The 2-Deep policy, requiring at least 2 adults with any group of boys (even just 1 boy), is partially to prevent sexual molestation. The policy that I can’t sleep in a tent with any boy other than my own son is for the same reason. Asking why I might be hung up on sex is really disingenuous. There is already a concern about this in Scouting.

When I was a Scout in the early 70s, this policy was not in place (as far as I know). But with the continuing acceptance of homosexuality and with a better understanding of sexual predators, the 2-Deep policy had to be made. That’s why for so long there wasn’t a ban on homosexuals. Society changed, and the Scouts had to take that into consideration.

Again, just like the Catholic Church. I’m sure there were and are rules about it, but rules aren’t always followed, and now there are boys who were scarred by a few priests. This speaks more the to the issue of gay Scouts leaders, but I think the concern is still real. Again, the issue of my son sleeping in a tent with someone sexually attracted to him is a concern.

I do think that, as most Scout troops are sponsored by churches, that the thoughts on what are “morally straight” may make an impression on gay scouts. Perhaps not officially, but being in the company of many who believe their religion’s proscription against it can be a very good influence. Given that, my disagreement with the policy change is tempered by this.

http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2013/06/11/exxon-mobils-rex-tillerson-urges-scouts-to-get-on-with-the-main-thing-scouting-after-historic-membership-policy-vote/

Scouts and Scouters refer to those days as the “good old days.” Gerry Ford was a Boy Scout then, and earned his Eagle rank. Stephen Spielberg won his Eagle then. Neil Armstrong and Bill Bradley Eagled. Hank Aaron was a Scout then.

What do you have against a program that works like that?

But no drinking on campouts.

No sex on campouts, either.

Why are you hung up about sex? Sounds like you could use more training, and especially more time camping.

I answered your question about a real reason to ban them in the post.

I know what the current Scout rules on alcohol at Scout functions are. I linked to them in the post.

You did read the post, right?

My main point is that if the impetus to not ban gays is because, as society now believes, they were born that way and we shouldn’t ban them for something that has a genetic component, then should alcoholics that are that way due to a genetic component be allowed, just the way they are? More generally, should society in general not try to change them, since they were born that way?

Further, do we really want to bring in the sexual attraction issue to the Scouts, as I mentioned in the second-to-last paragraph? And the issue with gay Scout leaders is even more of a concern. Just ask the Catholic church.

Scouts don’t ban alcoholics. We ban alcohol abuse on Scout functions. That ban stands for alcoholics and non-alcoholics alike.

Alcoholics can be members. No one can abuse alcohol, and in most cases no one can use alcohol, at Scout functions.

Are you a Scout? Do you understand the current membership flap?

Is there any good reason on Earth — real reason — ban gay kids?