Boy Scouts of America

So, the Scouts have had to declare bankruptcy. Reason, to stall payments to those who have been sexually abused by leaders and others in the Scouts.

Anyone remember when the Levi Strauss company blackmailed the Scouts into allowing homosexual leaders? Levi’s threatened to pull funding for the Scouts if they didn’t. The Scouts took the 30 pieces of silver and betrayed their Christian foundation. Now they are reaping what they sowed. Another part of our culture destroyed.

This article links to papers, some that support what you said and some that challenge what you just said Bob. So, let’s not do some dumb link war where you think you prove you are right based on some study. https://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

 

I didn’t know about Levi Strauss and Boy Scouts – I was surprised to find it was almost 30 years ago.

They brought it on themselves it seems. Caving easily is never a good move.

Caving in is never a good move, period. If there is any redeeming character quality Trump has, it is his refusal to cave in.

The scouting movement was not just about woodcraft, tying knots with a string, goofing around in the forest and finding your way home with a compass. It was about character building. Be prepared! was the motto. It was about honor and conserving values that mom and dad approved of. Thank God for Lord Baden-Powell. I made it to Eagle Scout.

The scouts law is for boys, as follows;

  1. A Scout’s honor is to be trusted – This means the scout will try as best as he can to do what he promised, or what is asked of him
  2. A Scout is loyal – to his king or queen, his leaders and his country.
  3. Scout’s duty is to be useful, and to help others
  4. A Scout is a friend to all, and a brother to every other Scout – Scouts help each other, regardless of the differences in status or social class.
  5. A scout is courteous – He is polite and helpful to all, especially women, children, and the elderly. He does not take anything for being helpful.
  6. A Scout is a friend to animals – He does not make them suffer, or kill them without need to do so.
  7. A Scout obeys orders – Even the ones he does not like.
  8. A Scout smiles and whistles
  9. A Scout is thrifty – he avoids unnecessary spending of money.
  10. A Scout is clean in thought, word and deed.

 

This article links to papers, some that support what you said and some that challenge what you just said Bob. So, let’s not do some dumb link war where you think you prove you are right based on some study. https://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
I don't see where your link addresses anything I said about the bankruptcy. What I did remember incorrectly was that Levis was directly involved in the Scout's decision to admit gays. The timeline doesn't seem to support the idea. I don't know whether they resumed funding for the Scouts or not. Levi's cut was one of the most notable of the thousand that brought the Scouts down.

Your link includes opinions that homosexuals are not necessarily pedophiles. I can agree with that. But I accept that any male who sexually engages another male including a male child is a homosexual. I admit I am making an assumption that the majority of sexual abuse was male on male child. I have heard no claim that any of the abuse was heterosexual. I don’t know how many girls were/are in the Scouts, but if there were many I would expect some reports of them being abused and not necessarily only by leaders.

I do blame the Scouts’ downfall and bankruptcy on their policy change to admit gays. In terms of means, motive and opportunity the abuse in the Scouts is essentially the same as that in the Catholic church. Same policy, same results. Both organizations suffered, and still suffer, pressures from a variety of sources not the least of which is to be “politically correct.” The pro-gay, anti-Christian haters won this one.

Ok. The levi straus thing was 3 decades ago. The 1700 expected cases of sexual abuse happened over the course of the past several decades. So it was happening well before gay scouts and scout leaders were allowed in. Show me where a gay person is more likely to sexually abuse children more than persons of other sexual persuasions. Idk. Are there studies that show this?

Gay scouts and scout leaders could have been in before they were allowed in. Why would a straight scout leader want to sexually mess with another scout? The very idea is repugnant to a straight man.

Sree and Tim, did you try my linked article?

Show me where a gay person is more likely to sexually abuse children more than persons of other sexual persuasions.
You have lumped heterosexual abuse with homosexual abuse. The abuses in the Scouts were apparently homosexual.

