Boy Scouts lift ban on gay leaders

originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker
Will they spread their beliefs about homosexuality

Are you concerned that heterosexual leaders "spread their beliefs" about heterosexuality?

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker
Will they spread their beliefs about homosexuality

Are you concerned that heterosexual leaders "spread their beliefs" about heterosexuality?

The thing is, being a homosexual isn't a "belief" -- it's a sexual preference that you don't get to choose.

It's not like religion. You don't sit around and choose what orientation you want to be and "follow it".

People that are anti-gay and homophobic make being gay seem like it's some kind of club or religion. They seem to think gay people have some kind of "gay agenda" to "recruit" and "turn people gay".

That isn't happening. In fact, I bet you'd meet quite a few gay people that wish they were straight. I've had a gay man tell me that his life would have been so much easier had he been straight, but he is what he is.

Religion = choice
Gay = not a choice

Just like how you don't choose to be attracted to the opposite sex, gay people don't "choose" to attracted to the same sex. Just because you can't wrap your head around how this could be possible doesn't mean it can't exist.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

You do know I was using the OP's phrasing and that's why I put it in quotes... Right?

I agree with everything you said.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Oh yeah, I thought it was going to put what you quoted into my post

Yeah, I was replying to what you were replying to

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
The thing is, being a homosexual isn't a "belief" -- it's a sexual preference that you don't get to choose.

It's not like religion. You don't sit around and choose what orientation you want to be and "follow it".

People that are anti-gay and homophobic make being gay seem like it's some kind of club or religion. They seem to think gay people have some kind of "gay agenda" to "recruit" and "turn people gay".

Too bad I'll probably get called antigay or homophobic but.. I think it's about setting examples. Maybe it isn't a choice and some people get exposed to homosexuality and don't have anything to counter it, maybe even on a subconscious level. Which makes sense to me because what do children know of adult relationships or romantic love for that matter? Not much, so along with all the adults telling it's ok they might grow up considering it the same as different gender love.

If we are all human, why does it happen to some but not others? And I personally don't buy into theories such as DNA or 'wired differently', DNA should be about procreation and it would be illogical DNA exists so that it can't exist anymore (since there's not going to be a passing on of genes).

If there was no such concept of homosexuality in the entire world, I doubt there would be more of them.

I'm fine with homosexuals living out their lives peacefully, but they shouldn't be allowed in certain positions, especially with children. The same with people who smoke, drink or do drugs or even religion for that matter, all those are things children should not have to choose about until they've reached adulthood. I know reality is very different ofcourse but that's just my opinion.

a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

You do realize that homosexuality exists in animal species, right?

I wonder if animals decide to be gay because they see other animals being gay?

There have been studies that have shown exposure to certain levels of androgen's (hormones) in the uterus can influence a person's sexual preference later in life. There have also been studies of the brain that show gay men have brain structures that are different than heterosexual men.

This is biological, not by choice.

Holding on to ignorance.

Helps no child.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

You do realize that homosexuality exists in animal species, right?

Heard it all before. Actually, humans are just animals too, just more complex and evolved. Which doesn't mean they can go bad. The argument proves nothing, humans can go bad, other species can't go bad, we're all just lifeforms really made of the same stuff. Just some of the species got lucky and evolved while others did not.

There's a lot of difference amongst animals too. Some just do it and don't care. Others (like swans for example) stay together their entire life. The same behaviour can be seen in humans, some just do it and don't care, others can't even think about cheating.

I wonder if animals decide to be gay because they see other animals being gay?

But you just said it wasn't a choice? Confusing but ah well. My point was that if it isn't a choice, it appears involuntary and unconscious, not rational or maybe even according to primitive impulses. So it must be something forced upon an individual and that is through example I believe.

There have been studies that have shown exposure to certain levels of androgen's (hormones) in the uterus can influence a person's sexual preference later in life. There have also been studies of the brain that show gay men have brain structures that are different than heterosexual men.

This is biological, not by choice.

Yeah well you would think sex wouldn't be that complicated yet people have written theses about it and made millions. They all have their own reasons for their opinions and many people like to play games save but a few who actually do something worthwhile like space exploration, which is what we all need even though the majority doesn't get that.

In the example above, I doubt children are measured in the womb itself (else I feel sorry for them, science is actually quite primitive, not at all safe and scifi as we all see in the movies). I also doubt the researches measured the children all through their lives and accounted for other possible causes and then listed them showing percentages for the most likely cause. Then it would be more convincing. But no, there are experts on love here and we should listen to them and also give them lots of money.

Until brain imaging technology is more advanced and the majority of bodily molecules has been accounted for and explained, I'll take it with a grain of salt although I doubt to see that in my lifetime. Not all of science is that advanced as they would want the public to believe for all kinds of reasons, mostly prestige and money.

a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

And I personally don't buy into theories such as DNA or 'wired differently'

Well then you don't buy into facts, which you are free to do.

a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

If you "heard it all before" about homosexuality in animals then why did you say this?

If there was no such concept of homosexuality in the entire world, I doubt there would be more of them.

If you knew then you would have known that statement was false.

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

If you "heard it all before" about homosexuality in animals then why did you say this?

If there was no such concept of homosexuality in the entire world, I doubt there would be more of them.

If you knew then you would have known that statement was false.

And ofcourse you know and can point out the error in my thoughts but since you don't really have an argument you don't mention it and just hope I'll believe what you say anyway even though I don't see much of an argument and start having doubts about my own.

But I don't agree with homosexuality, humans can be wrong about it, so can other species. It always begins with one which then tries to have it's way with others who might not have even conceived the act. It doesn't start with two and even if it did it would be coincidence and very small odds those two would happen to live in the same area and even smaller odds they would find eachother.

Perhaps we should just agree to disagree, seeing your post I don't believe you really want to think about my opinion and I'm too bored with all the old arguments trying to convince me of something which can't happen. I was just hoping someone would present a new argument. And maybe even affect some change, for example pro-gays and their supporters accepting for once they can't change people and tolerance and respect has to be present on both sides if they ever want to understand eachother. And with understanding comes all the other good stuff which would make this world a better place.

a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

I was just hoping someone would present a new argument. And maybe even affect some change, for example pro-gays and their supporters accepting for once they can't change people and tolerance and respect has to be present on both sides if they ever want to understand eachother.

You don't agree with homosexuality and that is ok.
Other people agree with it and that is ok.

You have a right to disagree and speak your opinion.
Others also have a right to disagree with you and speak their opinion.

This is tolerance/respect on both sides.

a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

You don't believe Homosexuals should be in certain positions of power?

So Heterosexual people are the only "Clean" kind of person to be around Children... how is that logical?

you assume that We could influence a Child's Sexuality or Gender-Identity is ignorant,

originally posted by: johnnyjoe1979
But I don't agree with homosexuality,

I don't understand what people mean when they say they "disagree" with homosexuality. That's like saying you disagree with wind. It's a fact of life. It exists. Do you mean you "disapprove"?

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

You don't believe Homosexuals should be in certain positions of power?

Just more so when it involves children directly. And not just in boyscouting but also in childrens daycare centres, schools etc.

If it were up to me than yes but I'm also in favor of screening those people in positions of power for any wrong conduct, regardless of sexual preference. And rest assured I don't expect this to ever become a reality.

So Heterosexual people are the only "Clean" kind of person to be around Children... how is that logical?

you assume that We could influence a Child's Sexuality or Gender-Identity is ignorant,

Part of me agrees, children have little knowledge/experience about sexuality or romantic love and what isn't there can't be influenced.

Except I don't agree with the "clean" remark, what is that about? Just trying to make your discussion partner look bad perhaps?

I would rather say I believe certain people are better role models than others. Heterosexual being a requisite but more like the basics, they should have a lot more in order for them to be good role models. I don't necessarily believe homosexuals are 'dirty' as opposed to 'clean', whatever you mean by that and if I have to follow this thought, it occurs to me heterosexuals can be just as dirty or homosexuals just as clean. It's just they have different goals in life and in this case having homosexuals as leaders will raise a lot of questions which can't be easily answered but something parents have to, except for those who take the easy way out by either saying it's all ok (because of God, nature, or all kinds of pseudo scientific reasoning) or not (again because of God, nature, or all kinds of pseudo scientific reasoning). It's a difficult complicated subject, not something I would want to discuss with my child until they're adults and I don't want them to go through all the hassle I went through dealing with the subject and have their time wasted (no offense but I'd rather see them chase the opposite sex and settle down). Ofcourse I can just decide not to send my kid to the boyscouts, something I did want for them before this.

And I'm also pretty sure there have been lots of children who wanted to become an astronaut or a fireman or police man after seeing such role models. Or children who believe less in love because of divorced parents and are more prone to divorce themselves at a later age. Children learn by imitation, but just like drugs a child is not always capable of telling something is good or bad.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: johnnyjoe1979
But I don't agree with homosexuality,

I don't understand what people mean when they say they "disagree" with homosexuality. That's like saying you disagree with wind. It's a fact of life. It exists. Do you mean you "disapprove"?

The difference I believe is I don't have the illusion I will ever convince anyone. You can't convince the wind to change it's ways. Even though many people in the past have tried to make others believe they can influence the weather.

But I do believe I can understand my fellow human being better by dialogue, I have to too because as you say it exists even if I don't believe it's truly love they are talking about for one thing. They say it exists, I say it doesn't and it's just lust and a deeper than usual kind of brother or sisterhood. The wind however does not say anything about the reality we all share, it just blows. It's that fine line I try to walk with not offending anyone with my opinions but not keeping silent about it at the same time and becoming some hermit in the woods.

originally posted by: johnnyjoe1979
They say it exists, I say it doesn't and it's just lust and a deeper than usual kind of brother or sisterhood.

So, it sounds like you don't BELIEVE homosexuality really exists. It's not that you don't AGREE or don't APPROVE, you just think some 350 Million people (5% of the world population) are living under some sort of delusion? Have I got that right?

It's that fine line I try to walk with not offending anyone with my opinions but not keeping silent about it at the same time and becoming some hermit in the woods.

I'm not offended. And I like civil discussion, especially with people who see things differently from me.

For what it's worth, not dealing with sexual orientation in the Boy Scouts for a moment,I'd like to mention the Girl Scouts have been a model organization in comparison.

I think for almost 20 years or more (as long as I've been alive) they accepted scouts and leaders who were homosexual.

They even accepted me as a transgender girl, despite having been born in a boy body.

Scouting is a lot of fun. The couple of years I was a Girl Scout brought more normality into my life at a crucial time as a preteen.

I got to make new friends and learn new things in a caring, safe environment. They also helped encourage my interest in astronomy and science in general which are big parts of my life now.

Everyone should have the opportunity to be involved in scouting. Sexual orientation or gender identity shouldn't matter.

Those who think gay people are some how more prone to being sexual predators need their head examined and use common sense. Predators are more likely to be heterosexual just like the rest of the general populace.

My gym teacher in high school was lesbian and I didn't "catch the gay" from her. Neither did any of her other students. I do know that I and other LGBT kids in her class felt more comfortable knowing we could talk with her about difference though.

a reply to: Sremmos80

" Should it not already??

Or is it not headline news because it was done by a straight man. "


Any Male who would Commit an Act like that would be Considered Technically Not a Heterosexual .

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Well you do know there has been cases of child molestation in the scouts before this right?
Which is why I asked shouldn't it already be headline news. Which it is.
So what leads you to believe that there will be more now?


And no, being a pedophile has nothing to do with your orientation.