Boy Scouts open ranks to gay youth on Jan. 1

Some churches are dropping their sponsorship of Scout units because of the new policy and some families are switching to a new conservative alternative called Trail Life USA. But massive defections haven’t materialized and most major sponsors, including the Roman Catholic and Mormon churches, are maintaining ties.
“There hasn’t been a whole lot of fallout,” said Haddock, a lawyer from Wichita, Kan. “If a church said they wouldn’t work with us, we’d have a church right down the street say, `We’ll take the troop.”’
The new policy was approved in May, with support from 60 percent of the 1,400 voting members of the BSA’s National Council. The vote followed bitter nationwide debate, and was accompanied by an announcement that the BSA would continue to exclude openly gay adults from leadership positions.

I was in scouts growing up. I can’t imagine a fellow scout being a homosexual and expecting to not cause problems in some form.

I’m a Catholic Assistant Scoutmaster in a Lutheran owned Troop. Very happy for this change. I think of the CCC (Unjust discrimination should be avoided)

Most of the homosexual youth who want to be Scouts are probably already Scouts.

I am with you on this. Being a homosexual should not get you banned from everything that goes on in the world. Discrimination is wrong. Period.

[LEFT]The National Catholic Committee on Scouting posted a question-and-answer document on its website, delving into the intersection of Scouting policy and Catholic teaching.
“The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that individuals who disclose a same-sex attraction are to be treated with the same dignity due all human beings … and also teaches that engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage is always immoral,” says the Q-and-A, concluding that the new BSA policy does not contradict Catholic teaching.
[LEFT]The ultimate decision on whether parishes would maintain or cut ties with the BSA was left to individual bishops. Several expressed cautious support for continuing in Scouting.
“As the new policy currently stands, I see no reason to prohibit our parishes from sponsoring Boy Scout troops,” said Rev. Kevin Rhoades, bishop of Indiana’s Fort Wayne-South Bend diocese. “At the same time, it is critical that we be vigilant on how this new policy is interpreted and implemented.”

Read more: Boy Scouts open ranks to gay youth on Jan. 1 - The Denver Post [/LEFT]

also see:

I like the change! You have to be celibate to be in the Boy Scouts anyway. And why should we be advocating isolating gay youth in a decidedly non-Catholic atmosphere anyway? That’s almost the equivalent of throwing their souls away because one thinks the attempt isn’t worth it. We should always provide gay youth with as Catholic of a support group as possible.

Absolutely agree. Unjust discrimination is wrong.

If a boy were actually causing trouble for other boys, that’s another thing, but just having SSA is not a choice and not a sin. Therefore, it’s not something he should be punished for.

They will still discriminate by age and sex (for now) Won’t be long though, and transgender girls will be joining the BOY scouts… Yay!

The only thing bad about it is that some organizations might withdraw critical funding because of this, but otherwise, I don’t mind it.

From a Boy Scout perspective, I can live with it. From a Venturing perspective, it bites.

When I was in school the kids in Boy Scouts kept that a secret as belonging to Boy Scouts was “gay” in teenage parlance.

This shouldn’t change anyones perception of it. :stuck_out_tongue:

Since I consider you a very reasonable poster on subjects where you have a very unique perspective, I would like to ask why, when and how is sexual preference relevant to Boy Scouts’ activities? I was a Girl Scout and as I look back on it, one of our leaders was likely a Lesbian but it was never an issue and we girls frankly never thought about it. Maybe there were also young girls with SSA in my troop or at camp but again, sexual matters were never an issue with girls. I have to wonder why this is even an issue? Are gay scouts now wearing a different badge or engaging in different activities?

I guess I am continually baffled by the necessity to make sexual matters an issue where they are simply not relevant. As I understand it, the majority of boy scouts aren’t even into puberty, much less acting out sexually.

Why is this necessary?

PS that being said, I HOPE they do not allow openly gay scoutmasters…that’s a bridge too far for me.

Hi Lisa. I agree with you that SMGS is a reasonable poster. In response to your point, I think the difference between the gays and lesbians of your time (however long ago that was :slight_smile: ) and the gays and lesbians of today is the vocalness of gays. 30 years ago there wasn’t a gay agenda working to transform our traditional institutions. 30 years ago, the gay or lesbian scoutmaster wasn’t “out” and vocal about everyone accepting their sexual persuasion. That is the difference. Just like at the Catholic high school - the vice principal would not have been fired had he not been openly gay. But this is the age we live in - when the gay lobby is allied with the secular left to transform our institutions. You are correct - it is not about acceptance and “live and let live” it is about radically transforming our society.


