Re: snowmanDon't know what your definition of normal is. The
Handbook states that in the US, the Scouting program is to be the
activity/mutual portion of the Young Men's program. I'll trust the
leaders of the Church over you any day.
Claudio: not in normal LDS wards. Scouts is held on a different night.
As an Eagle Scout I have mixed emotions about this. But to be clear I will say
the following. The Gospel was restored to the earth, not the BSA. The Church is
a sponsor of the BSA. It's not a requirement to join the BSA in order to
carry out Aaronic Priesthood functions. Unfortunately there are cases where
families are pressured and told " it's an obligation to join and
support to enroll their kids". And then have more pressure put on them to
donate to Friends of Scouting and other things. Nobody should feel like
that, that what unions do. Yes the BSA is the activity arm of the YM
organization. But by reading what some are saying here, it's like you are
saying the YM are incapable of doing activities without the BSA.If people
don't want to participate leave them alone.
Re: "Local Scouting is BSA, BSA is local Scouting."Yeah,
yeah. Same old tune BSA's professional scouters have been singing for
years. Maybe it's even been true, to one extent or another, depending on
one's location, in the past.But now?What will
National Council do when LGBT activists don't go quietly into the night?
What happens the next time atheists sue? How about when international scouts
withhold recognition? These are all matters of absolute indifference to local
scouters. But they've assumed huge import to BSA. They're the wedge
Scouting's enemies use to influence BSA to act against the interests of its
chartering orgs.National Council is BSA. And BSA has shown it's
more concerned for the feelings and beliefs of Scouting's enemies, than for
those of its friends.As we all know, that makes it a mere matter of
time before we'll be forced to part ways.Here's hoping
it'll be awhile, but it's now inevitable. And, in the meantime, BSA
has taken another step away from local Scouting.
Re: snowmanFor someone who claims years of experience, you sure are
wrong a lot. The Young Men's program, specifically with regards to Mutual
Night activities, is Scouting. Are you deliberately trying to deceive, or are
you just that ignorant?
Scouting is (continues) to be the activity arm of the young mens program of the
LDS Church. If you support the LDS prophet you will support your young men in
Jack:I would also invite you to volunteer for your Districts FoS
campaign nest year as a presenter. Been there done that for many years. And
just so you know, The young mens program has nothing to do with scouting.
It's two totally different programs.
I'm so embarrassed for so many of you.Hardly a one of you is
qualified to even post an opinion on this subject and any other article that
involves the rights of the "gay" community.I'm shaking my
head in utter disbelief in your archaic attitudes and so thankful I don't
live anywhere near most of you. Let the witch hunt begin.
@procurodorfiscal,Shown it's hand? It adopted a position consistent
with its largest supporter and Chartering Partner's position. Is that bad?
BSA had complete legal grounds to continue the prior position, but chose on its
own accord to re-examine it; it was not forced to do so. It took input from its
own membership before formulating a position that the majority could support.
Is that the bad thing? Consider this: When the missionary age was lowered,
opposition suddenly intensified. Coincidence? No. Since this is the program
most effective in preparing young men for missionary service and was endorsed
again in the recent Young Men leadership Broadcast.."we don't need
another program", we need to support it. Local Scouting is BSA, BSA is
local Scouting. The Methods of Scouting are still there, the values of Scouting
are still there, the Aims of Scouting are still there. It is still the activity
arm of the Aaronic Priesthood of the LDS Church and still has the support of its
biggest Chartering Partner. BSA indeed merits your support.
Re: "I would also invite you to volunteer for your Districts FoS campaign
ne[x]t year as a presenter."No thanks, Jack.Next
year will be the first in 40 or so years we won't be donating to FOS. BSA
has shown its hand. It will eventually betray its friends and cave in to
pressure from those who hate the organization and what it has always stood
for.I can't, in good conscience, continue to support BSA.
I'll continue to support local Scouting as long as I can, but BSA no longer
merits my support.
@snowmanI have been in Scouting for almost the many years, I currently
serve as the District Commissioner in my District of 149 units. FoS does NOT
fund any Scouting units, it benefits them through capital improvements like
upkeep on the Scout camps, purchase of equipment and real estate and program
materials. I would ask you to do some research into FoS, and the charter
agreement signed between your chartering organization and the Council. FoS
funds do not return to the Chartered Organization directly. I would also invite
you to volunteer for your Districts FoS campaign nest year as a presenter. You
will be trained and receive materials to distribute to the units when you give
your presentation. Those materials are quite specific as to where the donations
go and how they are used.
ReadMineFirst,Did you even read the church response?Did
you read my reply to "Legalize_the_Constitution" at 6:16 PM
yesterday?In the last days, the elect will be agreeable with the
Lord and his church. If you aren't in agreement, I really REALLY do
understand that. But publishing it is not the way.ANY time you feel
at odds or in doubt you ought to kneel in prayer and ask. Those who don't
will surely be lead away. Those who care for the welfare of their soul
don't murmur. When we feed doubt we surely must repent and humble
ourselves, then ask in faith if something is right.All people do is
extend arms of love and help to struggling young men and so many are downing
gallons and gallons of pickle juice because of it. I can't imagine the
horror of my bishop turning me away. If he had, I would not be the same man I am
today.Murmuring is not the way. It will not bring answers. It will
not confirm truth. It does not help or serve anyone. It destroys our love of God
and His children.
