God abhors. He infact destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis chapters 14-18. He referred up the men there as exceedingly wicked.
I offer this as a defense of the older man you mentioned. I don't know the exact wording as I wasn't there, but from your description, I imagine that what I wrote was the basis of his thinking.
Hope this helps.
Allow me a wording correction. In the second to last paragraph, it should read, "He referred to the men there as exceedingly wicked."
Stupid spell correct....
Anonymous, I understand where the biblical aspect comes from. My issue is not why he believe the sin is unacceptable, but why he believes the sin to be reason enough not to hope they can be good members of society and learn to live in a proper manner. Why leave these boys to the insanity that is the gay community?
Thank you Rev. Paul. I appreciate your view!
Are you referring to having gay men as leaders in the Scouts, or having gay boys in the Scouts? I went back and reread and I'm still not sure as I see references to both.
The Bible has a saying, "Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it."
If the Scouts are bringing gay boys in order to train them to be non-gay, that's one thing....
However, I don't want an openly gay Scout leader potentially "training" some child to be gay when he grows up. He certainly won't tell them that his "alternate lifestyle" is wrong.
At best, he'll teach the boys that his lifestyle is a choice. When its plainly a perversion. Much like abortion (another named abomination), its most often presented as a choice.
I mentioned both boys and adults as the gentleman didn't specify where he problem was.
Again, the biblical implications aren't my question. My question was wouldn't it be better to guide either youth or adults away from what seems to be a highly destructive environment toward one that is highly supportive instead? Is your answer no, as you believe any contact with an adult gay man legitimizes homosexuality and that is unacceptable? Or at least that could have been the point of the gentleman?
I've been forced to work with them before, but that's not what we're talking about here. I've given you my general thoughts here, reminding you again that I didn't hear his words.
For me, if it were up to me I wouldn't allow an adult gay male to be around young boys. I don't see how a group of boys would draw this theoretical man back to the other side. Nor do I see the regular outings that also includes other straight men being persuasive either. It usually works the other way around.
"Be not deceived, evil companionships corrupt good morals". 1st Corinthians 15:33 ASV 1901
So yes, I believe any volunteer hanging out with such people should be avoided unless you are trying to teach them the Truth, and I don't see that happening during a Boy Scout function.
Not knowing this man, that's the best answer I can give you.
I can't separate the biblical implications from my everyday life as that was how I was raised. And whether the old man was thinking along those lines specifically or not, biblical imications, as you put it, were much more woven into society's fabric when he was raised.
Interesting. This conversation was enlightening, thank you. I still don't agree, but at least I see your point.
Well, think about it some. I enjoyed it too. Thanks for not getting nasty as many would theee days when scripture starts getting quoted.
Hmm...we left Scouting not long after this decision. And although it was not the cause of our departure, it was the cause of much family discussion on the subject.
For you see, not long after the decision to permit gay Scouts to remain in Scouting, there was a companion suit filed to force the BSA to allow openly gay Scout leaders. And we both know it will likely succeed in this day and age.
Perhaps the working solution would be then to permit openly homosexual leaders IF they were of the opposite gender of the group they were leading. So gay men would be Girl Scout leaders, and lesbian women would be allowed to be Boy Scout leaders. At least that would limit the issue of same-sex pedofilia. And it would be less likely to confuse young Scouts with the lifestyle issues/choices, however you want to parse it.
Ultimately we left Scouting because our son did not want to do the work necessary to advance. He just wanted to do the fun stuff. So we left.
PS: Tell Six I said HI!
Does "DO" stand for "Dead On"? What I hear you saying is that shunning gay people will solve nothing, no matter your stance on homosexuality. And radical homosexuality supports publicized activities that are not appropriate for children or adults. Welcoming gays to a more positive community than that is the way to go. Correct me if I've misunderstood you there, but I think you've got it.
"What I hear you saying is that shunning gay people will solve nothing, no matter your stance on homosexuality."
Well, I think that is hooey. I'll be more pointed that the anonymous writer was last night.
You're all decent people here so why not just allow them to move in with you?
I mean, if being around you guys once or twice a week for a couple of hours and then the occasional weekend camp-out is that good for these gay people, then living with you should REALLY be good for them. Oh wait that would make most of you squeamish wouldn't it..... they are practicing homosexualism after all.
I'll post what the anonymous writer posted last night, as it's worth repeating as some apparently didn't read it the first time:
"Be not deceived, evil companionships corrupt good morals". 1st Corinthians 15:33 ASV 1901
Really, the Apostle Paul meant what he said here. You won't change these people allowing them to hang out with you for fun and games, they will change you, and seemingly they already have.
There is a reason that these people where shunned and shamed into the closet when this elderly man grew up. There is a reason, that for years, the military refused to allow these people to serve. It wasn't until recently that the progressive Democrats began removing God from the schools and allowing them to serve openly in the military.
"Welcoming gays to a more positive community than that is the way to go."
They think they are better educated, more open minded, more capable of complex thinking.... and thus, wiser. You know they think this because they ridicule those who think differently.
Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools
Some of you are starting to sound like these progressive Democrats that I mentioned above, and the sad thing is, I know you really aren't. You wouldn't all be gun folk if you were.
You just think you are being kind.
I know most of you are going to reject this, but you can't say you weren't warned.
The BIBLE says:
I Thessalonians 5:22 "Abstain from all appearance of evil."
It doesn't say see how close you can get to sin and not be guilty of it.
But America has in fact done this. Now look at the result of welcoming these people into the mainstream. The story in Houston is that some 'gay' mayor is trying to intimidate preachers and shame them with some crazy local law.
Alright. My browser shut down yesterday as I was putting the finishing touches on my response. It was going to be BRILLIANT I tell ya. I simply don't have the energy to recreate it. So after thinking about it today this is my answer:
MW, we homeschool so it's much easier to do the boring stuff. I just make it a school assignment and get the same "do I have to's?" that I would from any assignment:)
ERM, thank you for your support! I'm quite glad to know I was able to get my point across:)
Anonymous 2, I can't go back through and recreate my response, so I'm just going to say I don't agree and leave it at that. Thank you for your opinion, I appreciate your time giving it.
I will say, however, that your tone is much less civil than the conversation up to this point. If any further comments are made, I would ask that you maintain the level of civility in play.
Interesting set of comments... Nuff said...
From the standpoint of the average man (me) of average standing and no real religious beliefs except that if god made me he knows what is in my heart and that is good enough for me, I offer this.
I could care less what someone else does in their bedroom, or who they love and care for. As long as the don't try and harm me or mine and support my right to be who I am, I will support their right to be who they are.
Life is much too short and I have enough on my plate without worrying about what someone else may be doing and who they are doing it with. I'll leave that to God and I will treat them the same way they treat me.
Post a Comment