Boy Scouts

FRC's 'Stand with Scouts Sunday' Warns Gays Are Unclean and a Sign of the End Times

Last night, the Family Research Council held a “Stand with Scouts Sunday” event, featuring politicians such as Gov. Rick Perry and Rep. Steve Palazzo, to oppose a proposed resolution that would end the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on gay members who are under the age of eighteen.

The event included an address by pastor Robert Hall of Calvary Chapel Rio Rancho, who warned that the push to end the ban on gays is a sign of the End Times and will ultimately make America “self-destruct.” FRC president Tony Perkins argued that the BSA should fear what happened to the military after it repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, even though all reports so far have found no problems as a result.

Boy Scouts who participated in the webcast described homosexuality as unclean and expressed fears that he might “have my buddy come on to me.”

Watch highlights here:

Rep. Palazzo: If Boy Scouts Don't Maintain Anti-Gay Policy 'Then What Do We Stand For as a Country?'

Rep. Steve Palazzo (R-MS) has been working with the Family Research Council to defeat efforts to allow gays under the age of 18 into the Boy Scouts and appeared yesterday on FRC’s “Stand With Scouts Sunday” webcast. The congressman said he would do anything he could “to protect the Boy Scouts from this popular culture, this liberal agenda that is being crammed down their throat,” arguing that “the Boy Scouts are actually being bullied worse than any group or organization that has ever been bullied before.”

“They are being harassed and at the end of the day they are also being ridiculed by some in the liberal media,” he added. Palazzo asked if America cannot tell the Boy Scouts to “stand strong” and preserve its ban on gay members, “then what do we stand for as a country?”

Later, Palazzo said that the organization must “remove the agitators who are trying to corrupt the Boy Scouts of America and bend to popular culture.”


Rick Perry Urges Boy Scouts to Oppose Gay 'Pop Culture' Like Sam Houston Resisted Slavery

Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) appeared in the Family Research Council’s “Stand With Scouts Sunday” webcast last night where he told FRC president Tony Perkins that the Boy Scouts of America must resist those trying to “tear apart” the organization’s values and replace them with the “flavor of the month”—homosexuality.

He warned the BSA against becoming “more like pop culture” and urged scout leaders to channel the spirit of Sam Houston, whom Perry said lost his governorship because he was “against slavery” and opposed secession.


Truth In Action Ministries Film Warns Gays 'Puts Boys At Serious Risk'

Truth In Action Ministries, which last year produced a film warning that the “radical homosexual agenda” will destroy America like an iceberg hitting the Titanic, is out with a new short film opposing gay members in the Boy Scouts. Featuring Religious Right leaders like Bob Knight of the American Civil Rights Union, Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family, Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, the anti-gay activists warn that gays pose a physical and spiritual danger to children and do away with morality.

Watch highlights here:

Keyes: Gay Boy Scouts Will Force Other Scouts to be Gay

Alan Keyes is out with a new column opposing efforts to end the ban on openly gay members of the Boy Scouts and it is about as dumb as you’d expect.

He argues that if the Boy Scouts change the policy, then straight Boy Scouts will be forced to acquiesce to the “sexual advances” of their gay peers in order to avoid being “viciously accused of unrighteous bigotry.” Once they deny their faith and turn gay, Keyes warns, they will “slip into a whirlpool of compulsive sensual indulgence, moral guilt and spiritual confusion.”

“What is most disturbing is that it uses the young participants in the Scouting movement as cannon fodder in the battle against the natural family,” Keyes writes. “In the realm of moral contention, this deployment of, and against, children reminds me of the way the strategists of terror exploit kids in their perpetration of deadly acts of physical violence.”

We are in the midst of an historically unprecedented campaign to deny and disparage the rights of the God-endowed natural family. Do the top leaders of the BSA naïvely believe that the emotionally charged, personally confrontational situations their proposal will inevitably foment will not be exploited as part of this campaign? Obviously, the policy being proposed will produce situations the powerful elitist forces pushing for the normalization of homosexuality will portray in the worst possible light.

Ignoring the logic of God-acknowledging moral conscience, they will portray these situations as proof of willfully hurtful personal prejudice and unfair discrimination by the BSA. They will seek to prejudice public opinion in a way that lends credence to civil lawsuits and even criminal prosecution (on civil-rights grounds) against individual BSA leaders and the BSA itself. In addition to the erosion of trust and support from people who have relied on the BSA’s respect for the moral tenets of their faith, the BSA will have to devote financial and personnel resources to defending against these charges. Wrenched between these whirlpools of public reaction, the organization could easily go under.

The residual moral appeal of that façade will be used to attract and indoctrinate youngsters in an essentially self-serving, hedonistic and unmanly understanding of human family life, one that destroys the independent moral basis of the family as the primordial, God-ordained institution of human self-government. This will effectively deny the family’s institutional claim to possess God-endowed authority and rights which all other institutions of human government are obliged, by the Creator, to respect.

Thus understood in terms of its likely consequences, the latest proposal for ending the BSA’s ban on homosexual participation in Scouting is a strategic ploy. What is most disturbing is that it uses the young participants in the Scouting movement as cannon fodder in the battle against the natural family. Some youngsters will be positioned to draw other youngsters into situations where, because they react against sexual advances according to the moral precepts of the faith of their fathers, they will be viciously accused of unrighteous bigotry. Or else their vulnerable adolescent emotions will impel them to betray the tenets of conscience derived from their faith, and slip into a whirlpool of compulsive sensual indulgence, moral guilt and spiritual confusion.

In the realm of moral contention, this deployment of, and against, children reminds me of the way the strategists of terror exploit kids in their perpetration of deadly acts of physical violence. I earnestly pray to God to open the eyes of the BSA’s grass-roots leaders and participants. I pray that He will grant them the wisdom to see past false pretenses of compassion and tolerance, in order to recognize a strategy that intentionally and recklessly endangers the moral lives of the youngsters God has entrusted to their care. These young souls deserve better than to be casualties in the battle to force the American people to surrender the unalienable natural rights endowed by their Creator’s provision for the wholesome life of the human family.

Stemberger: Ending Gay Ban in Boy Scouts Will Lead to 'Sexual, Physical and Psychological Abuse'

John Stemberger of the Florida Family Policy Council and the new group, On My Honor, is out with a new list of the top ten reasons [PDF] to oppose a plan to end the ban on gay youth in the Boy Scouts. He warns that openly gay Scout members will create “further public scandal to the BSA, not to mention the tragedy of countless boys who will experience sexual, physical and psychological abuse” by jeopardizing the sleeping arrangements and safety precautions.

Opening the Boy Scouts to boys who openly proclaim being sexually attracted to other boys and/or openly identify themselves as "gay" will inevitably create an increase of boy-on-boy sexual contact which will result in further public scandal to the BSA, not to mention the tragedy of countless boys who will experience sexual, physical and psychological abuse. BSA’s own Youth Protection videos indicate that “70% of abuse to boys is by teenagers”. Two-deep leadership will have to be at least three-deep for units with homosexual youth. The complexity of sleeping arrangements will create a myriad of social and liability challenges. Sexual awareness and harassment training will be required in all Scouting units. The leaders setting forth the proposed policy clearly did not have the safety and security of the boys in the BSA as their paramount concern.

He also argues that it will lead to a loss in support from major church groups, even though the two largest church sponsors, the United Methodist Church and the Mormon Church, are comfortable with the policy change.

If the proposal is enacted, it will gut a major percentage of human capital in the BSA and utterly devastate the program financially, socially and legally. Of the faith based Scouting units, the vast majority of them are Latter-day Saints, Methodists, Catholics or Southern Baptists. Despite what denominations may decide for political reasons, the majority of local churches that charter Scout units will not be able to embrace this policy without violating their religious convictions. The BSA’s own “Voice of the Scout” surveys provide solid evidence that tens- and possibly hundreds of thousands of parents and Scouts will leave the program if the proposal is adopted. The financial impact from such a significant membership loss would be enormous. Camps will close, executives will be let go and properties will be sold off as a result of the vast loss of finances from major donors, private foundations and declining membership.

Stemberger concludes that a young gay man will only join scouting so he can begin “flaunting his sexuality and promoting a leftist political agenda” and “inject a sensitive and highly-charged political issue into the heart of the BSA”:

The Resolution robs parents of the sole authority to raise issues of sex and sexuality with their kids. Parents should have the exclusive right to raise issues about sex and sexuality with their children in their own time and in their own way, in the privacy of their homes; not brought up by other older boys around a campfire. Allowing open homosexuality would inject a sensitive and highly-charged political issue into the heart of the BSA, against the wishes of the vast majority of parents. Under the longstanding current policy, boys who have a same-sex attraction are not banned or removed from the program unless they act out in a manner that distracts from the mission of the BSA. Under the new policy all Scouting units would be required to accept a 17-year-old gay activist openly flaunting his sexuality and promoting a leftist political agenda.

Harvey: Gay-Inclusive Boy Scouts Will Foster 'Destructive Psychological Dynamics'

After writing a column for WorldNetDaily reprimanding the Boy Scouts of America for proposing a policy to lift the ban on gay members under the age of eighteen, Linda Harvey of Mission America took to the airwaves today to warn Scout leaders that such a move will “betray children” and engender “destructive psychological dynamics” within the organization. She alleged that homosexuality is a “high-risk and sinful lifestyle” and that gay scouts will inevitably try to have “physical and sexual contact” with their “fellow troop members who may not welcome this attention.”

The fiction of a fixed homosexual identity has no basis in fact and is terribly harmful, especially so to children. Why would a youth organization betray children so terribly to establish a regulation like this affecting over two million boys in America, leading them to condone a high-risk and sinful lifestyle? Then there’s the adult portion, of course open homosexuals should not be allowed as leaders, as with the president policy but if it’s wrong for adults why wouldn’t this be just as wrong for kids if not more so?

The people proposing this policy are not weighing the most pertinent factors. What exactly do they think boys who are bold enough to label themselves as gay to their fellow troop members will do? Not all but many of these will be middle or high school aged boys open to or actively seeking other boys to have a relationship with. Attraction means attraction; it’s not just a theoretical thing. That will most likely include confessing attraction to fellow troop members who may not welcome this attention followed by possible physical and sexual contact.

If this is voted in, those casting the votes will demonstrate an ignorance of basic facts that there is no science supporting an inborn gay identity for kids or adult. They will ignore health risks, especially to boys, and the destructive psychological dynamics of same-sex attraction within a small group of children of the same sex.

Right Wing Leftovers - 4/29/13

  • It is a genuine tragedy that this country never had the opportunity to witness the class that Sarah Palin would have brought to the Vice Presidency.
  • Even The Blaze is recognizing that Glenn Beck's 2123B timeline doesn't make much sense.
  • Tom Minnery says this nation may soon see a religious revial, in part because "religion makes people healthier" and so "given that health care costs are rising chronically, it may be that discounts on health insurance may be offered for those who attend church regularly or who otherwise demonstrate their religious participation."
  • Bryan Fischer continues to speculate that the military blocked the Southern Baptist Convention's website out of some sort of hostility toward Christians despite the fact that even the SBC says that was not the case.
  • Peter LaBarbera is not happy with news that the LDS church supports a proposal to drop the ban on gay Boy Scouts: "Look, this is a church which is outside of Christendom. Mormons can change their core beliefs and call it a divine transformation. They did it with polygamy; they did it with racism – and now I'm afraid, I'm very afraid, that they're going to do it with homosexuality.”
  • Finally, the AFA's Ed Vitagliano is also a little worked-up over the prospect that the Boy Scouts may soon allow gay scouts: "For the tolerance gurus there is a secular morality that is just as absolute as that preached by any Bible-thumper behind a pulpit. It is a pagan sexual ethic rooted in moral relativism with the taproot deeply embedded in Darwinian evolution. Its teachers have their own unbending laws cut into stone and pronounced from on high. Their prophets hurl jeremiads at the unrepentant, who are relegated to a this-worldly hell consisting of the drying up of corporate funding, the disdain and downright persecution of the civil state, banishment to the fringes on university campuses, and the sneering mockery of Hollywood. For these pioneers of the brave new world, people who practice sodomy are the saints and Christians are the sinners. And humanist stormtroopers have spent the last 60 years hunting down and driving out the infidels."

Harvey: What Will Boy Scout Leaders 'Say To Jesus When They Meet Him?'

Mission America’s Linda Harvey is warning that leaders of the Boy Scouts of America who seek to end the ban on gay members under the age of 18 will have to answer to God for their move to let in gay youth and their “nail polish, dangling earrings and make-up.”

In her WorldNetDaily column, she called such BSA officials “monsters” who will transform the scouts into a “pedophile’s dream” where “the likelihood of sexual abuse is extremely high.”

Congratulations on advancing the sexual anarchist agenda and drawing countless numbers of children into sin. What will these leaders say to Jesus when they meet Him?

It’s a lie. No child’s same-sex attraction should be condoned, but instead, caring adults will guide them toward overcoming these feelings while recognizing a red flag signaling abuse or other disorders.

The Scout board, however, by publicly proposing this change for an upcoming vote, betrays the trust of millions of American boys and the media attention profoundly damages boys’ beliefs about responsible manhood. The ideals of the Scouts are a sham without the recognition that growing into an honorable, mature male means embracing masculinity, not femininity, and eagerly anticipating marriage with a woman and fatherhood in that union.

Who are the monsters on this board who would callously foster and feed the deception that any valid orientation exists except God-designed heterosexuality, and that all else is deviance? Neither Christian doctrine, nor epidemiology, nor social science, nor genetic research supports this fiction. The vote in May should not only say “No” but toss these guys out on their deaf ears.

So early sexual experience is common among youth who adopt the unnatural “gay” identity, but to depict it as positive is another level of depravity. I reported several years back about books recommended by GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. In its reading recommendations, young teens having homosexual sex, sometimes with an adult, were common. And of course, adverse consequences are rare in these stories – no diseases, criminal prosecution of adult predators or emotional trauma. It’s truly a pedophile’s dream, where abused children “choose” to have early sex.

But such stories are now the guidebooks for the new “gay” teen, the troop members our sons will camp out with. Troop should not turn boys away, but deviant notions of sex and gender need to be turned away. And under current policy, they are.

Yet we have this new regressive proposal. Homosexual labels are to be OK for boys, but not adults, one more piece of nonsense. Some Scout leaders will conceal same-sex attractions and yet lead boys who confess these attractions. Won’t some leaders be unable to resist temptation? And predictably, won’t males with these proclivities be drawn in greater numbers than ever to Scout leadership, given the chance to meet willing boys? We would be handing them proximity and access, two basic pedophile/pederast values.

The Boy Scout cover story is that no sexual behavior is allowed in the Scouts, which will, of course, prevent this, as well as an out-and-proud 15 year old from making moves on your still impressionable younger sons. Does anyone realistically trust this will never happen? On the contrary, this policy sets up situations where the likelihood of sexual abuse is extremely high. And the Scout organization is reckless and naive if they don’t see the litigation coming from broken-hearted families whose sons have been victimized either by an older boy or an adult.

Homosexual attraction doesn’t behave by the nice rules constructed by the Boy Scout leaders. Visit a “gay” pride parade to observe what many of these folks consider proud and acceptable behavior in public. The homosexual youth members of your son’s troop may, in all probability, participate in such parades. They may belong to their school’s “gay-straight alliance,” groups that promulgate the myth of inborn homosexual identity, believe any objection to homosexuality is grounded in hate and that Christian conservatives are their enemies.

And let’s not forget the support these homosexually attracted youth will get from the “gay” lobby. The new policy provides a convenient weapon of intimidation to make sure these homosexually identified boys are able to fully “express who they are” within the troop – and nail polish, dangling earrings and make-up are just the beginning. Troop leaders who try to restore order should prepare for legal action.

LaBarbera Warns of Plan to 'Homosexualize the Scouts' Through 'Boy-On-Boy-Homosexual Promotion'

Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality is outraged by a proposal that would end the Boy Scouts of America's ban on gay members under the age of 18, warning in an interview on VCY America’s Crosstalk that such a “treacherous” compromise will inevitably “homosexualize the scouts.”

He warned that “boy-on-boy homosexual promotion” is “dangerous” and that no parent would want their son to have friends who talk about their “openly gay lifestyle” since “the sorts of things that are espoused in homosexuality are not morally straight.”

The Boy Scouts have really made a treacherous move and I think some pro-family leaders, some conservatives and some Christians have said ‘okay I’m already done with the Scouts.’ They are so appalled that the Scouts would move in this direction after they had already won, remember the Boy Scouts won in the Supreme Court, they won their constitutional right to live by their own standard, it was upheld by the Supreme Court. This would just lead to another court challenge that would make the scouts totally pro-homosexual because once you make the compromise and say that you can have scout kids of course the homosexual lawyers will challenge the adults, it will completely homosexualize the scouts, it will lead to more gay activism and I think it will destroy the scouts and their numbers will begin to plummet.

We have to remember that boy-on-boy homosexual promotion is also dangerous. I don’t think any parent wants a boy coming in talking about his openly gay lifestyle. We know from homosexual activism — I’ve been witnessing it for over twenty years — the sorts of things that are espoused in homosexuality are not morally straight. A lot of times you are seeing young people mimicking the sort of immoral things they see in the adult homosexual world. We simply don’t want homosexuality in the scouts in any way.

Later in the program, LaBarbera agreed with a caller who maintained that homosexuality leads to the collapse of society and feared that the Republican Party may soon “sell out God” and support gay rights, adding that such a position will lead to the establishment of a “wholesome” third party.

Caller: We were just recently at “Weekend to Remember” and that statement was made there by a man that had access to a lot of historical data, he searched back through the history of the world and there’s never been a government that has lasted more than three generations from the point of which they advocated and okayed homosexuality.

