Obama: The Boy Scouts Should Admit Gay Members

scout640_s640x427

The President weighs in on the Boy Scouts and homosexuals, and I find myself agreeing with him.

The Boy Scouts are, of course, a private organization and set whatever membership standards they want, but they seem to be moving toward acceptance of gays and that’s a good thing. Because there’s no good reason not to, other than unfounded and spurious notions about homosexuals being unsafe around children and outright bigotry.

But the Boy Scouts also represent another lesson for Americans. We’re often quick to jump to public policy solutions for every issue. There is always a push to pass “human rights laws” to outlaw discrimination by private organizations and businesses. The Boy Scouts, specifically, have been the target of discrimination lawsuits and here in North Dakota we’re considering laws expanding existing anti-discrimination laws to gays.

Yet, as we’re seeing with the Boy Scouts, such laws are unnecessary. Social pressure is enough. The Boy Scouts are looking to, and probably will, adapt to our changing national values lest they see their proud organization shrivel into irrelevance.

It just goes to show that not every social problem needs a public policy solution.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Patrick R. Pfeiffer

    “The Boy Scouts are, of course, a private organization and set whatever membership standards they want, but they seem to be moving toward acceptance of gays and that’s a good thing. Because there’s no good reason not to, other than unfounded and spurious notions about homosexuals being unsafe around children and outright bigotry.”
    I”m forced to disagree with the above assertion that begins your article.
    I can think of many reasons a parent would not want to have their young boys in close quarters with openly gay children or worse; adult leaders that do not involve irrational fear or bigotry.

    • salvagesalvage

      Ah, now this is more like it!

      So what are those reasons of fear and loathing the gays that is not irrational or bigotry?

      • LibertyFargo

        Would you want your teenage daughter on a weekend camping trip with a young man who is attracted to women? I wouldn’t. Is this any different? It that bigoted? It seems like common sense to me and doesn’t come from “hate” but reality.

        Furthermore, a private organization should be able to hold its own standards without being accused of bigotry. Should it not? Should a liberal organization or even an orthodox Jewish or Muslim organization be forced to have in its ranks an evangelical Christian because of fairness? What about a pro-homosexual group being forced to have a Catholic on their board of directors who is vehemently opposed to their position on homosexuality? That would be ridiculous. But too often, in cases like this, Christian organizations on campuses and, in this case, the Boy Scouts are being strong armed (thorough public shaming and name-calling) to change their position. So much for free-speech and freedom of religion.

        • salvagesalvage

          >Would you want your teenage daughter on a weekend camping trip with a young man who is attracted to women?

          Uh yes? He’s going to rape her? She’s going to rape him? Do you think it’s possible for a man and woman to be in close proximity without having sex? I’ve actually witnessed the phenomenon of sexually attractive people not having sex with each other in camping and other situations.

          >It seems like common sense to me and doesn’t come from “hate” but reality.

          Yes, gay people can’t be around children because they’ll try and have sex with them if they ever go into the woods.

          Yes, that is common sense.

          >Furthermore, a private organization should be able to hold its own standards without being accused of bigotry.

          No, a private organization can be as bigoted as they like but they are not free from being called on that bigotry. And if the everyone saying “Wow, what a bunch of *ssholes” makes them stop and think and go “Yeah, we are being *ssholes.” And they stop, cool. That’s the free market at work.

          >Should it not? Should a liberal organization or even an orthodox Jewish or Muslim organization be forced to have in its ranks an evangelical Christian because of fairness?

          Uh, do you think that is likely to happen? See if your augment is based on a scenario that never happens? It’s probably not a strong argument.
          >What about a pro-homosexual group being forced to have a Catholic on their board of directors who is vehemently opposed to their position on homosexuality?

          So being in the Boy Scouts is like being on the Boy Scouts board of directors?

          Do you have any more apples that you would like to compare to an orange?

          >That would be ridiculous. But too often, in cases like this, Christian organizations on campuses and, in this case, the Boy Scouts are being strong armed (thorough public shaming and name-calling) to change their position.

          Yes, they are, it’s pretty darn cool.

          >So much for free-speech and freedom of religion.

          So because the Boy Scouts are being pressured to allow gays and Christian organizations are… something the government is stopping you from saying stuff and you can no longer worship your god?

          Can you connect those dots a bit more please?

          • LibertyFargo

            I said nothing of “rape” only of appropriateness of relationships in adults/children when we’re talking about attraction, etc. How many male, heterosexual girl scout leaders do you know? You made the jump to “rape” not me. I also didn’t accuse anyone of anything. You seem to be the one jumping the gun on that one…

            You don’t have to like it and yes, you can call someone a name if you want. That is the beauty of a free country. Call the scouts (or any other group you disagree with) whatever you like.

            Did you know that there are Christian groups at PUBLIC universities (student lead) that are unable to become student groups because they won’t allow an atheist or someone who disagrees with their particular moral code to be student groups? Did you know that? But we don’t hear about Student lead muslim groups being denied access because they wouldn’t allow a jewish member? You think this doesn’t happen?

            My comparison was private organization to private organization… apples to apples.

            There is a bakery owner in Oregon who is currently being sued (under fairness/discrimination laws) because he refused to make a cake for a homosexual couple. Should not a private individual, business, corporation, organization be allowed to make its own rules? Can you tell me that you don’t think that this will eventually come down to a forced legal issue?

          • salvagesalvage

            > only of appropriateness of relationships in adults/children when we’re talking about attraction, etc.

            Huh? That doesn’t explain anything. What is the problem with your teenage daughter on a weekend camping trip with a young man who is attracted to women?

            >Did you know that there are Christian groups at PUBLIC universities

            No, what are you talking about, can you provide a link?

            >There is a bakery owner in Oregon who is currently being sued

            They are not currently being sued but they may face legal sanction for refusing service on discriminatory grounds.

            I have mixed feelings about these sorts of things, on one hand protecting minority from petty discrimination is a nice firewall against it being done on a large scale but on the other hand I dislike legislation that tells people they have to do something. Generally the law should say only what you can’t do with exceptions of course.

            I’m not 100% sure this is an exception.

            Part of the problem is I don’t understand what kind of bizarre god would care if one of it’s followers made a cake for gay people. It’s actually pretty retarded.

          • LibertyFargo

            >> Huh? That doesn’t explain anything. What is the problem with your teenage daughter on a weekend camping trip with a young man who is attracted to women?

            I guess we just have a different view of appropriateness. No i would not be ok with my teen/pre-teen daughter on a camping weekend with a male leader of whom I may or may not know very well. The potential for something inappropriate or even the appearance/misunderstanding of inappropriate would be enough for me in my care for a young woman/girl.

            The university story is second hand but from a good friend. I have a friend who was a TA/Grad Student at a public University who was spearheading a student-led Christian prayer group and they were denied “student org” status because they would not allow an atheist to apply for a leadership position in the group. The whole thing was a ruse, the atheist student didn’t want to actually be in the group but to prove a point. This was a number of years ago… I can’t find a link from the local paper online.

            The point is that YOU want to claim that the Boy Scouts are being discriminatory yet unwilling to recognize that the call for “fairness” is a ridiculous claim used as a ruse for “censorship of ideas that are not popular.” I get that you don’t agree with the current position of the scouts but they should be allowed to hold to that position. You say they “can” on one hand and then skewer them with the other.

            You are right on the bakery owner in Oregon. He hasn’t been sued… yet. But it has already made national headlines. However there are other similar cases in other states that have gone to court based on anti-discrimination laws and that is silly.

            >>Part of the problem is I don’t understand what kind of bizarre god would care if one of it’s followers made a cake for gay people. It’s actually pretty retarded.

            You can have your opinion but an ad hominem attack on someones beliefs as being “retarded” without interacting with the person or their beliefs, doesn’t bode well for you making your case.

            Look, we can agree to disagree… I’m ok with that. We can have wildly different views on kids camping with adults or our view of God… and, to your first reply, you are right in that freedom of speech doesn’t mean that I am free from rebuttal or even ridicule, however preaching “tolerance” on one hand and then condemning another as a “bigot” smacks of plain old hypocrisy.

          • salvagesalvage

            >he potential for something inappropriate

            That potential exists anywhere anytime and anyplace however you do know that real life isn’t like a porno right? See it’s this sort of bizarre fear and loathing of sex that leads to women being wrapped up in burkas.

            >The university story is second hand but from a good friend.

            Ah, well let me know when you have an actual example.

            There is no censorship, the Boy Scouts can do as they please but they’re not free from the fallout. People are finally realizing that being gay is not a big deal and certainly not grounds to say you can’t do something. It’s that simple.

            >anti-discrimination laws and that is silly.

            They can be but like I said I’d rather they go silly one way towards equal treatment for all than the other way.

            And sorry, if you refuse to bake a cake for someone because you believe a mythological character hates them you are a retard.

            That’s a bigotry I am comfortable with expression but to be clear I lean towards them being allowed to refuse to bake a cake because they think it will upset their god without any lawsuit. Nor do I believe in anyway that they should be refused anything on the grounds of their deeply silly beliefs so no hypocrisy.

            Look the baker and anyone else can hate the gays all they like but history has taught us we need to keep on eye on that hatred otherwise it can get out of control.

            But I will call them silly.

          • LibertyFargo

            Again you mis-construe my words. I don’t have a fear and loathing of sex nor do I view life as a “porno.” I’m not sure what caricature you’re envisioning but I think you are assuming too much. There is a reason there aren’t male girl scout leaders taking pre-teen girls on camping trips… there is a reason that you have male-counselors in male cabins and female counselors in female cabins at just about every summer camp in the country. I DO think this is a matter of common sense, but hey, we are free to disagree.

            I DO have an example but I’m sorry I can’t produce a news clipping from an event 6 years ago. The point I was trying to make is that there is an anti-christian bias that seems to be creeping into the public square and is already seen in parts of public education, including at the university level in some areas. Time will tell where the culture actually lands.

            Look, we don’t have to keep going around on this. We likely won’t agree via blog-comments discussion. But come to grips with your hypocrisy.

            Your essential point is “be tolerant of everyone”and then,

            >”And sorry, if you refuse to bake a cake for someone because you believe a mythological character hates them you are a retard.”

            Why do you assume it is hate? Why do you speak with distain and speak down to someone who believes in God… Just because you don’t? You are proving the point that too often the cries for tolerance aren’t really for tolerance but for acceptance of a particular belief. Which is exactly what you are accusing this baker, or me, or anyone else who has a different view of homosexuality than you do. I don’t hate anyone. really. I don’t. But I can’t prove that to you unless I agree with you on this issue apparently.

          • salvagesalvage

            Sure, Girl Scouts are for girls and the separation of sexes at a summer camp is obviously standard but that still doesn’t explain your original scenario or why gays can’t be in scouts.

            There is no anti-Christian bias in America, try and get elected without being a Christian. What there is however is a rise of atheism as more and more people realize that maybe the mythology of a Bronze Age tribe may not be the best source of morality and reason.

            I assume its hate because it is. Your god demands the death of gays, that isn’t an expression of hate?

            I speak with disdain to theists because they believe ridiculous things, I would have the same disdain for Scientologists, Truthers, people who think the world is flat, people who think the month they were born in affects their fortune and anyone else who believes silly things to be true. To be clear I would take a bullet for their right to believe these things, to practice whatever insane religion they like and would do nothing to prevent them from indulging. However I will mock, I will point out the illogic and other negative aspects.

            I have no idea if you hate gays but you seem to think that they do not deserve rights or to be treated as equals. I think gay sex is gross, I cannot begin to understand why anyone would want to have sex with a man, that includes women. But that doesn’t mean I can deny their love, deny them any and all rights that I enjoy or even declare what they do is any of my business.

            The baker doesn’t have to like the gays on any level but when they start to deny them service I can’t help but think that wrong and the very thin end of a very dangerous wedge.

          • slackwarerobert

            Did you ever see the seinfeld episode with the soup man? If he won’t serve you, then don’t go there. We had a bakery that was fantastic, but the health department would shut them down months at a time, I was deprived by the GOVERNMENT of my morning sugar rush. It is his bakery. I am denied entrance to wallmart, fine they don’t get my money. The criminal part is my representatives will not allow me to see them, and they are supposed to work for me. They are even keeping me from visiting my parents grave site.

          • salvagesalvage

            Ah but the Soup Nazi had an actual reason to refuse service; you didn’t follow the rules. He didn’t care who you had sex with, what color your skin was or what god you worshipped. An important distinctions.

            You mean the health department saved your life?

            Let me tell you a story, my first job was being a dish pig at a local restaurant, my job was to do the dishes and then clean the kitchen at close. We used bleach and all kinds of chemicals and we didn’t leave until that mother was sparkling. I was taught how to mop, how to clean, how to keep food safe. I worked there for about three years.

            My next job was at a different place doing salads and small orders. At the end of my first night I asked where the bleach was, nah man, we don’t use that. They used household grade stuff, some discount off brand bought in bulk. So I start doing the sort of cleaning that I was trained to do and they were horrified. That’ll take like an hour! No, we’re done, c’mon.

            I shrugged, getting out earlier was fine with me.

            I only worked there for a bit, I was waiting on another job at a much better place.

            Now restaurant number 1 was inspected all the time so we had to always be cleaning something, the motto was if you have time to lean you have time to clean.

            Government would come in, open drawers, look at the walk-ins, test the temp, everything and they were pricks about it. They’d ALWAYS find shit we’d have to deal with.

            Number 2? Well for whatever reason the inspectors didn’t come by, perhaps because it was smaller, maybe it’s was because the owner paid someone off in any case we didn’t worry about cleaning because no inspection.

            Then a customer got salmonella, nearly died, health inspector raid the place, all sort of stuff is wrong, they shut it down.

            If your local health department shut down that bakery it was because they were doing something that was going to kill you.

            > I am denied entrance to wallmart, fine they don’t get my money.

            Well just because you’re okay with being treated a certain way that doesn’t mean other people will feel the same way.

          • slackwarerobert

            I’m not OK with it. I just respect private property rights more. It is when government does it that really burns me up. Being exposed to germs is a good thing, you build up immunities so you don’t get sick.

          • salvagesalvage

            Ah but the Soup Nazi had an actual reason to refuse service;
            you didn’t follow the rules. He didn’t care who you had sex with, what color your skin was or what god you worshipped. An important distinctions.

            You mean the health department saved your life?

            Let me tell you a story, my first job was being a dish pig at a local restaurant, my job was to do the dishes and then clean the kitchen
            at close. We used bleach and all kinds of chemicals and we didn’t leave until that mother was sparkling. I was taught how to mop, how to clean, how to keep food safe. I worked there for about three years.

