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

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

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

source

by on Jan. 30, 2013 at 5:35 PM
Replies (41-50):
candlegal
by Judy on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:18 PM
1 mom liked this

That is the point, the first time they say no to a gay man that wants to be a scout leader, let the law suits begin.  By this all coming from the local level, the national BSA is off the hook.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

Why? They still get to choose who to allow in, that hasn't changed.

Quoting candlegal:

I guess it depends on what kind of of a troop you are in.   The ones around here aren't happy at all.

Quoting rfurlongg:

I disagree. The perception of it being forced is not shared my most local scouts. We are heavily involved in the scouts for our region and several of our local troops have been very active to change the scouts stance on Gays.It is often said that lasting change comes from within. If you want to improve the scouts and make them better push for the change you want. While the top may feel it is forced, it is highly welcomed and long over due at local levels. The future of scouts does not sit at the top but it comes with those moving up the ranks, and many (if not most)support this change. Those that do not, will simply leave just as many left when the scouts were chose to integrate. 

Quoting candlegal:

No organization will stay the same or ever get any better if they are running it with a "we better cover our butt" attitude.  It has nowhere to go but downhill.

Quoting rfurlongg:

Regardless, I still see it as positive. Ultimately in the long run this will strengthen and increase the longevity of the scouts.

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. 







brookiecookie87
by Platinum Member on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:19 PM

I think it is ironic that this article brings up the molestation cases. Because those tend to happen by straight men (Or men acting straight secretly gay).

Perhaps if these individuals were allowed to come out as gay they could release their urges on other grown adults instead of the dark of night with little boys.

In no way saying what they are doing is justified. But just saying that it is unrelated to the move the Boy Scounts are making.

The real problem when it comes to organizations and molesting little boys is the cover ups they tend to do to keep it hush hush.

candlegal
by Judy on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:20 PM

Really, have you read what has been going on in there lately and how much has been covered up?

Quoting terpmama:

First... Many many many eagle scouts (like my brother) sent their awards back to show their dislike of the anti homosexual policy. So it's not just the gays.

Second the BSA has one of the most proactive policy regarding pedophilia and teaching boys how to stay safe and thus one of the lowest occurances of problems of any group.


candlegal
by Judy on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:22 PM

Bingo, you nailed it.

Quoting brookiecookie87:

I think it is ironic that this article brings up the molestation cases. Because those tend to happen by straight men (Or men acting straight secretly gay).

Perhaps if these individuals were allowed to come out as gay they could release their urges on other grown adults instead of the dark of night with little boys.

In no way saying what they are doing is justified. But just saying that it is unrelated to the move the Boy Scounts are making.

The real problem when it comes to organizations and molesting little boys is the cover ups they tend to do to keep it hush hush.


lancet98
by Silver Member on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:26 PM
1 mom liked this

I'm afraid the author of the article and all the posts I read (I didn't read even nearly all of them), are missing one very, very important fact. At least I believe it to be a fact...

The Boy Scouts organization is not making this move to 'change the boy scouts', but to limit their liability.

It is a brilliant move, in that respect.  

 Once they divest themselves of all responsibility for running any actual troops, and throw it all off on the local organization, they may also hamstring or at least delay by YEARS, even decades, any ongoing or future attempts to prosecute them for reassigning molesters instead of removing them from the Boy Scouts in years past.

It's really, honestly, brilliant, from a legal point of view.   The organization will still receive monies from the local organizations, but throw all responsibility onto them and none onto themselves.   This should do an amazing job of protecting their finances.

From a point of view of morality, it is, admittedly, somewhat less than ethical or responsible.   But from a financial and legal standpoint, brilliant.   Really.

In one sense, I think that it is quite possible that reassigning or relocating suspected molesters was how just about any organization used to handle it.  So it can be argued that just about any organization that has existed for any length of time, has most likely handled the problem of child molesting employees or members, in the same way.

However, not all people believe that this reassignment/relocation is something all organizations have done.  

I have read a number of authors who feel reassignment is a peculiarly Christian way that Christian organizations have dealt with molesting members or employees.

Much of the reassignment/relocation of molesters is based on a old belief - not that prayer and Christian counsel could cure the molester (which some authors have eagerly claimed), but that the victim bears much or all, of the responsibility for 'attracting' the molester.

Therefore, remove the molester from the victim, problem solved.

There is also the peculiar idea behind this, that there is some sort of 'normal' relationship beneath this, rather than an adult taking advantage of a child.   But the idea is to 'end the relationship'.   Do that, and the problem will be resolved.