LaBarbera: We’ve seen this from historians, including secular historian Will Durant who said that America was already in decline and he cited homosexuality and its embrace, and that was way back in the 80s or maybe the 70s. So your caller is absolutely right and it is very sad to see Christian citizens now, including the Republican Party, being forced to choose between their faith and this political correctness. And if the Republican Party thinks the way to get ahead and to get more votes is to sell out God, they are deeply mistaken and I think it will lead to the formation of a more wholesome, pro-family party.

Witherspoon Institute Warns that Schools and Boy Scouts Will Push 'Bizarre and Self-Destructive' Homosexuality

Anthony Esolen of Providence College is out today with a column for the Witherspoon Institute, which funded the very much discredited Mark Regnerus study on same-sex parenting, warning about the perils of lifting the ban on gay members in the Boy Scouts.

In an essay about a young boy named Luke and his father, Esolen writes that “even savages” have rejected the idea of same-sex marriage. He also describes gays as “confused” people who “do bad and unnatural things with their bodies” and therefore “become prone to terrible disease.”

But while Luke’s dad wants his son to join the Boy Scouts, he is worried that troop leaders now have an “eye for young men” while teachers will “cheer when a boy publicizes his entry into the bizarre and self-destructive.”

Esolen warns that the Boy Scouts are transforming into the “Unisex Scouts” and that certain boys will “inevitably be enticed, by loneliness or a trick of the lewd or boredom or a desperate need to be noticed or a despair that they could ever become true men, into the life of the male forever seeking the male.”

I see a boy.

Luke is ten years old. He sports a cowlick across his forehead, and a bright smile.

He is a boy: vir futurus, a going-to-be man. Meaning: He will join other men, brothers fighting to attain or defend the common good. Greater meaning: He is made for a self-giving that is categorically impossible among his male friends. He is made for a woman. It is the orientation of his body, in its sexual form. It is the orientation of his masculine being, developing in a natural and healthy way.

None of this should be controversial, no more than claiming that the noonday sky is blue. Should someone protest, “It isn’t so! I saw it green once, when a tornado was coming,” we’d look askance, and wonder whether he had lost the capacity for normal communication. A boy is not a girl. A boy grows up to be a man. A man marries a woman, for love and for a family: That goal is stamped upon his body. Even savages without a doctorate in philosophy can figure it out.

With his own sex, however, there should be naturalness and ease. So the father, on their treks alone, undresses before the boy as carelessly as he would undress before the dog, teaching the boy to do the same. The meaning is clear: You and I are alike. That is why we can do this.

What about aberrations? When Luke asks about them, because of things he’s heard at school, the father says that certain people are confused, and do bad and unnatural things with their bodies. They become prone to terrible diseases. But when he catches Luke in a tiff calling another boy a sissy, he reprimands him severely. Since he would not complicate Luke’s passage to manhood, he grants other men’s sons the same courtesy, especially when those boys are walking a more difficult path.

He and his wife keep destructive images out of their home. No pitching the tent beside a cesspool. Luke doesn’t have a computer or a television in his bedroom. Why should Luke be taught his morals by people who dwell in a world unparalleled for its combination of depravity, stupidity, luxury, and vanity? Better to play with his little sister and brother, and talk to his parents.

Of course, Luke will not be at home all the time. Lately he has been asking to join an old group called the Boy Scouts. Luke’s father has to think about this.

In a healthy time, not so long ago, he would not have had to think about it. He’d have taken for granted that his commonsense view, that a boy is a boy, avir futurus, meant in the very structure of his body to be for a woman, for the begetting and raising of children, would have been shared by everyone else. In particular, it was shared by the Boy Scouts. For the Boy Scouts were, to quote the pastor whose homily appears in the first issue of Boys’ Life magazine, to “quit themselves like men.”

The boy in the title was, if anything, more important than the scout. If a certain boy in the ranks were caught trying to entice others in things unmanly, and here I am including also the unmanly things that boys attracted to girls do, he’d have been taken aside, or sent to the counseling he badly needed, or quietly dismissed from the corps.

He does not want any word, or suggestion, or tale, or touch, to make Luke’s passage through the straits any more troublesome than it must inevitably be. Most especially does he not want a young scoutmaster with an eye for young men to drop a casual hint about his life, as if it were as moral as eating.

Luke’s father has a right to expect that people will not obtrude themselves into his son’s normal growth to manhood. It is wrong to lay a snare in the boy’s path. It is downright wicked to do so, when the life held forth not only frustrates the natural aims of Luke’s parents and the natural fulfillment of the boy’s masculinity, but also leaves those who are snared prone to an array of terrible diseases, both physical and moral.

He notes with wry irritation that Luke’s teachers are apt to wag their fingers at perfectly innocent things, like cupcakes in a lunchbox, but will cheer when a boy publicizes his entry into the bizarre and self-destructive.

But it isn’t just the pitfalls that the father is thinking of. It occurs to him that the Boy Scouts and he have come to an impasse. There is no reconciling them. The Boy Scouts now proclaim that there is nothing to being a boy, and nothing to the boy’s becoming a man; they might as well be the Unisex Scouts, as they are in Canada, where the scouting movement has collapsed.

What is the father supposed to do? He can recall that better time, that healthier time, and can name several boys he knew who, if they were boys today, would inevitably be enticed, by loneliness or a trick of the lewd or boredom or a desperate need to be noticed or a despair that they could ever become true men, into the life of the male forever seeking the male.

He knows that most of them weathered the storms, precisely because the assumption that a boy is a boy gave them protection, some breathing space, some time to sort out their feelings and to grow up. He wants for Luke some small survival of that better time.

Louie Gohmert Cites Mark Foley Scandal to Defend Boy Scouts Gay Ban

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) defended the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on gay members today by pointing to the scandal surrounding former Republican congressman Mark Foley, who sent sexually explicit messages to several teenage male congressional pages.

Gohmert, who was filling in for Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on the Washington Watch radio program, accused Rep. Nancy Pelosi of hypocrisy because she condemned Foley’s actions but opposes the Boy Scouts’ ban.

Gohmert later agreed with John Stemberger, the Religious Right activist leading the campaign against gay Boy Scouts, when he said that allowing gays in the Boy Scouts would lead to the end of the program and “if scouting dies, part of the fabric of America dies.”

Gohmert: Back when there was a scandal in the House, I guess there was some left-wing group that had found out and then they sat on it for about a year and then right before the election released this story about one of our members from Florida making inappropriate advances toward eight pages, under age. And I heard Representative from San Francisco, Ms. Pelosi, making this speech on the Floor and the thing that really heartened me was because of the things she said I went to the Floor after her and said I am so gratified to know that Ms. Pelosi will now be helping us in maintaining the current position of the Boy Scouts and help us fight off the effort for Boy Scouts based on the things she has said about what’s happened with the page program. But apparently the things she had to say were only to condemn Republicans in an opportune movement that had nothing to do with being consistent when it came to the Boy Scout program…. Any other thoughts or observations, things you would want to encourage our listeners to do after hearing this broadcast?

Stemberger: Yes we have a simulcast coming up right at FRC studios, Sunday, May 5, it’s Stand with Scouts Sunday. We want to get folks all over the country to stand with scouting, especially folks in the program, it’s going to be an hour long program, we want folks to meet a half hour before and a half hour afterwards to organize because we’re going to have rallies around the country. That’s Sunday night, May 5 from 7-8, we want folks to gather at 6:30 and then the meeting will be over by 8:30. It will be a time to meet folks of other like mind. This is our opportunity. Look, scouting is one of the jewels of American culture; if scouting dies, part of the fabric of America dies.

Gohmert: It does.

Stemberger: Those of us who feel passionate about this, we need to fight to make sure we preserve scouting in America.

Gohmert: Yeah.

Later in the show, Gohmert told a listener named Jimmy, who warned the BSA against approving a proposal that would allow openly gay youth to join the Scouts, that homosexuality violates the Ten Commandments and as a result churches that host scout troops won’t go along with the new policy.

Gohmert blamed state and local governments for pressuring BSA to shift on the issue of gay membership. He said they’re accepting of Satanists but punish BSA simply for holding the same belief that “was contained in so many of the references to the lifestyle back among the Founders.”

Scouting has always had people who figured out they were attracted to people of the same-sex but what is being demanded is to be allowed to openly practice this. Jimmy makes the great point that so many of the scout troops, I don’t know what percentage it is but I know in East Texas so many of the troops are sponsored by churches who believe the Ten Commandments and when it says ‘thou shalt not commit adultery’ that means not having relations outside of marriage between a man and a woman. So this would once again be the government—well, government has helped push pressure, there are some state and local governments that have been preventing scouts from using their parks. You can have all kinds of weird beliefs, Satanic or whatever, and you can use the parks but they have made clear if you are a part of the Boy Scouts of America and believe what was contained in so many of the references to the lifestyle back among the Founders then Heaven help you they don’t want you to have anything to do with their parks.

Stemberger: Boy Scouts Will Face 'Physical Abuse' If It Doesn't Ban Kids Who Think 'It's Hip, It's Edgy To Be Gay'

Florida Family Policy Council head and anti-gay activist John Stemberger has created a new group, On My Honor, to oppose the “hyper-sexualization” of the Boy Scouts of America that he fears will take place if the group lifts its ban on gay members.

During an interview with Religious Right talk show host Janet Mefferd, Stemberger argued that if the BSA lifts the gay ban, the organization will experience a rise in “boy-on-boy” assaults and “emotional, sexual, psychological and physical abuse.”

He told Mefferd that kids these days all want to be gay and will then join the Boy Scouts to molest each other.

“It’s hip, it’s edgy to be gay and so they’re all saying they’re gay—they have no idea,” Stemberger said. “Well if scouting sends the message, ‘we’re open for gays,’ you’re going to have so much nonsense going on between older boys and younger boys.”

Mefferd: Now I know you are raising awareness as well about the dangers that open homosexuality within the scouting organization would present, what do you believe the biggest dangers would be if this policy were reversed and open homosexuality would be permitted in the Boy Scouts?

Stemberger: My personal opinion based upon my experience and talking to leaders all over the country and other scoutmasters, it is not going to be primarily adult gay men. Scouting has a very strict child protection program that requires two-deep leadership, that means that no adult can be alone with any child except with their own child at any time, they are extremely strict with it. So I don’t think the primary threat, although it could potentially be a threat, is going to be adults.

I think it is going to be boy-on-boy. My sister is a middle school teacher in Florida and she said, ‘John, everybody in the whole class is talking about ‘are you gay,’ ‘I’m gay,’ ‘I’m gender confused, what are you?’ It’s just like they don’t even know what they’re talking about. It’s hip, it’s edgy to be gay and so they’re all saying they’re gay—they have no idea. Well if scouting sends the message, ‘we’re open for gays,’ you’re going to have so much nonsense going on between older boys and younger boys, it’s just going to create a myriad of problems that really is going to result in further scandal, further disgrace to the scouts, not to mention just the tragedy of the emotional, sexual, psychological and physical abuse that will occur in the program. If even two children, even one child is going to be molested by another boy in the program, that is enough compelling in my judgment to say no, we are not going to do this, there is no reason for it whatsoever.

According to Stemberger, there really isn’t a ban on gays because you can still join as long as you are in the closet.

Later, Stemberger argued that the BSA should fear the example set by the Girl Scouts, which he claims is “being run by lesbians” and has “been really politicized and sexualized in a way that is inappropriate for children.”

Stemberger: Here’s an important point I want to make: currently there are people in scouting who are probably homosexual, there’s no litmus test, there’s no witch hunt to find out who they are; they’re discreet, they’re appropriate, they’re personal, they’re private, they’re not loud and proud, they’re not out there waving the rainbow flag and trying to make a big deal about it and trying to promote gay marriage and all this business. There’s no application question on what your sexual orientation is when you join scouting, the problem is what they’re allowing is open homosexuality. That’s a very different thing; that is promoting the gay agenda, that is promoting politics and it is just inappropriate. When it comes to children we think that sex and politics should stay out of the Boy Scouts, it should have no place in it whatsoever.

Stemberger: We have about two months to really make sure that this timeless institution is not transformed into something politicized thing like the Girl Scouts have, unfortunately where it is being run by lesbians and promoting Planned Parenthood, it’s just been really politicized and sexualized in a way that is inappropriate for children.

Mefferd: Yes, absolutely right.

Richard Land Explains How to Tell Your Gay Friends They Can't Join the Boy Scouts

Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission appeared yesterday on Istook Live, the Heritage Foundation radio show hosted by former Congressman Ernest Istook, to discuss why the Boy Scouts of America should maintain its ban on gay members.

Co-host C.J. Wheeler asked Land how to tell her gay peers and colleagues, “You’re my friend, but I don’t want you to be a Boy Scout leader. You’re my friend, but I’m tired of your agenda being forced down my throat.” She lamented that “it’s a hard world to really walk in out there” for “the average person out there who has friends in these communities,” because apparently life is really tough for straight people who support discrimination against their gay friends.

Land explained that gays and lesbians shouldn’t be treated any differently, except when it comes to their inclusion in the Boy Scouts, marriage and other social institutions. He told Wheeler to tell her gay friends that she respects them but thinks that if they are allowed to join the Boy Scouts they will jeopardize the ability of the organization to “protect children” and consequently “human tragedies will follow.”

Land also explained that “the homosexual activists have gone after [cultural] icons” such as the military, marriage and Disney in order to realize their “breathtaking” agenda.

Land: They do not believe in a live and let live philosophy. Let’s be very clear about what their agenda is, their agenda is to have the homosexual lifestyle affirmed by society as healthy and normal and as a perfectly acceptable to young people and to have those who disagree with that ostracized the level of being Ku Klux Klansmen.

Istook: I do want to expand on the Scouting part but you mentioned the overall agenda, Dr. Land, because it’s not just in Boy Scout’s, we see it in the policy toward same-sex marriage, we see it creeping into something’s such as the ‘anti-bullying agenda.’ What are the different fronts of this conflict?

Land: Well, every front, but the Boy Scouts are an icon and so the homosexual activists have gone after the icons, the cultural icons of our culture. They’ve gone after the military, the most admired institution in American society, the American military; they’ve gone after Disney, the family-friendly supposedly network and family-friendly entertainment venture; they’ve gone after marriage, what can be holier than marriage; now they’re going after the Boy Scouts, nothing is more American than Apple Pie than Boy Scouts. They are going to go after every front, they’ve gone after the cultural icons first but there is no place that they are not going to go and as I said there overall agenda is really quite breathtaking.

Barber & Staver: 'It Makes No Sense to Have Jerry Sandusky as Your Scout Master'

On today's "Faith and Freedom" radio program, Mat Staver and Matt Barber discussed the decisions by the Boy Scouts to delay the vote on lifting the ban on gay scouts and scout leaders as they wondered what the organization could even be thinking by contemplating such a change, saying there is no way that boy scouts can remain "morally straight" if "you have adults modeling for children what every major world religion and thousands of years of history have held to be immoral behavior."

As Staver said, "it makes no sense to have a Jerry Sandusky as your scout master and essentially that's what this policy would open up the doors to" while Barber asserted that gay activists are demanding access to your children, so "what father in his right mind" would let his son join the scouts if he knew that a gay man was serving as scout leader, especially since all gay men define themselves by the fact that they "sexually crave sex with other males" because they are "hyper-sexual":

We're Not Saying Gays Are Pedophiles, But…

As soon as the story broke that the Boy Scouts of America was considering a change in its national ban on gay members, Religious Right leaders immediately claimed that such a move would lead to an increase in child abuse in the Scouts.

But in a desperate attempt to play the victim, the very same conservative activists are now upset that they are facing criticism over their attempts to connect homosexuality with pedophilia.

The American Family Association’s Sandy Rios invited Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality onto her show today to defend her repeated attempts to link homosexuality with pedophilia, all the while claiming that she didn’t really say it, except that she did.

Rios: The push back to me about this topic, I get emails about ‘how dare you say that,’ they say that I say this, I didn’t, but I am indicating it or hinting at it, that all homosexuals would go into Scouting because they were recruiting, looking for love interests, sexual objects. Is that fair Peter?

LaBarbera: I just think there’s so many levels on the Scout issue. First of all, just the whole thing of biology, I have a thirteen year old daughter, I don’t care how noble a guy is I wouldn’t want him out in a tent with my daughter. Do we want these young boys—and the fact is you read the writings of some of these men, I’m sorry it’s not nice, ‘hairless boys,’ you see this in the writings over the years, do we want that temptation in the Scouts? No. Also it’s already on record. We know that homosexual pedophiles go where the boys are. Whether it’s the Catholic Church, the schools, coaches—

Rios: Shall we say Jerry Sandusky.

LaBarbera: Jerry Sandusky, the Boy Scouts. This is already a record. Homosexuality and the Boy Scouts do not mix and it’s just something that’s not appropriate and parents don’t need that worry. You have the fact of the other problem, which there’s a lot of in homosexual life, is this boy-on-boy predations.

Responding to a listener named Lawrence, Rios said that schools should once again prohibit gays and lesbians from teaching or any job involving children because they have “sexual aberrations in their life,” arguing that openly gay teachers “opened the gates to all kind of stuff” like female teachers who sleep with male students.

After complaining that the media refused to cover the murder of Jesse Dirkhising, who was raped and killed by a gay couple in 1999, Rios and LaBarbera said that Matthew Shepard was not a victim of anti-gay violence. Rios said the facts of the case were “twisted and fabricated” and LaBarbera asserted that its “absurd” to think Shepard was the victim of a hate crime.

Like Rios, Linda Harvey of Mission America also played the victim by explaining that anti-gay discrimination is necessary or otherwise people like her would feel discriminated against.

On her daily radio alert, she said that boys will be “preyed upon” and face “mental, spiritual and possibly physical corruption” if the ban on gay members is lifted, which she says “would amount to blatant anti-Christian, anti-common sense discrimination.”

