By Joseph Delli Gatti
This article was written in response to a LinkedIn forum topic entitled “I am curious as to what the thoughts are among Eagle Scouts across the nation about allowing Gays to be members of the Boy Scouts (link here)”.
Although this topic may cover aspects of Boy Scouting, this is a mature-adult topic. As such, more advanced principles of ethics and sexuality will be discussed. In other words, this is an ugly subject but is of dire importance – so, no children allowed.
Some of the arguers in favor of allowing homosexuals into the BSA scouting program mentioned that they didn’t believe sexuality had anything to do with morality, and that professed homosexual boys could be expected to act responsibly within the BSA programs. This article was written to not only explain that sexuality is an important aspect to morality, but why. It also informally presents some aspects of why homosexuals should continue to be banned from BSA.
For preliminary research, scan these Wikipedia topics and links:
Sexuality as a Part of Morality
A definition of morality, as found in the American Heritage Dictionary, is as follows:
n. pl. mo·ral·i·ties1. The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct.2. A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct: religious morality; Christian morality.3. Virtuous conduct.4. A rule or lesson in moral conduct.
Sexuality is a part of morality. In other words, our sexual practices do have moral bounds (rights and wrongs). If not, why are we opposed to bestiality and pedophilia? Who would ever admit it if they weren’t opposed? Both activities are illegal even today.
So, what about pedophilia – what’s morally wrong with that? Well, I’ll tell you why it’s so offensive – not just to children, but to society as a whole. Laws have determined that pre-pubescent and pubescent boys are too young to make mature decisions such as those concerning sexual relations/relationships (see Age of Consent Laws).
“Carnal knowledge”, a legal term likely originating from the Christian story of Adam and Eve, while geared more specifically towards an actual sex act, denotes that even teaching a child how to have sex is wrong. Carnal Knowledge and mental maturity aren’t the only factors involved, however.
Children Are Legally Unprepared to Make Sexual Decisions
We know that some children/teens make sex decisions and act on their developing urges before they are permitted, and before they are physically and psychologically ready; however, this should not be accepted, tolerated or considered a societal norm. It should especially not be tolerated by parents!
This vital law/rule/principle prohibiting sexual relations among children not only enables children to grow up and improve their mental faculties before making important adult decisions and before acting in a sexual capacity, but in a larger sense, also protects them from what we all know and accept to be abusive relationships.
Children’s bodies (both pubescent and prepubescent) are not developed well enough to safely handle the rigors of child birth, nor are their emotional and mental maturity levels. Children were previously deemed by US law not ready to handle the responsibilities of child rearing (see Age of Consent and topic links on that page). It makes sense that the age-of-consent laws’ age considerations for both physical and mental maturity would apply to both males and females due to sexual intercourse being defined specifically as insertion of a penis into a vagina. Sodomy laws further explained to society that exploration of sexual urges and relations outside of those heterosexual bounds were forbidden by law.
Many of the people who posted on the LinkedIn forum topic mentioned that “boys” are not sexual – neither gay nor straight. They are to be considered non-sexual because they are (and need to be considered by everyone) too young to make mature decisions concerning their sexuality. These people evidently feel that this is a politically correct and safe answer. However, a few of the people who argue this point still split on the topic of whether or not homosexual adults should be permitted to participate in the program.
In addition, if the situation were to arise involving a boy claiming that he is gay, this group of forum participants appears to be also split on how to deal with the situation: ignore, ban or watch over these boys with added caution. What would you expect the answer in the leadership manual to be?
Outside of the seemingly PC answers, even many accomplished Eagle Scouts find themselves lost in a sea of confusion and contradiction, and refuse to respond further – other than to repeat that the “program is about the boys… about the boys”, which says nothing more about their position or moral stance on the issue.
Old-school Sex Laws and Community Support
Before the “sexual revolution”, laws governing sexual conduct were oriented towards reproduction and reproductive relationships. Sodomy laws outlawed practically all forms of sexual activity that couldn’t result in the possibility of offspring (with some occasional minor exceptions or un-enforced instances of violations). A quick click over to wikipedia article about US Sodomy Law will confirm this.
