Gays have done a far better job than we have in getting even their opponents to acknowledge that gay equality is an issue worth debating. Atheists are always ignored in such discussions, even though our numbers are roughly equal.

Last edited Mon Jun 18, 2012, 12:15 PM - Edit history (1)

Not to mention obvious parental concerns about pedophilia. Talk about putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. (For those who don't understand what I mean, the fox would be the pedophile and the coop would be any place children gather). On the other hand, it is supposed to be about learning survival skills.

Are you suggesting the Scouts are prone to pedophilia, youth groups in general, or...

The kids are often the victims. I'm not suggesting that all scout masters are pedophiles, as all priests aren't. But let's not be naive about it.

apt to be pedophiles? Quit being coy and spell out what you mean.

That is some sick thinking. Shame on you. If you read the OP, you will see that the previously homophobic BSA is now accepting gays, which I applaud. My issue with BSA is it's history (note that word) of pedophilic scout masters. All the pedophiles I've encountered, and arrested, have not been gay.
Hope I spelled it out for you.

concerning one of you posts. Nowhere does Luminous Animal say or implies gays are pedophiles.

You bring a lot of allegations against the leadership of the Boy Scouts in earlier posts but do not offer any proof in the form of published statistics. Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of the Boy Scouts because I think they are a quasi-religious, paramilitary organization that teaches intolerance and bigotry concerning gays and atheists. And on top of that there are a lot of police and military types who strongly support the BSA and volunteer in the organization which goes to my point of having a paramilitary flavor.

When my two boys wanted to join the Boy Scouts I said no. I would never let them into an organization that would ban me from participating since I don't believe in a god or gods. Instead we have been going camping since they were six.

Decidedly uncivil behavior.

for someone else. I asked to clarify your comment because you seem to be saying it does and I am not the only one that has an issue with your comment.

...YOUR own way of thinking and attempting to ascertain if THAT is what YOU were thinking.

The problems you speak of are largely a thing of the past because of this. Obviously, someone is going to slip through. It's a lot tougher than it ever has been for such a thing to happen.

Your information is, at best, out-of-date.

I see thousands of scouts throughout the year, and in fact, I spoke to a couple of troop leaders this afternoon. Nice guys. Happy kids. I'm commenting on the past record of BSA, which until today has been anti-gay and is still, apparently anti-atheist, so forgive me if I remain somewhat skeptical. I'm sure the Vatican is upgrading it's monitoring too, but if I don't know the priest personally, my kid isn't going to be alone with him. Same with a scoutmaster, sorry. Don't get me wrong, I like them and the work they do, really.

Now that BSA has opened it's doors to the gay community, parents now have the added concern that their gay kids may want to join an organization that has less than stellar record when it comes to pedophilia. I have met many gay kids and understand their vulnerability in potentially risky environments, in which category I include the Catholic Church and BSA, both being organizations known to employ and sometimes harbor predators.
What did you think I meant?

Allowing openly gay scouts is "putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop?"

"You realize that gay kids aren't naturally more attractive to child rapists, right?

This makes no sense, unless you are implying some kind of connection between pedophilia and homosexuality. We are asking you to explain.

There is no connection between pedophilia and homosexuality imo and I have never tried to make a connection. Others have, apparently. My point is that all kids are vulnerable to pedophiles. When you put boys in an all male environment, then those kids who are feeling more insecure about themselves, gay or straight, they tend to look to their leaders, counselors, role models, mentors, priests, people with power, for advice and guidance. That puts the predator in a very powerful position. I would say that gay kids or those struggling with sexual identity would be ideal prey for pedophiles. I have encountered pedophiles and they are incredibly slick and manipulative. My opinions are based on my own experiences in life, not anything written in a tabloid.

It's the main excuse used by hate groups for legislating against gay people. The lie that we are not safe with children is the most damaging libel made against gay people. We need to be very careful not to buy into that lie in any shape or form.

"I would say that gay kids or those struggling with sexual identity would be ideal prey for pedophiles."

The direct implication is that straight kids (who are highly unlikely to struggle with sexual identity) less ideal prey. You keep insisting that you didn't mean that there's any correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia, but you keep directly implying it.

As usual, you either intentionally misconstrue my words to suit your own agenda, or you have a serious comprehension problem. When you start connecting dots to form conclusions, you need to connect them all, not just the first and last.

are ideal prey. How is that misconstruing? Do try and explain that one away with something more than "that's what you think."

You stepped into it pretty hard on this thread. Watching you flail isn't helping you any, though it is a tad entertaining.

Laconicsax is saying that I make a "correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia", when what I am correlating is pedophiles and their preferred prey. There are pedophiles who like young girls. Those pedophiles are unlikely to find victims in BSA. That leaves us with pedophiles who like young boys. Now, where do they find young boys? BSA and similar organizations. Bingo! Pedophiles are predators. They pick the most vulnerable, which in this case would include youngsters struggling with their sexual identity.
If you don't get it yet, then I can't help you. I thought you were one of the smarter ones.

What makes gay kids and kids children struggling with their sexual identity more vulnerable to pedophiles?

Will you finally explain why you repeatedly connect homosexuality to pedophilia or will you continue to deny having made the connection while continuing to restate it?

Gay kids are more vulnerable in these situations, because many have been subjected to bullying and ridicule and a lot of really ugly shit. Then they go to camp with BSA or similar outfits. They are looking for mentors, role models, approval, trust. These kids are often damaged, wounded birds and make for easy prey. Maybe you haven't known kids who have suffered at the hands of pedophiles, who held positions of trust. I have.
I draw no other connections between homosexuality and pedophilia. I trust that is now clear. If you think there is any further connection, you're on your own.

There is a clear connection between pedophile predators and gay boys in certain settings, like BSA. That is the only connection, a connection between predator and prey. Otherwise, I see no connection between homosexuality and pedophilia.

Saying it's "putting the fox in charge of the hen house" in response to a post about the Boy Scouts admitting homosexuals to its ranks doesn't sound good. It sounds like you're saying that admitting homosexuals would increase the risk of sex abuse because homosexuals would be in positions of authority allowing them to take advantage of children.

You probably didn't mean it that way, but I hope you understand why it sounds wrong to a couple of us. Editing the post to clarify your point probably wouldn't hurt.

Don't believe me?

Read my post #17 and your reply #22.
Read my post #37 and your reply #39.

It's true that boys who are gay and questioning are at a higher risk of being targeted by predators online, but nowhere have I seen a similar correlation for real life. You repeatedly claimed that gay kids and those struggling with their sexual identity are ideal prey for pedophiles, then would immediately deny claiming it. Don't believe me?

Read yardwork's post #23 and your reply #31

"I would say that gay kids or those struggling with sexual identity would be ideal prey for pedophiles."

How is this not implying that non-gay kids and kids who aren't struggling with sexual identity are less-than-ideal prey for pedophiles.

If you're going to say that non-gay kids and kids who aren't struggling with sexual identity are equally ideal prey for pedophiles, then why did you single out the gay kids and those struggling with sexual identity as "ideal prey for pedophiles?"

What does being gay have to do with pedophilia? You've consistently linked the two in this thread and have yet to explain yourself.

What "vulnerability" do you think that gay kids have that straight kids don't?

What are you saying here?

Furthermore, the BSA certainly has not opened its doors to the gay community. Far from it.

I don't think that there is any legitimate reason to single out "gay kids" as being "particularly vulnerable to sexual predators." As you clarified, ALL children are vulnerable to sexual predators. The risk factors for vulnerability have nothing to do with sexual identity. They have to do with being vulnerable - having no relationship with one or more parents, neglect, abuse, unsupportive home life, etc. We're seeing that in the Jerry Sandusky trial.

On what are you basing this claim? Do scoutmasters engage in pedophilia at a greater rate than the general population? I ask because Catholic priests do not, it's just that their church has protected, coddled, and provided them with access to fresh victims. Has the BSA done this? Please provide some documentation for your serious claims.

We don't entrust our kids to the general population. Certain people, like scout masters and priests and teachers are held to a higher standard then the general population.

In particular, this one: that the BSA is an &quot organization) known to employ and sometimes harbor predators" (emphasis mine)

Employ, sure. No disagreement there. Anyone could have hired a pedophile unknowingly. But what the Catholic church has been doing, I am not aware the BSA was. Do you have some evidence to the contrary? And evidence that gay kids are at a greater risk of abuse?

Let's call it the thin green line. Keep parsing away, though, I'm sure you'll find something else.

You refuse, and instead move to attack me instead.

Keep lecturing others on civility, ST. Good luck with anyone taking you seriously, though.

Please be specific.

Here is a link to help you out:

http://www.scouting.org/Training/YouthProtection.aspx

... we're both Eagles from the same troop, and he vehemently disagrees with the ban on homosexuals and atheists.

Still, he believes the BSA is more likely to admit homosexuals. He thinks this is the case because, in many cases, Boy Scouts use churches or religious schools as meeting places, and he believes the churches would have a bigger problem with atheists than they would with gays.

I'm not sure I agree with this sentiment, but it is something to chew on.

My son turned 18 last year, and my membership expired late last year. I hope to sign up again after things calm down in an effort to "Johnny Appleseed" a new troop.

I managed tp avoid all religious services except for a couple of forced ones at Wood Badge. (I was actually my Wood Badge Patrol's chaplain's aid which is sort of hilarious.) I served on District training staff. (I would have probably been on Wood Badge or NYLT staff had I not had scheduling conflicts that made me less active.)

I typically stayed off the subject of religion. When someone felt the need to engage, I used to paraphrase Carl Sagan:
God is the set of physical laws that govern the universe. U.S. Religious freedom allows us to define "God" any way we want. I confused many a people, but no one felt it necessary to do anything else but convince me that somehow what I just said lead to "therefore Jesus died for my sins."

Religion and Homosexuality rules aren't really enforced in a meaningful way--at least in any troop I have been involved with. My son made Eagle scout and shares my religious beliefs. A couple of other kids who made Eagle during my tenure were likely gay. I am not saying there are not freak troops sponsored by freak organizations that make a concerted effort to be exclusive. There are many of them. They aren't the rule.

The only reason the rules exist is because the BSA became the Youth program for the LDS. The LDS leveraged it's power and forced this nonsense. It put the BSA in a poison pill scenario of either losing a huge membership base or denying homosexuals and atheists. They chose a long gradual decline over a short immediate one.

In the end, the BSA is a great program for Boys. It provides a lot of leadership training for adults, too. I recommend to anyone, gay and/or atheist, to join given a chance or a reason too. Just pick the troop wisely, participate sensible, and enjoy the experience. We teach a lot of values that many would consider quite "liberal."

Religious differences and orientation aren't really a part of the program. There is really no useful purpose in making them part of the program--for anyone. No one talks about straight sex, and in a religiously diverse troops, no one forces a belief.

It's always good to hear the voice of experience. I see and talk to scouts regularly and they all seem to be having a great experience.

I will be the Committee Chair for my son's Troop starting next month.

Our Charter Organization is a local Volunteer Fire Department, and religion doesn't come up very often.

The official policy is:

"The Boy Scouts of America does not define what constitutes belief in God or practice of religion. Neither does the
BSA require membership in a religious organization or association for membership in the movement. If a Scout
does not belong to a religious organization or association, then his parent(s) or guardian(s) will be considered
responsible for his religious training. All that is required is the acknowledgment of belief in God as stated in
the Scout Oath, and the ability to be reverent as stated in the Scout Law"
(BSA Guide to Advancement 2011, pg 33. Publication #33088)

So as a parent, I define "god" for my son, and believe me, it is a pretty loose definition, and one can be reverent without a supernatural element.

For my son's Troop, I have been trying to create a version of the Boy Scouts I remember, the one prior to the LDS take over.

And as an added benefit one of the job descriptions for the Chair is too:

"Interpret National and Local policies to the Troop"

So, I will strive to have an open and accepting Troop for the boys, while being vigilant on Youth protection requirements for the adults.

asking what group of people a person would vote for for president (probably 2008). A large majority would vote for a woman, an African American, etc.

But the last two on the list (by % of votes) were homosexual and Atheist and the homosexual % was 10% higher than the % for Atheists. Edited to add: both of them came in after someone who is on death's door (72 year old)

I found it! Here it is (2007):

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/black_president_more_likely_than_mormon_or_atheist_/

*(This post will contain some generalizations, please don't jump on my back about them)

As it has been less acceptable to discriminate against/openly disparage certain groups (women, LGBT, African Am., Latinos, Mormons, etc)* the Right has a smaller pool of group of targets. Off the top of my head I would list Arabs/Muslims, 'Illegal Aliens', and Atheists*. Things will probably improve for those first two more quickly than the later.

I find it funny/sad that politicians/organizations will talk about improvements in diversity but fail to mention the Atheists.

so I won't be jumping on your back. Yes, there is still inequality in a lot of those areas, but it's not acceptable inequality. But atheists are fair game. As an atheist, it's more acceptable to them to attack me than it is to attack me because I'm a woman (though the attacks on women are generally thinly veiled attempts to control their reproductive behavior).