Many would cave in and allow homosexual identity and attraction to be respected and welcomed among their boys; that would mean mental, spiritual and possibly physical corruption plain and simple. Parents and grandparents the nation over are appalled at the irresponsibility of this potential move and the delay is not necessarily a good sign. What the national Boy Scouts may be hoping for is more dialogue, in other words, ways to pressure local troop leaders and national Christian groups threatening to disaffiliate if this new policy goes through. The delay also allows homosexual groups to mount bigger nationwide campaigns to spin the issue as a matter of hate versus love and tolerance. Those of us with experience with these folks know this does not reflect reality.

The Scouts may have homosexuals on staff pushing for this change. We do know that the far-left Huffington Post has been encouraging companies like Intel and UPS to drop corporate Boy Scout donations. Boy Scout board members Randall Stephenson of AT&T and Ernst & Young’s James Turley have been openly pushing for this change, and of course Barack Obama also did so in a recent speech. For our young men it amounts to saying ‘yes’ instead of ‘no way’ to the idea of two guys dating, kissing and even having sexual contact. It means leaders who have these attractions. It’s a matter of saying ‘yes’ to other boys in their troop calling themselves gay. A boy in these new homosexually-affirming troops won’t be able to object or say it’s not acceptable nor respectable. In other words this policy would amount to blatant anti-Christian, anti-common sense discrimination. It’s also a threat to boys who may be preyed upon by their own peers or older boys or by adults, all of whom would have more access to those whom they are attracted.

Rep. Palazzo Urges the Boy Scouts to Maintain Ban on Gay Members

Rep. Steve Palazzo (R-MS), best known for voting against Hurricane Sandy relief after pushing for federal aid after Hurricanes Katrina and Isaac for his district, is now championing the opposition to any change in the Boy Scouts of America’s policy on gay members. In an interview last week with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, who has repeatedly linked homosexuality to pedophilia, Palazzo warned that liberals are “using our very culture against us” and that “it’s time for the silent majority once again to step into the fight and protect America from the direction it’s heading.”

Palazzo: Conservative Christians across America have to wake up to reality that the liberal, the very well organized liberal base of this country is very organized and they are using our very culture against us. We have to stand up and have our voices heard. I know it’s difficult because people, you know they get up, they send their kids to school, they go to work, Friday nights they’re at the ball field, Saturday’s they’re in the yard, Sunday’s they’re in church, but if you don’t like the way this country is going and the direction it’s going down then it’s time for the silent majority once again to step into the fight and protect America from the direction it’s heading.

The congressman compared his efforts to maintain the BSA’s ban on gay Scouts to fighting in the Marines and accused President Obama and “his highly organized liberal machine” of having “unfairly attacked” the organization. “These people who are out there protesting and petitioning, I don’t think they care one thing about the Boy Scouts of America” and want the organization to fail, Palazzo said.

Of course, Palazzo endorsed Mitt Romney, who also urged the BSA to lift its ban on gay members.

Palazzo: I guess the Marine in me is you know when we hear gun fire we don’t run from it we run towards it, we want to help people whether they’re our fellow Marines or whether someone’s been innocently in the crossfire. That’s one of the reasons I’ve engaged in this conversation, I’m just not wired to stand by and watch an organization that wasn’t doing anything be unfairly attacked by Obama, which I’m pretty safe to say he was probably never a Scout, and his highly organized liberal machine. You made an example of Canada; Canada did something like this and within five years fifty percent of the membership has declined. These people who are out there protesting and petitioning, I don’t think they care one thing about the Boy Scouts of America and in fact I think they would like to see the organization probably go the way of a lot of other faith and family based organizations have gone in the past ten years.

Perkins: What prompted you to weigh into this? I will say I’ve actually talked to a few members, actually some more on the Senate side, encouraging them to weigh in and there is a little reluctance on some. So what prompted you to step in?

Palazzo: You know I’ve jumped out of C-130s before, I jumped out of a few Hueys; maybe I’m just not afraid of weighing in on things that are extremely important to me. That’s the way I’m wired as a parent of three young children, as a former Boy Scout, Cub Scout, whose actually benefited from the values and principles this organization espouses to just say listen I’m tired of watching organizations be unfairly attacked.

In a letter to the BSA board [PDF], Palazzo attacked gay rights advocates who he said “only seek to impose their liberal agenda with reckless disregard of the impact that this significant membership policy change would have on our children.”

I urge the Boy Scouts of America to refuse to give in to peer-pressure from politicians and media outlets by allowing openly gay members and adults as part of the organization. They only seek to impose their liberal agenda with reckless disregard of the impact that this significant membership policy change would have on our children. They fail to recognize that such a significant change to membership policies would compromise the overall message of the Boy Scouts, undermine its spiritual principles, and create conflicting membership policies among local chapters.

Newcombe: Opposition to Boy Scouts' Gay Ban Part of 'Mad Dash Toward Gomorrah'

Jerry Newcombe of Truth in Action Ministries warns that if the Boy Scouts of America “succumb to the tentacles of political correctness” and end the national ban on gay membership then they will join society’s “mad dash toward Gomorrah.” He argues that the debate over the discriminatory policy shows “we lost our common sense as a society” and fears there will “come a time when many parents (single or married) will avoid the Scouts because they can’t be sure if their child will be safe.”

In 1996, the late Robert Bork wrote a book entitled, "Slouching Toward Gomorrah." But today, we’re not slouching toward Sodom and Gomorrah, we seem to be in an all-out sprint.

As a former Boy Scout (not very advanced, for our troop fell apart after a short while), I’ve marveled how all these years, the Boy Scouts have stood firm. But now there’s intense pressure on them to cave into the gay movement, just as about every other group has in society, even many of our churches (despite what the Bible has to say about homosexuality---including redemption. Thankfully, there are thousands of ex-homosexuals alive today, changed by the Gospel).

As to the Boy Scouts, without officially allowing gay scoutmasters, isn’t it true that there have been many cases of molestation of boys by scoutmasters? Many lawsuits have been filed.

Wouldn’t opening up the Boy Scouts to explicitly gay scoutmasters increase the chances of that happening---not that all gays would do that? Have we lost our common sense as a society? Must all private, voluntary organizations today succumb to the tentacles of political correctness?