Yeah call me old fashioned but I think “Dont Ask Dont Tell” worked just fine when we were ten years old :). I just don’t know why a gay Scout would need to inform anyone of his or her orientation when it’s totally irrelevant to the activities promoted by Scouts. Further they are to be celibate so again the whole issue is just creating a conflict where none need exist. I presume the heterosexually oriented Scouts don’t bring up the subject either so why the need to make this public?


Celebate works fine for Boy Scouts, but I work with Venturing as well. Celibate doesn’t work so well when your youth can be married adults.

Hi Lisa! :wave:

With all due respect to Ishii, he is completely wrong. Think about the Girl Scouts now. It, actually, isn’t at all different than the attitude you have (and that I share) of “sexual orientation is irrelevant to the public service we’re doing.” It’s ALWAYS been that way. But on the other hand, think about how many conservatives have gone running, kicking, and screaming about how, through this lackadaisical attitude towards whether their girls have SSA, the Girl Scouts are “promoting lesbianism” and, as such, exclusionary Girl Scouts-like programs have been instituted:

[Rep.] Morris said he made his discoveries after talking to some knowledgeable constituents and conducting “a small amount of Web-based research.” He said the discussion and research led to his conclusions that the Girl Scouts encourage sexual activity, are a front for Planned Parenthood, and that scouts are encouraged to look up to role models who endorse feminist, lesbian and Communist agendas.

On the other hand, the Boy Scouts, for a long time, has exemplified the masculine over-bravado of “if you’re attracted to guys, you’re weak.” My gay male friend made it all the way to the Scout level immediately below Eagle, but he couldn’t complete it, because he felt the entire time like if anyone EVER found out he was even attracted to men, he’d immediately be thrown out, his accomplishments would be revoked, etc. etc. For a 16-yo kid, that kind of feeling is traumatizing, but it was completely justified. The Boy Scouts policy basically said “if you have SSA, you are not welcome here.” As celibacy was already required as part of the Boy Scouts oath, the Boy Scouts pre-alteration actually went out of their way to ensure that all kids with SSA who maintained celibacy were still not allowed in the program. Any way you slice it, that’s wrong.

It has nothing to do with gay kids being “loud and proud” about their sexuality. As a lesbian kid myself, I entrusted a few of my closest friends about my SSAs. Can you imagine a guy who tells his best friend, ends up having his best friend hate him for it, and then loses his Boy Scouts membership as well from his best friend telling everyone? Why should we be discouraging kids from opening up to their friends about their SSAs? Why should we be removing kids who struggle with them but don’t act upon them? Aren’t we sending a poor message?

In fact, most gay people just want to live their lives in peace. Yes, they want marriage, but so does every single person in this country because we over-glorify marriage as the ultimate goal for everyone. The bakery-suers and Perez Hilton types are the extreme minority in the LGBT community, as anyone who has experience in the community would know. I don’t go around claiming all conservatives act like Silvio Berlusconi or Rush Limbaugh, even though they’re both fairly loud, so why do gay people get stamped with the “oh you’re just a bakery-suer” nonsense from people?

Tldr; the Girl Scouts are still the same organization you’ve always known them to be, but the Boy Scouts have always been much worse and, until recently, have never exemplified the “sexual orientation has nothing to do with what we’re doing” attitude you hold. If anything, their policy has long been “be straight or get as far away from us as possible.”

PS: I agree with you about Scoutmasters being required to either be straight or celibate and not out.

Thank you. I really have little direct experience with Boy Scouts other than they do various “good deeds” at our church such as help deliver food boxes and clean up around the church. We’ve had a couple of Eagle projects that were a huge benefit to our Parish. But I agree, I don’t know what goes on inside the tent so to speak.