Sex was considered by the God of the Bible and by the US government first and foremost for making babies. The pleasurable and bonding feelings that accompanies this action helps strengthen the matrimonial bonds to keep members of a couple loyal to one another throughout their lives to promote their combined efforts in child rearing (see this CBN news clip).
The BSA included “God”, “morally straight”, and “clean” as guiding principles for all of its scouts and leaders. Leadership guidelines and manuals encourage and require those values. The scout handbook, merit-badges, and awards all require the principles of the Scout Oath and the Scout Law to be implemented into activities.
In the US, sex outside of marriage was forbidden by law until the 1970s (although not necessarily strictly enforced). Anti-sodomy laws, at minimum, proclaimed that the pro-creational powers of both men and women were to be used in a reverent and reproductive way. Special societal recognition and support was (and is still today to a large degree) given to these heterosexual reproductive relationships by way of
- Legal marriage licenses (permission to marry)
- Religious marriage ceremonies (symbolic acceptance from God)
- Public recognition government documentation and marriage certificates
- Protective laws (see here and here)
- Tax considerations
The LGBT and other activists for the sexual revolution seek to nullify this procreative recognition by calling sexual relationships that don’t involve coitus (or procreative attempts) a “marriage”.
I met a military man in 1996 who was prosecuted in a US military court for committing sodomy with his wife. This happened even after the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was in effect. He was sentenced to brig (jail) time and was fined substantially. So, the government was actually enforcing these laws at least to some degree within the jurisdiction of the US military near that date. (Update: click here to read about President Obama’s recent move to remove the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy from our nation’s military.)
Protecting our young offspring through sex and marriage laws continues to be vital to our morality as well as to our societal well being.
These laws not only protect our youth from adult child predators, but also protect children from the potential responsibilities resulting from their sexual relations/relationships. I want to reemphasize that these LAWS, law enforcement, and public conformity have kept our children safe. Violations in the past were prosecuted and punished when sex offenders were caught.
A Shift in Our Country’s Sexual Paradigm
Since the late sixties, the public’s ideas concerning sex have begun shifting to the idea that the first and foremost reason for sexual relations/relationships are to provide pleasure. This is now accompanied by benefits of strengthening a monogamous relationship that serve no purpose outside of selfish pleasure and enjoyment. Sexual relations also can result in the side occasional benefit of making babies for some couples – officially married or not.
Sex laws and practices have deviated from recognizing the powers and instruments of procreation and their intended purpose – laws have been passed nationwide since 2002 to consider anal sex as an acceptable practice. Sexual conduct is now defined by our nation as pleasurable activity – with procreativity as a fringe, yet just a very unnecessary aspect of sexual relationships. To state this boldly, homosexuals are being officially, and publicly recognized in “marriage” by five states around the country.
The nullification and negation of sodomy laws due to the Lawrence -v- Texas Supreme Court case in 2002 not only further testify and favor this newer definition of sex, but greatly weaken and/or void society’s arguments against bestiality and other sexual deviance.
Through Atheism, the relatively new religion of Evolutionism, and through refuting and mocking the claims of God and the Bible, people in our country have successfully protested that pro-creational abilities were obtained by chance or accident (rather than granted by God), and that using these abilities for virtually anything is in turn natural and acceptable.
We have effectively and greatly nullified an important word found in the US Declaration of Independence: “life”. Unfortunately, the US Social Security system, and other economical strategical concepts (such as long-term interest) were also built on the foundation created by those pre 196?-2003 laws and their associated expected results. (see the “2.1 Kids: Stable Population” video)
Because of our country’s decisions to promote the “sexual revolution” above the reverence for procreation, we largely weaken a pillar upon which our promise of financial interest and financial security is based.
Dangers of Sex Education and Abortion?
Sex education has gradually made its way clear down into elementary school – teaching children to act responsibly in THEIR decisions to engage in sexual relations. Condoms are being handed out; fifth graders are being shown diagrams of sex organs and even insertion (even at my own elementary school 20 years ago in California); birth control and safe-sex methods are all taught to prepare our children at increasingly younger ages to make their own responsible decisions concerning sex.
Why are we trying to make our youth ready and responsible for sexual relationships at increasingly younger ages, and why is sexual awareness among our young children and teens being condoned or embraced!? Why are we giving up that parental responsibility and turning it over to our children? Perhaps it’s so that both parents can focus on their primary obligations in the work place rather than focusing on what their children are doing at home, at school, and at play.
As both parents move more and more into the workplace, and as divorce rates have sky-rocketed since the 1960s, the instances of latch-key children and child neglect have increased dramatically – even in the face of a declining reproductive rate in the US. More children are forced to take on greater maturity, understanding, and responsibility for their own care. The idea of children exploring their sexuality at a younger age has gained much more promotion and societal acceptance – even over the last eight years.
In addition to extremely liberal sex education taught in public schools, and parents giving up their supervisory rights to their children, abortion has been legalized. This greatly weakens the argument that protects our children from child predators!
Not only has abortion been legalized as part of the sexual revolution, but it has also been afforded to children. In Washington, a 12-year-old girl may go to the doctor and have the following procedures done without parental knowledge or consent: STD tests and treatment, pregnancy tests, and even abortions.
This essentially nullifies the portion of our age-of-consent laws that state that children’s bodies are not adequately prepared for the rigors of child bearing – child bearing is no longer an issue that a pre-teen faces. Young children and teens are being deemed as responsible for their own sexual conduct by many states to an even greater degree. Parents by law have now relinquished their parental rights in these matters.
These combined aspects of sex education, the transfer of responsibility from parents to their children, and abortion laws have successfully taken rights and responsibilities of children’s sexuality and sexual relations from parents, have deemed children’s bodies adequate for sexual relationships, and have defined acceptable sexual practices as anal sex, etc. Anything goes for anyone at any age.
Now for the big question: What is to stop children from having consensual sexual relations with adults? NAMBLA has a very, very thin barrier to break through now, and it’s all our fault for being passive, tolerant, trendy and modern adults/parents. We somehow thought that becoming more sexually responsible would somehow protect our children from consequences?
Our country went from calling pedophilia an abhorrence that could be prosecuted, from putting these twisted child-abusing perverts behind bars for 20 years, to now, a nearly acceptable alternate-lifestyle practice. … and people laughed at Christianity and it’s “uninspired” and unfounded faith.
The Bible Serves Secular Society
Perverted definitions of “freedom”, blind tolerance towards evil, and rejecting religious principles upon which this country was founded has stripped away the laws that keep our society growing, safe, free, and healthy.
The Bible, upon which so many Christians (and other Abrahamic religions) base their faith, proclaims that sexual relationships are to be kept within the bonds of marriage, that sexual organs have a primary purpose of creating offspring, and that procreative powers should be reverenced by all (see The Bible, Genesis 1:27-29 & 2:24).
Regardless of whether the Bible presents an accurate history or not, is open to interpretation or not, contains fiction or not, proves God or not – the Bible was the guide book for our sex laws nation-wide before the late 1960s, and was the source for the freedoms we have experienced since the inception of the constitution. The Bible Prophets, law makers, and law enforcers are what kept us safe.
The Bible calls homosexuality wrong and an abhorrence, calls adultery wrong, states that marriage is for male and female partnerships only, and proclaims that people who do not take care of their children are responsible for their actions as well as for their children’s sins.
Even non-Christians and non-practicing Christians, by following the laws based on Biblical principles, benefitted and were protected along with their children. In other words, regardless of whether or not US citizens even believe in God or the Bible, the entire nation benefits when guarding and following anti-sodomy laws.
NAMBLA’s Ties to ILGA, Implications, and The Irony
Homosexuality, like pedophilia, was labeled by the World Health Organization as an illness. The ILGA (the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association), officially founded in 1978, was “instrumental” for having homosexuality dropped from the mental-illness list (see the Wikipedia article).
