Posted on 05/23/2013 5:06:55 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Assemblies of God leadership regrets that the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) has voted to change its policy regarding inclusion of homosexual youth members. We believe – as do a majority of Boy Scout volunteer leaders and parents – that this is not the best policy for BSA, nor for the young men it serves.
As the landmark 2000 Supreme Court decision stated, BSA is a private organization with freedom of association to determine its own membership standards, upholding BSA's policy not to allow homosexual leaders or members. BSA stated at the time that a departure from that longstanding policy would undermine its purpose of guiding boys to keep themselves "morally straight," which is part of the Boy Scout Oath.
While we are disappointed by BSA's recent membership decision, we are pleased that the organization will retain its policy regarding adult leaders, and applaud the organization for standing firm on that issue. However, today's vote to allow homosexual youth members negates BSA's ability to legally defend its position regarding leadership and opens the door to more efforts by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) lobbies to make further policy changes.
A majority of scout groups are sponsored by churches or other religious entities, which have as their foundation a belief in biblical teachings that identify homosexual behavior as outside of God's plan for sexuality. While we agree that youths who experience confusion or same-sex attraction need to be welcomed, in our churches they are confronted with this biblical teaching and will be counseled and prayed with that God will help them to align their lives in conformity to that teaching. We agree with the BSA that we need to demonstrate compassion and welcome those who are struggling with sexuality issues, but not in a way that condones such behavior, which is what the new BSA policy does.
Though the BSA shares a common mission with the Church, "to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes," the Church answers to a higher Authority in providing a value-added spiritual dimension. As such, based on Scripture, we provide a loving, welcoming environment to young people in their search for purpose, meaning and God's best for their lives. Until this decision today BSA agreed in teaching that "homosexual conduct is not morally straight" and in not wanting to "promote homosexual conduct as a legitimate form of behavior." BSA had been well-served by holding to that position.
We believe that the BSA policy change will lead to a mass exodus from the Boy Scout program, as Assemblies of God and many other churches can no longer support groups that are part of an organization allowing members who are openly homosexual. However, as a positive alternative, we offer a program – the Royal Rangers – that operates with values consistent to that of the BSA prior to today's change.
In the fractured family and culture today, we recognize that many youth are struggling with sexual identity and behavior. Our Assemblies of God churches seek to help these young people experience sexual purity in their lives, and remain virgins until married to a person of the opposite sex. Love, counseling and prayer is given for those who fail in this regard so that young people who engage in sexual relations outside marriage can reset their moral compass toward God's will through repentance, forgiveness and restoration.
Dr. George O. Wood General Superintendent Assemblies of God
SSAD(Same Sex Attraction Disorder) is something that should be treated as any disorder is. These people should not be invited into the mainstream of society and certainly not into youth groups! This is nonsense! Get these people the help they need. Coddling them will do no good for them or for our culture in general.
And the political leaning of those in the organizations doing the polling/surveying?
I have read that the 1994 NHLS survey is accepted as the gold standard in legal circles.
As for Gallup, well, yes, I know most everyone on FR are hugely distrustful of polls. But I look at the landscape of the U.S. and I see it reflected in these polls, i.e., acceptance/tolerance of issues that were once considered bad behavior.
No apology necessary. So sad the scouts just a big step toward obscurity.
The Family Research Council states that orthodox/fundamentalist believers need to understand both the strategy and argument of those who seek to revise or redefine historic Christian teaching regarding homosexuality. Called “revisionists,” these scholar-activists …
advance the notion that homosexuality is an issue over which people of good will can differ.
Or they claim that there is no “clear answer” to the issue.
Then they recommend, under the rubric of “fairness,” that churches appoint task forces to study the issue.
Once the “studies” begin, the revisionists claim …
that biblical passages that proscribe homosexual acts do not actually refer to homosexuality; they at most only condemn an “abusive” form of homosexuality.
Or they may concede that Scripture condemns homosexuality, but then argue that the biblical writers are only reflecting “culturally conditioned” moral beliefs of a pre-scientific culture.
As these arguments fail to persuade, a final ploy is an appeal to an overarching theological ethic—such as the presence of “love,” “commitment,” “mutuality,”— that allegedly trumps explicit moral imperatives and justifies homosexual relationships.