I also agree with you that the vast majority of gays and Lesbians just want to live peacefully. Certainly my gay friends have zero interest in marriage or activism. They participate in the County Fair parade with their horses, not the Gay Pride parade. But the reason we as Conservatives point to the GLAAD spokesmen, the Perez Hilton types and the bakery suers, is that these are the gays and Lesbians who are IMO wreaking havoc in our society. I do not begrudge anyone setting up their life however they want it. But demanding others capitulate, change or close their private businesses, threaten lawsuits or protests such as the Chik Fil A issue last year, are clearly not interested in playing nice.

I would certainly be opposed to persecuting or drumming a Scout from the organization because he was suspected of SSA. I just wish the changes were made from within, and based on a balanced approach to recognizing both sides of the issue instead of threats of lawsuits or pressuring sponsors to withhold funds until the Scouts kowtowed to the demands of activists.

BTW my cousin made his Eagle. He was gay but I certainly not “out” at the time. Perhaps no one knew or noticed or guessed? I see the boys come up and explain their projects at church, not spending one second thinking about their sexuality. I’m sorry it’s become an issue.


I totally agree with you about GLAAD, etc. I think it should be noted that there was an apparently massive drop-off in donations to GLAAD after they got Phil Robertson suspended. And I guarantee you that most of the donations to GLAAD are not from the same demographic as Duck Dynasty viewers.

I’ve had a few friends here and there that would get all super-loud about “oh we need to boycott this or protest that” and I just sat there and was like “guys…people don’t need to agree with you.” This happens on both sides of the aisle (One Million Moms, GLAAD, etc.), but honestly I’m tired of these vocal minorities grabbing the spotlight. I highly doubt the majority of people, whether liberal or conservative, gay or straight, etc. have any interest in forcing others to agree with them. I have not lost a single gay friend (though some have distanced themselves from me), even though they know my position on gay “marriage” and the effects of homosexuality on the soul, because they know I also love them to death, wish no ill for them, and would defend them with everything I had.

I, too, wish Boy Scouts had made the changes internally, but I don’t know if it ever would have happened. There are too many conservative Protestant religions that consider it sinful to even have SSAs, and then there is male culture that treats SSA as “unmanly” from a secular point of view. I can’t see that ever not being dominant in an all-male environment. Look at how long it took to get DADT repealed, which involved an almost identical situation as the Boy Scouts (strict laws on sexual chastity, heavily male environment, automatic removal if SSAs were discovered in any manner). And obviously that was only changed due to political pressure as well.

I think masculine guys have an easier time, though I know a few who have said it was still mental torture for them for half their childhood to literally lie to people about who they were attracted to. I’ve known a few who dated beards who were most definitely not aware that they were beards, and I’ve known a few who desperately dated women trying to force themselves to like women. I’d imagine their life would have been much easier if they could’ve been open about their SSA, received an affirming environment, then been taught true Christian morality on the issue and reassured they were not bad or evil in any way. The close friend I was discussing was a theatre junkie, so he had a much rougher time trying to force himself to look masculine. He also has had a few hate crime incidents happen to him in his small conservative hometown. Needless to say, he thinks Catholicism is a joke (considering his neighborhood was mostly Catholic and almost uniformly Christian of some sort, and he received this abuse at their hands). I doubt that’s what we as Catholics want kids growing up thinking…

Wrong about the secular leftist gay agenda wanting to transform traditional institutions? SMGS, when we have here a vice principal fired for marrying his partner - resulting in demonstrations at the cathedral in Seattle - calling for the Catholic church to “change its teaching” and we have the mayor of Seattle of all people, joining those demonstrations, you can’t tell me its all about “live and let live.” Its about trying to transform society - to pressure people to accept things they don’t want to. There may well be gays who are not interested in this agenda. But the agenda exists and we can see it in the lawsuits filed against private individuals - business owners, etc. - for merely standing up for their beliefs, for not embracing gay marriage. I can foresee a time in the not too distant future when churches will be sued for not embracing gay marriages. The secular left hates the Catholic church - and will use every opportunity it can find to undermine its influence in society and make it more like the Anglican church - a church that is increasingly based on relativism.


I agree with this.

What I have an issue with, in general, is what appears to be the ramming homosexual agenda down the throats of Boy Scouts. What people tend to forget in this issue is that were dealing with children/teens under the age of 18. There is no reason to be discussing heterosexual, or homosexual, agenda with these children. Homosexuals have to learn to keep their mouths shut around these children and meetings…just like heterosexuals have been doing for nearly a century.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit