Killing the Scouts

BoyScoutby Trevor Thomas5/27/15
The plague continues to spread. Whether the church, para-church organizations, the government, schools, corporations, small businesses, and even blood banks, the plague of liberalism seems to know no bounds. Because of their desire (again) to compromise with God-given absolute moral standards on sexuality, the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts are now the latest to go further down the wide path of destruction paved by modern liberalism.

The Girl Scouts of America recently announced a policy shift and will start allowing gender-confused boys into their ranks. The FAQ section of the Girl Scouts’ website reads, “Girl Scouts is proud to be the premiere leadership organization for girls in the country. Placement of [gender-confused] youth is handled on a case-by-case basis, with the welfare and best interests of the child and the members of the troop/group in question a top priority. That said, if the child is recognized by the family and school/community as a girl and lives culturally as a girl, then Girl Scouts is an organization that can serve [him] in a setting that is both emotionally and physically safe.”

Interestingly, after their surrender to the liberal sexual agenda nearly two years ago that allowed for homosexual members, I thought that the Boy Scouts next would capitulate when it comes to the gender-confused. Not wanting to let the boys outdo them, and showing themselves to be fine feminazi role models for today’s young females, the adults who lead the Girl Scouts beat the Boy Scouts to the punch!

Rather than delve into gender perverseness, it seems the Boy Scouts are still hung up on homosexuality. So much so that Boy Scouts of America (BSA) president Robert Gates recently announced that the BSA’s longstanding ban on homosexual scout leaders is now in question. Noting the “open defiance” that exists with some Boy Scout councils across the U.S. when it comes to “current membership policy,” Gates said that such issues could no longer be “ignored.”

He also noted the “social, political, and ‘juridicial’ changes taking place in our country.” Gates reminded listeners of the debates raging in the U.S. over “discrimination” based on “sexual orientation,” and rightly expressed fear that U.S. courts would force a change (full-on acceptance of all things homosexual) on the Boy Scouts.

So what’s Gates’ solution? Sounding much like the modern champion of “tolerance” that he is, Gates began, “We must deal with the world as it is, not as we might wish it would be.” He then offered a policy “that accepts and respects our different perspectives and beliefs, allows religious organizations — based on First Amendment protections of religious freedom — to establish their own standards for adult leaders, and preserves the Boy Scouts of America now and forever.”

Ahh, the sweet smell of compromise. Given Gates’ previous desire to allow homosexual scout leaders, preceded by his efforts to end “don’t ask, don’t tell” in the U.S. military, his recent comments come as little surprise. It’s almost as if Gates was placed in his position as president of Boy Scouts of America in order to lead the Scouts down the same path that he took our military.

Of course this is what happens when a man without (or with few) convictions is faced with making a moral decision that many will dislike. Simply put, when it comes to defending the truth on sexuality, Gates’ heart and mind are simply not in the fight.

It’s a shame, because more than ever before, America’s youth need the direction of pure hearts and sound minds when it comes matters of sexuality. For example, it would be wonderful if the Boys Scouts took the opportunity to teach young boys about the “born that way” myth. In spite of the popular meme perpetuated by the homosexual agenda, no one is “born gay.” This myth is so powerful that it has deceived even well-meaning conservatives like Ben Carson and Marco Rubio.

Since the Scout motto says, “On my honor, I will do my best… to keep myself physically strong,” it would also be nice if Boy Scout leadership told the truth on the tremendous health dangers associated with sexual immorality. This is especially the case for those involved in a homosexual lifestyle.

There are abundant data that reveal the dangers of a homosexual lifestyle. Even government health organizations who’ve fully bought into the homosexual agenda can’t deny the sad and sobering statistics when it comes to homosexuality. As the CDC notes, when compared to the general population, LGBT individuals are more likely to:

    • Use alcohol and drugs
    • Have higher rates of substance abuse
    • Continue heavy drinking later in life

Men who have sex with men account for 75% of primary and secondary syphilis cases in the U.S. and are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than are heterosexual men. Though homosexuals make up only about 2% of the population, homosexual men account for about two-thirds of all new HIV infections.

