Pastor resigns from local Boy Scouts council following change in policy

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    June 10, 2013 6:25 p.m.

    Actually, to sexually abuse someone does not require any sexual attraction to the person at all. Much sexual abuse is about exercising power. Additionally abuse of pre-pubescent boys often does not represent attraction to post pubescent boys at all.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    June 10, 2013 6:11 p.m.

    Orientation is not the same as thinking a thought on the action, it is having a feeling that is beyond easy control. The cases of same-gender attraction are not known, but what is clear is that people do not chose to have such attraction in most cases. Having the attraction is not the same as acting on it, in any way. Even the higher law of "looking on a women to lust after her" is still about the choice to have thoughts. Deep rooted feelings and predispositions are not the result of choices.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    June 10, 2013 5:56 p.m.

    I am still baffled on how this decision could work with scripture. Scripture condemns actions, not having pre-existing dispositions to something not acted on.

  • plainbrownwrapper Nashville, TN
    June 9, 2013 4:38 p.m.

    @sharrona --

    "There are Biblical exceptions."

    Ahhhh. Eunuchs are excepted from procreation.

    As we know from ancient-language scholars: "in translations of ancient texts, 'eunuch' may refer to a man who is not castrated but who is impotent, celibate, or otherwise not inclined to marry and procreate." -- IOW, homosexuals.

    As Jesus himself said, when speaking of men who shouldn't marry women: "For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their mother's womb..." (Matthew 19:12). Jesus himself acknowledged, WITHOUT condemnation, the existence of such men.

    As Clement of Alexandria wrote **1800 years ago** (referring to followers of Basilides): "'...there are some eunuchs who are so from their birth...' And their explanation of this saying is roughly as follows: Some men from their birth, have a natural sense of repulsion from a woman..." (Stromata, III. 1.1) . They acknowledged the meaning of this phrase **1800 years ago**.

    "Let no kind or degree of evil to any man"

    Of course, consensual homosexuality harms nobody.

    So -- we have people whom the Bible apparently excuses from procreation, whom Jesus himself apparently acknowledges without condemnation, and who harm nobody. Hmmmm.

    Don't we have more important things to worry about?

  • Eliyahu Pleasant Grove, UT
    June 8, 2013 9:15 p.m.

    Much like the scout leaders who resigned when their troops were integrated and they couldn't exclude black scouts any longer.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    June 8, 2013 8:00 p.m.

    RE: Amazondoc,You think THAT is the (1)"great" commandment? (2)**Many** people never have children. Are they all sinners. (3) Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." Romans 13: 8-10

    (1)Iwas quoting Spencer W. Kimball 12th President of the LDS.

    (2)There are Biblical exceptions. God saved the Ethiopian eunuch. So God’s election and salvation might become evident, in an undeniable way. the “angel of the Lord” and the “Holy Spirit” to direct Philip to the eunuch. (Acts 8:26-40).
    And(Paul)So I say to those who aren’t married and to widows—it’s better to stay unmarried, just as I am (1Cor 7:8) and Catholic nuns.

    (3)Love is a living, active principle of obedience to the whole law. Let us not only avoid injuries to the persons, property, and characters of men; but do no kind or degree of evil to any man, and study to be useful in every station of life. i.e ,Contrarius/Amazondoc is it now good to steal or ignore DN 4 post rules?

  • amazondoc USA, TN
    June 8, 2013 8:04 a.m.

    @Sharrona --

    Yes, we know that Paul (Romans and Corinthians) didn't like homosexuality. Paul also supported slavery, and believed that women were inferior to men.

    Homosexuality is not "unnatural". Animals exhibit homosexual behaviors out in nature -- therefore it's natural. Paul was wrong. Again.

    As for Adam and Eve -- the folks of the Bible didn't have in vitro fertilization or other fertility/reproductive technology. Is all such technology therefore evil? They also didn't have airplanes. Is flying therefore evil?

    "negates his first and great commandment to ‘multiply and replenish the earth.’ "

    You think THAT is the "great" commandment? **Many** people never have children. Are they all sinners??


    "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law.

    The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,” and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

    Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law."

    Romans 13: 8-10

  • kosimov Riverdale, UT
    June 8, 2013 2:30 a.m.

    The LDS people who are concerned about the LDS Church's position regarding the BSA's acceptance of homosexual orientation, should keep in mind that Scouting is NOT a Church function, but has only been a worthwhile program to guide youth who are experiencing the effects of becoming adults, and are vulnerable to many "worldly" influences, which the Church supports as "anything worthwhile or of good report" etc. IMO, the Church does not condemn or endorse the BSA decision. The Church simply says it will not change its practices because of the decision.

    What worries me more is: ef same-sex marriage becomes law , which appears to be eventually probable given this sorry administration's record so far, then a scout is honorable if he/she has no sexual relations outside of marriage, but if he/she marries with the same sex and consummates the marriage, the relations, according to the words of the law, are no longer "sinful", as for heterosexuals, because the scout has not had sexual relations outside of marriage. I'm afraid this issue would be much, much more damaging than what is happening now, and the real issues would be forced to be dealt with.

  • Rural sport fan DUCHESNE, UT
    June 8, 2013 12:34 a.m.

    Why does everyone have to equate disproval or refusing to accept something, with "hate"? I "hate" to tell you this, but they aren't the same things.

    I am a BSA leader, I am Mormon, I am a mature individual with my own opinions and ideas, which anyone with any awareness should know are influenced by my upbringing and faith. I am also fully capable of making the distinction between the individual, and their conduct. I think the fellow in the story isn't showing "hate", he is showing a lack of love, of understanding, and, sadly, of the very Christianity he professes. At least, I hope that's what is going on.

    Regardless, how about we all quit judging him, and each other, and gay people and bigots, since that is someone else's job; and get on with doing what we are supposed to do, here on this Earth?

  • sharrona layton, UT
    June 7, 2013 8:22 p.m.

    RE: Craig Clark, Understand The Pastor Beliefs are in the Reformed Tradition:

    The sanctity of the family: After Adam’s creation, God made Adam a helper(Eve) who became his life –long partner in the task given him by God. Eve the mother of all living, was to bear the children of the couple ,who were to in turn were to fill the earth with their descendants. Thus the family unit is a part of the creation ordinances and becomes a central theological aspect of both the Reformed doctrine of creation, with a central role assigned to the family unit[natural]in covenant theology.

    Christians Believe Bible is the word of God. The context of (Romans 1:26-27) and 1Corinthians 6, affirm that homosexuality is unnatural.

    Spencer W. Kimball explained,.. Clearly it is hostile to God’s purpose in that it negates his first and great commandment to ‘multiply and replenish the earth.’ … It would nullify God’s great program for his spirit children in that it would leave countless unembodied spirits in the heavenly world without the chance for the opportunities of mortality …” (The Miracle of Forgiveness,)

  • Ruthey01 Bremerton, WA
    June 7, 2013 6:36 p.m.

    This article has a paragraph that states, "We will not follow the BSA, Trapper Trails Council nor Mormons in endorsing what scripture and the church of Jesus Christ through the ages has defined as sin," the letter reads.

    Someone posted a "What Would Jesus Do" question. The question is very apt to the subject of homosexuality - or sex outside of marriage for heterosexuals. What did Jesus say to the woman caught in the act of adultery? What did he say to the Samaritan woman at the well - the one who had had 5 husbands and the man she was with at the time she spoke to Jesus wasn't her husband? Those were sins also. Dis he condemn them? No he taught them!! By his example. Can we do less??

    To dispel any questions... I am a married heterosexual and I am a Mormon! That doesn't mean that I exclude people from my life because they are "different" than I am. I try to love them as my Savior did when he died for them!!

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    June 7, 2013 4:37 p.m.


    "....Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.[Homosexuality]" ( James 4:1).

    In that passage, James wasn’t talking specifically about homosexuality as you should know.

    While the Bible prohibits same sex contact, it is silent on unconsummated same sex attraction (which many today argue is genetic). The now discarded Boy Scout policy was a controversy simply because it excluded from membership those with a same sex orientation.

    There’s nothing in the Bible insofar as I’m aware that prohibits association with or proscribes ostracism of those with same sex inclinations. I don't care that in Biblical times, the death penalty was proscribed for adultery and homosexuality. Those barbaric laws preceded the written Bible by hundreds of years.

  • Mack2828 Ft Thomas, KY
    June 7, 2013 3:44 p.m.

    I don't see how this man has done a single thing that is bigoted or unloving. Why do those who champion the gay agenda always resort to that kind of name calling? He simply had the courage to stand up for what he knows to be true.
    As a life long active member of the LDS church, I wish our leaders had this 'do what is right, let the consequence follow' kind of courage.

  • amazondoc USA, TN
    June 7, 2013 3:39 p.m.

    @LDSareChristians --

    "Since the BSA leadership consist of only heterosexual."

    1. Those studies I posted had nothing to do with BSA. They are true of the general populace -- most same-sex child molesters are married/have straight relationships and appear "normal".
    2. You are kidding yourself if you truly believe that all BSA leadership is currently straight. I assure you that there are at least some closeted gay leaders in the mix.

    "we have the 200% increase of Male on Male sexual assault in the military"

    That is a false claim.

    From "One Year Out: An Assessment of DADT Repeal’s Impact on Military Readiness" -- UCLA, plus a bunch of military faculty --

    1. "we did not uncover any evidence suggesting that DADT repeal has led to a rise in violence among service members"
    2. "Our that DADT repeal has had no overall negative impact on military readiness or its component dimensions, including cohesion, recruitment, retention, assaults, harassment or morale."
    3." the rate of male-male sexual assault did not increase after DADT repeal went into effect....These data call into question any assertion that repeal has led to an increase in assaults."

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    June 7, 2013 3:17 p.m.

    Years ago, I was a scout. I learn that you leave the camp site just as you found it. My dad taught me when you visit and stay with some one you give as much or more food or more than you eat. leave it as you found it or better. It shows you have honor to respect these places. Ego, self-esteem, is in the wrong place in scouting.

  • LDSareChristians Anchorage, AK
    June 7, 2013 2:58 p.m.


    You prove the ole adage about numbers.

    Since the BSA leadership consist of only heterosexual. That would be the only group for which there would be statistics on, succumbing to temptation and abusing youth. Your statistics are worthless unto any point you were trying to make.

    Right know, we have the 200% increase of Male on Male sexual assault in the military as an indicator what could happen. Will the same new openness in the BSA have the same results?

    I'd bet that the ratio of adults to youth abuse in the BSA is much lower than compared to USA population as whole, because of the stringent rules and oversight of BSA to it's adult leadership.

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    June 7, 2013 2:26 p.m.

    @JD "Can't help but think Joseph and Brigham would have done the same."

    And what would Moses have done? Oh yea, gays would have been stoned to death.

    Times change. Often times it is for the better.

  • Contrarius Lebanon, TN
    June 7, 2013 2:24 p.m.

    @Tekakaromatagi and Chris B --

    Just a few facts for ya --

    From a researcher at UC Davis: "many child molesters don't really have an adult sexual orientation. They have never developed the capacity for mature sexual relationships with other adults, either men or women. Instead, their sexual attractions focus on children – boys, girls, or children of both sexes.[....]many child molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals...Instead of gender, their sexual attractions are based primarily on age. These individuals ... are attracted to children, not to men or women. "

    British Journal of Psychiatry, 2001 -- men they studied with "no evidence of homosexuality" were at roughly 50% GREATER risk for becoming child abusers than men "who were homosexually inclined".

    Child Advocacy Center statistics -- 75% of all male child molesters are "married or have consenting sexual relationships (with women)" and that "only about 4 percent of same-sex abuse involves homosexual perpetrators".


Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1978 -- "sexual orientation was not related to the sex of the victim targeted" and "men who molested boys often had adult relationships with women".

    There's much more, but no room to post!

  • Contrarius Lebanon, TN
    June 7, 2013 2:11 p.m.

    @Cris B. --

    "Dozens of boy scouts have been abused over the years."

    Here's a few recent BSA abuse cases --

    ("year" is of the article -- not the year of the crime):

    2012 (conviction 1999), Philadelphia -- married, prominent LDS member
    2011, Pueblo -- divorced (not a leader)
    2009, Orem -- married scout leader
    2005, New York -- married scout leader, prominent Baptist church member
    2002, Denver/New York -- married scout leader

    So let's ban all married men. Especially those who go to church. ;-)


    Pamela Schultz, a researcher who published a book on child molesters, has said that "the molesters she interviewed were often church-going men and leaders in their churches. Many also have wives and families of their own. They project a picture of normalcy. " This is common knowledge amongst people who actually study same-sex child abuse.


    Stop obsessing over the innocent. The real predators are those who appear "normal".

  • danaslc Kearns, UT
    June 7, 2013 1:55 p.m.

    Bravo to the pastor. The boy scouts is for the young. I don't think that we should condone any kind of sex at all in the boy scouts. The boy scouts is for learning and for self confidence. I don't understand why we have to include those that are under 18 to voice what sexual preference they think they are. This just makes for an uncomfortable situation for all. Camping? Where do they sleep? I am glad my sons are done with the Boy Scout program and know that you won't see my grandchildren in the program nor will I donate any longer to that program. Sexual preference is not what the boy scouts should be about.

  • The Final Word Alpine, UT
    June 7, 2013 1:53 p.m.

    Too funny:

    Boy Scout oath:

    ....and morally straight.

    Wonder when they will get rid of that line?

    @Ranch "What would Jesus do? Who would he exclude?"

    Well He has been pretty clear on that. He has not tolerance for sin regardless of your orientation and no unclean thing shall enter.....

    It is not a matter of who he excludes. People of all types choose to exclude themselves with the choices they make. He doesn't discriminate, people know the rules and they essentially opt out.

    Nice try though.

  • J.D. Aurora, CO
    June 7, 2013 1:41 p.m.

    Can't help but think Joseph and Brigham would have done the same. Current leadership, not so much.

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    June 7, 2013 1:18 p.m.

    re: Cris B: "'straight women serve as Scoutmasters in the BSA' Agreed And yet they don't share tents with the boys. I'm frankly shocked liberals have such a hard time grasping such a simple concept."

    And yet Scoutmasters are still part of BSA, even though they don't share tents with the boys and girls. Imagine that. I wouldn't consider myself liberal by any stretch of the word, but why are you so obsessed with the belief that this membership policy is going to force boys to sleep in the same tent with anyone else that might make them uncomfortable?

    Frankly I'm shocked that you have such a hard time grasping such a simple concept as multiple tents being available at a camp out.

  • Ohio-LDS NE, OH
    June 7, 2013 1:13 p.m.

    Girlse, the issue is not girls, it is gays. As a society, we do *not* segregate gays from straights in the same ways we do with boys from girls. We do not have separate bathrooms, separate locker rooms, separate scout troops, or separate mission apartments for gays. Why not? There's no one answer. Partly it's that gender is easily identified (physically and through clothing norms). But whatever the reasons, as a society, we have learned to integrate gays and straights into intimate settings - locker rooms, missionary apartments, etc. - without more risk of abuse than occurs from heterosexuals. Scout camps are no different. So while we should always be concerned about safety, the risk of abuse is no more a reason to pull a boy from scouts than it is to pull a young man from a mission.

  • Grace Bakersfield, CA
    June 7, 2013 1:10 p.m.

    Are there any scouting badges on sexual purity? Is this topic within the purview of the BS motto vis-a-vis actual discussion time, badges, research, etc.?

    If not: the nays have the debate here. And kudos (Coug man, et al) for raising the heterosexual "messing around" issue. If the BSA were handling that issue better than parents and clergy, would our military possibly have a better track record with their current abysmal sexual assault travesty?

    If so: why?

    Ahh, that's right. Parents and clergy rule that domain. Where the blame lies, no one wants to accept. Houston, we have a problem on both fronts. And my boys got lectured, trained and grilled from Day 1. Cub Scouts never addressed that issue, and they lost interest before moving up. I still would have allowed them in the BSA if the gay issue had been an issue 20 years ago- We would have dealt with those parameters in our own home.

    Stop out-sourcing all parental responsibility to clergy, scouting, YMCA, or any other convenient scape goat.

  • Dubai Holladay Dubai, UAE, 00
    June 7, 2013 1:06 p.m.

    He is only hurting the kids in scouting, he is showing them what hate,ignorance and intolerence looks like.

    It's a good thing that people like this are not around the kids. We really do NOT need any more hate taught to kids.

    There are a lot of evil things going on in the world and being Gay is the furthest thing from Evil.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 7, 2013 1:02 p.m.

    Though I understand why he's quitting... I don't think that's the response I would have.

    If we kicked out the boys who have sinned... we wouldn't have many boys in our scout troops.

    I thought about quitting, but I'm going to remain a scout master. Boys have never been kicked out for being gay before, so this is not a big change to me. They just put it in writing to satisfy the GLBT community (which I don't see a need to do, but whatever).

    IMO... Boys Scouts regardless of sexual orientation should not be sexually active. I've never heard of a boy who committed a sexual sin being kicked out of Scouts. This is no different.

    IMO... Scout leaders should be an example to the boys of being "morally straight" and work with them on their commitment to remain "morally straight". But nobody gets kicked out for sin.

    Jesus is the best example we have. I don't think he would have quit on us because there are sinners among us. I'm not going to give up on ANY of my Scouts.

  • Girlse State Midvale, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:55 p.m.

    Ohio-LDS. Just as homosexuality is part of the world, so is heterosexuality. That appears to be Chris's point. And due to heterosexual feelings, as a society we separate men and women in private settings that otherwise would elicit potentially awkward and unwanted sexual feelings.
    And yes, I agree there is danger in the missionary field if there is a gay companion. No, he is not evil for being gay. Neither is any man evil for feelings towards women. But in private settings we as a society have determined it only logical to separate and prevent those private and potentially sexual encounters in places such as locker rooms. You are right gays are not more dangerous than straights. And again, to Chris's point, we separate straight men and straight women in many settings, including scouting. It is the logical and correct thing to do.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    June 7, 2013 12:47 p.m.


    ""And as I mentioned, 100% of the male abusers have been homosexuals."
    Please provide the sources for your data before you make such ridiculous claims.

    The source is the definition.

    If a male is attracted to another male, therefore, the male is homosexual or bisexual. By definition, a heterosexual man would not be attracted to another man. If he was then he would not be heterosexual.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:44 p.m.

    @Cris B.
    "100% of men/boys who have sexually assaulted another male are homosexuals or bisexuals.

    No heterosexual male has ever abused another boy."

    Sexual assault is based on power, not attraction so your statement is false.

  • Ohio-LDS NE, OH
    June 7, 2013 12:38 p.m.

    Chris B, as a father of three boy scouts, I am not overly concerned with them sharing tents with gay young men. I am also not overly concerned with them living in the same apartment as gay young adults when they serve as LDS missionaries. If anything, I am more concerned about potential abuse in the missionary program than the scouting program. As missionaries, they are much farther from my watch, spend much more time with gay companions, and do so in a much more intimate setting - an apartment.

    Why am not overly concerned about my boys' safety? Because homosexuality is a part of the world in which their Father in Heaven sent them. There is no way to prevent them from being around gay - whether at school, on the ball field, in scouts, or on a mission. And I would not want them to. Some of my best friends are gay. Instead of removing my boys from the world, I teach them correct principles and trust that any harm that comes to them will be remedied through the atonement. Gays are not any more dangerous than straights. They are our brothers and sisters.

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:29 p.m.

    "And as I mentioned, 100% of the male abusers have been homosexuals."

    Please provide the sources for your data before you make such ridiculous claims.

  • Thomas Smith Sandy, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:16 p.m.

    I lost my previous attempt, so apologize if this is a duplicate. After nearly 50 years in scouting, an holding every volunteer position including council camping commissioner, I have informed my local council that I will not participate, support, nor attend any associated scouting function. My ward leaders have been informed of the same. I am writing to encourage the fence sitters to stand up and be counted. Local level scout leaders overwhelmingly did not support this position of the national organization. I know of no other way to voice my strong opposition.

    The military did away with don't ask--don't tell, and in the last two years male-male sexual assault has increased over 200%, while the male-female assault increased only moderately. It all looks pretty plain to me .

  • Cris B. Sandy, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:09 p.m.


    If we find out that a man has been a peeping tom unbeknownst to a group of women, we stop that behavior, even if he has not sexually assaulted them yet.


    if a gay boy scout/leader has been watching other males change clothes and sleeping in tents with them, his dishonesty is not something to be commended.

    A remedy should be found.

    Again, please realize this is about Scout safety.

    Protect the boy scouts!

  • Cris B. Sandy, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:06 p.m.


    Dozens of boy scouts have been abused over the years.

    Yes, its happened.

    And as I mentioned, 100% of the male abusers have been homosexuals.


    Please accept reality so that we can work together on PROTECTING boy scouts.

    This is all about scout safety. Nothing more.

  • One of a Few Layton, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:00 p.m.

    Let me see if I have this straight, marriage is between one man and one woman except when it wasn't or isn't (reference concubines, David, Solomon, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, LDS position on divorce etc.) and God hates the act of people engaging in sexual activities with people other than the person's spouse but particularly - same sex sexual activities. And we know this for a fact, even though we don't know why a person is driven to engage in such contemptible conduct (ref. current LDS position).

    And last, just a dirty little secret for the self righteous - boys participating in scouting are also having sexual relations with girls not their spouse and they aren't being kicked out of scouting. In fact, to my knowledge I don't believe I've ever heard of a scout being asked not to participate in a scouting activity because he was engaging in frisky conduct with the opposite sex - not saying that it hasn't happened, just saying in my 40 years of participating in and observing scouting, I've never heard of it.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    June 7, 2013 11:52 a.m.

    We're changing and growing, and not everybody wants to come along.

  • CougMan San Diego, CA
    June 7, 2013 11:52 a.m.

    So I wonder if this Pastor kicks out of his Presbyterian congregation individuals that have Same Sex Attraction but remain celibate? The BSA policy is accepting anyone and then teaching them that their duty to God is to remain morally clean regardless of orientation.

    Likewise, I wonder if he kicks out of his congregation unmarried youth that actually commit forinication?

  • amazondoc USA, TN
    June 7, 2013 11:46 a.m.

    @Chris B --

    "And yet we all agree its not a good idea for them to share tents/change clothes together."

    And once again -- gay boy scouts have been sharing tents with straight boy scouts ever since the BSA was founded.

    The only change is that now they can be HONEST about it.

    Pretty simple concept.

    And as experience has **already** shown us:

    Closeted gay boy scouts have not assaulted straight boy scouts.
    Openly lesbian girl scouts have not assaulted straight girl scouts.
    Straight female Scoutmasters have not assaulted boy scouts.
    Openly lesbian troop leaders have not assaulted girl scouts.
    Straight male troop leaders have not assaulted girl scouts.

    Welcome to the Real World.

  • Cris B. Sandy, UT
    June 7, 2013 11:38 a.m.


    Here is a fact about assaults, both within the scouting community and not.

    100% of men/boys who have sexually assaulted another male are homosexuals or bisexuals.

    No heterosexual male has ever abused another boy.

    It's never happened.

    And if you think scout leaders have never abused scouts

    In the history of the world.

    If we're telling straight kids "tough deal with it" in changing clothes/sharing tents with homosexual boys, there is no difference between me walking into a women's locker room and telling them "tough, deal with it"

    No, I would never assault them.

    And yet that is not acceptable in our world.

    Welcome to reality

  • sharrona layton, UT
    June 7, 2013 11:34 a.m.

    RE: Craig Clark, The “pastor's” parting shot misrepresenting the position of others including the LDS Church showed no class.

    Pastor="shepherd,"(poimen)a spiritual guide, shepherd of souls. The Christian Pastor would commit the sin of omission,at least. "Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.[Homosexuality]" ( James 4:1).

    The Chief Shepherd(archipoimen) (1Peter 5:4 ), “But if you (*skandalizo)cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone hung around your neck. (Mark 9:42NLT)

    *to put a stumbling block or impediment in the way, upon which another MAY trip and fall, metaph. to offend(a) to entice to sin.

  • Cris B. Sandy, UT
    June 7, 2013 11:32 a.m.


    "Here's a secret that many straight men don't understand--just because you are a man, it doesn't mean that gay men are automatically attracted to you"

    Here is a secret for you.

    Just because a man/boy is straight does not mean they are attracted to every girl/female.

    And yet we all agree its not a good idea for them to share tents/change clothes together.


    Pretty simple concept.

  • Filo Doughboy Bakersfield, CA
    June 7, 2013 11:26 a.m.

    Reality? Really?

    The BSA bowed to PR pressure. Plain and simple. Toe in the door.

    Just wait an incremental minute. They'll come barging all the way in. THAT is reality, their agenda.

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    June 7, 2013 11:24 a.m.

    I am saddened to see a religious leader taking public action to exclude a small segment of the population from his scouting program. Think of the message he is sending to his congregation; we will not tolerate nor include those with same sex attraction to be amongst us in our congregations.

    So many of you bemoan the godless lifestyles of the homosexual population. Let's think about why so many gay men and women seem to abandon God. Could it be that after years of living the gospel, serving others, and trying to live chaste lives, they just gave up the last time they were reminded that they were broken, not faithful enough, or just straight-out sinners? Could the actions like this pastor took lead some members of his congregation to think they aren't wanted, needed, or loved by God?

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    June 7, 2013 11:14 a.m.

    To Chris B,

    You keep on stating that boys and girls don't share tents as a reason to exclude gay boys from the scouting program. I agree that boys and girls should not share tents, but what do you recommend you do with the gay boys on a camping excursion? Here's a secret that many straight men don't understand--just because you are a man, it doesn't mean that gay men are automatically attracted to you. Most gay boys are in need and want of good, strong platonic friendships with straight young men. If a gay young man is involved in scouts, he wants to be as morally clean as his straight counterparts, and he would never try anything to jeopardize that.

    Holding on to your argument, do you propose that gay men now change in the women's locker room at the gym, use the women's restroom? Of course not! It's time the paranoid public learns that just because a man is gay, it doesn't mean that he is automatically attracted to every man he meets.

  • ImABeliever Provo, UT
    June 7, 2013 10:54 a.m.

    Currently serving as a Boy Scout Committee Chairman and have served in other Boy Scout Leadership positions throughout the years and being very active L.D.S. I have struggled and still struggle a little with this decision from the Boy Scouts of America. I will remain for the time being.
    The Boy Scout Oath is that a Boy Scout shall be morally straight and the Boy Scout Law is that a Boy Scout shall live clean in word and deed.
    Both of these point directly to Duty to God.
    The Strength of Youth handbook dictates that if a youth acted upon any conduct of immorality (homosexuality) then there would be an issue as to be taken up with his
    Bishop and God.
    It would be devastating to the Boy Scouts of America organization if the L.D.S. Church pulled out with approximately 450,000 Boys in Scouting and it being the largest contributor.
    I wouldn't be surprised at all one day if the Church developed it's own Boy Scout Program independently just like they did with B.Y.U. Football.

  • Contrarius Lebanon, TN
    June 7, 2013 10:50 a.m.

    @Chris B --

    "I'm frankly shocked liberals have such a hard time grasping such a simple concept."

    What *you* don't seem to grasp is the fact that gay and straight boy scouts have been sharing tents together ever since the BSA has existed. There have ALWAYS been gay scouts within the organization. And guess what? The world didn't come to an end. Nobody jumped on anybody else in the depths of the night, despite your deeply held personal phobias.

    The ONLY difference now is that those gay scouts will be allowed to be HONEST about their orientation.

    Closeted gay boy scouts have not assaulted straight boy scouts.
    Openly lesbian girl scouts have not assaulted straight girl scouts.
    Straight female Scoutmasters have not assaulted boy scouts.
    Openly lesbian troop leaders have not assaulted girl scouts.
    Straight male troop leaders have not assaulted girl scouts.

    All this supposed assault that keeps happening in your head has not actually occurred out in the Real World.

    Welcome to reality.

  • esodije ALBUQUERQUE, NM
    June 7, 2013 10:42 a.m.

    I think people are missing the larger point, which is that the LDS Church is now speaking in terms of "orientation," effectively acknowledging that same-sex attraction is--or at least can be--an innate characteristic. We still say that to act on it is sinful, but it wasn't that long ago that one of the apostles assured us in General Conference that "no one is born that way." It's natural to wonder how much farther the church's position on homosexuality may "evolve" in the face of mounting socio-legal pressure.

  • OlderGreg USA, CA
    June 7, 2013 10:36 a.m.

    Apparently Pastor Humphrey believes that a raging-hormonal-changing kid can legitimately self-identify himself as a homosexual.

    Hopefully, his replacement will have a better understanding of peer pressure/ PC-PR/ and normal developement confusion --- and provide the needed guidance to the organization.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    June 7, 2013 10:35 a.m.


    "Quote: "Same-sex attraction itself is not a sin".


    Neither is heterosexual attraction

    And yet we don't have boys and girls share tents and change clothes together.

    "Quote: "Attraction to those of the same sex...should not be viewed as a disease or illness."


    Neither should heterosexual attraction.

    And yet boys and girls don't share tents.

    "Members of the Church who have same-sex attractions, but don’t act on them, can continue to enjoy full fellowship in the church, which includes holding the priesthood, carrying out callings, and attending the temple"

    Yes, Mormons allow that for heterosexuals too.

    And yet boys/girls don't share tents

    "As for gay scout leaders -- straight women serve as Scoutmasters in the BSA"


    And yet they don't share tents with the boys.

    I'm frankly shocked liberals have such a hard time grasping such a simple concept.

  • Moabmom Moab, UT
    June 7, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    @Ranch "Bigotry is not a "principle". What would Jesus do? Who would Jesus exclude?" Calling others a bigot just because they do not hold the same opinion or belief as you is so overused. Faith/belief in God is more than a trendy WWJD sound bite. To know WWJD, you have to know Him and what He says about certain behavior.(all of it, not just the parts that you like or can use to push your own agenda or a political point of view) I applaud the pastor for his stand to follow the whole council given in God's word and for acknowledging and humbly submitting to God's Authority. What those who are trying to push the LGBT lifestyle on the rest of us fail to understand is that "tolerance" does not equal acceptance. Most people of faith realize that they answer to a higher Authority than the LGBT community. That hardly qualifies as bigotry. WWJD? He certainly wouldn't go against what is clearly laid out in His Father's word and would not call "good" what His Father calls an abomination.

  • oldschooler USA, TX
    June 7, 2013 10:08 a.m.

    To UtahBruin: Thank You.

  • UtahBruin Saratoga Springs, UT
    June 7, 2013 9:52 a.m.

    @ Ranch, Way of the Warrior, BYUFaninDC,

    This guy has an opinion, he has a belief, he has a faith, he has a understanding of what he believes is right. Is he hurting anyone by his opinion, belief, faith, or understanding?....No.

    Why is he wrong just because he does not believe the same way as those of you who convict him of bigotry, pride, or not considering others?

    Why do people bash him for standing up for his convictions and values? You bash him only because he does not agree with you.

    No crime here people, not ill thoughts on his part, just his convictions and you want to convict a guy who has values and principals. What is our world coming too?

  • DH48 West Jordan, UT
    June 7, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    The key point is that this man has a right to decide for himself what he is comfortable with and the rest of us need to mind our own business. We have no more right to judge him than he has the right to judge others. But if he pulls himself out of the scouting organization that is fully his right. Hypocrisy runs deep within all of us.

  • Contrarius Lebanon, TN
    June 7, 2013 9:38 a.m.

    From the Mormons and Gays website:

    "Quote: "Same-sex attraction itself is not a sin".
    Quote: "Attraction to those of the same sex...should not be viewed as a disease or illness."
    Quote: "individuals do not choose to have such attractions"
    Quote: "Members of the Church who have same-sex attractions, but don’t act on them, can continue to enjoy full fellowship in the church, which includes holding the priesthood, carrying out callings, and attending the temple."

    Gay boy scouts are not sinning as long as they are celibate. Their orientation is not a choice.

    There is no valid reason to exclude them from scouting.

    As for gay scout leaders -- straight women serve as Scoutmasters in the BSA. And in the girl scouts, both lesbian women and straight men serve as leaders. How would gay men be any different?

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    June 7, 2013 9:36 a.m.

    I'm excited for the start of summer. For scouts to spend more time worrying and learning about orienteering and pioneering and a lot less time thinking about orientation.

  • Danish American Payson, UT
    June 7, 2013 9:35 a.m.

    The good censors at the News wouldn't post this comment before but I'll try again.

    I don't necessarily have a problem with the decision in an of its self. I don't have a problem with gays in of themselves. I had a gay friend who was in my Scout troop. What I have a problem with is the bullies who forced the decision. I'm tried of the LGBT being bullies who want to force their beliefs on me. It may be morally wrong not to want to rent MY property to a gay but it shouldn't be illegal. We are supposed to respect their point of view but there certainly isn't a reciprocal respect for mine. I will support my local Ward Scout Troop but I won't give another dime to Friends of Scouting because they let themselves be bullied.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    June 7, 2013 9:33 a.m.

    The pastor's parting shot misrepresenting the position of others including the LDS Church showed no class. Making a sour and bitter statement is an undignified way to go out that says more about him than the Boy Scouts of America and those he is excoriating.

  • Oatmeal Woods Cross, UT
    June 7, 2013 9:27 a.m.

    The real emotional conflict that many people are going through is a change in our UNDERSTANDING of homosexuality. Human experience and recent research suggests that sexual attraction is deeply rooted in our psychology and biology. It is arguably outside the realms of what most people would call "choice."

    "Sin," on the other hand, is a choice to act contrary to God's law, which varies from faith to faith. A person can experience attraction without sinning. Jesus himself was "tempted" (obviously with something he was inclined to do, or it wouldn't have been much of a temptation), yet overcame those temptations in the name of a higher good.

    Children, often having vastly different experiences of attraction and feeling at the onset of puberty, should NOT be subject to an evaluation of those feelings or attractions. Is there some sort of sexuality litmus test for 12 year old children? No. We establish rules to give them time to develop and come to terms with themselves. Scouting is on the right track.

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    June 7, 2013 9:20 a.m.

    re Chris B: Why would this new membership statement put them in the same tent? Coed Venturing crews don't have the boys and girls in the same tent.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    June 7, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    All words delaying the inevitable; Before God there is no such thing as 'gay' and there is no sexual relationship outside of marriage between a man and a women. If people want to mince words or keep hoping that God will change His mind, then so be it. Others have said it best, "...go and sin no more.' It is pride, an ironic word here, that keeps men and women away from God. Gay pride is no different.

  • Third try screen name Mapleton, UT
    June 7, 2013 9:17 a.m.

    As Orwell put it in repudiate morality while laying claim to it.
    This is a prime example of it. We were warned in conference about this tolerance trap.
    And we've learned from this Pastor of another faith exactly how to speak out about it.

  • oldschooler USA, TX
    June 7, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    I know now I am not alone on my way of thinking, I still support LDS church resolution but agree with Humphrey's actions, I do have the same posture regarding this matter.

  • bradleyc Layton, UT
    June 7, 2013 8:45 a.m.

    The policy to allow all young men to join scouting was the right decision. These scouts will still be held to the morally clean promise made in the Scout Oath. In the scout law it talks about being reverent which means obedient and humble before God. God has declared the act of homosexual sex and sex outside of the bonds of heterosexual marriage to be a sin.

    There should be no problem having young men or women in the scouting program if they commit and live righteous lives. We can help more kids having them in the program and teaching correct principals than we can having them out of the program completely. The leadership within the scouting organizations will need to be diligent though if a young man or young woman ever breaks those sexual rules. They will need to be ejected from the organization for the scouting program to remain credible.

    I support this good pastor in his right to his own belief but believe that his ladder is leaning against the wrong wall in this instance.

  • DonP Sainte Genevieve, MO
    June 7, 2013 8:40 a.m.

    I do believe there are many scriptures that relate thinking about sinning to committing the act. Jesus taught that someone looking on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery. Are these scriptures still valid under the church's new view that orientation is not a sin?

  • casual observer Salt Lake City, UT
    June 7, 2013 8:23 a.m.

    There is no evidence that homosexuality is a choice. Would the good reverend also condemn others who are born with conditions that he finds disagreeable? My understanding of Christianity is that Christians are supposed to help people follow its teachings, not categorically exclude people.

  • JLF Meridian, ID
    June 7, 2013 8:17 a.m.

    We all have our own personal thorn in the flesh, some weakness, which might plague us throughout our lives. How we respond to it is what matters.

  • jimhale Eugene, OR
    June 7, 2013 8:00 a.m.

    Recently, a friend who is LDS told me that same sex attraction must be involuntary because she knew a current teenager who at the ripe old age of two had announced, "I am a boy." The family responded, "No, God made you a girl." The two-year-old then said, "God made a mistake." The family, believing that young children are closer to God than the rest of us, took that announcement as having merit and have been supporting the girl's belief that God made a mistake all her life.
    I don't object to the LDS stand on this Scouting change. But I am disturbed that many in the Church seem to be buying into the homosexuality movement's basic contention: God makes mistakes. God made me this way.
    Neither science nor love excuses us from going and sinning no more. We should not be led by two-year-olds.

  • Cinci Man FT MITCHELL, KY
    June 7, 2013 7:55 a.m.

    And don't forget that marriage in the eyes of the LDS Church is between one man and one woman. So sexual activity outside of that definition of marriage is considered to be not "morally straight".

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    June 7, 2013 7:23 a.m.

    I think the bottom line is what atrulson alluded to..."orientation is not a sin". I absolutely's the act and engaging in unchaste behavior that is the sin regardless or one's orientation. Quick...which sin is greater a heterosexual boy/man who engages in fornication or a homosexual boy/man who engages in a sexual non marital relationship? The BSA frowns upon them BOTH, and even reiterates this in their new policy. This is why the LDS church has no issue with the new policy because it is firmly in line with church's values and the gospel of Jesus Christ.

  • Wyominguy Buffalo, WY
    June 7, 2013 7:14 a.m.

    Agreeing with the Church's views and policy on homosexuality I have no real problem with the change in BSA policy. I do however still find it sad that BSA seems to have allowed itself to be used to further an agenda that has nothing to do with Scouting. By falling into what I feel was a trap BSA has in fact lost many valuable leaders and has diminished its ability to serve youth.

  • suzyk#1 Mount Pleasant, UT
    June 7, 2013 7:05 a.m.

    To:Way of the Warrior...I don't believe pride has anything to do this Mr. Humphrey's decision to leave his Post with the scouts. We have been taught all of our life what is good or bad and when decisions(big) are made that goes against what we have been taught and have believed all of our lives it can be devastating. I don't understand why this change was made but it is Mr. Humphrey's choice to withdraw and he should not be condemned or be judged. I'm sure these scouts will miss his fine leadership and knowledge and that is the saddest part of it all.

  • techpubs Sioux City, IA
    June 7, 2013 6:36 a.m.

    The key point here should be that all Scouts maintain Scoutings' moral principles and not engage in sexual acts outside of marriage.

  • Duckhunted provo, UT
    June 7, 2013 6:19 a.m.

    I am socially liberal. I think if you are gay I'm happy for your choice. It's your choice not mine.If you are against homosexuality that's your choice not mine. So if I think this man follows what he believes. I would say the same thing about a gay scout master!

  • TA1 Alexandria, VA
    June 7, 2013 5:41 a.m.

    Agree with other posters - when you think more of yourself then you do of those you have the potential to serve and therefore exclude them from being helped, seems there is a conflict there, and it not the one that, I believe, the Savior would look favorably upon.

  • atrulson Bothell, WA
    June 7, 2013 5:37 a.m.

    Orientation is not a sin.

  • Hamath Omaha, NE
    June 7, 2013 5:32 a.m.

    So.... let me see if I understand. The Mormon church and this local Council leader are saying... if you state that you have homosexual tendencies but don't act on them, then you can join Boy Scouts. But according to this guy you are sinning to the point that he doesn't believe he should associate with you.

    What does that mean about someone who sees a girl (not his wife) and starts fantasizing about her some?

    Or how about the person who is so mad at a co-worker that they think about doing something violent to the co-worker, but restrains himself or herself somehow?

    Having a thought toward doing something but choosing otherwise or restraining yourself is NOT some terrible thing that justifies social shunning.

    Beyond just that. Church is for sinners. It should be rampantly full of people striving for moral straightness. But striving is the key word. They are sinners! We all are in some sense. Would you kick out someone from your church because they have desires that are not right according to your beliefs and are trying to change those desires or learn to control them? Would you shun them?

  • BYU Fan in DC Washington, DC
    June 7, 2013 5:21 a.m.

    are you kidding? Being a chaste gay boy IS THE SAME as being a chaste straight boy. The same goes for leaders. The real question the pastor should ask himself is if (hypothetically) he would deny his own son, if the boy came out that he was gay but hope to remain chaste through his youth.

  • Scott3 Quiet Neighborhood, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:44 a.m.

    Agree Life, Jesus would say go and sin no more. Nice work pastor, lets keep moving forward and have more scouts pull out.

    Does anyone know why this new scout policy could not have been a "don't ask, don't tell" policy?

  • Utah_1 Salt Lake City, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:36 a.m.

    BSA isn't proposing on January 1, 2014 of allowing homosexual scouts. It is allowing scouts that stay morally clean with same-sex attraction, orientation, and/or belief to be scouts. There is a difference.

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints allows someone with same-sex attraction, orientation, and/or belief to serve as an active member in callings of responsibility. It is only the persons actions that the Church teaches to be wrong that causes the Church, or BSA to take action limiting the status of the individual.

    "AND WHEREAS, Scouting is a youth program, and any sexual conduct, whether homosexual or heterosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting"

    The Church said this about the proposed standard " a single standard of moral purity for youth in the program, and a renewed emphasis for Scouts to honor their duty to God".

    Based on that, after Jan. 1, 2014, if you get a scout that has same-sex attraction, orientation, and/or belief, and the scout follows the " single standard of moral purity for youth in the program" he can participate. I don't have an issue with that.

  • Elcapitan Ivins, UT
    June 7, 2013 12:34 a.m.

    Things have not changed that much. The LDS stand just remains the same?

    Our Bishops and the local councils still have control...two deep leadership, etc. will tend to keep things in line. No Bishop is going to call an adult active gay to lead a scout troop under his jurisdiction. Nothing has changed under the inspired leadership of Pres. Monson.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    June 6, 2013 11:27 p.m.

    If boys shouldn't be in tents with girls, gays shouldn't be in tents with straight boys

    No, not all gays would become attackers.

    Neither would most boys attack girls in tents.

    It is not appropriate to force a straight boy to change clothes and sleep in a tent with someone who is attracted to him

    That is not fair to the straight boy

  • LifeLibertyHappiness Draper, UT
    June 6, 2013 10:43 p.m.

    Jesus would say,"Neither do I condemn thee. Go and sin no more." See John 8:11.

  • Way of the Warrior ARLINGTON, WA
    June 6, 2013 10:12 p.m.

    The only person hurt by Humphrey's resignation is Humphrey himself. It's unfortunate he mistakes his pride for principle.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    June 6, 2013 9:48 p.m.

    Bigotry is not a "principle". What would Jesus do? Who would Jesus exclude?

  • where's the beef Provo, UT
    June 6, 2013 9:29 p.m.

    Thank you for standing firm on your principles.

  • Aggie84 Idaho Falls, ID
    June 6, 2013 8:46 p.m.

    Good on ya, time for some other big hitters to do the same!