Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Why are Boy Scouts contemplating suicide?

Posted by   + Show Post

The Boy Scouts of America – one of the last truly great American institutions, which for 100 years has prepared tens of millions of boys for responsible manhood – is reportedly on the verge of changing its policy on homosexuals.

As NBC News first reported yesterday, BSA is talking about reversing, as early as next week, its decades-old policy of excluding homosexuals as adult leaders and scouts.

Considering that the United States Supreme Court has already sided with the Boy Scouts on this issue, and that a recent Gallup Poll shows most Americans side with the Scouts’ current policy, and that just six months ago BSA national spokesman Deron Smith affirmed the organization’s moral policy excluding homosexuals “is absolutely the best policy for the Boy Scouts,” this current development illustrates – if nothing else – the brutal effectiveness of the relentless intimidation and economic pressure brought to bear on the Boy Scouts by gay rights activists and cultural extremists.

Indeed, yesterday Smith did a complete 180 in disclosing in a press statement that BSA is now discussing ending the organization’s decades-long moral standard and, instead, deferring to the local chartering organizations to decide what their own membership standards will be – “consistent with each organization’s mission, principles, or religious beliefs.”

“The policy change under discussion,” Smith explained, “would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver scouting to determine how to address this issue.” In other words, the BSA would abandon its prohibition on homosexuals and every local Boy Scout troop or Cub Scout pack could do whatever it wanted.

As one might expect, traditionally minded Americans are alarmed. They warn this change would spell the end of the Boy Scouts as they have always known it – a quintessentially American, moral and God-based private organization, as exemplified in the Scout Oath “to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins pinpointed the main reason for the BSA’s change of thinking – namely, the attacks on their funding sources by activist homosexuals. Said Perkins:

“The Boy Scouts of America board would be making a serious mistake to bow to the strong-arm tactics of LGBT activists and open the organization to homosexuality. What has changed in terms of the Boy Scouts’ concern for the well-being of the boys under their care? Or is this not about the well-being of the Scouts, but the funding for the organization?

“The Boy Scouts has for decades been a force for moral integrity and leadership in the United States. Sadly, their principled stances have marked them as a target for harassment by homosexual activists and corporations such as UPS which are working to pressure the Boy Scouts into abandoning their historic values.”

However, there is a second, largely unmentioned and potentially even more devastating reason that such a move on the part of the Boy Scouts’ national leadership would spell serious trouble for the organization, one that goes beyond the sad fact that many good people would walk away from the BSA for abandoning its principles.

Although under-reported in the press, the BSA, like the Catholic Church, has had a long struggle with predatory scout leaders embedding themselves in scout units and using the authority, familiarity and good will that goes with that position to sexually exploit boys and young men.

Two decades ago, journalist Patrick Boyle was the lead author of a comprehensive five-part Washington Times series on the large number of cases of predatory scout leaders. The series served as the basis for Boyle’s book, “Scout’s Honor: Sexual Abuse in America’s Most Trusted Institution.” Boyle wrote:

On an average of more than once a week for the past two decades, a Cub Scout, Boy Scout or Explorer has reported being sexually abused by a Scout leader.
An investigation by The Washington Times shows that at least 1,151 Scouts have reported being abused by their leaders over the past 19 years, making sex abuse more common in Scouting than accidental deaths and serious injuries combined.

In that time, at least 416 men have been arrested or banned from Scouting for molesting the boys in their care – and experts say the real number of abusers and victims is probably several times higher.

Those are among the findings of an investigation that turned up abuse by Scout leaders in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

“I was naive to think the Boy Scouts was such a safe place,” said the mother of a Maryland boy abused by his Scoutmaster. “I thought the Boy Scouts was a sanctuary.”

In fact, the examination of sex abuse in Scouting reveals a long-standing paradox for the nation’s most revered youth group: For 80 years the Boy Scouts of America have given boys some of the best experiences of their lives, but for 80 years some men have used the Boy Scouts of America to have sexual relations with those boys.

“That’s been an issue since the Boy Scouts began,” said James Tarr, the nation’s chief Scout executive from 1979 through 1984.

In his reporting, Boyle does not implicate homosexuals as such, but refers to all of the predatory adult scouters as pedophiles or molesters.

Hold that thought while we fast-forward to today:

In 2010, the London Guardian newspaper reported that “America’s Scouting movement is fighting to keep secret thousands of ‘perversion files’ on suspected child molesters after it was ordered to pay record damages over the sexual abuse of a former Scout.” Describing a “growing scandal threatening to rival the crisis hitting the Roman Catholic church,” the UK paper reported that BSA “has been accused of covering up decades of child abuse” to protect the organization’s reputation.