            My next job was at a different place doing salads and small
            orders. At the end of my first night I asked where the bleach was, nah man, we don’t use that. They used household grade stuff, some discount off brand bought in bulk. So I start doing the sort of cleaning that I was trained to do and they were horrified. That’ll take like an hour! No, we’re done, c’mon.

            I shrugged, getting out earlier was fine with me.

            I only worked there for a bit, I was waiting on another job
            at a much better place.

            Now restaurant number 1 was inspected all the time so we had
            to always be cleaning something, the motto was if you have time to lean you have time to clean.

            Government would come in, open drawers, look at the
            walk-ins, test the temp, everything and they were pricks about it. They’d ALWAYS find shit we’d have to deal with.

            Number 2? Well for whatever reason the inspectors didn’t
            come by or at least I never saw them, perhaps because it was smaller, maybe it’s was because the owner paid someone off in any case we didn’t worry about cleaning because no inspection.

            Then a customer got salmonella, nearly died, health inspector
            raid the place, all sort of stuff is wrong, they shut it down.

            If your local health department shut down that bakery it was
            because they were doing something that was going to kill you.

      • Drain52

        So what are those reasons of fear and loathing the necrophiliacs that is not irrational or bigotry?

        • salvagesalvage

          Ha! Ha! Yes! Gays are like necrophiliacs!

    • slackwarerobert

      When I grew up we has a solution to sanduskie, priests, and other sickos who attack children. Go home load gun and shoot the b*stard. I can understand an 8 year old being overpowered in the shower, I can’t comprehend why he doesn’t shoot him the next day though. But the boy scout oath would be a good reason to ban them from the organization. let them join micheles fat kids are us group. But for the life of me I can’t remember any dances, except for trying to catch the girl scouts swimming in a creek, how would anyone know you are gay? If you point out a naked girls scout skinny dipping I don’t think anyone will care you aren’t interested or even notice you aren’t looking.

  • Tim Heise

    Is the BSA completly private?
    The BSA holds a Congressional charter under Title 36 of the United States Code,[19] which means that it is one of the comparatively rare “Title 36″ corporations in the United States.[20] The 1916 statute of incorporation established this institution amongst a small number of other patriotic and national organizations which are similarly chartered,[21] such as the Girl Scouts of the USA, the American Legion, the Red Cross, Major League Baseball, and the National Academy of Sciences. The federal incorporation was originally construed primarily as an honor, however it does grant the chartered organization some special privileges and rights, including freedom from antitrust and monopoly regulation, and complete control over the organization’s symbols and insignia. As example, outside of the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, no other youth organizations may use the term “scouts” or “scouting” in their name. The special recognition neither implies nor accords Congress any special control over the BSA, which remains free to function independently.[22]

    • Tim Heise

      above was taken from wikipedia.

    • Tim Heise

      Above is an argument for them to accept gays.

      • Guest

        When are you Mormons going to accept Gay Bishops?

  • Neiman

    Rob rolls out the old, ugly, stinking liberal chestnut of bigotry by Christians when they decide to stand on Scripture and against his debauchery. He will not be happy until his daughter grows up and marries another woman.

    The word bigotry, according to studies of word origins, “come from the German bei and Gott, or the English “by God.” William Camden wrote that the Normans were first called bigots, when their Duke Rollo, who when receiving Gisla, daughter of King Charles, in marriage, and with her the investiture of the dukedom, refused to kiss the king’s foot in token of subjection.” It is to literally say by God’s Holy Name I will be subject to no man, but the Lord only.

    Of course, liberals like Rob, also define it as “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance and is almost exclusively used against Christians. Further, hatred is also another word liberals like Rob love to use it whenever anyone opposes their libertine values, it is wholly subjective and absolutely wrong and liberals know they are wrong when they use it..

    What is wrong with bigotry? If one has deep seated, heart felt beliefs then why is it wrong to stand upon those values despite all opposition, to be prejudiced in their favor? Isn’t that exactly what Jesus, John the Baptist, Peter, Paul, John and all the Apostles, plus a myriad of saints lived and died for? If the scouts believe in God and being morally straight, why do social/moral liberals like Rob object? Aren’t those good things anymore?

    If the Boy Scouts give in to this social pressure and become the pink, feminazi scouts, to hell with them, they have surrendered age old values rather than suffer the ire of people that are going to hell anyway. They are no longer the Boy Scouts, they are some perverted form of the Boy Scouts and no Christian, IMO, should ever give them a single dime, buy a single candy bar or offer them any support, as they are officially then the anti-Christian Scouts.

    • chris

      The term “bigot” originally meant “religious hypocrite”, and it was a derogatory name that the French used for the Normans. That is the original definition of bigot. Nowadays it’s meaning is different and no longer means hypocrite, although it can have a similar negative connotation. I have a suspicion that the French started calling Normans bigots because Normans used to say “by god” all the time in everyday language, and it was the one thing the French identified the Normans by.

      • chris

        The whole story about “bigot” coming from someone’s refusal to kiss a king’s foot is likely fictional.

        • Neiman

          You want to argue over the origin of a word, as if your are the expert in everything and especially in your Christ hatred.

          • chris

            No, I simply googled it and probably saw the same information you did. The difference is that you tend to cherry pick the information that skews to your beliefs and don’t tell us all the inconvenient details. So I naturally don’t trust most things you say regarding language, history, science, etc and I prefer to investigate it myself. It’s called skepticism and it’s what people like myself do.

            Why did I make a big deal out of one word? Because you did, and in fact you made the word “bigot” the main topic of the first half of your long comment, and you even went as far as defending bigotry based on your erroneous understanding of history.

          • Neiman

            I simply used the online dictionary to determine the Etymology of the word “bigotry” and the one I gave is as good as any other source, it cannot be proven to be wrong; and yes, it did use the one that seem best to speak to the issue I wanted to address, being you Christ haters determination to paint all Christians as bigots and beneath you, beneath even your contempt, because they dare to actually believe in God and the moral values taught by Holy Scripture, being willing to die for their beliefs. You Christ haters cannot stand it, you want everyone to submit to your perverse views of the world and join you in your debauched lifestyles.

            You have NEVER proven me wrong on a single fact, but you chase me around so you can attack Christ through me and Judeo-Christian values and promote your godless evolutionary nonsense. I will not bow down and kiss the hem of your Christ hating robes Bei Gott! I choose mostly to ignore you and your many lies, as you are an extreme egoist and you are unable to discuss any matter rationally. Like all Christ hating liberals, you shotgun every issue, your ADD making it impossible to debate you, while you like your god Billy Jeff, like to argue what the definition of “is” – “is,” so you can obfuscate and misdirect.

          • chris

            It’s the other way around. You shotgun every topic and try to make a religious war out of it. The word “bigot” has nothing to do with being pro or anti Christian and everything to do with an old animosity between ethnic groups of people hundreds of years ago. You turned it into a religious war, and then get mad when I call BS. You have such an obvious hatred towards non-christians it’s not even funny. I, on the other hand, have no problem with Christians, in fact I don’t even care what religion people are, as long as they have a good character. I bet you prefer to stay away from nonchristians at any given opportunity, and surround yourself with like-minded people. I myself do not discriminate based on religion at all.

          • Neiman

            Pretty much in love with yourself, aren’t you. Don’t worry, the Scouts will allow gay scoutmasters, they are cowards; and you can be one and bugger all the little boys you want to your heart’s content.

            I was never mad, that is your self projection, based on your own fears, just like your boasting, you have never proven anything I said wrong, because I deal in facts and you are just throwing a fit because I won’t agree with you. I do not hate non-Christians, but like God, I do hate those like you that work overtime to keep people from Him, His Love and His Salvation. You only troll around seeking victims of your anti-Christian bigotry.

            I am around educators every day, 99% being liberals and non-Christian.

          • chris

            These are changing times, as they always have been. That’s the way the western world works and has always worked. Change and progress is the one thing that separates Western society from all of the other traditionalist societies. If you don’t like it, then move to the Middle East where they want to stay in the dark ages.

            Speaking of self-projection, all of those people who you think are antichrists may be simply your own hatreds extending out in front of you. Most people don’t really care what religion you are, but you seem to be geared up to battle the whole world, like Don Quixote and his side-kick Sancho Panza.

          • Neiman

            God calls the whole world evil and while Jesus came to offer all men salvation, if they accept it by faith; since you and your kind crucified Him – yes, you were there too, it is you and your kind that are at war with God, you hate Him and all His children.

          • slackwarerobert

            forcing your beliefs on the boy scouts is not enlightenment or change for the better. That is the middle east.

          • chris

            “I am around educators every day, 99% being liberals and non-Christian.”

            Like always, I have a problem believing you. Assuming you do work in some kind of school, I’m sure many people around you are Christians and non-liberal, but you just classify them all together because of your extreme bigotry. I would investigate further if I could.

          • Neiman

            Our public education system is almost totally liberal and you know it. Yet, I understand your extreme egoism, aided by your chronically-acute narcissism, stimulated by your gross inferiority complex is beyond the help of medical science.

  • 11B40

    Greetings:

    Did our Pied Piping President mention anything about whether the Muslims should admit homosexuals ???

    • Neiman

      Very astute observation, someone should ask him.

    • Davo

      There are tons of gay Muslims. I don’t understand your post. No one “admits” you into Islam, anyway.

      • slackwarerobert

        OK then, does obama mention letting living gay muslims into the mosque.

      • 11B40

        Greetings, Davo:

        You are right in that my language is somewhat strained. Primarily that was because, as I think you may well know, I was trying to make a point about the willingness of our President to undermine aspects of our American culture while “Hearing no evil, Seeing no evil, Speaking no evil” about the religion with which we are at war, and with which he has had more than a passing acquaintance, and which prescribes not shunning but death for homosexuals.

        Such is the time in which we live.

        • Davo

          We’re talking about the guy who killed bin Laden, right?

          • mickey_moussaoui

            We ARE talking about the guy who watched an American Ambassador and three Marines get butchered in Benghazi

          • two_amber_lamps

            If Obama encourages the Boy Scouts to allow gay scoutmasters, does that mean he was ok with Ambassador Stevens getting a#$raped after he was murdered?

    • sbark

      That will his next “opinion”……..the BSA should be a organization of Islam and accept gays, so they can recruit inside the BSA………
      ……..after all isnt that what this is all about…….another place to recruit.
      It is speculated that the present small slave trade to gay couples will explode if/when the western world gives govt affirmation to gay “marriage”……the demand for children inside those gay couples will create a slave trade market .

    • Rocky

      yes, let’s put perverts in charge of children. what could go wrong?

  • Stuart

    Does President Obama also agree that whites should be allowed on the Globe Trotters Team or be able to join the NAACP.? How about the idea of inclusiveness be addressed In these areas also? Heck Homosexual white men need be included there also?
    How about the sensitivity he talks about concerning offending other religions and offensive videos and comments that are viral? Does President Obama believe that the picture of Christ made out of DEFICATION or urinating on should not be allowed to be paid for through tax payer money for the Endowment For The Arts? How about Hollywoods portrayal of Christ as married or a Homosexual? Is he consistent or selective for political purposes?

    • WOOF

      Barak said your going to have to work on your jump shot and dribble if you want to play for the Harlem Globe Trotters.
      The NAACP has a membership apps, iPad and android.
      You’re time is your business regarding homosexual issues.

    • mickey_moussaoui

      Does Obama think ALL christians should be exempt for paying for abortion and birth control in his obamacare? NO. Case closed. Obama is just another nosey hipocrit lib

    • Matthew Hawkins

      I’m a member of the NAACP.

  • Stuart

    What say you Rob on my comments and the one below by Neiman? Are these questions that deserve addressing? Or Should we just ignore inconsistencies in you and President Obama? Do Christians now somehow become a security threat to our nation because they have certain dogma that you and your sacred dogma disagree with?
    I’d like a succinct response to those observations!

  • Patrick R. Pfeiffer

    What the heck I’m on a roll being a bigot and all so allow me to speak more truth to Political Correctness:
    Whatever homosexuality may NOT be; it is by definition unnatural.
    The purpose of 2 sexes in nature is reproduction. The last time I checked 2 homosexuals would not be able to reproduce sexually by natural means; therefore this “orientation” is unnatural. If all homosexuals on Earth were placed alone in say Australia, and practiced nothing but homosexuality, their orientation would be extinct in one generation. That is not a viable biological strategy; it is completely unnatural.
    I don’t presume to judge homosexuals nor do I feel they are per se immoral or anything like that. But I do declare their behavior unnatural and rare.
    And I resent the endless drumbeat of political correctness and social pressure demanding that I view homosexualtiy as a perfectly normal, natural, common and viable lifestyle “choice” that I must present as such to my children because that is a pervsersion of the truth.

    • Davo

      Dude, EVERYONE’s sex lives–even boring straight couples–includes some “rare” elements. You think just by virtue of listening to Rush Limbaugh the desire for ass-play or golden showers just up and disappears?

      Take your ten closest straight friends. Among them, you’ll find people into threesomes, S&M, pegging, wife-swapping, and all sorts of other “abnormal” practices.

      How are you going to keep your children away from that?

      • Patrick R. Pfeiffer

        It’s all perfectly normal and good, right Davo?
        Heck everybody’s thought of doing a goat or a dead body at some point right?
        Society just has to wise up and accept anything and everything!
        Keeping my kids away from the emotionally disturbed behavior you describe will be easy-it’s called being an involved parent who guides them into healthy lifestyles.
        I’m not sure homosexuals would approve of you equivocating their situation to the depraved voluntary practices you seem to know a lot about by the way.

        • Davo

          I’m very interested to discover how *exactly* you’ve ascertained that none of your kids’ friends’ parents like to have anal sex, or piss on each other after climaxing. Did you send them with a questionnaire?

          • slackwarerobert

            No, I looked at their sewer bill, and it is the same as mine so they use the toilet like normal people. The other you will just have to take my word for it. (here is a hint, court records….)

        • Davo

          “Keeping my kids away from the emotionally disturbed behavior you describe will be easy-it’s called being an involved parent who guides them into healthy lifestyles.”

          How exactly do you plan on keeping your son from performing cunnilingus on his wife?

          • slackwarerobert

            I’ll take him aside and mention that the hair gets in your teeth, get a brownie instead.

    • salvagesalvage

      >Whatever homosexuality may NOT be; it is by definition unnatural.

      Except that homosexuality appears in nature and that human beings have had a percentage of homosexuals for about as long as there have been human beings.

      Oh and the cloths you wear, the car you drive, the gun you shoot aren’t “natural” so that means they’re bad?