@zoar --"If there is no family history of homosexuality than it
is impossible to be born that way."That's baloney. There are tons of congenital conditions that do not have "family
histories". Downs syndrome is one obvious and common example -- trisomy 21
is not inherited at all.Nonetheless, several studies HAVE found that
homosexuality may tend to follow family lines and may have genetic linkages.
Check out recent studies by Sergey Gavrilets, for instance, other studies by
Andrea Camperio-Ciani, and yet other studies by Dean Hamer. Also,
research done by Simon LeVay has found physical differences in the brains --
specifically the hypothalamus -- between gay and straight men.And in
women who are born with congenital adrenal hyperplasia, roughly half of these
women grow up to be lesbian.So, yes indeed, plenty of research DOES
point towards a genetic/biological origin for homosexuality.And
heck, even the LDS church itself acknowledges that homosexuality is not a
@Sneaky Jimmy"The boy scouts did the only thing they could do to
stay relevant. They have finally realized you should not exclude young men
because of the way they were born."If there is no family history
of homosexuality than it is impossible to be born that way. So if homosexuals
claim that is the way they were born do they support that argument with evidence
that their family lines have relatives that were also homosexuals?
@banderson --"Their message is clear, if you are acting out on
something that isn't your nature, you are sinning"Now
here's an interesting statement.The LDS church acknowledges
that same-sex attraction is not a choice.And if it's not a
choice, then it is indeed "in the nature" of the homosexual person to
feel this attraction. Those are your only two options -- choice, or
nature.So, according to your own words, homosexuals SHOULD act on
their attractions -- because, after all, it is in their nature.According to your own words, homosexuals would be sinning if they did NOT act
on their attractions.
In response to Manzanita: I truly agree with your comment. From the very
deepest part of my soul I find myself screaming out..."President
Packer"! And how does this decision agree with Elder Oak's call in
October 2012 General Conference to protect the children of the world? I am so
utterly confused. Even my sweet very active daughter asked her husband if he
wished that they were Southern Baptists right now.
Contrary to popular believe FOS donations do not fund any troops, but only local
councils. See the BSA website for verification. I tried to post the link but
couldn't.As for those who noticed that the comments have changed: the
whole issue has changed. A few months ago the proposed vote was for total
inclusion. The vote now was whether to allow boys who are openly gay. And I am
with the church on this one: as long as they follow the standards, I don't
see a problem with it. However, I don't know how the voting was reported in
your neck of the woods on TV. Here in Cali it was very one-sided: most stations
only interviewed members of the LGBT community and they are outraged. They feel
nothing has been accomplished and they will continue to push. As someone said,
the door has been opened. This vote just bought some time for the boys. But I
feel it is the beginning of the end for BSA. Hope it will last long enough for
my son to make Eagle.
I see this as just one more victory for secular religion. The LDS Church's
support of it is puzzling but not a surprise.
I need to say first and formost, I'll support what ever the church does.
My interpretation of the church's stance is that they will support this
depending on what BSA does with it. So, it is still possible the church could
still pull support from BSA over this, or maybe not. Time will tell, and that
is the point, we have to see what happens.That said, based on how
our society works, I think BSA made the wrong call. Now they are going to be
fighting a two front war. The liberals have made it clear this is not "good
enough" and now conservatives are mad too. I'm expecting many lawsuits
to come as well. I think the best thing BSA could do (since their very
existence is at stake) is go for an all or nothing approach, so that at least
one side is fully supportive. Let's be honest, even if the church supports
BSA, how many members won't? Will be interesting to see how many units are
left in a year.
The gay community doesn't care about kids as much as they care about their
issues, which is acceptance of something immoral. The Scouts are walking a very
thin line, something the gay community will only see as a way to eventually get
full 'acceptance' of the gay lifestyle. The church's stance is
thus: We know we have members who struggle with adultery, pornograpy,
homosexuality, dishonesty, abuse, etc; We welcome all of God's children to
come to the waters of Christ, but if you are tempted to adultery, don't do
it; if you are tempted to pornograhy, don't do it, if you are tempted to
homosexuality, don't do it. The church hasn't changed their stance on
the evils of Homosexuality one bit. However, all are children of God and as
such, He wants to give them every chance in the world to get it right. Their
message is clear, if you are acting out on something that isn't your
nature, you are sinning, and sexual sins are of the most grevious. The Scouts,
unfortunately, are just the latest whipping boy for achieving acceptance of
immorality. Patience. God is in control.
Fortunately my son just got his Eagle Scout, because as of this vote, my family
is done with belonging to the Scouting organization.
I'm an active church member and scout leader, my husband is Cubmaster and
our son is a Cubscout. I am not willing to allow my son to be a political pawn
for an organization that has fallen to political and financial fear. I am
disapointed that adults are confronting our compassion for children to forward
an agenda. The gay rights lobbyists have made it clear that they will continue
to push for laws that punush organizations for excluding homosexuals, regardless
of religious beliefs. I regret that my church leaders have chosen to stave off
lawsuits over taking a strong stance against homosexuality. I'm glad the
Baptist organizations are holding to their religious convictions. I regret that
my church chose to be safe rather than drawing a line in the sand. And yes, I
love homosexual/gay people of all ages.
Jack: Having been a Scout leader for over 35 years I should know what I am
Atl134"NPR has stated within the last week that homeless teens are
40-60% gay. "Because bigoted parents kick them out.So by using your logic every hooker and every John are sex
maniacs/nympho'sNPR is wrong at least twice a day.......these
teens are indeed homeless, but because they choose to perform homosexual acts
hardly makes them gay by choice
it is interesting that since 1910 there have been a lot of gay boys in scouting
but silent about their orientation. the only difference now is that they can be
open about it.
Whatever their orientation, kids don't need to be having sex with anybody.
And keeping busy, mind, heart, and hands, is good for all of them at a time when
so much is going on inside. But tell me, bitd, before all this came up, was
anyone concerned with young people experimenting, or sharing magazines they
shouldn't have been reading (or even knowing about)? No one seems worried,
either, when men are at the girls' camp. Or is this something reserved for
SSA and, especially males? Is it fear of the unknown? Would it not make more
sense to discuss these fears with those who have something to say based on their
own experience, rather than sharing it with others who have never had any
experience in this? Just a suggestion.
Have the Boy Scouts just fallen into a "tolerance trap"?
How do we expect to bring others unto Christ if we can't show them the love
of Christ. By allowing "gays" into the scouting program, we are not
openly embracing the lifestyle, or embracing it at all for that matter. We are
simply showing them that they are able to find the love of Christ. We can't
expect a teenage boy to run to the Church (or to Christ) if he is pushed away
for his confusion. The Prophet understands this, and I stand beside him, as he
receives this revelation from Christ.
The Church should make very clear that any boy who advocates sexual activity
(either homosexual or heterosexual) is not welcome in a Scout organization.
Sometimes, just the advocacy can be as damaging to a young child as the actual
@snowman,FoS funds the capitol improvements at the Scout owned properties,
pays salaries and adds to the financial strength of BSA. It does not fund
units. Each unit must fund itself through fund-raising or through the
chartering organization. FoS benefits all units, it does not fund them.
What will happen to the scout oath...."morally straight"?
J-TX: Friends of Scouting funds all Scout units
Heres the problem with this.....Young boys will often do things like pee on the
fire or go swimming in the lake in their underwear and so forth. I do not think
it is a good idea to have young boys who are attracted to other boys sharing
tents and going on overnight sleep overs. Just like I believe young boys and
young girls shouldn't be sharing tents and going on over night trips
together. I think this is just asking for trouble.
Legalize_the_Constitution,Do you want the church to say "Go all
ye heathens to the depths of the fiery pit lest ye repent"?I
have read in D&C recently about preaching nothing but repentance, so I
appreciate your concern. But I also read that until we are called to direct
anything else that we aren't to do it. If you are questioning the decisions
of the church, keep it to yourself and God. Pray about it. But publishing them
is not the way to go.Sometimes prophets are bold, sometimes they
aren't because others will simply harden to boldness. Unless you have the
power and authority to know which is right at which time then where is your
complaint?You can't declare repentance by saying "get away
from here kid, you aren't welcome". I don't like it when members
call themselves "openly gay Mormon" for various reasons, but I have no
right to tell them not to come to church. I worry about the youth's
exposure to an acceptance of certain behaviors just as much, but firm reproach
isn't always right. Speaking softly can be just as intense. Helaman 5:30
This changes nothing for chartering organizations who don't wish to admit
I am or was a Cubmaster at my ward and I have two sons in the scouting program.
I will be resigning my position and my boys will not participate in this
program. The Church can't control the majority of units here as it does in
Utah and all it takes is one "lost boy" to act out on his desires on my
younger sons. I refuse to let that happen. Sure, the boys in the ward unit are
probably ok, but what about at council events or Jamboree type events. Can they
make that promise to me? I doubt it. And this fight is not over as they will
keep pushing for gay leaders. I am astonished and hurt by the Church's
support of immorality by their non-action. But they probably were not thinking
much past Salt Lake City.
As a former scout and scout leader I thank the Church for its compassionate
view. I hope other religious organizations will follow.
Kickin' story, Sarah. Glad you included your byline.
I'm an active LDS member and have been all my life, and have never
questioned the decisions or the direction of the church until recently with
respect to these homosexual positions and policies that we have seen of late. I
feel like the church is trying to remain morally neutral on an issue that is
very important to stand up for what is right with boldness and clarity. While I don't blame those with same sex attraction temptations for
having the temptation, I do believe in redemption and repentance, and I
don't think the church is clearly articulating a path of repentance and
forsaking temptation when it comes to these issues. For the scouts,
I wouldn't want my young boys to go on camp outs with other boys who have
openly declared they are gay. If a young man is confused about his sexual
orientation, that is one thing, but when someone proclaims they are gay I
believe that they have made a decision to accept these temptations as fact and
give up the fight towards trying to change and live morally straight.