Sexual activity with a person of the same sex is the definition of homosexuality regardless of whether it is with an adult or a child. If one engages in homosexual activity then that person is a homosexual, by definition. If all the abuses were homosexual then all of those who committed them were homosexual and consequently none of the abusers were straight.

The abuses were not alleged to be heterosexual. I think it fair to expect heterosexual abuse is mostly committed by straight people. Lausten’s linked article addressed your question quite well.

Sexual activity with a person of the same sex is the definition of homosexuality regardless of whether it is with an adult or a child.
I don't think you are for real, or if you are, you are not able to accept information counter to your biases, so, not gonna spend a lot of time with you on this. My wife worked with men like this for 20 years, as a prison psychologist, so I know a little about it. These attractions don't compare to adult sexual activity, so your definition does not apply. In most cases, the men have an abnormal understanding of sex and power and compassion.
Lausten: My wife worked with men like this for 20 years, as a prison psychologist, so I know a little about it.
Is your wife a woman? I ask this question seriously. Please don't read anything improper into it. In the interest of a useful discussion, we need to be aware of and acknowledge our biases. I am a straight guy and accept that my orientation is hardwired. Your judgment on homosexuality must be viewed accordingly. I agree with Bob and would like to understand what I am missing here with regard to your observation.
Lausten: Sree and Tim, did you try my linked article?
I have yet to read your link but did a research on Professor Herek. He is a homosexual. I have had many debates with LGBT folks and have to admit that they are a pretty sharp crowd. Some of them are the most intellectually formidable people I have tangled with. My conclusion? To each his own thing.

What you are missing Sree is that someone’s gender or orientation does not change facts.

What facts, Lausten? That we are all different? I have no problem with that at all. Diversity is great. I love America for that very quality: all in one. Just don’t force me to bake your cake.

No one is forcing you to do anything. If you open a store and get all the protections society provides then you are expected to provide your services fairly and evenly to that society.

These attractions don’t compare to adult sexual activity, so your definition does not apply. In most cases, the men have an abnormal understanding of sex and power and compassion.
I think the definition is exactly correct. What a person does is the only thing we can know about them. We can not truly know whether or not a man considers himself to be a homosexual, and it doesn't matter. It is a person's activity and only his activity, not his intention, his feelings, whether he has abnormal understanding or anything else that determines what he is.
I think the definition is exactly correct
I know you do. But I come to this forum to hear new ideas, to learn things. You should try it.
No one is forcing you to do anything. If you open a store and get all the protections society provides then you are expected to provide your services fairly and evenly to that society.
If no one was doing the forcing, then there wouldn't have been such a big farce over that cake.

Confronting and compelling each other to comply is not the appropriate way to resolve differences in society.

 

Lausten, I just read (scanned attentively) your linked article. Thanks.

So it seems that a large portion of folks who are pedophiles are persons who have profound delays in the development of sexual attraction to adults, due to never having been able to establish any adult/adult relationships. Therefore they are not correctly classified as homosexuals, even if their child victims are the same gender

Anyway the important assertion to be highlighted, I think, is that we do not know that the allowance of gays into the Scouts increased the rate of occurrence of the reported acts of pedophilia. We do not even know whether there was a correlation of any kind. However, I assume that the latter is knowable to anyone who can access the past several decades of data re: all of the alleged cases of pedophilia.

 

 

Tim, what was reported was not general pedophilia. What was reported was sexual abuse of Scout members. Will you really try to shift the focus? The vast majority of Scout members and leaders was/is male. Are we wrong to conclude, without further evidence, that most if not all of the abuse was male on male.

Therefore they are not correctly classified as homosexuals, even if their child victims are the same gender.
This is the same sort of liberal BS that says these criminals are not really bad people and the reason they did bad things is because we as society failed them and we should understand them, protect them, pet and comfort them and be ashamed of ourselves for not being politically correct towards them. Are you going to be able to say the same sort of thing when some pervert rapes your young daughter or granddaughter or the 6-year-old daughter of one of your friends? I think not.