Quote:
Originally Posted by August
What mixing genders OR allowing open homosexuality does is completely change the social dynamic of any group by adding a whole new layer of complexity to it and I think in the case of the Boy Scouts it is a level of complexity that is unhealthy and unnecessary. The Scouts are not supposed to be about sex of any kind.
|
That's a fair point but do you think the discriminatory and exclusionary step of refusing access to all gay people goes too far?
Also, how does allowing gay people in suddenly make it all about sex?
Surely it's as focused on sex as the old rulebook was, ie rules about what orientations were and were not allowed. There's your first level of complexity right there.
Also as far as changing social group dynamics, can it not be said that doing so in this case allows it to reflect more accurately the society we live in?
Quote:
Trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. That is what they are there to learn.
I believe anything else is best reserved for learning about elsewhere.
|
Agreed entirely. It's not like lifting the ban on gay people will add the word "homosexual" to that list. Also I think it would serve to underline the "friendly, courteous, kind & reverent" part of the list
It's not as if gay people who want to be scout leaders are interested in anything other than what you mentioned. Blocking them out gives the idea that gay people
can't be trusted not to make everything about sex.
EDIT - I see AVG made the same point but better, while I was typing