Boy Scouts of America to allow openly gay youths to join

[Guest anonone]

Another positive step here in the USA.  The ban on leaders is still in place, but for a group like the Scouts to open up just a bit, this is a great indicator that the tide continues to turn.....

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/us/boy-scouts-to-admit-openly-gay-youths-as-members.html?_r=0

 

The Boy Scouts of America on Thursday ended its longstanding policy of forbidding openly gay youths to participate in its activities, a step its chief executive called “compassionate, caring and kind.” 

The decision, which came after years of resistance and wrenching internal debate, was widely seen as a milestone for the Boy Scouts, a symbol of traditional America. More than 1,400 volunteer leaders from across the country voted, with more than 60 percent approving a measure that said no youth may be denied membership “on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.”

The top national leaders of the Boy Scouts, who pledge fealty to God and country, had urged the change in the face of vehement opposition from conservative parents and volunteers, some of whom said they would quit the organization. But the vote put the Scouts more in line with the swift rise in public acceptance of homosexuality, especially among younger parents who are essential to the future of an institution that has been losing members for decades.

 

 

The Scouts did not consider the even more divisive question of whether to allow openly gay adults and leaders. This drew criticism from advocates for gay rights, who called the decision a breakthrough but vowed to continue pressing the Scouts to allow gay members of all ages.

Some conservative churches and parents said the Scouts were violating their oath to be “morally straight” and said they would drop out.

 

Several sponsors, including the UPS Foundation, Merck, the Intel Foundation, and many local United Ways and city agencies had already ended financing for the Scouts because the group’s policies violated their own nondiscrimination guidelines.

 

 

 

(cartoon from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/leslie-marshall/2013/02/07/boy-scouts-of-america-should-allow-gay-members)

[NIrishGuy]

How ridiculous to lift the ban on members being gay but yet NOT on having gay scout leaders - and this vote coming from the very Scout leaders themselves, I think that tells you where their heads are REALLY at !!

So a scout goes through his entire youth as a (gay) scout, perhaps right up to getting his Eagle Scout badge and lives and breathes scouting all his life and then at 18 or 20 has to either leave, taking all his enthusiasm and knowledge with him, OR go back in the closet and deny that he's actually gay to enable him to keep on doing what he's loved all those years ! Yeah there's progress for you !

Whilst this may be seen as a SMALL step in the right direction the vote was only carried by 60% of those voting and the question about them accepting gay leaders not to have even been asked by the ruling Council is just them hoping that they've dodged that particular the bullet until another day instead of them actually grasping the nettle and just going ahead and ending their discriminatory practices.  So it appears that they still have a long way to go in their heads both as an Organisation and at least 40% of the leaders who voted as to the whole " yeah some people are gay get over it" campaign :-(  

So, "yes, we'll allow gay kids to join now, but hey just don't start thinking that you're actually equal to us or anything, or that you can teach us anything or that you talk, lead or deal with our kids or members in any way, cause you know what, actually we still think you're all just a little bit morally suspect deep down. But hey I guess we can tolerate a few of you joining if it stops the bad press and hell who knows perhaps our straight leaders can actually straighten you confused kids out somehow as you'll sure as hell not see any gay role models in THIS organisation". - yes, definitely a long way to go me thinks - and for an organisation that prides itself on being so good at camping too ( joke) !!

Shame on them, they need to lift their ban on leaders now too and stop their discriminatory homophobic crap NOW and do that not just as they are being put under PR or Sponsors pressure but simply because its the right thing to DO !! :-(

[Guest scottishguy]

From my experiences in Scout-like organisations, it certainly wasn't openly gay leaders who wanted into your school knickers anyway - it was the older "str8" lads or the "happily married" adults.

 

So, if the implication is that the continued discrimination is a child protection issue - well, it simply isn't.

 

[NIrishGuy]

I note ( and am glad) that you underlined the implication part there as you'd absolutely right about that and my experience/s in the BB ( no not THAT one, but the Boys Brigade i.e. whats also known here in Ireland as the paramilitary wing of the Church :-) I can confirm the same.

 

But what i want to know is why is no one CALLING the Scouts on this and asking them DO THEY think and if are they claiming that it's a Child protection issue if so why ?  To be fair to them I'm not sure they are actually claiming that but are more leaning towards "being gay doesn't sit with our moral code"  - but lets face it that's just another way of saying " you're all perverts and sodomites and we want nothing to do with you" - I mean this is an Organisation who only as recently as July 2012 concluded that its long-standing ban on gay scouts was "the best policy for the organisation" so that reads to me more like my above " actually we don't want a gay about the place but hey if we let a few in I GUESS that's ok if it takes the heat off until things die down, but hey lets DEFINITELY never treat gay people as actual equals or anything like that as that's just a bridge too far for those perverts"

 

So, whilst their vote is more positive than negative I personally don't feel the gay community should be throwing garlands at them JUST yet until they get their house in order and start treating ALL gay people equally as surely MORALLY that's the right thing to do  - not that we gays would know anything about being morally straight of course according to them  - "apparently".