The Canadian healthcare system notes that the life expectancy of homosexual men is 20 years less than the average. In addition, gays, lesbians, and bisexuals in Canada:

    • Commit suicide at rates from 2 to 13.9 times more often than average
    • Have smoking rates 1.3 to 3 times higher than average
    • Have rates of alcoholism 1.4 to 7 times higher than average
    • Have rates of illicit drug use 1.6 to 19 times higher than average
    • Show rates of depression 1.8 to 3 times higher than average
    • Gay and bisexual men comprise 76.1% of AIDS cases
    • Gay and bisexual men comprise 54% of new HIV infections each year

If they are committed to the truth, Scouting organizations should also reveal to young boys and girls that, though they may experience same-sex attractions, they are not doomed to the devastation that comes from living a homosexual lifestyle. In other words, it is possible to come out of the homosexual lifestyle. In spite of the recent best efforts of liberals to suppress the truth — going so far as to make it illegal — conversion therapy works.

Any organization committed to helping young boys maintain a “physically strong,” and “mentally awake” lifestyle, or committed to helping young girls “respect” themselves and to be “Courageous and Strong,” should certainly make our youth aware of the dangers of a homosexual lifestyle.

Gates is right about one thing: these issues can’t be ignored. However, instead of fighting for what’s right, the former secretary of defense has surrendered on one of the most important moral battles of our time. How tragic that two of the oldest and most premiere youth organizations in the U.S. have taken the wide road that leads to destruction when it comes to these important truths.


Copyright 2015, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com • email: tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World • Blog: Whose Slave Are You?
 • (2007 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Killing the Scouts

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Thanks, Trevor, for letting me share this with the crowd here. (We’re a crowd, not a mob.)

    Of particular interesting is the “born that way” link he provided in the article. Interesting read.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    Surrendering to the libertinists is always the easiest way given their overpowering influence in the synoptic media. Of course, this process of subverting traditionalist organizations from within is an old leftist trick. The Soviets made good use of it in stalinizing Eastern Europe, as I noted in my comment on Iron Curtain.

  3. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Regarding the self-destructive pathologies which are associated with homosexuality, the Left and mindless libertarians will claim these pathologies are the result of pressures put on homosexuals due to society’s judgmental views on the homosexuality.

    Thus it follows that once homosexuality is accepted by everyone, homosexuals will no longer manifest such behavior. In the end, the Left and libertarians wish to see any and all sexual actions, including copulating with a corpse or using infants a la Tiberius.

    No norm means no abnormal. No laws means no crimes. The dopey libertarians probably believe this. The satanic Leftists know better and simply wish to keep the masses in a stupor on sex, drugs and rock-n-roll, ya know, the inverse of Marx’s saying about religion being the opiate of the masses.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Bread and circuses, updated for 2015.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      No norm means no abnormal.

      Do you know what normal is? Do you know what abnormal is? Do you know what a crime is? Do you know what homosexuality is?

      Well, I’m just pulling your leg, Mr. Kung. But pummeling people, as the Left has, with doubt and prevarication has an effect. They are like the acid that eats away at the granite of civilization. They weaken it. And pretty soon, no one can come up with a reason why *not* to do something. Foundational thinking, for all intents and purposes, has been abolished by being so badly muddled. All that is then left is pop culture. Does anyone here really want to base society on mere mass-marketed fads? That’s exactly what we’re doing. We’re changing the Constitution, natural law, and tradition as if they were simply a shirt.

    • NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

      As you say KFZ, normalizing homosexuality is one of the Left’s goals for another reason than its general libertinism (a/k/a distracting the masses) – it is simultaneously part of its attack on the family and on the very concept of normality. And with a weakling like Robert Gates, we see how deadly the refusal to fight for normality in general and hetero-normality in particular are.

  4. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Paul Kengor has an article today . . . well, it’s rather an advertisement for his new book. But he makes some outstanding points.

    It’s possible (duh!) to endlessly parse this question (it’s part of what we do here…probably better than anyplace else). And the fact is, the people doing the parsing are the only thoughtful ones left who have the capacity to think in a strategic way and to see the “plans within plans.”

    Kengor is quite write. The mainstreaming of homosexuality by the Left was never about “fairness” or “marriage equality.” It was about destroying the family. More specifically, it is about a bunch of narcissistic, grievance-minded red diaper doper babies who blame mommy and daddy for all their shortcomings. The family (particularly paternalism) is seen as an impediment to a socialist utopia that presumably can be created by the Golden Children if given complete control of society.

    Given that so many yutes know so little about history, and what history they do know is full of Leftist-friendly propaganda, they are in no position to think strategically, to see the “plans within plans.” All they can do is react to pop-culture sloganeering. Re-packaged this grievance and destruction as “marriage equality” and that’s enough for them. Then they can get back do doing what the hoi polloi have always done, as noted by William Shatner in his song, “Common People”.

    You’ll never fail like common people,
    You’ll never watch your life slide out of view,
    And dance and drink and screw,
    Because there’s nothing else to do.

    This is the “democracy” that is overcoming us. Once again, proving that all I needed to know about life, I learned in Star Trek (or a derivative of same).

    • Timothy Lane says:

      The essence of liberalism has always been to create a totalitarian state with no institution of any kind (such as family, church, charity, or business) standing between the cogs and the machine. They can’t admit that, so everything they say is just propaganda to cover for their goals. This is why, with liberals, you always have to distinguish between the justification for something, and the real reason for it.

  5. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    They can’t admit that, so everything they say is just propaganda to cover for their goals.

    There is a lot of covering going on…so much so that I don’t think people have much of a clue. And a man who doesn’t know his own history is lost to the image-crafters. If there is no foundation to an idea other than it derives from a popular culture driven by fad and fashion, one is prone to picking up bad ideas.

    It’s arguable (I have so argued) that no-fault divorce, the family-smashing entitlement state, and the beastliness of atheism have wreaked the most damage to marriage. “Gay marriage,” to me, is more like the last vultures who swoop in after the lion has already made its kill and filled its belly.

    So though I see the idea of homosexual marriage as serious, and certainly ludicrous, I think it pays to put it into perspective. Homosexual marriage is the equivalent of the band continuing to play even after the ship has already hit the iceberg. That doesn’t make it right. That doesn’t make it unimportant. But I think it is important that we don’t miss the larger issues and become like some of those fools who go for “immigration reform” (which does nothing practical but legitimize the lawlessness) because they won’t fess up to the real fact: There are millions of felons in our midst who have crossed over the border illegally and have no right to be here.

    To some degree, we could grant acceptance (as Jonah Goldberg has, clearly for marketing purposes) to homosexual marriage and not much would change. It’s good to exterminate the rats, if you’ll pardon the analogy, but if the reality is that the walls of the building are already crumbling, it doesn’t cure the problem to exterminate the rats.

    In the name of taking care of the elderly, Social Security has arguably done more than anything else to undermine the family. I don’t have to take care of mother. That’s the government’s job. Whatever “good intentions” these programs may have had, the end result is that this, and other welfare programs, has greased the skids for not having to depend upon the traditional family.

    There’s no question we ought to oppose the homosexual mafia wherever they go. They do not represent “tolerance.” They represent a deep hatred for families, tradition, religion, and just anything Western. They want their abnormalities to be normalized. That is the point. And although as conservatives and Christians we might offer sympathy, a respectful tolerance, and guidance, there is no reason on earth to treat homosexual conduct as good, normal, or worthy.

    But if families are now defunct anyway (and statistics are showing this is more and more so in terms of the number of children with broken families comprised of just one parent), then to borrow a line from Hillary, “What difference does it make?” And that’s sort of where we are in regards to homosexual marriage. The horses have already bolted the barn. We could close the gate on homosexual marriage — and should — but the bigger issues have already been decided and lost.

    The job of a citizen in the West today is to pretend that everything is alright (aka smiles, everyone, smiles). The zeitgeist is “I’m okay, you’re okay.” The only social crimes worth getting hot and bothered about are those that derive from Cultural Marxism, crimes of race, class, or gender — or especially environmental crimes.

    As for the rest of the focus, we are destined to become livestock of the government. They are no longer just the administrative sphere, they have captured the moral sphere. This is why families, religion, and freedom (of thought and speech) are enemies to the Left. They present an authority counter to that of the state. And the morality of the state will inevitably (and already is) about simply increasing the size, power, and prestige of the state. Homosexuals will be consumed by this as much as anyone, although for now they serve as a nice marketing gimmick at the moment.