NAMBLA, (North American Man Boy Love Association), a pedophile organization (one of four pedophile organizations that belonged to the ILGA until 1994) sought the same status as its associates – moving from an illness status to a sexual-orientation status. In 1994, the ILGA was told that it could not receive public funding and would lose its UN status as an independant UN consultant if it continued to support pedophilia/pederasty. Needless to say, NAMBLA was ejected from the ILGA. The ostracism of pedophile organizations from this gay and lesbian organization were professed to be based on moral grounds:
Almost all gay rights groups are opposed to NAMBLA and contend that their reason for disavowing NAMBLA has always been their sharing of the general public’s disdain for pedophilia and child sexual abuse (as expressed in issues statements). These gay rights groups reject NAMBLA’s claims of an analogy between the campaign for gay and lesbian equality and the abolition of age-of-consent laws, and view NAMBLA’s rhetoric about “the sexual rights of youth” as a cover for its members’ “real agenda”. – wikipedia.com
The homosexual movement currently focuses the argument for membership in the BSA on the claim that sexuality is not a part of morality, and has been based on the notion that a private organization discriminating against them on the basis of sexuality is not fair. Yet, one of the most prominent gay organizations in the US not only discriminated against NAMBLA based on “moral” grounds (sexual orientation), but also still seeks public funding while excluding pedophiles from its organization. The ILGA is not the only organization to take this position either.
When asked about the ILGA’s decision, gay activist and author Edmund White said, “Our movement cannot survive the man-boy issue. It’s not a question of who’s right, it’s a matter of political naivete.” – see the ILGA Wikipedia article. (emphasis added by me)
Steve Endean, a gay lobbyist for ILGA said, “If you attach it [the man/boy love issue] to gay rights, gay rights will never happen.”
Another conclusion that could be drawn is that the ILGA simply couldn’t survive with NAMBLA and the other pedophile organizations at the time – even though homosexuals may not truly believe that sexual morality is an issue.
Homosexuals Should Not Be in Boy Scouts
To frost the celebration cake, pro-gays would like to allow professed homosexual boys and adults into the BSA program, a nationally and internationally renowned organization with a reputation of high moral values. These values consist of God, community, country, and personal development for youth among others.
The BSA currently has a 0-tolerance policy that has been set by the organization’s top leaders, and that has been proclaimed through the organization’s stances in multiple court cases. This policy appears at times to be enforced to varying degrees and manners at the local level. It’s my belief that when local troops, leaders, and/or boys ignore regulations and the Boy Scout Oath and Law, they begin to lose out on the intended scouting spirit and experience.
To allow these local “exceptions to the norm” to set organizational policy and to redefine/alter the Scout Oath and Scout Law would certainly change the BSA organization and its core values to accommodate a minority set of boys and leaders.
Currently in Scouting, sexual interactions between youth peers is referred to as “peer-on-peer sexual abuse” – and rightly so. Changing policy would not be beneficial to the scouts or leaders who currently participate in the BSA programs and who promote the official BSA core values.
In addition to this aspect, the BSA’s decision would provide great material for organizations like NAMBLA to further prove that young boys can identify themselves as homosexual and can act in a responsible capacity concerning their sexuality among other boys within a youth organization.
While this attestation may sound OK on the surface, it is important to be reminded what can happen when young boys are deemed responsible for their sexuality and sexual relationships. NAMBLA and pedophiles everywhere witness a major victory in their goal to “end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen mutually consenting relationships”. – mission statement of NAMBLA
Currently with the abolition of anti-sodomy laws, anal sex (previously considered sexual abuse – even among adults) is now considered by law to be a societally acceptable sexual expression.
In other words, it’s not considered abuse any more. So if anal sex is no longer considered abusive, what makes it prosecutable?
Views About Homosexuality
Sexuality is a moral issue. Homosexuality is not good for society. Homosexuality has also paved the way and lit the path for other sexually deviant movements – making it much easier for those pedophile and zoophile people to find acceptance in their alternate lifestyles. The sexual revolution truly opens the flood gates for complete sexual freedom – something the majority of Americans don’t truly want to see happen. And what more is needed for them to succeed beyond an endorsement by the BSA and the stamp of approval from society via public recognition of homosexual “marriage”?
The LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bi-sexual Transgender) movement uses rainbows, care-free pink, and cute acronyms to invite acceptance. It uses stories of persecution, discrimination, and other similar civil-rights type experiences of the past to invoke sympathy. On the surface, it asks for nothing more than tolerance, love, and an equal place in society.
During this same time, homosexual movements have sided with bestial and pedophile organizations and causes, and have successfully redefined sexual relationships (and marriage in some states) as primarily pleasurable rather than pro-creational. Homosexuals claim that their sexual relationships can be monogamous, but for the most part admittedly are not. The spreading of STDs are also not unique to homosexuals; however, homosexuals are again admittedly at a much higher risk, and do spread STDs at a much higher rate. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in its January 2009 press release said, “Syphilis, a disease close to being eliminated as a public health threat less than a decade ago, has increased each year since 2000 and remains a serious threat to the health of gay and bisexual men.”
Scare and bully tactics are also often used by LGBT activists to change minds and suppress opposition. The terms “homophobic”, “hater”, and “intolerant” are words often used by homosexuals and members of the sexual/homosexual revolution in a hateful way to describe people who disagree with homosexual relations. Many corporations have also caved to this pressure and threats of public scrutiny. Many corporations now offer gay spousal benefits, and have added homosexuals to the list of protected classes even though not required by state laws.
Strong-arm Attempts of Homosexuals and Other Participants of The Sexual Revolution
Many LGBT organizations and individuals have openly attacked the BSA through law suits, have removed funding, have pressured other organizations to hurt the BSA, and have confiscated use of property to the BSA. All of this has been done to force accommodations for homosexual lifestyles, and to force acceptance of homosexuality among people with strong moral convictions. Religious persecution and mocking beliefs and relationships held sacred to people constitute an opposite to religious tolerance and religious freedom.
In the LinkedIn.com forum topic, every religious viewpoint (and I’m not exaggerating) was mocked, disputed, invalidated, and disrespected by a small group of gay-rights activists. For a group calling for tolerance and respect of ideal differences, it sure doesn’t show any of those qualities towards anyone standing in its way.
The homosexual supporters want to eliminate the portion of the Boy Scout Oath and Law that deal with “God”, “morally straight” (meaning non-deviant) and “clean”. By eliminating these core values from the BSA, the people who currently participate and honor those values would be forced to either participate in a program that denounces those beliefs or to leave the organization. The people most responsible for the success of the BSA would lose their long-term sweat equity in the program. The long-standing reputation of the BSA would have to be discarded in favor of a new “gay-friendly” one.
The majority of BSA participants who promote the nuclear family and who denounce and discourage its obstacles without compromise would certainly be left out of the organization, and would be no-longer tolerated. The true LGBT movement slogan then becomes, “We’re here; we’re queer! Get used to it or get out!”
People who have little understanding on the subject tend to move in favor of the least opposition, embarrassment, and pain. Sadly, this has been on the side of severe error.
What Warrants an Attitude of Tolerance
To tolerate means to endure pain and hardship. Tolerance is not a blanket principle that stands above all else. Tolerance is admirable when it furthers a positive and worthy agenda, for example: the continued long-term good of society (continued life), morals, God and religion, helping people to overcome personal weakness, and accommodating people who aren’t capable of survival without assistance.
Tolerance should not be practiced when it promotes evil, tramples on God and religion, destroys the moral foundation of our great country, makes or encourages people to be weaker or when it helps to unduly oppress the majority.
There is a time for tolerance, and a time to stand up for correct principles!
American, Christian Principles, and Solutions
While I am appalled at the intolerant and careless methods used by these organizations to further the “LGBT” agenda, I am more shocked concerning the manner in which my parent’s generation handled it.
Liberals pushed for abortion in the name of choice and human rights. The results are that a 12-year-old can get an abortion, birth control, and STD treatments without parental consent. Where were our parents during land-mark catastrophes like Roe -vs- Wade? Then again, where were we during the 2003 landmark case Lawrence -vs- Texas?
The liberals also pushed for programs like sex education for young children and early teens in the name of child safety and education. The results of that action are ever-increasing child awareness of sexuality and sexual relations, and a professed level responsibility and maturity of children to freely make those adult decisions. Many schools are even providing the means of sexual “protection” (condoms, etc).
To my parents’ credit, they did fight this, but never had enough support from other single, neglectful, and conveniently ignorant parents in the PTA. More and more adults want their children to learn responsibility at an increasingly early age. Who would have known that it was a child’s irresponsibility, immaturity, lack of education, and lack of birth control that helped protect them from child predators and other potential consequences?
We all have our weaknesses and follies. We all have issues that keep us from being perfect. Homosexuals are not alone in this. Christianity teaches society to “love one another” and to care for one another. It is a religion of repentance and forgiveness, long suffering and patience, humility and charity. Mostly, it’s a religion practiced by example.
Although a very large percentage of the US population is Christian or is affiliated with other Abrahamic religions adhering to the philosophies of the Old Testament prophets, not everyone is religious. However, religious principles, promoted qualities, and God-based rules of conduct can be practiced to a great degree by nearly everyone living in our society. This practice is what keeps society the most prosperous and ultimately the most free. Those qualities and principles need to be re-emphasized and need to be practiced even more in order to fix this long-term predicament.
Suggestions For Real Societal and Healing Change
So, what needs to change in order to protect our children? The previous damage is obvious and has been explained. Harmful and intrusive advances on society are not solely a direct result of the homosexual-led “sexual revolution”, but also from the careless manner in which homosexuals sought rights, and from the Liberal/Socialist agenda.
I believe that we have good reason to hope, and that we possess time needed to fix our mistakes and the mistakes of the older generation. Reversing the damage will be tough and will take time, but everyone can do something.
Taking back the responsibility of making mature sexual decisions for your children is vital. That means that more parental involvement and enforcement of nuclear-family values are absolutely required.
In addition, we can accomplish the following tasks:
- Restrict practices like abortion and abortion rights for children.
- Get liberal judges who “legislate from the bench” out of office and restrict the Judicial Branch’s ability to trump and change law by themselves.
- Remove sex education from elementary and jr.-high schools, and restrict sex-ed in high schools to abstinence-only education – let them know that sex for children and adolescents is against the law! Teach them to go to an adult if they are threatened by peer-on-peer abuse or if they have the desire to engage in it (even consensually).
- Ensure that schools and children aren’t left with the parental responsibility that you should possess.
- Put an amendment in our constitutions that declares marriage as a heterosexual relationship only.
- Re-institute and re-enforce the importance of sodomy laws that restrict sex to the insertion of a penis into a vagina (and re-establish the definition of sexual intercourse)
- Restrict the propagation of pornography (especially on the Internet) and restrict other media that promotes societally damaging sexual relationships.
- Ban participation of professed homosexuals, pedophiles, and zoophiles from your respected organizations like the BSA. Reject the notion that blind tolerance is good tolerance.
- Reassert that we are “one nation under God” by promoting sexual morality, de-vilifying Christianity and the Bible, and by respecting the principles upon which our freedom, prosperity, and safety rest.
- Shut out the politically “Socialist/Liberal” voice in our country that became so vocal in the late 1960s and 1970s (see this YouTube video).
There are certainly many more things that can and should be done; however, the things listed above should help anyone get started.
Remember, you aren’t alone. You have the majority of the country on your side. A tiny movement with a loud voice was able to strategize, find what they perceived as loopholes in the law, and won key arguments with a few key judges – ultimately stomping out anti-sodomy and abortion laws in our country.
Imagine what we can do if we as a majority actually stand up for ourselves and for our families! Stand up for your parental and God-given familial rights, and help us all to protect our children.