It reported that an Oregon jury heard the case of former scout Kerry Lewis, “who was repeatedly assaulted by a former assistant scoutmaster, Timur Dykes, in the 1980s.” Dykes, the paper reported, “had admitted to a superior in the Scouts that he had abused boys, but was allowed to remain in the organization and is alleged to have sexually assaulted several other children who are also taking legal action.”

Get the picture? Just as in some Catholic dioceses, someone in authority with the Boy Scouts made the unwise and unprincipled decision to protect the organization rather than rat out the perpetrator and protect children.

There’s more:

The judge in the case overruled the Scouts’ attempts to keep the jury from seeing about 1,200 files kept by the organization on suspected pedophiles. Kelly Clark, Lewis’s lawyer, told the jury that while the files were often used to remove child abusers from the Scouting movement, many were allowed to remain in the organization. He said that the Scouts rarely alerted the police and when they did, the movement asked the authorities to avoid publicity. Clark told the jury that the Scouting leadership had been “reckless and outrageous” in failing to warn parents and boys about the problem.

The jury agreed and awarded Lewis $18.5 million, the largest-ever award to a single plaintiff in a U.S. child-abuse case, according to the Telegraph.

The files shown to the jury “were not made public and are just a small part of what is believed to be a cache of as many as 6,000 held at the Scouts’ headquarters in Texas, dating back to the 1920s,” the report added.

“We said they had 75 years of secret files about pedophiles, and that’s the way the evidence came in. I think that fact in itself was just staggering to the jury,” said Clark, Lewis’s lawyer. “They had a regular practice of placing guys on probation and then they would allow them to continue to be active in Scouting, not unlike some of what you saw in the Catholic church.”

Now the big question in all this, of course, is the following: With these sex-abuse cases within the Boy Scouting organization, just as those within the Catholic Church, are we dealing with actual “pedophiles” or with predatory homosexuals?

Virtually all defenders of the gay agenda will angrily denounce the mere suggestion that homosexuals could be victimizers here, or that the two groups could even overlap.

Yet while the London Telegraph and many others note the striking similarity between “pedophiles” in the Boy Scouts and “pedophile priests” in the Catholic Church, there is a disturbing if little-known reality to all this:

Contrary to the media myth that the Catholic Church’s problems are primarily with “pedophile priests” – terminology which safely absolves homosexuals from suspicion – the major portion of the church’s sexual-abuse problem has been the infiltration of its seminaries by homosexuals. In fact, widespread cases of predatory homosexual priests created a full-blown crisis for the church.

“The real problem the Catholic Church faces,” explains Father Donald B. Cozzens, author of “The Changing Face of the Priesthood,” is the “disproportionate number of gay men that populate our seminaries.”

Or as former California Congressman Bob Dornan put it, “the Catholic Church in this country has been penetrated by an aggressive homosexual network.”

And National Review senior writer Rod Dreher put it even more bluntly: “This is chiefly a scandal about unchaste or criminal homosexuals in the Catholic priesthood. … The overwhelming majority of priests who have molested minors are not pedophiles – that is … among the rare adults sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. They are, rather, “ephebophiles” – adults who are sexually attracted to post-pubescent youths, generally aged 12 to 17. And their victims have been almost exclusively boys.”

“Pedophilia” is, by definition, sexual contact with a pre-pubescent child. Most of the boys molested by “pedophile priests” have been pubescent teens. Likewise, in the scout world, although we can comfortably indulge the fantasy that there is a wide gulf between the land of homosexuals and the land of same-sex pedophiles, this does not comport with the known facts. (If you want, you can read Scientific American’s explanation here – but bottom line, many of these sex-abuse cases, whether in Scouts or in church, do not involve actual pedophiles.)

The Washington Times – which for its in-depth investigation reviewed “internal Scout records and tens of thousands of pages of court records from around the country, including confessions of molesters and testimony from children,” and also interviewed “molesters, families of victims, Scout leaders, sex abuse experts and lawyers” and analyzed the cases on a computer database – discovered the following:

Each year from 1971 through 1989, an average of at least 21 male Scout leaders and camp workers were banned from Scouting or arrested for sexual misconduct with Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts and Explorers. The acts ranged from proposing sex acts and fondling boys in their sleep to performing oral sex and intercourse with the children.

Pause-button, please. Cub Scouting is for boys 7 to 10, the Boy Scouts is open to boys 11 to 18, and Explorers (which was replaced in 1998 by Venturing) is for 14-to-20-year-olds. The average age of puberty for males in the U.S. is 13.
Although it’s politically incorrect in the extreme, it has to be said: In the homosexual subculture, sexual attraction toward young teen boys is far more prevalent and prized than gay activists would like you to know.

Moreover, predators are known to go where the children are. And that means the Boy Scouts are arguably at even higher risk of sexual-abuse on a broad scale than the Catholic Church was and is. That is why BSA has instituted one of the best Youth Protection Training programs in the world, as a direct response to predators in their midst.

How ironic and unfortunate, then, that the Boy Scouts are now being so pressured that they are contemplating opening themselves up to lawsuits, to disgrace, and to huge jury awards and out-of-court settlements. After all, by changing their policy on homosexual leaders, the BSA would be adopting a more overt and inviting stance toward homosexual leaders than the Catholic Church ever did – essentially advertising for homosexual adult “scouters.”

If you do not think lawsuits, test cases, de facto recruitment and de facto affirmative action will not follow adoption of this policy, then you do not understand the political and moral left. If you think the vast gay rights lobby will finally leave the Scouts alone, once the policy reversal occurs (if it does), you do not understand the left.

Just as bed-and-breakfasts, photographers and many other business are routinely sued today by homosexual activists as a tactical means of advancing their position, the scouting organization will likewise fall prey to this long-term legal strategy if it betrays its own commitment to being “morally straight.”

America is in a time of great crisis on many fronts, and much that is good we are in danger of permanently losing. The Boy Scouts of America is one of the most important and loved and truly valuable organizations in American history. It is literally a sacred trust between one generation and the next. The Supreme Court is on their side. Public opinion is on their side. God is on their side.

Why on earth would they trade all this away by giving in to pressure from people who detest them and everything they stand for?

A little bit of America will die if the Boy Scouts organization gives in to the pressure and makes this decision. You might want to let them know how you feel. You can reach the Boy Scouts of America at 972-580-2000. Tell them how much you appreciate them – and tell them to stand strong.

Should the Boy Scouts accept homosexual leaders and members?

  • No, it will be the death of the organization, and more boys will be victimized by sexual predators (37%, 416 Votes)
  • No, doing so would make a mockery of the Boy Scout oath to stay 'morally straight' (29%, 322 Votes)
  • No, they'd be turning their backs on their core Judeo-Christian foundation. Christians and other religious groups will boycott them (23%, 260 Votes)
  • Homosexuals should just start their own Gay Scouts of America (4%, 44 Votes)
  • No, boys who are homosexual should join the Girl Scouts (2%, 18 Votes)
  • No, it would be like the Catholic Church mandating homosexual priests (2%, 17 Votes)
  • No, if they do it, it will also mean transsexual and transvestite scout masters and scouts (less than 1%, 9 Votes)
  • Other (less than 1%, 6 Votes)
  • No, there's a reason the Girl Scouts have lost so much credibility and popularity (less than 1%, 6 Votes)
  • Yes, discriminating against homosexuals is no different than an organization excluding blacks and Jews (less than 1%, 5 Votes)
  • No, they will be targeted with test-case lawsuits to force homosexual recruitment (less than 1%, 4 Votes)
  • Yes, it's past time the organization acknowleged homosexuals are people too (less than 1%, 4 Votes)
  • Yes, it's time to be fair to all people (less than 1%, 2 Votes)
  • Yes, as long as the decision to welcome homosexuals is left to local troops (less than 1%, 1 Votes)
  • Yes, and there should be affirmative action to recruit more homosexuals (less than 1%, 1 Votes)
  • Yes, but they should begin forming all-gay troops (0%, 0 Votes)
  • Yes, and they should be forced to pay reparations for discriminating against a whole class of people (0%, 0 Votes)

Total Voters: 1,115


by on Jan. 30, 2013 at 5:35 PM
Replies (251-256):
by Ruby Member on Feb. 1, 2013 at 10:48 AM
I only read the first paragraph I admit it. Is it because the gays are destroying the scouts? That seems to be the majority content of Candle's posts.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
by Platinum Member on Feb. 1, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Yes-Because originally I was just making a remark. I wasn't trying to solve a mystery and give a solution.

By the way-I called you obtuse because you are being obtuse.

Again-Unless they are pedophiles already and can't distinguish between right and wrong why would they be offended?

If I pointed out that straight men are the ones most likely to molest little girls would they then be equally offended? Or would they realize I am talking about pedophiles and people who cannot distinguish between right and wrong?

Or in your world is molesting little kids something every average normal person does? So when someone references it they -need- to add that the person/group is a pedophile and mentally disturbed so as not to offend the whole group?

Quoting LilyofPhilly:

You /insulted a whole group of people, not once, but 5 times. Instead of trying to "clarify", you ought to have just apologized and moved on.
BTW, throwing around words like obtuse doesn't make you credible. And I believe you were the one who offered the simple solution of " letting them express their true nature".

Quoting brookiecookie87:

Of course I have changed and reworded it because each time I answer it you completely miss the point so I reword it and rephrase it and clarify it.

Unless there is a new debate tactic where you act obtuse and then point out, "You clarified your stance more and more! Ha! Wrong!".

And you are over simplify and exaggerating now. The issue is not as simple as you want it to be.

Quoting LilyofPhilly:

I think it's pretty clear to everyone, except you, what you meant to say. You said it 5 times, 5 different ways. But nonetheless, your finished hypothesis, after all your *clarifying* came out even more ridiculous that the original statements. The idea that there are homosexual pedophiles with personality disorders prone to pounce on Boy Scouts if not given the chance to role play with an adult partner is astoundingly absurd. If acceptance of a person's sexual orientation could prevent pedophilia, there's be no *straight* men molesting little girls. They'd all be off role playing with the barely legal set.

Quoting brookiecookie87:

Right-Contortionist. Why? Because I explained what I meant. What a world you must live in.

Like I said earlier. You have no desire to understand what I am saying. That is clear by the fact that I have to explain it to you two to three different ways before you claim to understand it. And even then you don't actually understand it you just found a different angle to twist and distort it. Your only desire is to find something wrong with what I said-Even if it means ignoring what I said.

Quoting LilyofPhilly:

Quoting brookiecookie87:

I think you might be actively trying not to understand my claims. Perhaps you value you being right more than trying to understand. Because I have answered this many times.

Being a pedophile doesn't mean you WILL molest children. The same way being homosexual doesn't mean you WILL molest boys. And the same way just being disturbed doesn't mean you WILL molest kids.

There are a LOT of factors to be accounted for when it comes to something like this. I over simplified with my first comments because I didn't think it would turn into some long drawn out debate.

As I have said before-Someone who is a pedophile can release those desires with an adult. Deviant, yes-illegal, no. You see this all the time with guys who dress their girlfriends in girl scout outfits or school girl outfits. I was merely suggesting that if these guys that are priest, or boy scout leaders had an outlet for their fantasies (Again we are talking about ones who are pedophiles, and mentally disturbed in some way) they might not touch those boys they are taking care of.

So a pedophile, who is mentally disturbed but in a relationship with another adult male might just live out his fantasies with his partner the same way some heterosexual males do it.

A repressed homosexual who is a pedophile and mentally disturbed and with a wife won't have these outlets.  Then you add on top of it that he is taking care of a group of males who look up to him and you have a recipe for disaster.

Wow, you are quite the contortionist!

So your assertion is that the Boy Scout leaders and Priests who are molesting boys are doing it because they are homosexual AND repressed AND pedophiles AND mentally disturbed AND don't have an adult partner to role play with??? LMAO!

Oh, now I finally get you!

Imagine wanting something your whole life. But everyone telling you that it is wrong natural. That if you did it you would be bad fine. A sin. An abomination.

So you meet a girl guy who likes you and you try your best to make it work. You get married. You have adopt kids. All this time you are hating loving yourself because you don't love your wife husband. You are not physically attracted to her him. But if you came out. Your family would hate  loves you. Your church would hate loves you. You would be an abomination and a sinner.

Your kid grows up and becomes a boy scout. You are now a boyscout leader (Or whatever they are called) and suddenly have this group of boys who look up to you and idolize you. For the first yet another time in your life you can act out your desires with people who will not call you an abomination or a sinner
.  But you don't go for it, because you've been role playing with your husband, dressing him up like a boy scout all along, and even though you're mentally unstable, the crisis is averted!

Nope, still sounds freaking rediculous, and still not buying that you never meant to say people that are gay might be led into pedophilia due to repression and sudden opportunity. Although, I do believe this is what you've convinced yourself you meant. 

Can you explain to me why, you think so many men molest little girls when there are probably plenty of grown women who would fantasy role play little school girl with them? 

Join us on the 99% Moms group!
The Ninety-Nine Percent Moms   

If they enforced bank regulations like they do park rules, we wouldn't be in this mess

by TC on Feb. 1, 2013 at 3:54 PM
Thank you for that explanation. It was very informative.
That was my take on the article as well, but, as I said, I have limited knowledge of the BSA to begin with. Thank you for your in-put.

Quoting Ziva65:

The local troops have a lot of autonomy already. Hubby is a scoutmaster, our troop has 50 boys. Our troop has been around 50 years or so, highly organized. They are pretty separate from the district.

Then, our largest troops here are Mormon troops. Huge troops, quite separate and distinct from other troops as well as the district.

I think each already has its own style. People are free to choose whichever one they want, some are more strict almost dictatorial, some run by women, some run by pastors, some very religious others not at all, there's a little of everything.

I don't see the problem with this, predators could still get into BSA without or without this decision. If they stick to their BSA youth protection policies, they'll be fine. I think that is just a response to pressure and the media. The big media issue was here in our district. I think the perspective if the article is an argument not to allow gays, but I don't see it as a valid argument.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:


Isn't that the only decision left to the local level?

I'm not familiar with the BSA at all.

Quoting candlegal:

Leaving these decisions to the local level will make sure they aren't involved .  You know whether or not to allow this gay boy in or this gay scoutmaster, etc.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What would they need to "cover their butts" from?

Quoting candlegal:

The organization is getting ready to cover their butts in a very big way.

Quoting rfurlongg:

My sons are scouts. I fully this change of policy. The change is coming from within the organization. It reflects the growth of the boy scouts. Those who do not like the direction the scouts are taking are welcome to leave. 

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
by Gold Member on Feb. 1, 2013 at 8:16 PM

I will add that the outcome of this will be very interesting. First, the local troops don't have the funds or legal backing to enforce any decision they do make if challenged. honestly I hear the scoutmasters (men ) talking, and they really are fearful of sharing a tent with a gay man. They are fearful of having a gay man as a troop member or leader.

Something about heterosexual men. not all of course, but many. I used to work for  a huge firm with gay men in San Francisco. My bosses (all male) wouldn't even come to meetings at my office because of those that I worked with. The bosses wouldn't even come to lunches. Many of these gay men are still my friends, and I have a different outlook than so many. Really if you get to know people as people, this is a non-issue, but not everyone can see past that.

From their perspective, it's like having men and women sleep in a tent together. We know if we are around lesbians, that we(as women in general) aren't a target, but really many heterosexual men feel that way. I do see that as becoming an issue in scouts. I'm not saying it's rational, nor do I agree- just conveying general perceptions that aren't generally spoken out loud.

Not really sure what will happen with it, as I'm sure local troops will get challenged on this issue, and not be able to back it up. I would not at all be surprised if people simply leave scouting, or it simply folds over time.

by Bazinga! on Feb. 2, 2013 at 7:40 PM

 Well thank you for answering honestly. I know there are things we don't agree on, but I do enjoy your posts, and your honesty.

Quoting candlegal:

I definitely do not agree to that.

Quoting Euphoric:

 Well I agree. So then do you agree rather a scout leader is gay or straight, it doesn't matter. Either could be a great leader?

Quoting candlegal:

No one has said being gay is the biggest sin, it is not even a sin unless it is acted upon.   Murder is by far a bigger sin.  To hurt a child is a much bigger sin whether you be straight or gay.  

Quoting Euphoric:

 Can anyone answer? Why do people think gay people will hurt children? Why is gay looked at as the biggest sin, when everyone on the planet sins?
by Judy on Feb. 2, 2013 at 7:52 PM
1 mom liked this

You are welcome and thank you.

Quoting Euphoric:

 Well thank you for answering honestly. I know there are things we don't agree on, but I do enjoy your posts, and your honesty.

Quoting candlegal:

I definitely do not agree to that.

Quoting Euphoric:

 Well I agree. So then do you agree rather a scout leader is gay or straight, it doesn't matter. Either could be a great leader?

Quoting candlegal:

No one has said being gay is the biggest sin, it is not even a sin unless it is acted upon.   Murder is by far a bigger sin.  To hurt a child is a much bigger sin whether you be straight or gay.  

Quoting Euphoric:

 Can anyone answer? Why do people think gay people will hurt children? Why is gay looked at as the biggest sin, when everyone on the planet sins?



Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)