[ceejay]

Quote from Wayne Brock, the Chief Executive of BSA:

“This is not about what’s legal but what’s compassionate, caring and kind,”

Compassionate? That sounds to me as if Mr Brock views homosexuality as some sort of affliction to be pitied, and that far from feeling that a wrong is being righted, he views it as an act of generosity, charity even with an essentially straight organisation admitting gays out of the goodness of their hearts. That hardly puts gay scouts on an equal footing.

Compare this to the official UK Scout guidelines which can be found at this link:

http://members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/search/?cat=377,378

This quote is from "Being Gay with an Adult role in Scouting:
 

 

There is no basis on which any volunteer offering his or her services in any capacity

can be refused an appointment in, or Membership of, the Movement on the

grounds of heterosexual or homosexual orientation. Homosexuality has been

perceived as incompatible with Scouting by some people (both within and outside

The Scout Association) on the basis of a presumed link between

homosexu ality and paedophilia. This perception has been used to deny homosexual

people the chance to work with young people as Scout Leaders. There is no link between

homosexuality and paedophilia, and therefore there is no justification for

restricting Membership on this basis.”

 

 

 

[Guest anonone]

Wow.  Some strong feelings about this, I guess.

 

I view this more as a gauge of changing social acceptance than cause for celebration that the Scouts of America have completely eliminated any homosexual discrimination.  The Boy Scouts of America have historically been adamantly opposed to any inclusion of homosexuals in their organization.  I see this announcement as another rung in the continual erosion of anti-gay discrimination in the larger society, not as the end of the line for this issue.

 

As more and more announcements like this are generated, it really makes the religious conservatives appear more like the bigoted assholes they truly are. 

 

Guys, this is a marathon...not a sprint. 

[NIrishGuy]

Just how long should we be prepared to wait then Anonone, our lifetime, the next generation of gay guys lifetimes or the next ? 

 

What's wrong with us all just saying "This is bullshit, just stop your blatant discrimination in many areas of society NOW, we won't stand for it any longer !"

 

Personally I think we've been WAY too generous in allowing the straight community to set the pace of change and it's good to see the gay community asserting itself of late and DEMANDING their equal rights and not quietly hoping or asking "please can we have our basic equal rights" in issues such as marriage equality etc, enough is enough and the time to all speak out is I believe now and NOT to wait until people such as the Scouts and their like decide that we have conformed enough to their narrow views for them to allow us admission to their hallowed organisations and or whatever Federal and State bodies that chose to treat gay people with contempt ( as that's OUR job when dealing with each other it seems and a role which we seem to be able to manage to undertake perfectly well without THEIR help it seems :-)

 

 

( Oh and the above comments are not directed at you personally in any way Anonone, I'm just speaking generally here) 

 

Right, rant over, where's my Bra as I'm off to burn it !!  

[Guest fountainhall]

I've also read the comments in detail, and I agree more with anonone. Perhaps because I'm older than NIrish, whose views I accept are held by many others, I can recall the times in most of the smaller towns and cities in the UK when gay people were whispered about and referred to dismissively as "queer" - i.e. "not like us". Few gays came out then because of the social stigma it carried. Gay bars? Perhaps in London and a couple of other big cities. In most others, there were only private clubs where "those people" could socialise together.

 

The changes over my lifetime have been huge. In the early 1950s there was, as wikipedia calls it, "a conspiracy of silence around homosexuality." Although too young to read about it personally, the arrest of one of the most famous Shakespearean actors of all time, the newly knighted Sir John Gielgud, for "persistently importuning young men for immoral purposes" in 1953 was news only because of his name - and his stupidity for giving his real name, something another actor Alec Guinness had lied about when similarly arrested some years earlier. Such arrests happened all the time. There was even a special force of handsome young police officers whose primary job was entrapment of gay men. (And lest we forget, Singapore had a similar police task force that regularly entrapped gay men until much more recently).

 

Gielgud almost committed suicide, such was the publicity attached to his case. One peer of the realm even called for him to be publicly horsewhipped in the street and stripped of his knighthood. He could go nowhere near Hollywood for 10 years because of the US attitudes towards homosexuality.

 

Did the British public object? Thankfully, some did, with more doing so over time. As a result, the government finally changed the law. Acceptance of the LGBT community has developed from a trickle to what now seems a flood in comparison. How many gay men and women 40 years ago would have envisioned governments around the world discussing gay marriage, let alone agreeing to it? I'll bet less than a handful.

 

How long did it take for women to gain the right to vote? How long did it take African-Americans not just to be able to vote but to be able to eat in the same cafes and piss in the same urinals as white Americans. Society as we know it is made up of a plurality of views. As members of society we have accepted through the ages that the majority rules. That's the system, like it or not. The LGBT lobby has to use many different means to get its views across. And in many parts of the world it is winning that fight in so many ways. But it cannot win the war just by demanding change - if only because many members of its community for their own reasons will not openly join that fight. The fact is we are not all united. So the leaders of our gay community must cajole and persuade - as it has been doing with very considerable success. 