As for the claim that the article makes that 'the gays' are the ones molesting young and preteen and young teen children, nothing is completely impossible in a world with billions of people, but in general, no. 

In the past, it was often said by radical right wingers that homosexuals attacked children and 'turned them gay', and that they had a peculiar prediliction for children.   This was just one more reason we should think they were evil and do our best to rid the world of them, one more reason it was ok to harrass and harm them.

People who sexually molest children and young preteens, are generally not also homosexuals.   There is some research evidence that backs up the two as being biologically different.

When I think of child abusers, I get a picture in my mind of Jerry Sandusky with that peculiar, flat, emotionless, dull expression of his.

 

UpSheRises
by Platinum Member on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:30 PM
2 moms liked this
Becoming more inclusive is not suicidal.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
lwalker270
by Bronze Member on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:31 PM
1 mom liked this

I'm pretty sure homosexuals have been involved in scouting as both scouts and leaders since the first troop was chartered.

I think the change in policy is a good thing.  Both my boys are involved in scouting and I would have absolutely no issue with them having a gay den leader.  

candlegal
by Judy on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:32 PM

that is exactly what I said in the first couple of pages.

Quoting lancet98:

I'm afraid the author of the article and all the posts I read (I didn't read even nearly all of them), are missing one very, very important fact. At least I believe it to be a fact...

The Boy Scouts organization is not making this move to 'change the boy scouts', but to limit their liability.

It is a brilliant move, in that respect.  

 Once they divest themselves of all responsibility for running any actual troops, and throw it all off on the local organization, they may also hamstring or at least delay by YEARS, even decades, any ongoing or future attempts to prosecute them for reassigning molesters instead of removing them from the Boy Scouts in years past.

It's really, honestly, brilliant, from a legal point of view.   The organization will still receive monies from the local organizations, but throw all responsibility onto them and none onto themselves.   This should do an amazing job of protecting their finances.

From a point of view of morality, it is, admittedly, somewhat less than ethical or responsible.   But from a financial and legal standpoint, brilliant.   Really.

In one sense, I think that it is quite possible that reassigning or relocating suspected molesters was how just about any organization used to handle it.  So it can be argued that just about any organization that has existed for any length of time, has most likely handled the problem of child molesting employees or members, in the same way.

However, not all people believe that this reassignment/relocation is something all organizations have done.  

I have read a number of authors who feel reassignment is a peculiarly Christian way that Christian organizations have dealt with molesting members or employees.

Much of the reassignment/relocation of molesters is based on a old belief - not that prayer and Christian counsel could cure the molester (which some authors have eagerly claimed), but that the victim bears much of the responsibility for 'attracting' the molester.

As for the claim that the article makes that 'the gays' are the ones molesting young and preteen and young teen children, nothing is completely impossible in a world with billions of people, but in general, no. 

In the past, it was often said by radical right wingers that homosexuals attacked children and 'turned them gay', and that they had a peculiar prediliction for children.   This was just one more reason we should think they were evil and do our best to rid the world of them, one more reason it was ok to harrass and harm them.

People who sexually molest children and young preteens, are generally not also homosexuals.   There is some research evidence that backs up the two as being biologically different.

When I think of child abusers, I get a picture in my mind of Jerry Sandusky with that peculiar, flat, emotionless, dull expression of his.



candlegal
by Judy on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:33 PM

I am pretty sure they have been also.  They were just smart enough to keep it to themselves.

Quoting lwalker270:

I'm pretty sure homosexuals have been involved in scouting as both scouts and leaders since the first troop was chartered.

I think the change in policy is a good thing.  Both my boys are involved in scouting and I would have absolutely no issue with them having a gay den leader.  


terpmama
by Silver Member on Jan. 30, 2013 at 6:34 PM
Assume you are talkin about my second point... To which I say... Hi, I'm a mom who disagreed with the ban and so since my sons would not be joining have lived under a rock as far as current news (with the exception of my brother talking about returning his eagle award)...


Quoting candlegal:

Really, have you read what has been going on in there lately and how much has been covered up?

Quoting terpmama:

First... Many many many eagle scouts (like my brother) sent their awards back to show their dislike of the anti homosexual policy. So it's not just the gays.



Second the BSA has one of the most proactive policy regarding pedophilia and teaching boys how to stay safe and thus one of the lowest occurances of problems of any group.



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
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)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN