Skip to main content

View Diary: Conservative bigots whine about being social pariahs (240 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The Boy Scouts did vote to allow (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JerryNA

    openly gay Scouts last year and the first openly gay Eagle Scout was recognized early this year.  Their position on openly gay leaders is about to implode for several reasons.  The  reason they used to give for not allowing openly gay leaders was the fear of pedophilia.  Of course, there is no link between homosexuality and pedophilia, as their own experience demonstrates -- they had a major pedophilia scandal in the 1980s when openly gay scout masters were prohibited.  They even stated when the lifting of the ban on gay scouts was made that even though they weren't allowing gay scout leaders, they recognized homosexuality had nothing to do with pedophilia.  So, they basically have no justification for the ban on openly gay leaders.  There are other things that will occur.  There will be a gay scout who, when he reaches 18, will want to be an adult leader.  How can they say that the day before his eighteenth birthday he was a member in good standing of Scouts and the day he turns 18, having done nothing any different, he suddenly isn't?  
    They are also continuing to lose corporate sponsorship, and they had a large exodus of units in the Bible Belt areas after the ruling last year, so the people who are left are more likely to want to allow gay scout leaders.  It's going to come, and sooner rather than later.

    •  i also understand (0+ / 0-)

      the desire to defend the boy scouts.  but honestly it is like defending the Catholics, or second baptist church.  For years they said that allows gay boy scouts would be promoting sin, all while promoting fornication by minors and adultery by adults through refusing to dismiss boy scouts that were not virgin and leaders who were divorced.  This is fact.  This is bigotry, pure and simple.  And that they are still having this conversation mean that they continue to be bigots, albeit bigots that are so greedy that they are willing to compromise their values for a 20 gold pieces.

      •  If they change their practices, I think (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JerryNA

        they should not be condemned.  Would you want everyone in the world to think all US citizens are racist because we had segregation 50 years ago?

        As far as the Church is concerned, despite Pope Francis's nice words, they have not changed their actual position on homosexuality.  All the Pope has done is say, "let's stop talking about this so much."  And there is no indication that they will change.  The Boy Scouts have actually changed their policies, and they will change them further in the future.  That's the difference.

        •  "Let's stop talking about this" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          raspberryberet

          is a couple of steps in a much better direction.

          First: it's a signal for the faithful to re-direct their energies away from stirring up this conflict. And not having the Catholics in this conversation will pretty much automatically change the dynamics of it, as well as creating a precedent for other religious conservatives to take their leave of it, too.

          Second: It's an acknowledgement that the Church has exactly zero credibility left on issues of sexuality. Their own house is so deeply out of order on this that it's not a conversation they should be having with anyone for a very long while.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site