I do not know Neil Lupton. I do know that there are several Jewish scouters on the national level who are very angry with orthodox/fundamentalist Christian scouters.
4/24/2013 - According to a Wall Street Journal blog by Geoffrey Fowler, Scouting leaders in Baltimore (Northeast Region Executive Vice President Jay Lenrow) and Los Angeles proposed their own membership standards resolutions to end BSA’s longstanding ban on adult homosexual leaders. These resolutions indicated that there is still discord within the liberal ranks of BSA volunteers who believe the National Executive Committee membership standards resolution doesn’t go far enough to eliminate discrimination. BSA National spokesman Deron Smith said the organization had “received various resolutions recommending a variety of options about this policy,” and that it referred those to its Resolutions Committee. That committee would meet sufficiently in advance of the annual National Council business meeting in May to address the resolutions, he said.
The proposal from Mr. Lenrow stipulated that in choosing adult leaders each local organization “shall have the right (but not be required) to grant membership to individuals … without regard to sexual orientation.” Mr. Lenrow, who is from Baltimore, submitted his resolution as an individual BSA volunteer though he said he has support from other BSA volunteer leaders who are authorized to vote in May. Mr. Lenrow, who is Jewish, said the issue is related to freedom of religion for him. “I have bristled for 12 years because I felt that certain religious groups were preventing me from participating in Scouting in accordance with my religious principles,” he said. Some of Mr. Lenrow’s supporters say his proposal might make it to the ballot because it doesn’t directly contradict the national proposal, which changed the policy on gay youth, but essentially made no change to the rules about adults. Scouts for Equality founder Zach Wahls said he supported “anything that gets us towards a full resolution – and Jay’s resolution would do that — but our campaign won’t be over until we have gotten to the goal of full inclusion.”
So, in other words, they have seven months to figure out how they can rationalize continuing support of the butt scouts. Yes, I'm Catholic but not a contemporary, progressive Catholic. I give no benefit of the doubt to these guys. If they were sincere the statement would have read like the Assembly of God statement. No need for additional analysis. The BSA butt crack is there staring you in the face.
I agree with you. Conservatives will leave; progressives will come flooding in, particularly in the suburbs of big cities. In Seattle lefties are celebrating the new inclusiveness and inviting others like them into the big tent. The organization will become an Obama brown shirt corps(e) and a major PR tool of the homosexual agenda. The decision is a major green light for queer scouts and scoutmasters (master takes on a new meaning) to do as they please. BSA insignia condoms and KY jelly available by this time next year.
Bookmarked for future reference.
Thanks for the clarification. Even smaller than I suspected. Shows what a small, vocal minority can do with the right media support.
Luckily, Christians have the New Testament and Jesus.
Stay in the Scouts and let him get his Eagle. If you’re involved in Scouting, stay involved. Why abandon it to a tiny minority that want to ruin Scouting?
If a kid’s suffering from same sex attraction, better that it’s out in public where he can get help and treatment and even stop and jail the abuser.
While I understand your frustration and your opinions concerning this matter, I find it hard to digest because no where do I see you define what “support” is. It is very clear what God’s Word and God have to say about the sin; however, it is also clear that he loves people and HATES the sin. As Christians we are called to love one another just as God loves us. As a former homosexual, I would not have been saved by the love of God through people’s hate and denying me food and shelter, like I have seen some “Christians” do. They did not save me by chasing me around with a sign or attempt to stone me to death. No, they showed me God’s love by providing my needs and by loving me and hating the sin.
When you say you have no sympathy for homosexuals, you should revise that and say you have no sympathy for homosexuality. By keeping with your original statement, and as a Christian, you are stating that there is no need to love people if they do not adhere to everything the Bible says. As soon as they sin, you find a reason to not love them. Is that what Christ did to the woman at the well because of her adultery? No! He didn’t say to her, “Because you are an adulterer, you have no place in the Kingdom of God.” Rather, he said, “Go and sin no more.” Just something to think about.
This is what I got out of your post. If I misunderstood something, please do not hesitate to correct me. We all need correction.
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.