Posted on 07/18/2012 6:48:53 PM PDT by South40
Should the Boy Scouts be able to ban gays?
• Yes
• No
• I'm not sure
(scroll down on right)
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
The poll is irrelevant. SCOTUS already ruled on this issue, therefore it is “settled law” which can never again be questioned.
Of course
The poll is already gone, I guess they didn’t get the result they wanted.
In answer to the question, “YES!” First off, it is known as freedom of association. Second, if they allowed this it’d destroy the Boy Scouts (which, come to think of it, IS THE ENTIRE REASON FOR PUSHING THIS CRAP).
The simple fact is that orgs like the Boy Scouts should not be about sexual orientation. I would bet tens of thousands of homosexuals have been Boy Scouts. I know a cousin who was/is a homosexual and a Boy Scout. But nobody knew it at the time. Because he didn’t broadcast it. The whole thing is a farce. If your goal when attempting to join the Boy Scouts is to advertise some sexual deviancy, then pick another org to join.
35% don’t believe in the Constitution and freedom.
Yep, too late for me too. Consolation that it ended well, though. (I daresay it’s ended. I heard on woai radio yesterday that some gal with her son (0_o) was protesting (I think in Dallas).
You can’t persuade me that homosexuals don’t want to pull down organizations like the BSA for the dual puposes of gaining public acceptance for their immoral lifestyle, and (2) cruising for recruits.
Exhibit A: Jerry Sandusky.
Polls like this are never irrelevant. Had the left gotten its desired result they, with help from a complicit liberal media, would have used it to advance the sham known as 'gay rights'.
It's important that polls like this be tempered with reason. And that can only come from conservatives who don't subscribe to the leftist agenda.
I guess the polls are not going the way they’d like. Both this one and the other one have already been changed.
Sandusky and Penn State elites want gay men to have access to young boys...
Camping works for them too...
I’ve tried a logical argument when people complain about the BSA policy, but I find they don’t do well with logic.
If someone says they want to allow a homosexual to lead the scouts, I ask them if they would send their 12-year-old daughters on an overnight camping trip with a 24-year-old single male. If they don’t immediately blanche, I remind them to think about what kind of single 22-year-old guy wants to go camping with young girls.
But that’s exactly the same situation if you send a homosexual leader with young boys.
The argument about homosexual boys is colored by the annoying fact that labelling younger boys as homosexual is actually a trick of the homosexual community. Most boys will have questions about sexuality, and they will naturally be curious, and will grow out of it as they become mature. So if we argue that 12-year-old homosexual boys can’t be in the scouts, we are unfortunately giving in to the homosexual agenda.
Still, it’s easy enough to argue — would you send your 14-year-old daughter on a campout where they slept unsupervised in a tent with a 16-year-old boy? That is exactly what you are doing if you put a 14-year-old boy in a tent with a 16-year-old homosexual boy.
I also like to make this logical argument. Let’s assume your goal is to prevent any opportunity or appearance for sexual attraction. We’ll use the shower as an example.
If you have all heterosexual boys, it’s easy. You can put as many heterosexual boys together in a shower, and they won’t be attracted to each other.
If you introduce a single heterosexual girl, you need a 2nd shower — that’s obvious. But, you could introduce as many heterosexual girls as you want, and you still only need two showers.
Now, what if you put a homosexual boy in the mix? Well, if you only have one, you just need a second shower. But what if you have a second homosexual boy? Well, they can’t go in the 1st shower, but they can’t go in the 2nd shower. Now you need a separate shower for every single homosexual boy. In other words, you can’t create a “gay-only” troop and solve the problem,. because then all your boys are sexually attracted to each other.
Theoretically, you could put one homosexual girl in with one homosexual boy — neither would be attracted to each other. But you can’t get another homosexual girl in the mix either.
That’s because there is a fundamental difference between opposite-sex attraction and same-sex attraction. Most people completely ignore this “pairing” problem But it is really a major issue with cultural socialization.
Because we know that when you add a sexual component to a social setting, it distracts. Put several girls in a room together, they will socialize. Throw an attractive male in the room, the girls will stop socializing, and start competing.
Well, in a homosexual community, everybody is competing. You can’t put more than two homosexuals together before you have the potential for sexual competition. Thus, homosexual communities are fundamentally sexual in nature, while the heterosexual communities can be organized easily into large asexual components.
Bookmarked, outstanding post.
The cowards at MSNBC pulled the poll.
There is little question that a part of the gay lifestyle yet remaining in the closet includes their obsession with young boys. What other group is there that devotes an international organization to the same sex rape of kids. The answer is, there is none other than that formed by male queers. What choice do these pervs have but to deny open membership. They would never come out of the closet on this issue, yet they continue seeking adoption of young boys and inclusion in every organization where boys are available. Wake up to these deviants. They are coming to grade schools near you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.