Added: 5 years ago
From: TheAmura
Views: 13,998
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (157)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I say this guys full of shit

  • I wonder what the people interviewed think when they see how their ideas were portrayed as horribly wrong and retarded. It's like they switch on the tube and go "what the fuck?"

  • Is it me or do the gay guys look straighter than the straight guys?

  • Yeah, because all gay guys are pedaphiles. This dude needs to shut the hell up. Gays guys like other men not little boys, it's like saying because you like women you must automaticly like little girls.

  • fuck you in the neck, motherfucker

    hahaha, epic

  • @mmpezzotti Epic!

  • Chalk one up for the gay guys! lol

  • What about those terrible boys who do things like seduce their gym teachers 'n scoutmasters? Rape their best friend's dad? Grope the swim coach in the lockerroom, and rip the Speedo off the lifeguard? Who's going to put those horny little guys under control?

    I'd done all the above (and far more) by the time I was 12... and you know what? The law says THEY were "predators" for it.

    Go figure.

  • Insomniabreeze is correct sir, because paedophilia and homosexuality are completely seperate, and male paedophiles are more common that female ones; so little girls are more at risk.

    If the boy scouts don't allow anyone to join or be a part of for any reason than say, criminality, then they are a prejudicial organisation.

  • Separate, yes. Exclusive, no.

    It is possible to be both (Homosexual and a Paedophile), or one or the other and not both, or neither.

    HOWEVER, If one IS a Pedophile, AND a homosexual, that's bad in the BSA. At least, worse than if you were a pedophile and straight.

    So does it not make sense for a corporation (BSA is incorporated, I believe) to reduce it's liability risk in any way it can? If you could TELL if someone was a pedophile, I would fully support gay scoutmasters. Just not Nambla.

  • It's worse to be a gay pedophile than a straight pedophile? Wow, you're really going to have to clarify your reasoning on this one b/c I don't even know where to START commenting on that statement.

  • Never said that. It's worse to be a pedophile than a NON pedophile.

    What I REALLY said was, if you had, say, a 1% chance of any particular scoutmaster being a pedophile, regardless of whether he's gay or straight, if that 1% pedophile is straight, he's less likely to be sexually attracted to young boys. That is the simplest possible logic...even Rash Windbaugh should be able to reason THAT one out.

  • Insomniabreeze is correct sir, because paedophilia and homosexuality are completely seperate, and male paedophiles are more common that female ones; so little girls are more at risk.

    If the boy scouts don't allow anyone to join or be a part of for any reason than say, criminality, then they are a prejudicial organisation.

  • We should be able to rely on the fact that a grown up working with children is not going to molest them. Besides, what's the guarantee that a heterosexual female isn't going to molest a girl scout troop? Oh right, there's no such thing as female pedophiles who target children of their own sex, right? Riiiight...

  • That has to be the dubmest logic I ever heard in my entire life. By this logic, "we should be able to rely on the fact that a grown up world leader would never kill millions of the citizens of the country he was elected to lead."

    Pol Pot? Adolph Hitler? Saddam Hussein?

    Gee, I guess THAT logic doesn't work.

  • Because the case of homicidal maniacs who perpetuated mass genocide is REALLY applicable to the scouts (and I said "grown ups working with children", so yeah...awesome reading comprehension there). What I was saying was that you can't judge the eligibility of scout leaders by their gender. Lots of other things - but not their gender. But I guess it's pretty pointless to argue this with a person like you. Good luck in your ostracizing mission. (That was sarcasm by the way - just checking.)

  • You need to take some courses in logic and reading comprehension yourself. When refuting someone's logic, it is legitimate to demonstrate it's inaccuracy by applying the same argument to another parallel case (Elected leaders working with their citizens, versus grown ups working with children. Different? yes. parallel? Yes. Both cases involve someone in a trusted position of authority)

  • Homicidal maniacs versus pedophiles would be a more valid comparison. If a person is a known pedophile or homicidal maniac, then you would be justified in not hiring them for scoutmaster or priest or day-care provider.

  • don't state ur dumbass opinions for fact

  • Just someone else who is too afraid of the real world so he chooses a false sense of safety in his shell of ignorance.

  • Glad to hear you admit it.

  • I was referring to you lol. Classic come back btw.

    And by classic I mean cliche and uninspired.

  • Your post was worded in such a way that it was ambiguous as to whom it was referred to. In any case, I have no fear whatsoever of gay people, I merely point out that the Scouts are a private organization, which shouldn't be recieveing public funding anyway, any more than farm subsidies make any sense, and can set their own rules, so live with it.

    If conclusion jumping were an olympic sport, you would win the gold.

  • But... it's not a private organization since it is accepting public funding. Thus your entire argument is destroyed.

    If they want to exclude someone based on sexuality, race, or religion they have to stop accepting public funding first. You can't always have your cake and eat it too.

    If being a jackass where something to aspire to, you'd win life.

  • They never SOLICITED public funding in the first place..it was volunteered. Would YOU refuse free money? 'twas a bad decision to start taking tax money in the first place.

  • Irrelevant. If they accept public funding, then they are a public organization, and according to the law it is illegal for them to discriminate because of sexual orientation, race, or religion.

    If they want to not be a public organization then they should stop accepting public funding. That is how it works, or should work anyways.

  • This was actually a really cool and fascinating movie. Props to my fellow gay guys right on guys.

  • and their hair is fabulous. ba dum dum splash

  • stats I've heard put little girls as the most commonly molested group, not little boys. but whatever.

  • This is why you can't let people who graduate from Clown College do experiments. This "experiment" has so much bias. Practice effect and the fact they can observe, then they get to go. Those things don't affect reality!

  • First, YAY for gay! We win!

    Second, Penn had me at "fuck you in the neck, mutherfucker!"

    Third, can an Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins really be trusted as credible, and be believed over what an asshole like TimothyRed1990 says? I say yes.

  • Do you sing show tunes around the campfire? LOL

  • I'm not much of a showtune kind of gay . . . I'm more of a rhythm and blues/rock-a-billy kind of fag.

    But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night . . . with a showtune kind of gay. :o)

  • Yes, if they were a private organization then I agree that they should be allowed to exclude who they want but they are funded by taxpayers meaning they are funded by the people, gays and all... so they have no right to exclude anyone be they gay or Atheist or whatever.

  • The Scouts want it both ways. If they want to discriminate, they are a private organization, but they become a public organization if they want federal funding. 

    And how many Scout members know that this organization was founded by a bisexual? How many know that the American chapter was founded by an atheist?

  • The gay guys did it faster AND looked FAB-u-LOUS!

  • boy scouts can exclude who they want, it's their organization

  • When they stop getting government aid they can be as bigoted as they want, until then they have to be fair.

  • just because the government might give them aid, doesn't mean they're part of the government.

  • It means they are government supported, and the government is not allowed to (or at least isn't supposed to be allowed to) support bigoted organizations (or religious organizations).

  • well, that's the government's fault for supporting them isn't it?

  • Yes, it is their fault, let's make them stop.

  • oh, and would you please look up the definition of bigot please and get back to me?

  • A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own. Are you saying I'm a bigot?

  • Now if the boy scouts were going out lynching gays that would make them bigots. They just don't let gays into their club.

    They don't let girls into their club. I never hear people complaining about the sexism of the boy scouts.

  • You don't have to lynch people to be a bigot, just intolerant which they are. Once again, I wouldn't care if they were a private group without government aid. If you can find me some girls that want to be in the boy scouts and have been turned away I'll eat my hat.

  • Karate , I am a firefighter, and its a good thing they let me in that club, because I have saved many straight lives, and no one cared that I was gay when I way pulling them out of a burning buld. Funny how that works.

  • so what?

  • Karate, I am trying to convey, that exclusion actually hurts the whole of society and the club that is excluding, we can learn so much from diversity, also we have no idea what great things can be done by the person we are excluding, yrs ago you could not be gay as a firefighter.

  • So should the boyscouts be FORCED to include everyone because you think that exclusion is wrong? Are the boy scouts obligated to do everything that the fire department in your particular city has done?

  • being that the Scouts do not pay full market rent for public schools to meet at, and are deductable as a chartable group, are tax exempt . The scouts need to make up their mind if they are public or private.

  • there's a difference between being a non-profit organization and a public organization you know.

  • Karate, when The Boy Scouts are 100% private, then they can thumb their nose at all the faggots, until then , they are up for speculation.

  • don't you think it's a little harmful to society to impose accepted norms on every privately owned organization in the world?

  • Karate, it was an accepted norm at one time that black and white be seperated, and it was a norm that interacial marriage was forbidden, and it was a norm that women could not vote.

  • take another look at what i said there please, as your reply did not address it's base comment.

    I said that it IS HARMFUL to impose accepted norms on private organizations.

    A person requiring Boy Scouts to accept gays is imposing, what that person things ought to be the accepted norm, on the Boy scouts

  • Thy( The Boy Scouts of America ) are not Private!!! Secondly there is nothing harmful about having homosexuals in your community.

  • "Secondly there is nothing harmful about having homosexuals in your community."

    I hope you realize that I'm coming from a stance of non-intervention and NOT a stance of anti-homosexuality.

  • Then exactly what is your stance on the Boy Scouts and their stance on keeping Homosexuals , Atheist and many more out of the Scouts?

  • do you have a problem with reading or something?

    i said non-intervention

    non-intervention

    non-intervention

    non-intervention

    non-intervention

  • Karate, No, I think it is you that has comprehension problems. You claim to have no stance on homosexuals, but if it were blacks that the Boy Scouts did not want in, I am sure that would be differnt.

  • no it wouldn't be different.

  • Karate, discrimination for any group, that can not help the way they are born, is not what this nation was built on, and as long as the Scouts are not 100% private, they are to answer to the American Public.

  • Do to The Boy Scouts having camps on Pulic property, and meetings on public property, etc etc, that the tax payers pay for, there must be intervention, and trust me there will be, the tooth paste is already out of the tube.

  • 2 of the 2 troops i've been in have met in private property. 1: a church, and 2: moose lodge. Also, I've never camped in a place that A: was not owned by the boy scouts, or

    B: was not open to any other private organizations or individuals to camp in.

    Also, boy scouts, for the most part, do not get the majority of their funding from the government. They may get some here and there, but the majority of their funding domes from donations from individuals and coorperations.

  • You have once again missed my Point. I said even if they are getting a small slice of Goverment dollars or spending Any time on Property paid by you and me, they will answer to the public.

  • let's say someone gets a social security check and then goes and buys a bit of land. Is that your land too? If you can't truthfully answer yes to that question, then you can't prove that the boy scouts are a public organization.

  • Karate, your going off on tangents, thats like me saying suppose if I were king and I ............your becoming childish in order to win a debate. the fact is if the scouts want to use a Park or a Center etc, then they are accountable to the public, its that simple!

  • tangents? you mean the point that you don't become public property if the government pays you any money?  Who's being childish?

    The fact is that pretty much any organization, public or private, is allowed to use a park or a center. That doesn't make the boy scouts public.

  • Yes! it does make them Public if your getting Gov. dollars and using their land, that is the way it is.

  • are you saying that anyone who gets government money is accountable to you, like say... the elderly, the poor, and college students. Are they public people?

    wikipedia says:

    "National is registered as a non-profit private corporation and is funded from private donations, membership dues, corporate sponsors, and special events."

    the boy-scouts rights as a private organization was also held up in supreme court. they are private, hands down.

  • The Pentagon gave the Boy Scouts 8 million Dollars to assist in a Jamboree and The Boy Scouts many times have used Military bases, the High Courts and the Sentae are in a dead lock over this matter, so there is no hands down there junior.

  • The Bible was used to fight Freedom of Slaves, Interacial Marriage, etc. It always takes time for the general public to get used to the idea. England, The Netherlands, Spain,Canada, South Africa & Belgium all have Gay Marriage. it just takes time

  • the thing is that it's up to the boy scouts and the boy scouts alone to make that decision.

  • You right,,,that is very true, but one day they will have little to no funds, no help etc, and money changes every thing, if you do not believe that you are very naive.

  • Oh, by the way never use Widapedia, it is a public forum it can be canged by a 10 yr old over night. Also, yes, if the Elderly , college students etc accept money, they are held accoutable to the Goverment.

  • It's more than wikipedia that says that. I bet you can't find anything contrary to that.

  • Karate, I got my source from Cornell University- law School, from Time Magazine, and U.S & world Report, Yep, I guess you trumped me with that darn Wikapedia.

  • and what do YOUR sources say?

  • the Sources say , that it it still going through the courts, and probably will until one day The Scouts make provisons.

  • well, according to law(dot)cornell(dot)edu, the boy scouts right to exclude gays was uplheld by the supreme court of the United States and the Boy Scouts was never refered to as anything but a private organization.

  • Yes, this is true, in 2000 the boy Scouts have had the right to discriminate, but will reamain in Litagation is places like Philly, and others, Trust me it will not be able for ever.

  • I found From the Cornell Law School News that Places Like Connecticut, and Philly among other states are cutting off all funds and bnnot allowing The Scouts to Discrimanate. All the money going to lawyers, it stated , that they can not see it going on much longer.

  • Gay marriage was ruled out in Mass, but eventually won and (10) other states in America like Vermont and NJ, Conn. etc etc. all have gay marriage, . This was never going to happen, but it did

  • Do you Remeber whan Cracer Barrel Refused to Hire gays, 20 yrs later after ,being draind with legal suits, They have changed, and Gays can now work at Crqker Barrel,,Its only a matter of wearing them Dowm.

  • Nothing is forever , and time eventually changes , If you live long enough you will be shocked as I have in my life time so far. In my pasrensts day, Interacial marriage was a HUGE taboo.

  • Philly used to Rent huge Buildings for one Dollar to the Scouts, now they have to pay martket Price, and Conneticuit has stopped all and any help. Calif, and other states are following.

  • it's not particularly hard for a smart troop to find a place to meet for free.  they could probably ask a church or something.

  • Yes, your correct, The Boy Scouts can even meet in a Private home, but Public Places one by one will be removed as time goes on.

  • Hey ,I need to get going for now, I am at the fire station for now, and have to do some drills. talk at ya later

  • If the Scouts are getting one dollar from the Gov, they are accountable.

  • If it is sin that keeps atheist and homosexuals from the Scouts ,why is it they have so many fat scouts, ( gluttony)

  • "no one cared that I was gay when I way pulling them out of a burning buld."

    Well, if you're hot and single, I'd seriously think about lighting my building on fire :0)

  • I appreciate the offer, you seem like a nice and well rounded person ,,but I am taken, & we live in Vermont in a civil union ,we moved here from Fl. We are both 47. I sure had been through the gambit before I found happiness.

  • Look at all of the comments from bigots. Gay men don't abuse children, it is always the mentally ill. To make it seem like being gay is an illness, just makes you stupid. There is something called B-O-O-K-S and they have all kinds of great info. Maybe you should put down your book of hate (BIBLE) and read a little more on how NOT to judge people based on them being different.

  • thank you.

  • "Catholic Priest are raping young men over and over because they are homosexuals with sick minds."

    They're doing it because they are gay guys who have been repressed to the point where they can't deal with their sexuality in a healthy way.

  • h ttp://ww w.boxturtlebulletin.c om/Articles/000,002.htm

    This URL is to an excellent article debunking the claim that homosexuals are more likely to molest kids. (remove spaces in URL to get it to execute)

  • I'm glad this is here, especially Fred Berlin's statements at the end. With the removal of full Penn & Teller videos from YouTube, I'm happy this snippit survived. Thank you.

  • fuck that guy in the neck

  • Posters here are missing the point of Scouting. Scouts do train in a way that can lead them into the military -u should thank them instead. Peds don't have to be gay, but neither have a place in Scouts. Obviously posters here haven't been Scouts. They are trained to save lives - possibly yours one day. My suggestion for the homosexuals (also a recruiting group of people) would be to join the Girl Scouts as they might fit in better.

  • That's a crock of shit. Gay men are men, identify themselves as men, feel like men. And they hate selling cookies.

  • Ya know, the military had a problem with this issue as well - are you seeing a pattern here? Is it because the general populous has a hard time understanding the gays' position on? I've seen 2-headed cows before - simple freak of nature, nothing more. U might be right about the percentage, Scouts just don't want to borrow trouble.

  • There is no such thing as a homosexual problem, only a homophobia problem, and the fact that there is such a stir about this reflects the fears ond insecurities of too many men. There are only a few nations left that bar gays from their militaries, and I'm ahamed of the USA for being among them.

  • very very well put thank you so much for that!

  • Hmm, why would the government want to give a lot of money to the largest boy-only non-profit organization in the country?

    Couldn't be military recruitment, could it be?

  • when did homosexuality become a movement

  • In Germany in the second half of the 19th century.

  • FOOD FOR THOUGHT: The Boy Scouts organization encourages its members to actively participate in the religion of their choice. I say RELIGION kills! Is this organization rejecting Jesus as Lord and Savior? Christian Churches seem to be sending the wrong message when they lock out homosexuals from attending worship, but allow boy scouts in their services (and to use church facilities).

  • penn and teller are so fucking cool!!!!

  • Not all gays are pedophiles you stupid dickheads. I think pedophilia is disgusting and I'm gay.. Anyway the boyscouts SUCK and NO, they do not have the right to disclude anyone based on sexual preference.. this REALLY IS bullshit

  • WTF!!! if i had a gun i would shoot that asshole that had no f'in clue wat he was tlking about...ppl join BSA cause they're ped. BS!!! being a Boy Scout myself...esp. as a youth, this guy is full of SHIT!!! hell i'm gay, and not a ped. AND i know like 20 gay ppl in scouts!! (they might be youth or adult) national BSA headquarters is also SCREWED UP!!!!

  • Im a Eagle scout and ppl do not join the boy scouts fot that reason they join to have fun and go campin and earn there eagle Like i did God created adam and eve not adam and steve

  • fuck off you racist slime ball. Eaglescouter. Many people don't believe in the same god as you do. Using tax dollars to support racist bigoted organizations who base their policies of a myth is violation of separation between church and state.

  • your a faget

  • "Fuck you in the neck, motherfucker."

    I honestly couldn't have said it any better myself.

  • I'm gay :(

  • why do you say that with a frown? be proud, dumbass

  • Okay I like Penn & teller but that last part was seriously wrong... The FBI keeps records of that stuff and its all public. the proportions are incredible for men on boys however the second highest number is men on girl followed by womon on boys and women on girls. A Gay guy is more likely to be a pedofile but a lesbian is less likely. However the man-boy is vastly overrepresented... nearly 1/3 of all sex crimes againest children (dont bitch if you aint got the time to actually look it up...)

  • The mistake you're falling into is treating males who molest pre-pubescent boys as a sub-set of homosexuals. The FBI--which you seem to respect--reports that only 10% of pedophiles have any sexual preference at all. Of the non-pedophile men who have molested pre-pubescent boys, most are genuinely attracted to adult females (as verified by phalometric tests) and responded to an opportunity.

  • not sure about that 10%... if you've got a reference PM me that.

    But even if that is true it still doesn't explain the disproportion because at max it should be only 1/4... (man-boy, woman-boy, man-girl, and woman-girl).

    I don't trust the government in general... but the claim was there isn't any evidence to support that and since most people trust the Government or at least the FBI.

  • 30% of the molestation victims are boys. Most of these attacks are carried out by pedophiles or heterosexual men (yes, real heterosexuals who are attracted to the feminine characteristics of pre-pubescent boys). If you looked for the attackers among openly gay males, and had a perfect test for guilt, you would solve only 2%-3% of the cases. Boys are trusted in the custody of hetersexual men more than girls are. So the opportunity is greater.

  • Also, I don't quite know what you mean "at max it should be only 1/4... (man-boy, woman-boy, man-girl, and woman-girl)." The vast majority of molestations are done by men. (The "men" doing this are composed of hetero/homo/pedophile). 70% of victims are girls, 30% boys. The tactic of the so-called "Family Research Council" of calling the attackers of boys "homosexuals" can't stand up to close analysis--it's an anti-evolution-type argument.

  • Ah, another study from UC-Davis backs up everything I said, and critically examines the garbage put out by the "Family Research Council" and completely destroys it. <htt p://psychology.ucdavis.e du/rainbow/h tml/facts_molestation.h tml> (remove spaces in URL to execute) You guys wanted facts and not loud swearing, well here you go.

  • stanayers: FUCK YOU!

  • Yeah, you really told him. =|

  • No, I told him. And he hasn't been back.

  • Shout the f word more!

    Do GIRL scouts let men alone with girls? No. Safety trumps rights. The men are policed. And everyone KNOWS WHO THEY ARE.

    Compare homosexuals in BSA. To have similar assurance you'd have to REGISTER the Homos. Make them dress differently, and actively police them. Sound good? No? Hmm.

    "We're gay, REALLY WANT to go camping with your adolescent son! Trust us- we just like young people and the outdoors. Your nausea is just HOMOPHOBIA. Get over it!" Right.

  • So it's because only men can be sexual deviants, has nothing to do with homophobia?

    In other words you're sexist rather than homophobic but still just as misinformed. Lovely!

  • You got it, sorta. I recognize differences between the sexes, yes. Among them is this fact: Men are far more likely to be sexual predators. Ask a cop, a judge, or a behavioral psychologist. Anywhere. Overwhelmingly, sex crimes are men's crimes. There are exceptions, but we're talking about the rule. Homosexuals should not be left alone with little boys. Unless you think gay sex is OK for little boys, in which case, I grieve for you.

  • The data doesn't support the statement that the homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals. If that is the case, then NO men should be allowed near boys since they might become victimizers.

  • Assume pedphilia rates hom/het=1. Assume female pedophilia rates are near zero- they are. Then we conclude the same. Almost all pedophiles are men. Most men are heterosexual. So pedophiles are mostly seeking girls. Men are presumed to be heterosexual. It's thus unwise for parents of young girls to let them travel with unknown men sans chaperone. The same logic asserts homosexuals shouldn't be placed as guardians over boys, as they would be in Scouting.

  • Doesn't matter. You can't persecute people on the POSSIBILITY that they might do wrong. Don't try to sugar coat it, that's discrimination and nothing else.

    We heteros led the way for pedophilia, polygamy and all the rest of the deviancy and so to point to some minority group and say "you're the problem" is either hypocrisy or denial.

    So like the movie said, which is it? Asshole or idiot?

  • while i do agree that you cant discriminate like that the most compelling argument in favor of the Boy Scouts is that they are a private organization. The Free Masons are not forced to let Jews or Blacks in for the same reason. But nobody complains about that even thoughg the organization isnt a racist group and a black or Jew may still wan it (unlike something liket he Klan)

  • Actually, that argument gets debunked in that episode too. (it's not shown in this clip) The boy scouts, in several ways, DO get government tax money and their meetings are often held in schools which is a blantant violation of the "no discrimination on school grounds" policies.

  • "So like the movie said, which is it? Asshole or idiot?"

    Both?

  • That logic makes no sense... because men are normally straight and pedofiles are normally men pedofiles are always straight men? seriously dude...

  • No. Most assaults on young boys are committed by pedophiles--i.e. men with absolutely no attraction to adults--or heterosexual men. The heterosexuals who molest boys say they are attracted to the feminine characteristics of young boys. Phallometric tests confirm that these guys are attracted to young boys & adult women. The church fails to mention that a large number of these guys have also molested little girls, preferring instead to call them "homosexuals."

  • how do you figure that? The data says that man/boy pedofile cases are overly represtened againest man/girl cases than gay men against straight men... it does not say anything to the nature that gay men are pedofiles always... just more often (in proportion) than straight men

  • No. Read the thread. I answered lordpottymouth rhetorically: SAY (axiomatically for argument) that rate_Hom_pedo=rate_het_pedo. And het%>>hom% Then note common protection for girls. Logic invokes same protection for boys among homosexuals. His logic is flawed. Reality: Hom_pedo_rate>>Het_pedo_rate. So the conclusion is strengthened. So, no gay scout leaders. Freedom of assoc is a strong angle, but not in this dialogue.

  • 96% of all people in jail for violent offenses are men yet we don't make different rules for men and women do we?

    Innocent until proven guilty, period. End of story. No debate.

  • "fuck you in the neck motherfucker." awesome video.

  • lol, "then theres THIS asshole"

  • Great video.

  • Who is molested the most? Females. Who mostlikely to molest? MEn. Do the math. Heteros molest more.

  • There are no girls in the Boy Scouts. What's your point idiot?

  • My point is that there is an implication that homos can't be boyscouts because of molestation innuendo etc.

    p.s.fuck you

  • It is the implication of your 'p.s' that scares the Scouting organization btw. The only homosexuals that are banned from the Scouts are the leaders, not the boys themselves. If homosexuality really isn't a choice, then I suspect that there are probably many homosexuals in the organization - just in the form of adolescent boys and the may not even know it yet. Obviously you have no children to worry about. Homos or heteros - neither would be good.

  • How does being gay make you unfit to be around kids? What are you trying to say about gay men? That they, by default,like kids? Should we bar straight men from coaching girls?

  • Interesting point, however... It would be a rare occasion I would think that a man would be put in the position of having to take care of young girls toiletry needs for example or some other awkward situation. Laws take care of the guilty whatever their orientation. Scout leaders have a lot of rules that have to be followed concerning this because parents try to slap lawsuits on the BSA. Parents are the ones behind the policies as well remember.

  • The Mormon Church is behind these policies because it is the Scouts largest benefactor. There was no problem until this Church seized input. The AMERICAN Scouts is the only chapter that bars homosexuals, and atheists. Boy homosexuals are not excluded because they're too young to realize they may be homosexual, and they take it for granted that they will be heterosexuals with wife and children.

  • I like this video. really said something about homophobics.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more