A boy is a boy
Jack Durish (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Fri May 08 13:58:47 1998
What some of you are saying is that a homosexual boy is not a boy at
all. Or that is what I think you are saying. It says that boys and girls
are allowed in Sea Scouts. So why the big fuss over letting a homosexual
Boy or Girl into Sea Scouts? A homosexual is just like everyone else,
they love, they hate, and they have all the same parts as a heterosexual
of the same gender. So they should join a private institution? Why? They
are integrated into the community just like everyone else. Society
doesn't ban them so why should we?
What rules would they be breaking?
Orange County California
Bill Claycomb wrote:
> I don't know if this has been responded to already -- my list is set to
> digest mode, so I only see it once a day, but I thought I would say a
> few words anyway.
> > It is interesting that two persons who have benefited from the > B.S.A.'s "relaxing" their standards have such opposing view points!
> Since I am someone who did not gain membership rights through the
> "relaxing" of standards, I feel justified in presented an opposing
> position. I do not mean to imply that anyone should feel unjustified in
> making comments, though some may feel that way due to previous comments.
> I feel that I, and the entire organization, benefited from the changes
> refered to. I don't think that was the original implication, however.
> This was:
> > Meaning, when "Boy" Scouting was first established, it was for boys
> > only. A couple of decades back, the B.S.A. woke up (at least > partially) and started admitting girls.
> > Did it weaken the program? Or did it expand it? I guess it is for > each of us to decide then accept (at least for a little while longer).
> I agree that the Boy Scouts decision to admit women was "waking up" to
> some extent, because the addition they make to the program is
> beneficial, and because their inclusion (and contributions) are
> consistent with the foundations of the program we enjoy. There is
> nothing in the Scout Oath or Law that makes any reference to gender,
> only to standards that both men and women are equally capable of
> There is, however, a point to be made against the inclusion of people
> that do not follow the guidelines set out by the Scout Oath and Law.
> That point is simple -- to join an organization, particularly a private
> organization (another hotly debated topic), you may be required to meet
> membership standards. If you do not meet those standards, you do not
> have any right to join, no matter how much money you get from the ACLU.
> (Sorry, couldn't resist that cheap shot).
> Basically, the issue of admitting women and the issue of admitting
> homosexuals or athiests is not the same. Because they are two issues
> that involve a growth in the potential membership base, they may seem
> similar, but when we examine the foundations of the arguments against
> each, we find that they are very different.
> I feel that the Boy Scouts are not only sending a message to the
> community, but a message to their own membership by taking a stand on
> this issue. That message might seem negative to some, but I prefer to
> think of it as a positive message: that we will not bend to pressure
> from special interest groups, that the BSA has standards that we have
> stood by and taught our children by since 1910, and we will continue to
> do so.
> In Scouting,
> Bill Claycomb