[KhorTose]

I too agree with Anonone.  It is a first and very positive step.  What is great is that the places (mostly public entities and states), and businesses that boycott them now will probably continue to do so, as their adult leader stance is still discriminatory.  Also the most bigoted group inside the boy scouts may very well leave over this and form their own groups, which will make the remainder even more liberal.  Given a certain amount of time, I am sure the adult leadership issue will also resolve itself.  I am with Anonone on his one step at a time marathon rather then a splint.

    A s an aside, I am shocked that the Mormon Church (one of the biggest groups inside the BSA) took a neutral stand on this.  Prior to this they have been far more homophobic then even the Babtist church.  Maybe Romney's loss in the recent election finally sent them a message.  Look for a new revelations to come out of their--connected directly to God--leadership.

[Guest scottishguy]

Would it be enormously controversial to suggest that maybe the Americans ought to work towards taking religion out of their politics?

 

From a distance it seems that it's mostly all hipocrisy anyway - an awful lot of these "god-fearing" politicians have been caught shagging like rabbits.

[NIrishGuy]

To be fair considering the Bishops of the Church of England etc still sit in the House of Lords unelected and DO still sway power when it comes to the outcome of voting etc ( just watch them go once the marriage equality bill hits the Lords for it's reading there next !) I think we to could do with doing the same  - and don't even start me on this backwater so called religious shit hole that I live in here in N.i Ieland where both sides still basically vote in their politicians based on their religion ( and so then politics) .

 

So I'm ALL for separation of Church and State and think it should be even more enforced than it currently is - so if they Americans are prone to mixing their religion and politics too much then I've a fair idea who it was that taught them to do that  maybe.  And I'm not even sure we can blame the English on this one as the Scot's and the Irish were ( and still are) some of the worst offenders perhaps  :-(

 

So, yes I'm all for that - just as long as the other side don't get in of course ! :-)

[Guest]

So I'm ALL for separation of Church and State and think it should be even more enforced than it currently is - so if they Americans are prone to mixing their religion and politics too much then I've a fair idea who it was that taught them to do that  maybe. 

I agree. Furthermore, I would separate all religion from schools as well.  There is no logical basis for teaching & imposing beliefs which are unproven in schools. Not only that, it can lead to segregation of schooling by religion, which is a very bad thing if we're trying to have a successful & integrated society.

 

The indigenous British population are becoming more secular, which is a very good thing. Sadly, we have a head of state who is also head of the church & as for the national anthem, well it alienates people like me.

 

Then we have the problem of one other specific religion, which seems to be bringing terrorism and violence to our streets.

 

Luckily, all of the other immigrant communities seem to be have well & make a positive contribution to our society.

[Guest scottishguy]

NIrish, the House of Lords can not trump the House of Commons under any circumstances and hasn't been able to since 1911. It can only delay legislation - and whilst the influence of the Bishops (who number 25 out of 760) is, I agree, unwelcome  - given the primacy of the HoC and the small number of Bishops, I have difficulty with the idea that they hold sway in any significant way. Sure they can make a noise, but I doubt they have any real influence. 

 

Finally, whilst I recognise the point you make re N Irish politics and you are of course 100% correct,  there is simply no significant religious divide within Scottish politics these days , and I frankly can't personally remember a time there was.That's precisely why we were able to push through the repeal of Section 28 before the UK - by a parliamentary majority of almost 6-1 - and why we will push the Gay Marriage bill through before the UK also.

 

I'm grateful for z909's contribution because it illustrates where we in Scotland DO fall down - in continuing to subsidise the provision of separate state-funded education (ostensibly) for Roman Catholics. Having said that, if you were to pass by the largest RC school in Scotland at 4pm, you'd quickly realise that about 40% of the pupils must actually be moslems - so obviously that is being gradually diluted, and the growing trend now is for non-denominational and RC schools to at least share the same campus.

 

Purely from observation, it appears to me that American politicians are forced to pander to various religious minorities in a far more overt and dangerous way than those in the UK.  It's almost unthinkable that Obama would make a speech which didn't deliberately mention God at least once.

[kokopelli]

It's almost unthinkable that Obama would make a speech which didn't deliberately mention God at least once.

Praise the Lord; Hallelujah.

[KhorTose]

Purely from observation, it appears to me that American politicians are forced to pander to various religious minorities in a far more overt and dangerous way than those in the UK.  It's almost unthinkable that Obama would make a speech which didn't deliberately mention God at least once.

Yes, but it is becoming less and less every day with every death of these old stuck in the mud Christians.  Most of the youth in America do not share their parents homophobia according to recent studies, and that included the youth members of the BSA.