A lot of single parents struggle to provide positive influences to their children. The Scouts provides an exemplary, affordable outlet and means by which many of these young boys can find positive male role models. Will there come a time when many parents (single or married) will avoid the Scouts because they can’t be sure if their child will be safe? We should speak out before it’s too late. (The Boy Scouts number is 972-580-2400.)

In his book, "Slouching Toward Gomorrah," Robert Bork writes, “If we slide into a modern, high-tech version of the Dark Ages, we will have done it to ourselves without the assistance of the Germanic tribes that destroyed Roman civilization.” (p. 4).

Bork adds, “We are living through a cultural collapse, and major corporations are presiding over that collapse and grabbing everything they can on the way down.” Corporations? “Presiding over the collapse?”

He also notes: “The upshot is that American popular culture is in a free fall, with the bottom not yet in sight. This is what the liberal view of human nature has brought us to….There is an eager and growing market for depravity, and profitable industries devoted to supplying it.” (p.139).

Will nothing slow down society’s mad dash toward Gomorrah?

Rios: Opponents of Boy Scouts' Gay Ban Should Pay for Child Abuse Cases

The American Family Association’s Sandy Rios today continued to press the Boy Scouts of America against opening the organization to gay members on her radio show. She said that opponents of the ban like AT&T CEO Randall Stevenson, Ernst & Young CEO James Turley and Mitt Romney (!) who are affiliated with the BSA should be forced to pay for any future settlements of all the child abuse cases that Rios claims will be a consequence of having openly gay Boy Scouts.

I think I have a solution, I just thought of it this morning. I think these guys, let’s put Mitt Romney in there, and let’s put the guy with Ernst & Young whose name is James Turley, and let’s put Randall Stevenson the CEO of AT&T, and any of the other organizations or corporate sponsors who are pushing the Boy Scouts for this policy change. I think actually we might let this go through with the stipulation that whatever lawsuits are brought from now until the end of time against Boy Scout leaders who have sexually molested their Scouts, that they personally are responsible to pay them. Let’s go after Mitt Romney, let’s go after the guy at Ernst & Young, let’s go after Randall Stevenson at AT&T, let them write a check and just say, ‘I believe in this so much that I am willing personally to cover any costs on the outside, ridiculous chance that some Boy Scout should be molested by a gay Scout leader or seduced. If there is any harm then I’ll pay, I will pay.’ If they are willing to sign that statement, go for it. While we’re at it, we should have AT&T and all the other organizations like Ernst & Young that are pushing for this put their corporate—just think of all the money, the potential of lawsuits.

The AFA has even called for Stephenson to resign from the BSA board for “using his corporate influence to bully the BSA into gay assimilation,” and joined a whole host of Religious Right groups demanding that both Stephenson and Turley step down.

Along with the AFA, the coalition includes ex-gay groups like the Restored Hope Network and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX) in addition to Mat Staver’s Liberty Counsel; Rick Scarborough’s Vision America; Scott Lively’s Abiding Truth Ministries; Linda Harvey’s Mission America; Peter LaBarbera’s Americans For Truth About Homosexuality; Brian Camenker’s MassResistance... and the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, which apparently still exists.

Erik Rush: Supporting Gay Rights like 'Capitulating to a Developmentally Disabled Child'

Erik Rush writes today at WorldNetDaily that equality for gays and lesbians endangers “our very survival.” Rush has previously issued warnings about President Obama and his death squads, and even claimed that gay rights advocates will usher in the next Holocaust. In today’s column, Rush says that homosexuality is a “choice” that represents a “clear and present danger” to society. He calls same-sex marriage a “farcical instrument of societal destruction” that consists of “monogamous homosexual couples playing house.” Rush even equates support for gay rights to “capitulating to a developmentally disabled child who wants to play with matches simply because they have been persistent in their requests to do so.”

Private organizations that ostensibly have the right to discriminate all they like have been placed under tremendous pressure in recent years by a militant homosexual lobby that wishes to normalize the popular perception of homosexual behavior. I am convinced that many of its “true believers” aren’t even aware they are merely pawns of the radical left, but given the latter’s tenacious modus operandi, otherwise intelligent, conscientious people have nonetheless subscribed to the prevailing propaganda proffered by an agenda-driven press and the homosexual lobby.

Then, there’s the ongoing discussion and legislation relative to homosexual “marriage.” Like black Klansmen and male sorority sisters, “gay marriage” simply doesn’t exist. Oh, we have monogamous homosexual couples playing house, and certain states issuing marriage licenses to them, but there’s no marriage there. This is because marriage is not a civil union; it’s an ordained one.

I continue to find this amusing, despite the clear and present danger it represents to our culture. Here we have the opponents of this farcical instrument of societal destruction actually engaging in the debate over whether or not to “allow” something that simply doesn’t exist.

In the case of the Boy Scouts of America, they have simply bought into – or very nearly bought into – the aforementioned pro-homosexual propaganda. Here, we have the fact that homosexuals do not account for the percentages that activists tout; in reality, 1 to 3 percent of the overall population is probably fairly accurate. The entertainment media and the press would have us believe that it is closer to 10 percent, and if you watch television, you’re likely to surmise that every third person you set eyes on is homosexual. 

There’s much more, of course: The widespread myth that homosexuality is normal rather than aberrant, that it is hard-wired into individuals rather than being a persuasion or choice, that it is not harmful to society, and that it is not harmful to children. One particularly dangerous fallacy advanced by homosexual activists is that pedophiles (such as those who have been charged with molesting Boy Scouts over the years) are not homosexuals.

These submissions against better judgment are analogous to capitulating to a developmentally disabled child who wants to play with matches simply because they have been persistent in their requests to do so. Obviously, the child does not know better; as the developmentally sound individual present, it is that person’s responsibility to refuse his or her requests, not defer to them.

Everything I have described here is indicative of a very dangerous intellectual indolence that reflects either a weak moral constitution on the part of many Americans, or a kind of acknowledged apathy wherein individuals realize we are on the road to ruin, but have reconciled themselves to helplessness. They are as yet unaware that the stakes encompass far more than civil rights or the economy; they will determine our very survival.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious