Comments about ‘Mitt Romney, President Obama affirm support for gay Boy Scout leaders’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Aug. 9 2012 1:00 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Salt Lake City, Utah

The Boy Scouts of America refused to buckle under politically correct pressure and allow leaders who are Gay. Parents want their young men to be able to follow the examples set by their leaders. No need to confuse young men about the Boy Scout Oath where they pledge to keep themselves morally straight.

El Chango Supremo
Rexburg, ID

Thanks DNEWS for a misleading headline.

Participating in the boy scouts and being a leader in the bow scouts are two different things. Mitt also said he thinks the Boy scouts should be able to decide how they want to handle the issue.

Cedar Hills, UT

Gays will never be allowed as adult leaders in Boy Scouts of America. The moment that happens the LDS church will drop the Boy Scouts. The Scouts recently upheld their moral code and banned gays from BSA. There is no way any parent is going to send their son on a camp out with a Gay man. This isn't about equal rights - this is about protecting young boys from men who happen to be "turned on" by other boys and men. This is simply unacceptable and frightening. I can understand Romney if he defers to the judgement of BSA on this issue and doesn't attempt to sue them as Obama usually does in an attempt to force his will upon them.

Mcallen, TX

After the Penn State incident, I don't understand Obama.

Agua Dulce, TX

Mitt Romney's "long-standing support"?

St. George, Utah

The comments quoted from both Mitt Romney's and President Obama's campains were very vague!
and the head line for the article was very miss leading. The comments and quotes in the article do not support the title to the articles implacations. I do not support openly gay as leaders or members of any youth group just as I would not support anyone overly outspoken about sex and or any pornography addict.


>He also opposes discrimination in all forms

Unless it benefits whatever minority group that is going to get him the most votes, of course.

When BO comes out and denounces racist programs and organizations such as Affirmative Action, La Raza, the NAACP, and such, then maybe I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on such statements.

Voice of Reason
Layton, UT

Romney & Obama's positions are NOT the same. Obama thinks that gays should be able to be Boy Scout leaders. Romney believes that gays should be able to PARTICIPATE in Boy Scouts...those are NOT the same thing. So until somebody asks Romney point-blank if gays should be leaders, not just participants, in BSA, we really don't know his position.

I'm willing to bet Romney would side with mainstream America and say that, maybe, it's not a good idea having adults who are sexually attracted to males supervising minor males on overnight campouts. Just a thought.

And before we get to some extreme gay activist trying to shut me up by calling that observation of reality somehow "hateful", remember that I'd have just as big a problem with adult straight males supervising minor females alone on a campout. And in view of the fact that promiscuity is absolutely enormously higher among gays than straights, and that gays are more likely statistically to victimize minors, I'd be that much more worried about gays in that situation than even straight males. That's not based on "bigotry"...that's based on love of my children.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

Romney's quoted comments from 1994 still don't fully answer his full position. Most people don't differentiate between gays who act on their tendency by being immoral, and gays who keep themselves "morally straight", and Romney's comments, unfortunately, are very ambiguous in this regard. Just as the LDS Church allows people who struggle with same-gender attraction to be full members of the church if they follow and obey the commandments, I'm also sure that Romney in this same way supports the idea of having gays who do the same to be active participants in the Boy Scouts of America. But Romney's comment hasn't differentiated that nuance -- so we are left to speculate. This article is making it sound like Romney supports gays who are living immoral lifestyles to be a part of the Boy Scouts of America, but I highly doubt that is his actual position.

Salt Lake City, UT

Your logic would be like banning straight men from serving as LDS Bishops because they'd have one on one interviews with women for things like temple recommends.

midvale guy

Who cares? Let him give up his award. It is up to him, he earned it. There is so much dissent and objection on everything by everyone that it all really doesn't matter. I hope some organizations in this country will stand up for their beliefs and choose to exclude members who do not carry forth their ideals. Otherwise we should just make one big club and give everybody a membership card and an award that has no meaning or significance at all because everybody will have one.

Kaysville, UT

I just took a survey for a graduate student at the University of Phoenix in conjunction with the Deseret News involving non-professional journalists and professional journalists. This title and article just do not agree.

Cebterville, Utah

Lets remember, if you are gay that does not mean you are a sexual predator. If you are a gay adult, you prefer same sex relationships. Sexual predators are adults looking for children to be with. Some gays are fine around the youth, can be examples in other good ways and can even adopt children. Don't lump the two together.

Salt Lake City, UT


Sandusky was married to a woman and had several children, he probably would have been more than eligible to take a group of young boy scouts on camping trips.

Being openly gay does not have anything to do with pedophilia. Serial pedophiles often attempt hide their actions by being "Family Men".

I've known many gay men throughout my life and would not only trust them with children, but would prefer them over many of the straight, married men and women I have also known.

Lehi, UT

I am not sure of the significance of knowing what either candidate thinks. BSA is a private organization. Thank heavens!!

Stephen Kent Ehat
Lindon, UT

It is interesting that on Thursday, Aug. 2, 2012, in the Chicago suburb of Oakbrook Terrace, Ill., 5-year-old Dr. Robert Wise stood in front of M. Spencer Green, an Associated Press photographer, and, holding his Eagle Scout medal, announced to all the world, "I am interested in removing all evidence that I was ever a Scout."

I cannot think of a better way to remove all evidence that he was even a Scout than to hold the medal in front of a newspaper photographer and make such a statement. I personally had not previously known he was a Scout. His very public act made it clear he once was. But, of course, he had a much different point he wanted to make. And he made it.

Suppose the Roman Catholic Church were to announce that it did not want gay men to serve as priests (who interact with alter boys). Would President Obama decry the announcement? Would Mitt Romney? Or would it be relegated to the background and would the press remind everyone, "It's the economy, stupid"?

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

El Chango Supremo,

The headline didn't mislead. It didn't even imply anything, you simply inferred it (I did too) and falsely. Romney supports it, but doesn't support forcing BSoA against their free right to choose for themselves.

I support gays having the right to choose for themselves to believe and live according to the dictates of their own conscience. If they want to go to the 'church of the gays', believe what they will, and even hold private ceremonies and rituals and call themselves 'married' then I have no problem with it. But I choose not to support or endorse those actions and I especially do not support extending state recognition to their union or other such moral choices. Their union is immoral and does not align with principles of happiness that are fundamental to human existence. Most people are so focused on their own opinions that they ignore an important distinction. I am not forcing my beliefs on others. If I were, I would be forcing all men to marry a woman, etc. While I disagree, one CAN support BSoA's right to choose while disagreeing with the choices they make.

Voice of Reason
Layton, UT

Let's be clear - of course not all gays are sexual predators; most aren't. That was clearly not the point of my post. The point is, they are statistically more LIKELY to victimize minors, which is strongly supported empirical fact. That obviously doesn't mean that ALL are, or even a majority are. But we need to put to bed once and for all the gay activist myth that the minute a gay victimizes a minor, then presto-chango...they're no longer gay, they're a pedophile. They say that, BS meters throughout America are going off like sirens. I guess that means no straights can victimize children either...

Cache county, USA

If its ok for gays to be leaders in the boy scouts, then why do gay people call non gay people straight?
Doesn't the term straight mean accurate, and by the rules?
I choose my leaders to be rule followers.

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT


"Some gays"? Like who? Larry Brinkin? The question isn't if "they all are" but tendencies.

Gay does not equal 'sexual predator'. I agree with that. One can indeed give in to certain temptations and not intend or choose to hurt others the way predators do. However, when someone chooses to reject the very fundamental things that define who they are, such as their anatomical identity and function- then it is only expected when such persons also choose to reject the fundamental morals that are inherent to our existence. It would have to be easier to convince yourself that it is 'okay' to harm another person when you have convinced yourself that your own body was meant to do something that it clearly wasn't designed for.

If I started pretending I was a dinosaur, nearly every psychologist in the world would be willing to recognize that doing something else incongruous with 'being human' would only be expected.

When people are willing to give in to temptation, it doesn't foster happiness and doesn't promote other moral choices. That is something that disqualifies someone from being appropriate to guide youth. Political correctness doesn't justify risking youth safety.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments