You are entitled to your opinion MomtoEli. However, currently your opinion is the policy. Those of who disagree (I'm a Catholic) with your opinion want to change it so the policy can reflect everyone's opinions based on their own opinions and beliefs. We are not forcing our beliefs on you, the current policy is forcing your beliefs on us. Even now you sit on this forum and argue that your views should trump mine. your religious beliefs should trump mine, and your Charter Organization should get to make the membership rules for my Charter Organization. Frankly, I find that notion repulsive and offensive. I follow my Faith to the letter. I study its Scripture, its doctrine, and its tradition. In the Catholic Church, one must hate the sin, but not the sinner. Until a Homosexual engages in homosexual behavior they are not sinning in the Catholic tradition. Even if they do, homosexuality isn't any greater a sin than greed, adultery, and a whole handful of different sins.

The Scout Oath and Law are made of Universal Truths. They are not anchored in any one Religious tradition. Rather than letting the Conservatives call the shots for everyone, why not let every Unit make the determination for themselves? Why do Modern Conservatives fear Freedom so much?

Respectfully yours,
Sentinel947

OGE you mean basementdweller what?????

BD , OGE here I thought you had written the "Rest of Us" comment, I was wrong

"We are not forcing our beliefs on you, the current policy is forcing your beliefs on us."
BSA policy is forcing someone's beliefs on you? How? Is that how they handle recruitment in your council? Press gangs come out and force folks into scouting?

I have no sympathy for someone who joined under false pretenses.

How about the kid who joins as a Cub Scout and realizes somewhere in middle school that he's gay and those policies apply to him? Would you consider him to have joined under "false pretenses"?

NJCubScouter, thank you for bringing the conversation back to civility. It is difficult to keep emotions in check.

You are right that there are two sides that cannot be reconciled and I would agree that the best thing to do would be let each unit (or CO) decide for themselves. However - I have not believe from the beginning that solution would suffice - and follow up comments by several on the other side of the argument have already made it very clear that it will NOT be acceptable to them and they will continue to push until there is no longer a choice.

So, the ideal isn't *really* to let people find the place they are comfortable inside the BSA, from the perspective of those doing the pushing. The ideal is to leave no place where those who object on moral grounds to be accommodated within the BSA.

And that should offend every one of you who are beating me over the head with how awful I am for objecting to local choice.

Dudes - local choice isn't the goal. Do you really not see that? Or do you know that but try to beat down the other side pushing to this compromise position so you can then turn around and beat them down to the real goal? And just to be sure you know I'm not making this up I'll post a link ...http://bigstory.ap.org/article/boy-scouts-board-meets-amid-talk-policy-gays ... this quote is found all over the place, including in this article:

"Gay-rights supporters contend that no Scout units anywhere should exclude gays, and vowed to maintain pressure on the BSA's corporate donors to achieve that goal. Some conservatives, including religious leaders whose churches sponsor troops, warned of mass defections if the ban were even partially eased. They urged supporters to flood headquarters with phone calls."

For the record - the photo at the top of this article is offensive to me as I don't believe this is a childs' fight.

jim, your argument is specious. While the policy was formalized in the late '70s, the ban was in place for decades. The ineligible volunteer files back this up as does the evidence presented in the Dale case.

ASM, I know plenty of Christians who do not believe in the exclusion of gay people. These include my wife, who is Catholic, my daughter who has become active in her husband's Episcopalian Church, and (as I learned for certain on Scout Sunday) the pastor of the church that is our troop's CO, and presumably, most of the members of that church as well. (I don't include myself on the list since I am not a Christian. I do hang out with them, though.)

An increasing number of Christian sects are accepting and inclusive to the point of recognizing and performing same sex marriage and ordaining openly gay clergy. Those who describe anti-gay bias as traditional Christian values should remember that no one sect has a copyright on the title Christian.

You are correct, Hal. The label Christian has been diluted to the point that it has no meaning anymore. Perhaps it is better for me to identify myself as a Christ follower who holds the cannonized Bible to be the infalilable, true word of God, believe that it has been protected by God himself in the translating process to the end that the Bible I hold in my hand IS, in fact, God's word to me. Further that I believe Jesus Christ IS God, has been God from the beginning, not a part of creation, but always existed, and that God exists in three distinct persons but yet is one God. That I believe God created everything, including men and women, that He doesn't make mistakes and stick us in the wrong bodies, and that He directed that marriage is to be between one man and one woman.

But I can't figure out a shorter name for it. :-)

Not exactly. It's more like the "here are the membership criteria; if you'd like to charter and organization with such criteria, welcome to BSA" argument.

You noted earlier that the "The Scout Oath and Law are made of Universal Truths." If this is true, then surely your chartered organization doesn't need the BSA with its (outdated, unfair, immoral, unfashionable - or whatever it is you think is wrong with it - membership policy). You can embrace those universal truths in an organization with membership criteria more to your liking.

Double post - deleted double
and - something appears rather buggy - all comments appear to have been replaced with one comment.

Callooh! Callay!Not exactly. It's more like the "here are the membership criteria; if you'd like to charter and organization with such criteria, welcome to BSA" argument. You noted earlier that the "The Scout Oath and Law are made of Universal Truths." If this is true, then surely your chartered organization doesn't need the BSA with its (outdated, unfair, immoral, unfashionable - or whatever it is you think is wrong with it - membership policy). You can embrace those universal truths in an organization with membership criteria more to your liking.

Nowhere in the Universal Truths of Scouting does it say "Exclude Gay people." That's your interpretation. Most of the World's Scouting organizations allow homosexuals. How does homosexuals in the Scouting hurt you in anyway Callooh? Do you not associate with any sinners? Do you know no alcoholics? Anybody who had a divorce? Somebody who stole in their life? Someone who had sex outside of marriage? Someone who had an abortion? You are selectively picking and choosing your sins.

Yours in Scouting, (Which unless you say otherwise, because you obviously own the BSA)
Sentinel947.

Then as I dismount my horse, explain to me why you are opposed to allowing gays into the Scouts.

Yours in Scouting,
Sentinel947