    This is all too much for your typical useful idiot to absorb. In between adding to his or her tattoos, all he or she wants to know is that he or she is the cat’s meow because he or she (or it!) has supported “marriage equality” and thus has shown — despite the cartoons scribbled on his or her body — that he or she (or it!) is enlightened, tolerant, and morally superior.

    Mooo!

    • Timothy Lane says:

      The importance of homofascism is not what it does to the family (you’re right that the harm there is relatively minor, at least by comparison with so many other pathologies already enshrined in modern society), but rather its use as a weapon against religion and against religious or moralistic charities and organizations (such as, of course, the Boy Scouts). The goal is to destroy whichever of these they can’t subvert into adjuncts of Barry’s Behemoth. It’s the tried and true method previously deployed by Lenin and Stalin, and adopted by other communists, so it’s no surprise that modern liberals follow the same pattern.

      • Pst4usa says:

        Timothy, I agree, but I see a different aspect of the homofacism from the governments perspective, all along the same vain. If they can redefine a dogs tail to be called a leg, you might ask a yute, after this revelation from government. How many legs does a dog have, and you could expect the answer to come back 5. Of course the correct answer remains 4, no matter what the government says.
        So I see the redefinition of marriage much the same way, it is an exercise of ultimate power over us sheep. It has all the effects mentioned above, but as both you and Brad have pointed out, the redefinition effect will be minimal at this point The consent of the governed in allowing this to take place however, will have much larger effect on this country and the world for that matter.

    • Pst4usa says:

      I think Baaaaaa! is more appropriate finish Brad.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        LOL. If I knew what kind of a sound a camel made (or how to write it) I might have used that. But I stand corrected.

  6. Pst4usa says:

    Trevor, very good post. My extension of this thought. If we refuse to learn from history, we are condemned to repeat it. I am not sure how many times the world has gone through this cycle, but I will use a fairly resent example of the phenomena. The European Church, (any liberal denomination will do), it bends its message to the will of society, (currently The Pope and his GoreBull Warming concerns comes to mind). Their ends justify their means, but the ends are not theirs, they are God’s!
    They think this will do just what they want, more butts in the seats, (again not the proper goal). Since they have lost their souls, they put the plans into action slowly at first, maybe seeing a slight bump in attendance, then the plan speeds up to the point that there is no moral code by which the members are asked to adhere. As membership falls, the now corrupt leadership starts a campaign to attach those old members as intolerant bigots, and inflexible; for being the reason that their plan is not working, the reason that membership is all but gone. Until the smaller church buildings must be sold to pay the bills, (this will not be the case for the Catholic Church), but it is OK, because no-one, save a few faithful, cares anymore what happens to that church.
    If you look at some data, you will see that it is the more conservative religions that are growing, the ones that require some commitment to follow a foundation, a structure, Sorry to say the Muslims are leading the way in growth, the fact that they have standards, albeit incorrect ones, is what is attracting to so many. So all across Europe, these Christian churches die and not one soul seems able to figure out why. Maybe they should try to stand up for their founder, Jesus; or at least the Book that should be their Gospel; instead of the well-trodden path to failure, Chamberlinesque appeasement.
    Well, I am sorry to say that it is not just the libs, (that works for Liberals and Libertarians, both equally gutless), that have caused this. It is all of us, (we did, however, hold out much longer than the Europeans). We are so cowed by the left and ever increasingly the libertarians, to be afraid to stand up for principles, we will take the easy way out, don’t offend anyone, we are lazy, cowardly and frankly so self-centered that we ignore the push from these folks that seem to be feeding off each other like sharks in a feeding frenzy, and I might add to such success in boggles the mind.
    The purpose of the Boy Scouts should be to raise up a generation of men, willing to stand up against such PC BS, hell, stand for anything. But standing up, means you must believe in something and you will be called names, pretty weak blackmail if you ask me!
    For this leftist blackmail to work you need to fear the loss of something; what is it we are hanging on to so tightly, that we keep allowing this to happen? Reputation? Political power? Well what good is reputation or political power, if you do not have the courage to use it? Republicans? Can you hear us now? In today’s America you are free to believe whatever you choose, as long as it does not offend the TTL. (Totalitarian Tolerant Left).