If the issue ever becomes, (which I suspect it will) about homosexual scout
masters and leaders, then I suspect the LDS Church may have to re-examin the
issue. I never thought the church would try to exclude children from Scouts no
matter what issues they may have. So let's see where this goes from here.
It would be nice if it stopped at this point, but I bet it won't.
Progressive forces are never satisfied until they have destroyed all tradition.
People really don't see the difference between a young boy who may be gay
and a girl?News flash for everyone, there are already gay boys in
scouts. For one thing most boys of scouting age probably don't know one way
or the other, and haven't thought about it. They may have some confusing
feelings start to emerge at that age, but that's probably about it.Do you want to be the bishop that has to tell the young 14 year old boy
that he can't join scouts with the rest of the boys in the ward because he
has been having feelings of attraction towards other boys?Sexuality
doesn't belong in scouts one way or the other. This should really be a
non-issue, and I am glad to see the official church statement saying pretty much
Once again, these completely human organizations continue to make unremarkable,
predictable, and totally flawed decisions - decisions that demonstrate over and
over again that either there is no god to give "revelation" on such
matters, or there are no humans capable of receiving god's mind and will on
such matters, or both.Those who claim to speak for god are no
better, and most often worse, at making policy and doctrine decisions as are
regular human beings using their rational minds without any god.Hmmm. Go figure.
Why is it okay for a "faithful" LDS member to openly declare that the
Church is wrong on this BSA issue, including suggesting they will refuse a
calling to serve in the organization (a calling that presumably comes from God),
but it is not possible to be "faithful" if a member openly declares that
the Church is wrong on the Prop 8 issue in the eyes of the "faithful"
LDS posters here?What a curious observation.
"...The key is the need to be chaste. The feelings of being gay in
themselves is not a sin. it is the acting on the feelings. No different from a
heterosexual boy. They have hormones for girls no big deal they need to control
those hormones."Look, I totally agree with your statement, but
we are not dealing with whether having gay feelings are sinful or not. We are
dealing with the issue of whether a boy with homosexual tendencies will be
helped or hindered from entertaining sexual thoughts by sharing a tent with
another boy. To help you understand my thinking, please answer me
honestly. Is it appropriate at Girls Camp for a chaste teenage boy to share a
pup tent with a chaste young woman if there is no mutual attraction between
them? Moreover, would it be appropriate for a chaste teenage boy to share a
tent with an attractive chaste young woman who is not attracted to men? Why or
why not?Remember that the Church didn't make this decision, but
they are going to work with it and I agree that they should. My point is that
it is going to complicate things a bit.
This will be the same issue as the blacks getting the priesthood in the
70's. Some never could fathom how black's got the priesthood and were
angry at the church for including all worthy members to have the priesthood.Today it is gays. There will be some that can't fathom how gays can
participate in scouts or the priesthood. The key is the need to be chaste. The
feelings of being gay in themselves is not a sin. it is the acting on the
feelings. No different from a heterosexual boy. They have hormones for girls no
big deal they need to control those hormones.This is really a non
issue unless you want to make it one.This is why you should never
justify your gospel beliefs with politics. Your politics may lead you astray but
the gospel won't.
There was never any rule regarding sexual orientation in the BSA, so things
haven't changed for all of you who now say, "I won't be supporting
BSA anymore." The moral rule has not changed of "no sexual
relations." LDS church members should be on board with this 100% if they
truly believe that being gay in and of itself is not a sin. I would also like
to point out that most young teenage boys with same sex attraction have not come
out. They are in turmoil, struggling with their feelings of being different and
most of them loathing themselves because of what they feel. Believe me, they are
not going to "come on" to your sons that are straight. At that age, they
are hiding who they are for fear of ridicule and exclusion (which it seems many
of adults are happy to promote). I applaud the BSA in this clarification of
their stance and the LDS church for supporting it!!
For most of my life, I thought homosexuals were deviants. I did my share of
looking down my nose at them, believing them to be sinners destined to be
burned, as was Sodom and Gomorrah. In recent years I have read so much about all
kinds of medical research into all kinds of conditions. It seems clear that
there are genetic or other biological reasons for all our conditions.I believe now that same-sex attraction is natural and biologically-rooted. It
is seen in nature among animals. We see it among humans. Same-sex attraction
comes in varying degrees of intensity, as does heterosexual attraction. How the Lord wants us to treat each other is not always clear (e.g. the
black race). But we should be open minded, which will help us be accepting and
loving of all.
I think the church made the correct decision, but there are nagging problems
coming down the pike that will need to be addressed. Suppose two
boys are struggling with same-sex attraction, but are keeping the standards of
the church. Now suppose these two boys are in a position to share a tent
together. Now if I am trying to keep the standards of the church and I have
homosexual tendencies, how will going on a campout and sharing a tent with other
boys not be a potential source of temptation? And what if two boys share that
temptation? Are we going to say it be the responsibility of the leaders to ask
each boy which sex they are attracted to so they are properly segregated? You
see where I am going here?Let me lay out the problem another way.
Why do heterosexually oriented boys not attend girls camp? After all, if I keep
the standards of the church and the girl in the tent with me is ugly, it
shouldn't be a problem, right? My point is, the whole idea of
the ban was to keep it simple by keeping the sexual element out of it
For all you people who are saying that the church is "softening" its
stance towards gays and that the leadership is "progressive" need to
know that nothing has changed at all. You think that we hate gays, but
that's not true. People who have same-sex attraction are welcome to church,
welcome to participate, can go to the temple, etc. as long as they are not
acting on it and violating the law of chastity (which says that ANY kind of
sexual relation outside of marriage is wrong). I have friends who have same-sex
attraction and they are able to go to the temple, hold callings, etc. They were
in scouts! If having the same stance as before is considered
"progressive" then you're right, but that word implies some change
and there hasn't been any changes made.
@JBQ"There really is no such thing as a gay teen. "You
never had a crush on someone of the opposite gender while you were a teen?"NPR has stated within the last week that homeless teens are 40-60%
gay. "Because bigoted parents kick them out.
I suppose church leaders believe that they are outsmarting the gay movement.
They might hold off a major lawsuit for a few years with their decision.
Eventually all will learn that the gay movement is after religion and while this
decision slowed down their movement it will come back in force with bigger guns
blazing. For now, scouting is a front in this fight and a small barrier between
religion and the gay movement. The innocent boys are just pawns in this game.
The church states blanket policy hoping to advert any negative consequences like
they received for prop 8. So, in the short run it may be the smartest thing to
do - keep the scout program and appease the gay leaders who are and were ready
to sue. Eventually, this will be a battle that no organized religion can ignore
as the gay movement has no compassion for their own only their agenda to subvert
and supplant organized religion. Too bad the boys will be lost in all of this.
Tough issue accross the board. The BSA cannot be separated from religion because
that is what it was formed on. If religion is taken out of it then it is no
longer the BSA (Duty to God). To those that say everyone has done a 180 on this
issue you are incorrect. When it first came to light the BSA was considering a
change it was to allow homosexual leaders. That changed. The reason that changed
is because the BSA realized this would be the end of support by 70% of its
membership. The Church was not on board until the BSA removed the leaders from
the mix then the Church made a statement of support. I will not withdraw my
support at this time. However, if homosexual adults (meaning practicing) are
allowed then I will as will a large group. There are various reasons but what it
comes down to is my belief that it is morally wrong and against the will of God.
And as I noted earlier, the BSA has always had religious ties and will cease to
be the BSA if those ties are severed.
@Justmythoughts - If you think there aren't *already* (and always have
been) gay Scouts and/or gay Scout leaders in the BSA, you haven't been
paying attention. Pretending that homosexuality doesn't exist
is just silly. Of *course* gay Scout leaders should be allowed - and they should
be required to adhere to the exact same principles of behavior as are currently
expected of female Scout leaders. I really do not see the problem
here. BSA protocol already stipulates that at least two Scout Leaders are
present for camping trips and other similar events. Nothing has changed.
@ MoJules - Florissant, MO "There are many gays in the church who are temple
worthy, the church is taking the same kind of stand, live the standards and you
are welcome to be part of the group."Hold on there.....You need to define what you mean by "gays".If you mean
someone who has a homsexual desire but doesn't act on that desire, then
yes, you are correct.If you mean someone who has a homsexual desire
but DOES act on that desire then you are 100% incorrect; in THAT case there is
no such thing as a "gay" Latter-day Saint who is "temple
"On the other hand, Gay Rights activists will push for homosexual adults to
be accepted as leaders."In our troop, we have adult women
leaders. They do not sleep in the same tent with scouts other then their own
boys. Same with the male leaders.Couldn't one make the exact
same argument against having heterosexual female leaders as having gay male
This is not news....nor is it any more of an acceptance of gays into the
church.....the statement is purposely NOT taking a stand on this. It merely
repeats that "behavior" is the driving factor in the inclusivity of the
Boy Scouts, meaning that as long as a "gay" boy isn't having sexual
relations with anyone, he is included. It in no way addresses homosexuality in
the church since "behavior" is still the driving factor, NOT acceptance.
While philosophically I agree with this decision, it spells the end of Scouting.
Some religious groups will sithdraw their support. On the other hand, Gay
Rights activists will push for homosexual adults to be accepted as leaders. This
decision did give the LDS Church breathing space and time to develop their own
youth programs. Scouting in Utah has a life expectancy of only a few years now.
The boy scouts did the only thing they could do to stay relevant. They have
finally realized you should not exclude young men because of the way they were
born. It's gratifying to see that the youth are way ahead of the adults on
this. I don't think it's a problem for kids (at least on the West
Coast) to have gay scouts in scouting. Some of the comments here are darn right
hilarious, "they" never go on scout camps without their fathers,
"gender confusion" "homosexual behavior". Replace the word gay
with "Negroes" and you feel like its the 60's all over again.
Remember the lawsuit a few years ago that went all the way to the Supreme Court?
Seems like a waste of money now.
It seems the moral divide has been properly bridged by both the BSA and the LDS
Church. I commend both for their thoughtful decision and direction.
Help! we need General Patton!
@ scodyshootfight KC, MO"...I look at my own ward's efforts
in scouting. We have spent the past 4 months or so fundraising, planning
fundraising, planning scout camp, planning high adventure, etc etc. We have put
so much effort into it that we haven't used any mutual time for service,
fellowshipping inactives, and working on Duty to God...and you begin to wonder
if the benefit is worth the amazing amount of headaches and sacrifice. Good
comes from scouting, but at what cost?"The cost is of
advancement. Scouts have service projects quarterly if not monthly in order to
advance in rank. The Scout Committee will not advance without service in each
rank. So, if this is true, which I don't believe, your ward is not the
norm. I'll bet your scouts are doing more service,
fellowshipping, and worship than you give them credit.
GEO,My point is that when this issue first surfaced, the outrage in
this forum was palpable and widespread.There were many many comments
with the general idea that "The Church will NEVER go along with this."
The comment section on this article is far different from when the
issue first came to the forefront.
JoeBlow,I read through all these comments and I don't come to the
same conclusion as you. What I see is a church that is hoping that the
implementation of this altered policy will allow said church to continue its
same, long standing, policies and practices. I see a church that acknowledges
that an independent organization made a thoughtful decision about its own
policies in the context of a difficult and controversial social issue. I see
some members of that church that are unhappy that said independent organization,
which they have supported with time and treasure for years, did not heed their
input and position on said issue and instead sided with a vocal minority that is
pursuing an agenda that those same members of said church consider fundamentally
immoral. Those same members will apparently be less supportive, to varying
degrees, of said independent organization.The take away message here is
that some people stand up of what they believe while allowing others to believe
and act differently. Conversely, some people try and force there beliefs on
others. Look carefully at who is being tolerant and who isn't on this
issue. Tolerance doesn't equal embracing and supporting.
Here's the problem with gay boy scouts. The teen years are filled with
turmoil and confusion. There really is no such thing as a gay teen. It is
"arrested deelopment" in one form or another. The end result may be gay
but teens are finding out who they are. The moral authority of religion has
always been an anchor in which to guide moral development. This is the mystery
of God. Now that man and woman have decided to "take the role of God"
and redefine moral behavior, you have problems. The "new normal" is
actually a detioration of the "old normal". Acceptance of a
"twisted reality" is the same as accepting the "twisted cross"
of the 40s. NPR has stated within the last week that homeless teens are 40-60%
gay. They are not gay but engaging in gay behavior which is aided and abetted by
interference from adults who interfere with the emotional development of someone
who is vulnerable. In the same situation, girls turn to prostitution. Obviously,
the next step from an intrusive government is to force churches to accept gay
principles which are against their precepts and to be persecuted if they
It will be interesting to see how the following is handled: Gay young man going
on a campout with the scouts. How will they accommodate sleeping arrangements?
They don't allow boys and girls to share tents. I agree that this will be
the begginning of the end. The LGBT will push and push until they destroy a
This s the exact right decision. kudos to the LDS church and others for getting
Wait, so if a 17 year old boy has sex with his high school girlfriend, are we
going to start kicking them out of the Boy Scouts? I don't remember needing
to pass a Temple Recommend interview to get my Eagle Scout award.
Bottom line:Right or wrong, Friends of Scouting will get fewer
donations.This won't impact LDS troops as much as it will
non-LDS troops, because FOS subsidizes the non-LDS troops. The LDS Church
budgets for BSA activities.I predict that a higher percentage of my
non-LDS (Baptist, Methodist) southern neighbors will withhold financial support
for the BSA, and there will soon be a financial crisis.Will the LGBT
community press the United Way to re-fund scouting? Nope.Will the LGBT
community all of a sudden start donating to FOS? Nope.After all, the BSA
still "discriminates" against gay leaders....Purely
financially, the BSA will become irrelevant and unsustainable, will fade like
the GSA. Facilities will not be kept up, property will have to be sold,
administrators will be laid off, scout stores will close.Get used to
ordering your merit badge patches over the internet.
The LDS Church has the right to follow their concience on this issue and I will
support their right to do so. I must add that I believe that political
correctness is one of the things that is wrong with the Country and this is a
move of political correctness both by BSA and the LDS Church.
The LDS church puts the wellfare of the boys above any political movements.
I'm certain they look at this change as an opportunity to minister to some
of the least in our society. This is about the boys.The majority of
homeless youth identify as being gay. Some are expelled from their homes for
"coming out", while others crave the drama of being different until it
escalates to very unsafe lifestyle choices and personal exploitation. Scouting can be a safe environment to encourage young men to discipline their
actions and curb their urges, and turn their hearts away from a focus on selfish
self-destructive identities and seek a life of service and building the
communities in which they live. Most mature adults should readily
see this as an opportunity for outreach and not despise these youth who are--for
the most part--being swept away by social pressures that until now they never
had means to cope with... Scouting provides a way to cope.
@ county mom,Take your kids out of scouting and enjoy the family on your
own.Your attitude towards all this will create all kinds of problems
within the family over the next number of years. You'd be surprised.
I applaud the common sense stance by the LDS church.What I find
amusing is the comments. Several months ago, the comment section was full of
contempt for the BSA for even considering such a change.Now, most
comments appear to support the change and suggest that their were in favor of it
all along.Nothing like a public church position to get people in
As a missionary in the late 70's we gave a discussion on the law of
chastity. We taught that no one was to have any intimate physical relations with
no one except our own husband and wife. I am confused on how that law can change
to meet the new norms of society. My suggestion is to have the LDS church
start their own scouting program and combine it with the Duty to God and any
other programs already established by the church. I earned my eagle scout
award many years ago. I was proud of that accomplishment and what it stood for.
I will no longer contribute to the FOS or volunteer any more time with this
I really look forward to the day where fear isn't smeared across our lives
with ignorant comments. I really am amazed that supposed 'Christians'
are constantly in the business of treating people who are not like them like
second class citizens. This judgmental attitude is exactly what our savior
denounced and showed accepting of all people whether they were homeless, his
enemies or prostitutes. This is what happens when a culture selectively cuts and
pastes scripture for their own agenda and not give any context to phrases and
stories of where they come from.
The Savior showed great love and understanding to every person. He taught the
poor, the rich, the outcast and the sinners. Would he have abandoned a young
man struggling with same-sex-attraction? "A new commandment I give unto
you, That ye love one another, as I have loved you, that ye also love one
another" John 13:34
For any church critic ready to herald this as change, let's examine the
church's response. Gay oriented youth can join, but only if they agree to
the same behavioral standards set for all youth. This means that despite
defining themselves as gay, they can't have any sexual relationships, nor
would they be able to date anyone of the same sex as that would violate the
rules on dating and chastity. Participating in a homosexual relationship, sexual
or not still violates the standards of the church. They don't have to be
members of our church to join scouting, but they have to act like a heterosexual
youth for all intents and purposes and even harder is that they can't date
based on their orientation. Not a problem for most 11-13 yr olds, but a bigger
problem for high school age boys.
I wouldn't want my teenage boys camping with girls, so why would I want
them to camp with boys who have the same sexual orientation as girls? So do we
allow girls to join as long as they don't have sexual relations with the
boys or each other? This is a slippery slope and bad policy.
Sorry Charlie!: You wrote: "Faithful members of the LDS Church will not be
affected by this policy since the LDS Leadership has expressed its continuing
support of the Boy Scouts and their acceptance of this policy."I
believe your assumption that a person isn't a faithful member of the LDS
Church if they choose to discontinue financial support of scouting is offensive
and judgmental. For some of us, the decision by the national scouting leaders
with regard to admitting gay members is just the last straw in our belief that
scouting isn't the best way to teach all boys the values of life and/or
provide a social opportunity for them. I don't recall any question in any
interview with a priesthood leader that asks if I support the scouting program.
I conclude that means it isn't all that important to being a faithful
I will restrict activity in scouting as much as practicable for my 3 boys in
scouting now, and the 2 following them. There certainly will be no more actively
supporting the BSA in our family. I strongly disagree with this compromise with
a vocally and very wrong minority group of people trying to push their agenda on
all the rest of us. Conciliatory words to the public do little to change the
high moral ground that was sacrificed in this compromise.
I have not read all of the comments but I hope that our scout leaders will
enforce the moral laws of scouting in both cases of heterosexual and homosexual
misconduct if it occurs. No more looking away for either situation. If a boy
can not maintain the strict moral code in scouting, meaning no sexual activity,
they should not advance in rank, including getting their Eagle.
I agree that no youth should be denied the benefits of scouting based on sexual
orientation. But since so much of scouting is outdoors and on overnight
activities, I also don't know if we should feel obligated to have our kids
go on these overnight activities away from home if they are going to be with
kids who have same gender attraction.Also, I look at my own
ward's efforts in scouting. We have spent the past 4 months or so
fundraising, planning fundraising, planning scout camp, planning high adventure,
etc etc. We have put so much effort into it that we haven't used any
mutual time for service, fellowshipping inactives, and working on Duty to God.
Combine that with the fact that EVERY week in June is devoted to scout camps for
all ages and you begin to wonder if the benefit is worth the amazing amount of
headaches and sacrifice. Good comes from scouting, but at what cost? Could we
do better? And do we need to require so much of a time commitment from leaders
who have their own families and who would like to have their own summer
vacations with their kids?
I'm a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and my
position has been agreeable to the teachings of my faith on this issue from day
one. Perhaps those who believe all the members of the church are the same. I
don't believe it. In fact, I know it aint so. I attend church and see
diversity of political persuasions fairly often.I have some opinions
which are more conservative and some which aren't. I'll tell you what
I do believe, that those complaining about members of the church on this forum
are attempting to distract from a meaningful discussion and nothing more or
less.MarkA,As an LDS scout, we used LDS Church
facilities. They were used as facilities only; we didn't talk religion in
scouts and there were non-LDS scouts. Someone volunteered a prayer for safety
before scout camps, and some didn't participate in them. No sermons were
given.The BSA has many LDS scouts, which has formed a historical
relationship of respect between the LDS Church and BSA, nothing more. The LDS
Church has well-known positions on homosexuality.It isn't about
religion, but organizations.
Thinking of my parents tonight, and of the decades they gave to Scouting. Even
though I'm not surprised by the outcome of the BSA's vote today, I am
sad.I'm not a homophobe or gay-basher. I'm not even
worried about awkward situations at Scout camp- that's pretty
far-fetched.Just please don't even THINK about comparing this
to being allowed to drink from the same drinking fountain, sit at the same lunch
counter, or at the front of the bus. This is about forcing a nonprofit
organization to recreate itself to the liking of a vocal special-interest
group.I'm sorry for the Executive Scout committee at the
national level. I'm sure they are weary of the badgering, haranguing, and
years of the BSA being in the cross-hairs. Well, that might have eased up a
little with this decision, but it's definitely not a victory for the BSA.
The scriptures say little children are holy and sanctified through the atonement
of Jesus Christ. Elder Bednar teaches that the atonement has enabling powers.
Perhaps there is healing power through the atonement for gender confusion as
well. Thank goodness for a loving Father in Heaven who wants what is best for
each of His children, regardless of current circumstances.
So no sexual relations for the kids, doesn't matter if it's with a boy
or girl. This vote didn't change moral standings that the scouts have
Now that the door has been opened.... How long until the first law suit for
leaders? The BSA showed no spine... I think we are seeing the end of Boy
Scouts....what parent wants to subject their boys to this and how will a leader
ever feel comfortable "volunteering" to put himself in that situation?
Boy Scout leaders are being asked to put themselves in a bad situation. If
they think the gay community will be happy with this change, they must be
dreaming. It will only embolden them more and before we know it BSA will no
longer exist. It will go down in flames like the rest of society.
@MarkAIt's that Duty to God thing, the oath that a Scout takes and
tries to make God a part of his life. Religion, whatever a Scouts religion, is
a big part of the values of Scouting. They are inseparable. Duty to God, Duty
to Country, Duty to self.
Re: ". . . there were many commenters saying the Church would drop the BSA
if they ever allowed this . . . ."The new rule requires no
immediate change to current Church policy or practice. That doesn't mean
the Church won't eventually be forced to drop Scouting. Or make changes to
current practices to protect LDS scouts.The new rule will require
LDS troops to accelerate the current trend, participating less and less in
national and regional functions, in favor of more single-troop activities, in
non-BSA facilities, and Young Men activities.The activists are far
from finished, in pushing their agenda.The not-too-distant future
will see more pressure to require "nondiscrimination" policies,
regarding both boys and leaders. National Council will someday knuckle under,
adopting polices we can't accept.But, no worries. As Boy
Scouting follows Girl Scouts into irrelevance, there'll be a Church program
ready to replace it.LGBT activists will ensure it's just a
matter of time. The more, the better, of course.It'll give us
opportunity for a more orderly transition to the new program.
There are many gays in the church who are temple worthy, the church is taking
the same kind of stand, live the standards and you are welcome to be part of the
I applaud BSA's decision. I still don't understand what scouting has
to do with religion. I wish we could keep them separate.
Thank you LDS Church for your inclusive stance on all Boy Scouts. You have shown
us what the Savior meant when He said "suffer the children to come unto
me." He did not place any restrictions on which children. All young men need
the skills and leadership the Boy Scouts provide. Those that struggle with
homosexuality need good role models in a moral environment to help them escape
vulnerability and predators. Thank you LDS leaders for demonstrating Choosing
@ IMAPatriot2: As you follow the lead of your church, it is your right to
choose not to continue to contribute to Scouting. Faithful members of the LDS
Church will not be affected by this policy since the LDS Leadership has
expressed its continuing support of the Boy Scouts and their acceptance of this
Let the right-wingers throw their tantrums. The rest of society is moving
Guess where my $$$ won't be going? That should save me a few bucks each
year when they come for the Sustaining Membership drive.
I have nothing to apologize for... cuz my position has been the same as the
church's from the beginning... and I honestly don't think that this
position is too difficult to reach for those paying attention as a member in the
@Obama10 The church hasn't been "softening" in its approach to
same-sex issues. Things are the same as they were. The media at large has
Mukkake,I hope that you don't really think you can accurately assess
the "progressiveness" of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints based on a handful of comments on the Deseret News website.
If you do, perhaps you need a good dose of "progressiveness"
yourself.From the Church's standpoint, this was always a side-show
because the Church is opposed to any, and all, sexual activity outside of
marriage. Whether or not that is "progressive" is a matter of opinion,
I suppose. The fact that homosexual behavior is one of many ways to violate the
Law of Chastity remains unchanged in all of this.
Agree with bw00ds - there is nothing new here.
This enlightened statement must disappoint the critics of the LDS church.
@Mukkake I don't know about the past comments here because I haven't
read them, but I disagree with your use of the term "progressive
leadership." I think "inspired leadership" is more appropriate. As
the official statement states, there is nothing new here and nothing that has
change or will change the church's implementation of church policy.
Funny, when this subject was first mentioned a few months ago, there were many
commenters saying the Church would drop the BSA if they ever allowed this, and
they would never donate to FOS again. I warned them at the time, that the
church is softening its approach to "gay" issues and that the Church
would not drop the BSA. Where are those posters now?
This will not change what we do.They never go on scout camps without their
father.They never share a tent.
Ah, so much for all the comments on here the last few months that insisted the
LDS Church would quit the BSA if the policy change was made.Glad to
know the leadership is more progressive than the membership. Good thing the tail
doesn't wag the dog.Commence apologia.