      >The purpose of 2 sexes in nature is reproduction.

      So people who don’t have children are gay?

      >But I do declare their behavior unnatural and rare.

      And that means what?

      > lifestyle “choice”

      They’re actually born that way so not much of a choice or do you think they decide to be gay? If so when did you decide to be straight? I myself never made any conscious choice to like boobies and the vagina and I’m not sure anyone ever has.

      • slackwarerobert

        So why do you punish people who are born to be serial killers and shoot up movie theaters then? Why is killing people a choice but sticking it up someones outtie not?

        I was born with a gun, I also have no choice and have to carry them all the time. (think about it you civilian libs….)

        • salvagesalvage

          Ah now this is some awesome wingnut gibberish right here.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Wow…. look at the silly commu-crat! Wingnut… wingnut… wingnut…

            You’re about as original in your insults as a monkey flinging fecal matter. I wonder what you’ll call a conservative next….

            OH I got IT!! WINGNUT!!

            BRAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaA!

            Oh SS…. you so amuse you!

          • slackwarerobert

            Well refute the logic then.

          • salvagesalvage

            Well there really isn’t any logic there, just gibbering but if I get the general idea you seem to think that gay sex is somehow intrinsically harmful, which it is not.

          • slackwarerobert

            Hmm, maybe you are reading a different post. Says why is one trait a choice, and the other not? english is not my first choice to get ideas across, it is so devoid of logic. binary is so much better. it is for going out or it’s not. see simple no room to misunderstand. Wife knows I am a sick bastard, and has learned to except it. If you want equal rights get the government out of marriage, we can’t afford more spending by doubling the government employees feeding on the tax payer. Pay off the debt, and I will be at the front of the line for you, will have very strong pant seams, but I ‘ll be up there.

      • Neiman

        Homosexuality does not occur in nature. That is absolutely untrue.

        Unnatural as it is an unnatural violation of natural design.

        • salvagesalvage

          It does:

          http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx

          Now I know you and your god hate homosexuals but that mindless rage doesn’t trump reality.

          • Neiman


            Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals…. For reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed towards an individual of the opposite sex. Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such. Nevertheless, the interaction of other instincts (particularly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual. Such behavior cannot be equated with an animal homosexuality. All it means is that animal sexual behavior encompasses aspects beyond that of reproduction.

            http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_in_animals_myth

            You are reaching to excuse what is a deviation from the norm, a perversion of nature to justify homosexuality. We also find infanticide and cannibalism in the animal kingdom, does that justify our killing our children or eating each other? If your answer is no, then neither can we use unusual male dominance, aggression and other causes of seeming homosexual “mounting” as justifying homosexuality.

          • salvagesalvage

            CONSERVAPEDIA! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!

            Oh wingnut that really trumps science!

            And yes! Homosexuality is like infanticide and cannibalism! THEY’RE THE SAME THING!!! That is such a valid argument.

            Look, I get it, you hate fags, that’s fine free country you can hate anyone you like for whatever reason you decide on but deary, homosexuality is like being a ginger; a genetic quirk that really doesn’t mean much to anyone other than the individual.

          • Neiman

            The point was pinhead that, all those things appear in the animal kingdom, but that appearance does not make them right for human beings. So, if you and your kind want to justify your deviant behavior because is rarely occurs among animals, then you could just as easily justify the others.

            No, you do not get it, it is not hate, but the love of God to seek to rescue them from their perversions and help them obtain eternal life with God.through repentance.

            Homosexuality is destructive of the people involved, all their intimate partners, family, friends and society – it harms everyone.

          • salvagesalvage

            Nope, about 1 in 10 humans are born with same-sex attraction, obviously a naturally occurring phenomenon.

            What’s interesting here is you have shown the capacity to learn, you went from Homosexuality does not occur in nature to admitting that it happens rarely. Congrats! Yes, it does happen rarely but it does happen and thus is perfectly natural.

            So if you believe in some sort of creator god then your god makes gays, you can’t get around that fact so isn’t it weird that your god makes some people gay and then commands you to kill them? I’m not sure that’s “love”.

            No, being gay is no more destructive than being straight. Every bad thing that can happen as a result of gay sex can happen from straight sex. It’s just sex and if you’re not involved its really nothing to get excited about.

          • slackwarerobert

            only because doctors keep interfering with darwin.

          • salvagesalvage

            And you’re babbling again.

          • Neiman

            Wrong again Gay Man.

            I did not admit what you think, you are jumping to conclusions. I said that homosexuality does occur rarely in nature, but not homosexual animals. There is a great difference in activity versus nature. I showed how showing forms of aggression, dominance, dealing with fear or anxiety there are occurrences of what we might call homosexual acts, but it is in appearances only and such attractions cannot be defined as their being homosexual. Cannibalism and infanticide occur as well in nature, but are not natural and as we would condemn such acts in human beings, homosexuality deserves the same condemnation as being just as harmful and deviant.

            God does NOT make gay people, you are like your sister Gay Bob in making that asinine claim. He created Adam and Eve and through procreation, by their freewill choices human beings procreated other human beings and as they corrupted God’s creation, they corrupted their offspring by their own deviant sexual conduct. See Sodom and Gomorrah and the people around Noah for prime examples of such deviant sexuality and it being passed on by their perverted influences to their children.

            God commanded all sorts of evil people, people that were produced through procreation killed, because He did not want them corrupting His Chosen People – Israel. Showing thereby His hatred of sin because it keeps souls from His presence and eternal life; having mercy though, He brought forth a Savior that could save all souls that repented of their sins and turned to Him by faith. If you continue in your homosexual conduct, a lifestyle choice, refusing to repent, then God will not condemn you, you will condemn yourself.

            I have often listed herein and do not have the patience to repeat now, how destructive homosexuality is to all flesh on earth and will play a large role in billions of souls going to hell and suffering without end.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            He created Adam and Eve and through procreation

            Who was doing the procreation there, Old Pal?

          • Neiman

            Adam and Eve you liar from hell, I am not your pal.

            Now how does your god save you without your being born again in Christ? Still waiting fro the answer Gay Bob.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Old Pal, you stated: “He created Adam and Eve and through procreation”. Who was He procreating with?

          • Neiman

            Liar I am not your pal.

            Liar, I said, “He created (the original act) Adam and Eve AND through procreation they (Adam and Eve) produced all living human beings.

            You just cannot stop lying can you?

            Now back to my question, no honest man would fail or be tardy in answering the question of his salvation, transparently, honestly and completely – unless he were being dishonest (you are) and had something to hide. What are you hiding Gay Bob? “how does your god save you without your being born again in Christ? Still waiting for the answer Gay Bob.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Old Pal, were Adam and Eve married or just very good friends and who did their kids marry? Siblings?

          • Neiman

            I am not your pal, which makes you a damned liar.

            You have not apologized for misquoting me, which makes you a double damned liar.

            You have not answered my questions about your made-up god and her salvation message, so you are a coward and grossly dishonest.

            You sir/madam are a lying coward!

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Old Pal, you are not my pal, never were, probably never will be.

            But I remain hopeful.
            Will you be my pal, Old Pal?

          • Neiman

            Demonic games, that is all you have, you are truly of the devil.

            What about your made-up god, how does she save you without faith in Christ? What are you hiding? Yo know that once you answer, everyone here will know what a damned liar you are and a coward too.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Old Pal, will you be my wingnut pal?

          • salvagesalvage

            No, your god made everything right? Every single atom, molecule, quirk and quark? That’s your superstition right? Therefore it made the gay, that’s just plain old logic.

            No, not free will, no one decides to be gay, it’s a biological imperative.

            As the for the rest of it your god is quite the looney, chosen people? So he made one set of humans that he like more than the others? Why not make them all “chosen”?

            I love the concept of hell, so your god is going to torture everyone who doesn’t think as you and it does? So I guess our god must really like Hitler, Saddam and all the other dictators.

          • Neiman

            First, you cannot prove a genetic causation, it does not exist. Your side have plenty of theories, but to prove a genetic cause every gay would have to have the identical markings and every one with those marking would have to be gay, no exceptions. Those genetic markers do not exist.

            Let us pretend that one day a 100% reliable genetic marker is found. Okay, is it the result of cause or effect? Next, still pretending those markers are found, people with them must still choose to act upon them or deny them, that makes it a lifestyle choice. No one is forced to engage in gay sex. Next, we ask alcoholics, suffering a much less dangerous impulse than homosexuality, to quit for their own good and that of other lives they impact. The same with child molesters and many others with destructive impulses/desires; but because of money and political power, only the deviant gay impulse must not be resisted and must be given special protections. Quite odd that.

            God will not send anyone to hell, you make a freewill choice, like you do with homosexuality to disobey Him and not accept His Salvation. You send yourself to hell, He sent His Son to save you, if you would only believe. He will not torment you, you will be tormented by the myriad of evil thoughts and actions you willingly pursued in this life and by the image of Heaven and God’s Love you saw on Judgment Day and know you will never see or feel again. You, like Scrooge, weave your own torturous chains, you create your own everlasting torments.

            Yes, God chose the Jews as His own people, through whom He would preserve His Word and through whom He would send the Messiah to save our souls and we Christians are rejoicing that He chose them, as it was for our benefit and the benefit of anyone that would believe in Jesus.

          • salvagesalvage

            >Those genetic markers do not exist.

            Wow, you sure do know a lot about genetics!

            And no, being gay is not like being a drunk, it’s like being straight only you have sex with your own sex.

            >He sent His Son to save you

            Yes, your god sent itself to save us from itself by sacrificing itself to itself.

            Makes perfect sense!

            Not to mention your god once again screwed up or haven’t you noticed that Christian are not even a majority?

            Weird that your god can’t get its creation to worship it.

          • salvagesalvage

            Oh and as for Noah, you do know that story is complete nonsense right? That none of it is even remotely plausible? That only a complete ignoramus would cite it as an argument for anything? See that why you hate the gays, you’re just plain stupid.

          • Neiman

            Just because you choose to disbelieve it, does not mean it isn’t true.

            The Science of Archaeology supports the Biblical record of the Flood. Discoveries of ancient clay tablets and monuments reveal inscriptions of this event, some found in ancient Mesopotamia (Babylonia). In the “Gilgamesh Epic,” we have the account of the Babylonian Flood. Gilgamesh was an early king after the flood. He tells of his search for Utnapishtim (Mesopotamia’s Noah). Utnapishtim relates to him his version of the flood and how he escaped from it. His version closely parallels the account of Moses.

            The gods determined to destroy mankind with a flood, and gave warning. Instructions were given to build a boat [ark] and take into it “the seedof all living things.” The ark was built, a family taken inside and theflood began at a given time. Later the ark came to rest on Mt. Nisir [location unknown], and Utnapishtim sent forth a dove, a swallow, and a raven. The dove and the swallow returned, but the raven saw that the waters were abated and did not return. All left the ark and sacrifices were offered to the gods of Utnapishtim (Boyd 1969:73).

            The “Gilgamesh Epic” may be gauged by its impact upon other nations. As early as 2000BC, it was known in at least four other languages. A fragment found at Megiddo in 1955 reveals that this epic was known in Palestine in the 14th century BC. By way of comparison, it appears that archaeology’s Babylonian account and the Biblical account refer to the same Flood.

            http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2010/11/17/The-Ancient-Document-Rule-and-the-Flood-of-Noahe28099s-Day.aspx

            Thank you for the name calling, it only reinforces my faith.

          • salvagesalvage

            That is all a load of fetid dingos kidneys, it is nowhere near science, sense, logic or reason. You do not have faith your are delusional. You believe stuff to be true that simply is not.

            According to the myth The Flood covered the tallest mountain right? That would mean a) an awful lot of water is missing and b) Noah and his family and the crittters didn’t need to breath.

          • salvagesalvage

            And isn’t it weird that your god doesn’t destroy cities anymore? Now a days they’re destroyed by things like earthquakes, tsunamis, wildfires…. wait… you don’t suppose that back in the day when natural disasters would occurs the survivors not understanding what had happened would say it was their god’s punishment? And have you noticed that Canada, several European nations and soon the Uk have legalized gay marriage and your god hasn’t said a thing about it?

            I know, I know, your god is waiting until they all die so it can throw the fags into Hell to be tortured for being gay the way your god made them. Makes perfect sense!

          • Neiman

            I have answered it elsewhere, God sends no one to hell, you go there by your freewill choice in rejecting His Salvation, just like those in Noah’s day.

            God made no one homosexual, He created Adam and Eve, they procreated all other human beings and these humans, rejecting God destroyed His perfect creation and even the children in their own wombs.

          • salvagesalvage

            Nope. See your god made me right? He made me with a brain and experiences that make it quite literally impossible to believe in it.

            You know how you don’t believe in Zeus or Allah? Same deal, you don’t choose not to believe in them, you simply do not because you cannot.

            Of course if you had been born Muslim then you would believe in Allah with the same fever as you do your god but then of course your god would throw you into Hell for not believing in it.

            You do know that Christianity has always been a minority religion right? So that means your god has thrown more people into Hell than Heaven for being born to the wrong religion.

            Nice god you have there.

          • salvagesalvage

            So humanity is the result of incest?

            No silly person, Adam and Eve is a myth, it like most of the stories from the Bible makes no sense and contradicts the physical evidence in the case evolution.

            If we were made by some sort of a god its “Adam and Eve” was a single celled organism and it went to great lengths to make the whole think look like random chance.

          • Neiman

            Go away, I am tired of your Christ hatred and your lies and your games. You are beyond all hope and in eternity, you will remember every word and they will torment your hell-bound soul.

          • salvagesalvage

            Ha! Ha! Yes! I hate Jesus because I can’t help but notice his story makes absolutely no sense and that Christianity has never been the One True religion, not even a majority. I made that alllll up!

            And yes, your loving merciful god is going to send me to Hell after making me with a brain and giving me life experiences that make it impossible to believe in it. That’s not crazy at all!

            Sad little theist, reality too much for you so you must hide in fairy tales.

          • slackarerobert

            How do you know god didn’t make obama president to destroy those countries with his stupid go bankrupt financial ideas? Canada just lost there penny, what more evidence do you need they are going down for the count.

          • mickey_moussaoui

            Epigenetics are heritable changes caused by factors other than DNA. Instead of traits getting passed down through the genes, epigenetic change happens because of the way genes are regulated, or turned on and off.

            Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/12/11/homosexuality-ultimately-result-gene-regulation-researchers-find/#ixzz2K2EKLfGE

          • salvagesalvage

            Fascinating stuff!

        • slackwarerobert

          So where does the sandra fluke of the sea horse fall in nature, the guy sl*t is always getting knocked up?

