You misrepresented my claim, so I corrected you. As for the "passage" that actually proves my actual claim, I told you: item 1 of the Scout Law. Please take the time to actually read my posts if you are going to "respond" to them. If you had read my previous post you would understand why this isn't an intellectually honest complaint. Try again. I guess if actually reading my posts is too much to hope for than Google is far too much to hope for. Item 1 of the Scout Law is "Trustworthy." Start here if you want: http://ascoutis.org/trustworthy.php Meanwhile, back in reality, they were always there, they were just closeted. This isn't rocket surgery. Anyone who got only sexual exclusion out of scouting wasn't much of a scout. So far you "explanations" have consisted of blatant misrepresentations and refusals to understand the posts you are "responding" to.
Did you know that men are more likely to be child molesters than women? Lets ban men from all child care positions. Let me refute myself. People are innocent until proven guilty. Just because a few men are child molesters doesn't mean that we should treat all men as if they are child molesters without evidence. You can't judge individuals based on general trends among a tiny minority of offenders.
They don't seem to. Any research done on it shows that 3% of homosexual men molest children. That's the exact same percentage of heterosexual men that molest children.
"Boy Scouts of America may file for bankruptcy" how does a non-profit like this go BK, what kinda debt did they have?
nothing to do with the left, they borrowed too much money, the question is what did they borrow money for?
Fair enough. The source contains a lot of literature, hence my selection and copy of this excerpt. If you want to read it directly from the source, there are headings to the left. I picked this from the heading "Other approaches" about the fifth one down.
There are rules in place to safeguard such things from happening. If a local troop failed to observe the rules, then anything can happen. It's funny you keep bringing up that gays are danger to boys but say you are not associating pedophiles with gay. BSA's policy on gays is a recent phenomenon, so how do you explain 1965 to the in between time??
The scouts are considering bankruptcy due to sexual abuse scandals — just like their old religious masters in the churches — not due to them *gasp* accepting gay children instead of damming them to hell like the good christofacists demanded. I for one am glad the church stopped funding them, every moral organization should sever ties with all religious organizations that hide child predators and preach hatred. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...y-file-bankruptcy-due-costs-sex-abuse-n947576
The BSA allows gay as part of the leadership. If a CO refuses, they will face a discrimination lawsuit. No if, but, and or about it.
LOL....are you dissing one of your fellow RWer as well?? US Conservative is an Eagle Scout as well. You guys are pathetically hilarious.
Thank you for this. I will dig into more but from the opening couple hundred words it reads like agenda science, an apologia. My primary contention stands. No recent research on any area of gay/str8 differences will be funded or published. It's untouchable. There's also the 'file drawer' effect, where research intended to show no differences that fails, will be disposed of without publication. This is very popular in the leftist social sciences when the agenda de jour isn't confirmed through 'experimentation'.
The LDS church splits away totally from Scouts BSA at the first of the year. LDS are presently about 20% of the BSA membership.
that is why I took out the excerpt that I did. It refers to surveys which aren't hard science but it's data. Yes the politics surrending it makes it impossible to do any objective research. I'm going by what I presented.