The Boy Scouts of America is expected to announce as early as today whether or not it's long-standing ban on gay scouts and leaders will be lifted.
The Family Research council and 41 allied organization ran an ad in USA Today this morning urging the Scouts to stay true to their "timeless values" and not to surrender to financial or political pressures by corporate elites on the issue of homosexuality.
FRC's president Tony Perkins echoes this sentiment on Starting Point this morning, saying that "the question before the Scouts is are we going to continue on our mission or are we going to cave into corporate dollars."
Explaining that he wouldn't let his daughters go on a camping trip with heterosexual males, Perkins says that having gays in the Boy Scouts doesn't "pass the parent test."
"The Boy Scouts have had a long history of struggling with an issue of protecting the boys," Perkins says. "They have not been able to create the perfect environment but they’re doing what they can. The question they need to ask is will this help us and will it make for a safer environment."
Same old supremacist nonsense. A bunch of whining and freaking out over the prospect of 'others' being treated decently.
Ms. O Brien did a drastically poor job at interviewing. A clear indicator of her values......it was almost comical to see her feeble attempt to put Mr. Perkins down. How illogicaly and misinformed can she be of the consequences of joing normal boys with gay boys, our normal sons should not be placed in a dangerous position fearing for their safety. Heaven and hell cannot reside in the same dimension.....but I am thinking she's never read the bible .... it's a battle but in the end Upstanding Morals will Prevail.
Hello, you used to write wonderful, but the last few posts have been kinda boring?I miss your super writings. Past few posts are just a little out of track! come on! etoile isabel marant
It's also the case that the BSA program doesn't actually work for gays. The program is designed as a safe place for boys so that they can "be themselves" and not be distracted by the opposite sex. Since the gay scouts would be distracted by the other boys, and wouldn't be able to just "be themselves" for fear of looking bad in the eyes of potential romantic partners, they wouldn't be able to succeed in the program. Frankly, they would actually do better in the Girls Scouts where they wouldn't be distracted by sexual thoughts.
Additionally the YPT policies of the BSA, which are the best in the world, would fail with openlygay scouts in the program. How do you decide who is the tent buddy of a gay scout? There is no way to answer that question acceptably. You can't put him with a straight scout for the same reason you couldn't put a boy with a girl. You certainly can't put him with another gay scout for exactly the same reason. And if you segregated the gay scouts, you would end up with a lawsuit for that anyway. So it's a no-win situation for everyone, including the gay scout.
if god is a core value of the boy scouts, why in the world would they introduce homosexuality to the association?? That makes no kind of sense. read Leviticus 18:22 "thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an ABOMINATION" the bible clearly makes reference to it and God tells moses this is one of the reasons he is sending the flood. STOP DISTORTING MORALLY GOOD VALUES AND GIVING THE LAME EXCUSE OF DISCRIMINATION.
I am a mother of two boys, ages 9 and 14. The Boy Scouts should not be forced to accept gay men or boys. It's bad enough worrying whether a 'supposed' heterosexual male will do something to your kids in a situation like this let alone a known gay male. My husband and I have had the conversation many times about leaving our two boys to camp without us with ANY other men...even the fathers of some of our friends. YOU NEVER KNOW!!!! As Mr. Perkins has stated, why don't they create their own organization instead of putting themselves in a situation that would make others uncomfortable? I don't care what anyone says, no matter how PC you want to be.....straight boys DO NOT want to be in close quarters with gay boys!!!! I've talked with my 14 year son and his friends and they are fine with having to associate with gay boys in school and in other similar situations but they do draw the line in a case like this where they'd have to sleep near them. And don't call me a homophobe. I lived with a gay man as a roommate for 5 years and have been friends with him and his 'husband' for the past twenty years. I have no problem taking my boys to their house for get togethers and my boys do understand and don't care one way or the other. This crap is getting real old though......leave the Boy Scouts alone!!!
I think Tony Perkins should go pound sand. And take the rest of the intolerant people who think allow gays to be openly gay in the scouts will ruin the scouts. I can assure you that for as long as there have been scouts there have been gay scouts. They just simply hid it of course. And with a record of sexual abuse by "straight, married" scout leaders that rivals the Catholic Priests the BSA has no business moralizing to anyone.
Besides, the national ban only gives the local organizations the authority to decide whether or not they'll allow gay scouts or leaders. So, Tony, you can be secure in the knowledge the scouts will still be able to discriminate and since SCOTUS already ruled it's a private organization and can exclude gays I'm sure that ruling will continue to apply all the way down to the troop level. So no civil suite will be likely to succeed in "forcing" anyone to admit gays.
Mr. Perkins laid out the argument so perfectly. I would have a conniption if I knew a gay Scoutmaster was camping with my son. I would go absolutely crazy. The "parent test," as he puts it, is spot on.
Furthermore, he nailed the next part of the argument, which is that the default rule always favors the more common situation. We don't accommodate one den mother against the interests of thousands of parents and their boy scout children. The Constitution may mandate that result in public situations, but private organizations are totally free to make the sensible decision here.
Absolutely one of the worst interviews I've ever seen. There was no seeking of information or to understand a point of view, only to corral the guest to give Ms. O'Brien the chance to demonstrate her biases. A textbook example of poor journalism.
This was some of the worst "news" anchoring have seen in a long time. Journalists, even hosts, should be somewhat objective and reporting the facts, at least in theory. This woman had her agenda out for everyone to see, smirking and rolling her eyes, tlaking over her guest, interrupting him, putting words in his mouth to make him look bad. Totally amatuer, even though she has been in the news biz for far too long. Clearly she approached this subject and her guest with her personal opinion on display and acted as though she wanted everyone to know that she disagreed with him, and was willign to even be rude to him! Mr. Perkins was polite, professional and calm even while being treated rudely by this terrible host. CNN should get some real professionals that can seperate their personal opinions from the job of reporting on news and interviewing guests! Its like the left's version of FoxNews! Pathetic!
The definition of "tolerance" has changed in America. "Tolerance" used to mean when people of different mindsets could listen respectfully to each other, and honestly discuss their true beliefs and opinions with consideration and kindness. But "tolerance" today in America is no longer defined that way. According to those who try to rule from their TV show thrones and radio airwaves, "tolerance" has become a domineering mindset by a few who – like Soledad, that are clearly attempting to advance a radical and specific agenda. Most "news" has ceased to be true "news", and is more personal opinion and agenda driven. People like Soledad can claim "intolerance" even when someone like, for example, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council on Soledad's "interview" this morning, speaks kindly from their honest and common sense viewpoint. He was raked over for his concern for our children and the possible fallout for the Boy Scouts allowing openly homosexual males to be leaders in that PRIVATE organization. Soledad put words into his mouth that he DID NOT say, insinuating that he was saying something against people who practice homosexuality. He did NOT say anything like that, and was clearly simply stating an honest concern that makes sense! Soledad, why didn't you stick with the topic of WHY he had concerns, instead of making everything into a political issue! Now THAT would be a good interview! What news person can really be taken seriously, when you ask a question and right after you ask it, you interrupt, hassel and sneer at your interviewee? Your facial expressions and way of handling your interviewees you disagree with discredits any weight your opinion might otherwise have when you are so irreverent and unkind. You hardly allowed Mr. Perkins to answer your questions! Why, then, did you have him on – to make him look bad? Therein lies my point of the agenda-driven topics and lack of respect that pervades some "news" shows these days! I for one am TIRED of the "battles" that go on, on "news" shows – just like I have been tired of the political battles between Democrats and Republicans! As with everyone else who has seen your show, I have seen this over and over with many other people you've had on, who apparently don't agree with your viewpoint – to the point I usually end up not watching your show much anymore! Beware, America, start standing up for real respect and decency to each other, no matter what viewpoint we come from! We need to reinstate some Moral Fiber in this nation, or this nation is going to stop being a haven for freedom of YOUR viewpoint!
Starting Point airs weekdays from 7am to 9am ET on CNN. Check in often to join the daily conversation.