      • slackwarerobert

        When I was 12 and opened a playboy at the magazine rack. didn’t know what to do with it, but knew right then I liked what I saw. So why will you not except that homophobes are born that way and have no choice?

        • salvagesalvage

          I’m sure some of them have been so indoctrinated into hating gays or anything else they don’t understand that may be so and since I don’t think anyone has any problem with homophobes getting married or buying cakes or anything else like that I’m not sure what your point is?

          • slackwarerobert

            My point is I know when I decided I like women. And if it isn’t a choice, then logic says that repulsion of gays must also not be a choice. I don’t care if you want to marry 6 guys, a monkey, and I guess their favorite the ol 2 dong shark. The only problem I have is the government is broke and this will double or triple “benifit” costs of workers. We can’t afford it. Get government out of marriage and go for it.

          • salvagesalvage

            You did not decide to like women, that “choice” was made by your biology.

            Repulsion may not be a choice, like many emotions but what we do in response to them is.

            The government is not broke and saying gays can’t be equal because it’s expensive is deeply retarded.

          • slackwarerobert

            Guess you don’t get much news, we are so broke a revolution is probably the only option. As I said, get rid of the marriage benefits, and I could care less who you marry. But we cannot afford that many more federal moochers. But gays are equal, name one right they are denied that everyone else is also not denied.

          • salvagesalvage

            No wingnut, America is not “broke”. Countries and their economies are not like people and their bank accounts.

            And yes, the “Haw! Haw! Gay people can marry anyone of the opposite sex they like just like straights! That’s fair!” may pass for wit and insight on “Fox and Friends” Rush or whatever hole you swill hooch in but in the real world it’s retarded semantics that shows just how ignorant wingnut you are.

        • Drain52

          Some unfortunates are born with spina bifida. They had no choice. Does that make their problem normal or praiseworthy? Personal blame has nothing to do with homosexuality. It’s whether you think that inborn defects should be accepted as nothing unusual.

    • chris

      What exactly do we do that IS natural? I’m sure blogging on the internet is natural. Drinking beer to get drunk, now that’s natural. How about getting ears pierced, I see animals doing that that all the time in the nature shows.

      This is a bogus argument.

      • slackwarerobert

        get out of the gutter and put your cloths on, naturist are not the norm either. Natural order is the food chain, and since gays taste better according to j. dahmer, it s*cks to be you, in more than one way literally.

  • salvagesalvage

    ….

    Damn. I was getting ready to jump all over this post but Rob goes and says very sensible actual conservative stuff.

    Hrmph.

  • Patrick R. Pfeiffer

    Of course while we’re talking about gays and the Boy Scouts we’re not talking about spiraling debt; a crashing economy or sending F16’s and M1 tanks to a radical muslim who lives next door to Israel.
    Well played Mr. President.

    • yy4u2

      If there ever is a remake of “Wag the Dog,” it will be tough to choose between Billy or Bumma.

  • matthew_bosch

    I assume enrollment in the Boy Scouts has taken a dip? With most institutions, survival becomes more important than founding principles.

  • LibertyFargo

    The scouts are a private organization. If they are so “out of touch” with the “mainstream culture” then leave them alone and let the market dictate who supports them based on shared values.

    That isn’t happening. The progressive movement in this country is publicly shaming them and taking them to court. The SC upheld their right to make their own positions but the pressure continues.

    The true freedom/libertarian course is to let them do what they want to do and to stop bullying them to capitulate to the current ebb and flow of cultural changes. The beauty of the American system (or at least the one that was) was that those with whom you disagreed could believe whatever they wanted and be left alone. Now, if you are “offensive” that is the same as infringing on their “rights” and on that I call BS. If it was such a BIG deal why doesn’t another more inclusive organization spring up that parallels the Scouts without being so “morally 1950s” for so many (Sarcasm)… let those ideas compete in the marketplace of ideas.

    The reality is that will not happen. This isn’t about fairness but about forcing cultural changes on private individuals and private organizations. Simple as that.

  • LibertyFargo

    Rob – the correct (libertarian) response to the question of “should the scouts admit gay members?” should NOT be “yes” but “they should be able to decide for themselves without being bullied to any position.”

    But you found yourself agreeing with the president? Why is that? Nobody SHOULD have to do anything that isn’t infringing on someone else’s rights. Being a boy scout is not in the Bill of Rights last I checked…

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      I think I am taking the correct libertarian response. I don’t think the boy Scouts should be forced to change. I hope they’ll want to change.

      Is the President asking for a law or other policy forcing the Boy Scouts to make this change? Or is he just expressing an opinion?

      • LibertyFargo

        do you think the president supports law suits like the one in oregon where a homosexual couple is suing a private business because he, based on his own values, doesn’t support a homosexual marriage and refused to do business? Of course he does.

        He wasn’t asked the question but that has been the course of modern liberalism as well as historical statism.

        The President was asked “SHOULD they change?” The answer is, “they can and SHOULD do whatever they feel is right.”

        To your credit you did say it shouldn’t be forced. There is a fine line there but it needs to be drawn.

        • Davo

          “do you think the president supports law suits like the one in oregon where a homosexual couple is suing a private business because he, based on his own values, doesn’t support a homosexual marriage and refused to do business? Of course he does.”

          I hope you’re putting your mind-reading skills to better use than merely making trenchant comments on political blogs.

          • LibertyFargo

            Thanks for engaging in the whole argument/discussion. (Sarcasm)

          • LibertyFargo

            let me rephrase:

            Do you think the president would sign a bill that required the Boy Scouts to accept homosexuals into their ranks?

            I’m willing to bet… yes.
            Conjecture? Sure. But I think Vegas odds would consider it a “sure bet.”

          • Matthew Hawkins

            Back it up.

            Give me just one statement from Obama where he would support this.

            I’m betting you are just raging homophobe who knows nothing of policy.

          • LibertyFargo

            wow. you don’t know me at all but thanks for the personal attack.

          • slackwarerobert

            I barak insane obama do solomely swear to uphold the constitution. How much more evidence do you need?
            This will be a shock to you, but homophobes have rights. Why is it homo’s have no choice, but you say homophobes do?

          • camsaure

            Sheesh, I thought you claimed to be a lawyer. But instead of any argument you resort to name calling and play the homophobe card. Lawyers are known to state that anyone whom represents themselves in court has a fool for a lawyer. But in reality, anyone who would hire the likes of you to represent them has even a bigger fool for a lawyer. Wipe your nose now sonny.

      • slackwarerobert

        with obama it is the same thing. you forget he doesn’t need congress to write laws. it is up to him to write them when congress should have already done so.

  • sbark

    Interesting article in the Washington Examiner that says watching large amounts of porn boosts support for gay marriage in heterosexual men…….
    it must help them “evolve” on the issue I guess………

    • slackwarerobert

      you sure it just isn’t wanting more women and support for polygamy? If all the men marry each other there will only be me to take care of all the women folk. Seems pretty selfish to me.

      • sbark

        You’d be the lone survivor……in the right place at the right time.
        Just gotta hope all the women dont marry women also…..
        they’d need you just as “seedstock”

        • slackwarerobert

          Not a problem, i’ll live in the southeast. Just hope the wife doesn’t find out, or the survivor thing won’t be for long……

  • joeb

    “On my honor, I will do my best: To do my duty to God and my country, and to obey the scout law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.”

    If you think the Scout Oath is compatible with homosexuality, then we’re just going to disagree.

    To each their own, so let the scouts be.
    If homosexuals feel the need to go camping, then they can start their own organization.

    • slackwarerobert

      Or join the log cabin republicans…..

  • Stuart

    Woof..woof. You are oh so cleaver with that sophism. Now I don’t know if you are for whites being included in black organizations , as latheists should be forced upon Christian organizations. That is the case and point. You have hidden!

    Should we just stick to Case and Point without playing games with this discussion? The retort of the Globe Trotters was making a point about being forced against your will or doctrine or policy or your dogma being undermined by those with beliefs that differ.
    Interesting to find I couldn’t type Christ’s name in the case and point about art.

    The comment about dribbling was juvenile in its entirety! Please stick to case and point. Sophism is for deceivers.

    Common Rob..show your true colors. Have you decided not to decide to comment and remain indifferent? I think I have seen a quote some where that said, ” the only thing worse than anger is indifference.”I tend to agree with that quote whole heartedly!

  • HG

    I pity the sons put in harms way for “changing national values”.
    Knowing the difference between right and wrong helps us avoid the pitfalls of social trends.

  • yy4u2

    If the President, yourself and gays want a private organization, they should start their own. Free market and freedom of speech. Could they call it Boy on Boy Scouts without infringing on the trade name? To each his own but quit highjacking names and definitions like (gay) marriage. I bet NAMBLA would be happy to start out the national chapter.

  • disqus_k6DOW8mA24

    No No No use some common sense. I have been a Scout and Scout leader
    since 1958. We take Scouts away from their parents for up to two week
    trips into the remote wilderness. Having a sexually active gay Scout
    leader leading as an authority figure, isolated Scouts he may be
    attracted to would be the same poor judgement as me, a hetero sexual
    Scout Leader, taking 15 attractive young ladies alone out in the
    wilderness for two weeks. While both the gay and Hetero leaders may
    avoid temptation, eventually some leader some where will turn it into
    something very very bad. If you consider an adult having sex with minors
    bad.

  • mickey_moussaoui

    The scouts are a private institution. What they do is of no business of obama or government.
    Perhaps obama should sanction a new scout program for his people. Call it the Twink Scouts. He can guest lecture them on pole smoking

    • two_amber_lamps

      Or call em the Obama Youth?

  • HG

    I wonder if this has anything to do with the BSA decision?

    http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/boy-scouts-covered-up-for-child-molesters/

    But lets remember that molestation of boys is by other boys or men is homosexual molestation.

  • slackwarerobert

    Why can’t you gay men find a women who likes anal? I have never gotten an answer to that. Just turn her over and aim high.

    • mickey_moussaoui

      They like smoking pole just as much

      • slackwarerobert

        ck, stick a cucumber in the other one. Or find one that teaches, and you can eat the leftovers after classes.

  • HG

    Here is some of those “unfounded and spurious notions”.

    Pedophiles are usually attracted to a particular age range and/or sex of child. Research categorizes male pedophiles by whether they are attracted to only male children (homosexual pedophilia), female children (heterosexual pedophilia), or children from both sexes (bisexual pedophilia) (3, 6, 10, 29). The percentage of homosexual pedophiles ranges from 9% to 40%, which is approximately 4 to 20 times higher than the rate of adult men attracted to other adult men (using a prevalence rate of adult homosexuality of 2%—4%) (5, 7, 10, 19, 29, 30). This finding does not imply that homosexuals are more likely to molest children, just that a larger percentage of pedophiles are homosexual or bisexual in orientation to children (19). Individuals attracted to females usually prefer children between the ages of 8 and 10 years (3, 5, 31). Individuals attracted to males usually prefer slightly older boys between the ages of 10 and 13 years (3, 5). Heterosexual pedophiles, in self-report studies, have on average abused 5.2 children and committed an average of 34 sexual acts vs homosexual pedophiles who have on average abused 10.7 children and committed an average of 52 acts (15). Bisexual offenders have on average abused 27.3 children and committed more than 120 acts (15). A study by Abel et al. (32) of 377 nonincarcerated, non-incest-related pedophiles, whose legal situations had been resolved and who were surveyed using an anonymous self-report questionnaire, found that heterosexual pedophiles on average reported abusing 19.8 children and committing 23.2 acts, whereas homosexual pedophiles had abused 150.2 children and committed 281.7 acts. These studies confirm law enforcement reports about the serial nature of the crime, the large number of children abused by each pedophile, and the underreporting of assaults (1).

    http://focus.psychiatryonline….

  • mickey_moussaoui

    Well, just like in the military, I suspect there have been gay scouts for a long time now. BSA may have to figure out some way to weed out the perverts.

  • Patrick R. Pfeiffer

    That 1 in 10 humans are born gay is utterly preposterous and is just more made up liberal pseudo-science. All propoganda and wishful thinking; no science.
    I can accept that some humans-an infitesimal percentage-might indeed be born with an attraction to the same sex. I also feel it’s highly likely that environmental, family and social conditons might create same-sex attraction in other individuals.
    Either way, we’re back to this reality: Homosexuality is first and foremost a sexual orientation.
    The sole biological purpose of sex is reproduction: to pass on our genes. Other than survival this is the most primal and basic instinct in our nature. The reason sex feels good is so that we’ll want to do it-and increase the odds we’ll pass on our genes..
    True homosexuality is not capable of reproduction. Therefore homosexuality is NOT NORMAL. PERIOD.
    And if a person was born homosexual; and practiced true homosexuality; they would not pass on their genes therefore any incidents of genetic homosexuality would quickly be eliminated from the human gene pool.
    Many things arise in nature that are not likely to be successful from a biological standpoint and those that make no sense tend to be weeded out by nature.
    As for “why” these things occur and what God’s designs might be, I make no claim to understandi the mind of God. But I think a lot of the purpose of this life on Earth is us learning different lessons we need to learn to grow as souls and therefore we encounter an awful lot that confounds and challenges us.

    • slackwarerobert

      So was dahmer born gay, or do they just taste better?

  • Mike

    If the boy scouts don’t want the government telling them who they have to admit, they should stop taking federal funding

    • slackwarerobert

      If the government wants to tell people who to associate with, it should amend the constitution.

  • Stuart

    Rob, you state that the Boy Scout’s are moving toward so called enlighten thinking,it’s your opinion that is about time there is no good reason not to do so on the Homosexual issue. And if your idea of god is secular humanisms god then that is a different definition that the Orthodox Church.
    Next I would educate yourself to the DITACHE to understand what the teachings were before the Bible was printed,and this format or letter was passed along to all the churches in homes etc. NOW this document even addresses abortion. The root word for good comes from God. What is good and healthy according to the Scriptures.

    Funny how progressives and liberals have made putty out of the Scriptures and Judeo-Christian principles for what they determine as good. The Gospel of Christ is an offense to unbelievers. Does that mean we should keep out mouths shut and compromise with existentialists ,nihilists,new agers, humanists and anything goes dogmas of humanists? And not make judgements?

  • Jeremiah Glosenger

    The scouts is an organization that teaches morals including being “morally straight.” That is sufficient to exclude those who advocate for homosexual activity (not necessarily those who feel same gender attraction). I’m not sure who you are referencing with “our” changing national values, but a large number of people in this country still recognize that sin is always sin no matter what the polls show. Even if they become a minority, their rights to that religious expression in their lives is Constitutionally protected.

Top