    • Timothy Lane says:

      The problem is a lack of moral courage. Robert Gates had already shown he had none, so it’s no surprise that he surrendered pre-emptively rather than stand on moral principle.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Maybe they should try to stand up for their founder, Jesus; or at least the Book that should be their Gospel; instead of the well-trodden path to failure, Chamberlinesque appeasement.

      Well said, Pat.

      In today’s America you are free to believe whatever you choose, as long as it does not offend the TTL. (Totalitarian Tolerant Left).

      Exactly.

  7. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    I was talking to a friend yesterday — just shooting the conservative bull — and happened upon an idea that I’m now rather fond of.

    This doesn’t directly relate to the Scouts, per se. But consider for a moment that the Colonists built their own world, from the fields they cleared to the town councils they peopled to the forms of government they formed — first adapting to British ways and then fashioning a system of their own. Although no system is free of pikers, hangers-on, and parasites, the remarkable thing is (whatever one thinks about the accomplishments of the Indians), they took a wild continent and civilized it, made it productive, and made it generally good…by their own hands.

    Now, consider the world being constructed by all these weenies, wussies, low information voters, emasculated men, ill-informed women, and those who really have the grand conceit that they are “saving the planet.” Much like the Seattle comic chain owner who suddenly discovered that his support for a $15/hr minimum wage was untenable for his business, liberals/Progressives aren’t actually making their own world. They are helping to make someone else’s. But what is definitely not being constructed is the one that is being sold to them.

    “If you like your health insurance, you can keep it.” This is the reality of the world being built for them. They buy into the marketing slogans and then (sometimes) are surprised when things didn’t turn out like they wanted. And this will be the story of America in the coming decades. The society being built (an environmental utopia, a “social justice” utopia, a “fairness” utopia, an “equality” utopia) isn’t going to be what they get. It never is.

    I bare no special grudge against homosexuals. But the world they are being sold is not the one they are going to get. We don’t know what law of unintended consequences will bite next (AIDS was certainly one), but it will. And the marketers at the top who use blacks or homosexuals or “the poor” or whomever for their political ends will easily (as the Left always does) move on. When there is no clear and established principles then principles can, and will, change on a dime. This is the history of the Left. There is always some new villain needed to energy their lunatic cause.

    So they promise “justice” or “equality” or whatever — get the votes from the useful idiots — and the Left wrecks everything it touches. And the low-information voters see little more than an extension of rights (in the case of the Boy Scouts). Shallow people with no real plan that is anchored in reality can only ever destroy things. Nor are they able to see the “plans within plans” of the people pushing the agenda…people who could care less about the Scouts or the mentally-confused children who are the pawns in their game.

    And in the end, these feel-good Progressives and liberals will end up not having built what they suppose they were building. Can they wake up? Will they wake up? It seems doubtful. They have so much of their own ego invested in themselves as the Golden Children — those specially sainted people who are smarter, more compassionate and — gosh darn it — people just like them.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Some of them wake up when reality bites them personally on the rump. But they rarely learn to generalize the lesson (a point Sunny Lohman made in her video about the zombie apocalypse, the zombies being Outer Party Democrats). As for the Inner Party, like Santiago Casares Quiroga, they act in full knowledge of what they’re doing and what they’re concealing from their willing dupes.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        By coincidence (and I’ll always let you know when I steal from him), Rush was kinda-sorta talking on this subject. He was wondering when and if the Millennials (or their children) will throw off the immorality of their elders, much as is perceived to be the common story of the Victorians in the Victorian Age.

        I believe it to be a real question — given the excessive and oppressive administrative state as a backdrop — just how much of a course correction anyone can willfully make.

        But hearts and minds can change. People may begin to openly talk about the intellectual, moral, and governmental rot that you and I (and others here) so plainly so. Who knows? That yute in Seattle who (eyeroll) noticed after the fact that a $15/hr minimum wage was problematic may begin to engage in that thing that, although not unique to humans, is taken to its most refined state of those in Darwin’s menagerie: forethought.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *