Quote:
|
Originally Posted by matthew330
Homosexuals are prohibited from being scoutmasters, not members. Why is it that this phenomena is reality, or should be? If BSA were truly discriminating, then the gay youth of america would be excluded from joining, but they aren't. The fact of the matter is, sexuality shouldn't be an issue for members of the boy scouts. They are simply young people growing up and learning lessons **enter the flamer.
|
So it's OK to discriminate against a group, as long as you don't discriminate against all ages of that group. Gotcha.
Quote:
|
They aren't banned from being youth leaders because of their sexual preference, they are banned because there sexual preference injects itself into every nonsexual aspect of their lives.
|
No, they are banned because bigoted idiots THINK their sexual preference injects itself into every nonsexual aspect of their lives.
That's frankly a stupid statement that you can't possibly back up. You're acting like they eat differently, work differently, and do everything differently because of their homosexuality. That's crap. What's next, black people can't do long division without the answer being influenced by African traditions?
There's no difference between a gay and a straight guy except for his sexual preference. Plenty of gay people can be good leaders, while plenty of straight people can be bad leaders. Need I remind you that not one of the Catholic priests who molested young boys was (openly, anyway) gay?
Quote:
|
You may take some offense to that, but if it weren't true, would ones sexuality ever have become an issue here? Absolutely not. Learning about ones sexuality during the formative years (i.e. - the BSA years), is tough enough.
|
So what you're saying is, if a bigoted idiot makes sexuality an issue, it's the fault of the person the bigoted idiot has a problem with. That really doesn't make any sense.
Quote:
|
Shakran, were straight people allowed to be GLB masters, so to speak?
|
If you mean faculty advisors (all clubs had to have one) the guy who was the faculty advisor was married to a woman, so I'd say yes.
If you mean president of the club or whatever, yes they were, if they were members of the club, which as I said before there weren't any straight members of the club.
Quote:
|
Not to mention this is a club focused on ones sexuality. If a young person decides he'd like to be a part, more power to him, but sexuality should not be forced on anyone that age. If a grown man is incapable of leading young people in a social club (which has NOTHING to do with ones sexuality), without revealing his sexual preference, then he shouldn't be leading them in the first place.
|
So lemme get this straight. If a BSA leader reveals his sexual preference, he has to be kicked out. By your logic if a straight BSA leader makes a comment about a cute woman, or shows up with his wife, therefore confirming his sexual orientation, he also must be kicked out.
What you're really saying is that you don't like gay people and you want to shove them under the rug. But to assuage your guilty conscious, you say we'll allow the gay children to be with the rest of society. Only when they grow up will they be ostracized.
Same thing used to happen before the civil rights movement. It was OK for white kids to play with "that darling little black boy" but as soon as the kid grew up he became the "filthy nigger."
As I've said before, our society congratulates itself because it now finds prejudicial behavior toward blacks to be offensive, but in reality it deserves no congratulations. It's simply shifted its discrimination from black people to gay people. Our society is every bit as bigoted and hateful as it was in the 1950's, we're just being bigoted and hateful to a less politically-incorrect group.