E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSJennifer Tyrrell, who was ousted as a den mother for her son's Cub Scout troop because of her sexual orientation, is fighting back. Tyrrell talks to msnbc's Thomas Roberts about her petition to change the Boy Scouts of America's long-standing policy on banning open or avowed homosexuals.
Jennifer Tyrrell and her 7-year-old son have had many rewarding experiences with the Boy Scouts of America, but their participation in the national organization came to an end because she is gay, and the group does not allow open or avowed homosexuals in their membership.
Tyrrell learned the news on April 10. The loss has been devastating.
“We were like a family, so in essence … we lost our scouting family, but they also lost two members of their scouting family,” the former Tiger Cubs den leader from Bridgeport, Ohio, told msnbc.com, at points breaking down into tears.
“The best time in our lives we’ve had in the last year, it’s gone … because we can’t be scouts any more. I can’t stop crying,” she later added.
Tyrrell, a 32-year-old stay at home mother of four, said she agreed to become the den master on the day she signed up her son, Cruz Burns, for the local troop, last year. She had concerns about the Boy Scouts' policy against homosexuals, but a Cubmaster said that – locally -- they wouldn’t have problem.
“He said they would stand, you know, hand in hand with us and stand behind us all the way. Well, actually, that's been true,” she said. “I've never had a problem.”
Boy Scouts spokesman Deron Smith said Tyrrell was removed from the program for being in violation of the national policy regarding homosexuals.
“This policy was understood by her and her fellow volunteers, but not followed, upon her registering in the program,” he wrote in an email to msnbc.com.
Tyrrell said she would still be at home, crying on the couch, if her friends hadn’t encouraged her to hold a protest in town against her dismissal and start a campaign online to seek changes to the Boy Scouts policy.
Courtesy of Jennifer Tyrrell
Jennifer Tyrrell and her son Cruz Burns.
That petition has garnered more than 170,000 signatures
The Boy Scouts’ policy became a focus of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000, when the justices sided with the organization in a lawsuit involving a former Assistant Scoutmaster who was gay, citing the protections of the First Amendment.
“Scouting, and the majority of parents it serves, does not believe it is the right forum for children to become aware of the issue of sexual orientation, or engage in discussions about being gay. Rather, such complex matters should be discussed with parents, caregivers, or spiritual advisers, at the appropriate time and in the right setting,” Smith said. “We fully understand and appreciate that not everyone will agree with any one position or policy.”
But Tyrrell said sexual orientation wasn’t a topic until her dismissal. The children just knew that Cruz had two moms, but there was no further discussion about sexuality.
She also questioned the timing of the revoking of her membership, claiming that as the recently-appointed treasurer, she was trying to iron out some financial discrepancies – and was going to formally make her queries at a meeting the day she was removed.
“She did raise question about the local unit’s finances, however her removal from the program was solely for being in violation of national policy,” Smith wrote.
Tyrrell said she will continue to push for changes at the Boy Scouts and called on them to take “the high road” and change their policy to include “all Americans.”
“… because we’re just people,” she said. “We’re just gay people who love their kids.”
Leave a Comment:
If homosexuals and lesbians want to join the scouts, let them start their own non-Christian group and call it the "Gay Scouts."
Exactly,
There would be nothing wrong with having the homosexual scouts and they could have their own rules. These scouting clubs have been around for years. There is room for more clubs in america.
There are various clubs and orginizations that I cannot be a member of and that is fine, for there are many others I can join if I wish too, or if I elect too. I can start my own.
America! What a country.
How about if we simply end all taxpayer subsidies for the bigots? Then they'd be free to discriminate as they like.
Yup, as soon as they stop using our public, tax paid buildings and our taxpayer dollars, they can discriminate as much as they want!!
Who would want to be a part of a mean-spirited group like they are. Gay people are discriminated against like none other. They are MUCH better than the homophobic jerks who manage the scouts. But, keep their molesters in. PFFT.. seriously
As an Eagle Scout, a Vigil Honor member of the OA, a longtime Scouter and a firm believer in Scouting for all (but not a member of "Scouting For ALL", due to its extremist approach, I would like to let everyone know that I will NOT walk away from the BSA over this issue. I will not join Camp Fire or any of the other so-called alternatives to the BSA -- their programs strike me as insipid, and vastly inferior to that of the BSA. I will not walk away from it because I can see no OBJECTIVE justification, within the core values of the BSA as embodied in the Scout Oath, Law, Motto or Slogan, for the exclusion of gays from the ranks of the BSA (I'll omit my arguments for inclusion of the nontheistic or girls as too distracting, here).
For years, I have challenged people to show me that OBJECTIVE justification. Typically, the responses are "a Scout promises to be clean, and morally straight." Well -- give me an OBJECTIVE definition of each. YOU may feel that a gay person can be neither; but I believe just as strongly that they can. I know gay people who live a much cleaner and much more morally straight lives as compared to some heterosexuals who profess a nominal faith in God but whose lives belie that profession. When I joined Boy Scouts, I joined a religiously diverse troop; and even though we were 100% heterosexual and all profesed a belief in God, we did have disagreements on the details of the principles of the Oath, Law, Motto and Slogan. My father, the son of his boyhood Scoutmaster and who then became my Scoutmaster, said that the principles of Scouting provide general guidelines. It is up to the individual Scout to fill in the details, with the help of his family, community, religion and so on. A Mormon or Muslim many supply different details that I (a Unitarian) would; but I am not going to tell them that they are wrong because their details differ from mine.
People have asserted that the BSA is a private organization, and can do as it pleases. Well, it IS a private organization -- although it operates under a Congressional Charter; but sorry, folks -- it CANNOT do as it pleases. The BSA MUST set an example for us all by following the principles of the Oath, Law, Motto and Slogan; and until someone can show us all an OBJECTIVE justification for excluding gays from the ranks of the BSA, I will continue to assert that they are wrong to continue that exclusion. One of the things which attracted me to Scouting was its universality and the feeling of brotherhood with Scouts from around the world. If we can tolerate diversity of opinions in the worldwide community of Scouting, we can tolerate it here, folks.
The same arguments apply to excluding women from Boy Scouts and men from Girl Scouts .
But pedophiles abound in the boy scouts of America, except they are not open.
Pedophiles abound in many places in our american society, including even our public educational system and religous places and are not open, until they are caught, arrested and put away for destroying a young persons life. Whats the point?
robert haile wrote "But pedophiles abound in the boy scouts of America, except they are not open."
But Boy Scout policy formally discriminates against men with a sexual attraction to other men, usually boys. BSA does what it can.
Pedophiles do NOT abound in scouts. That is completely wrong. We have many safety nets in place to prevent that behavior.
At some point, the Boy Scouts of America will change. The strongest statement that Jennifer can make would be to have Cruz continue with the program. Moreover Jennifer could volunteer for whatever needs doing as any parent can. Ditch the uniform not the child.
Ah, memories. I remember Boy Scouts. I made it to Life Scout...would have made Eagle, but there was this issue of being put in for Order of the Arrow for 4 straight years, never being selected and teased every year about it. Those are my memories. There was never any talk about homosexuality, though.
Organizations like the Boy Scouts are in a very unique position. The majority of boys doing the Boy Scout thing are living through some of their most impressionable years. Instead of wondering why homosexuals are not allowed, maybe we should wonder why they are so interested. I mean, they are just boys.
let them run the scouts without my financial support
As a Cub Scout 45 years ago I remember some fun times with my Dad and friends. It's probably the only thing I could look forward to that got my parents apart and stopped all their fighting. It got me out of the house and gave me something that I did without my brothers in the way. I was 8 I think and I new the difference between boys and girls and thought it was cool to be in an all boys club and still do. So I guess that tells you how I feel about women pretending to be men.
The Boy Scouts are more than a Sierra Club with uniforms. The group's main goals include fostering beliefs and ideals founded on a belief in God. This is not to deny that our society possesses "a wide range of moral and ethical beliefs, not all of which are founded on God." However, that does not give anyone the right to charge a private, ideologically oriented group like the Boy Scouts with immoral or illegal discrimination simply because it refuses to reduce its membership standards to a lowest common denominator of beliefs that everyone in society can agree on.
Since such a lowest common denominator is notoriously elusive, your logic suggests that the only principled thing for the Boy Scouts to do is eliminate all credos. The result would be an organization stripped of its essential function of character-building -- not because religious belief is a sine qua non of good character, but because adherence to some common basic set of principles is the best training for membership in a civilized community.
The Boy Scout are just cheap, bigoted trash. They are the worse possible model of decency and morality for modern young men. Parents should keep their kids OUT of this pernicious organization.
I believe the Boy Scouts lose a lot of potential members because of their public stance against homosexuals -- and that many of those who turn away from the Boy Scouts are actually families headed by heterosexual parents who find this homophobic policy to be offensive.
I have heard a lot of good things about the Boy Scouts and the skills they teach. I went to an informational meeting and was really tempted to sign my son up. But the organization's hostility towards gays and agnostics made me very uncomfortable. My sister and several friends of mine (all of us are married heteros) said that the vocal discrimination against gay individuals was the reason they did not want their sons to be involved in the Boy Scouts. We live in a socially progressive area...and the local boy scout pack seemed to be really low on membership here. The Boy Scouts should be aware that they are alienating more than just the target audience that they want to keep away.
Cal_shi wrote "I believe the Boy Scouts lose a lot of potential members because of their public stance against homosexuals"
And gain members because of this policy.
The Boy Scouts of America is a PRIVATE organization, which has the RIGHT to decide who it wants to include and who it does not. This woman knew this going in, and got accustomed to getting away with breaking the national policies of the group. Now they tell her she can't be involved, and she is upset? It is a travesty that there are people out there that think that they can push their own agendas and MAKE people think they way they want them to. It is not bigotry for them to make these policies, it is tradition. And it is the freedom to choose how THEY want the organization to continue. It is not being close-minded to think this way, it is the American expectation to believe how you want and not push your beliefs on others. This woman is pushing hers on the BSA, not the other way around because the BSA already let her know their expectations. This woman is just looking for pity.
The BSA is a private, quasi-religious group which unfortunately receives taxpayer money through certain government subsidies.
Those subsidies must end, especially given their discrimination against gays and atheists.
skrekk wrote "Those subsidies must end, especially given their discrimination against gays and atheists"
Your stance applies to the Girl Scouts that discriminate on the basis of sex.
The Girl Scouts are light years ahead of the Boy Scouts on gender identity issues too - they simply don't have the bizarre hangups or bigotry that Vincent and the BSA have.
Pedophilia is a straight problem. It has nothing to do with gay men or gay women. Gay men and women in mature adult relationships with other gay men and women don't molest children. There is not a single incident of a mature gay man or women that is involved with another adult gay man or women involved with the molestation of children. Let the the straight people handle their own problems.
What is the problem here? It's called the BOY scouts, not the mixed gender scouts. Why would a woman want to join a group that is for those of the male gender? It puts pressure on the kid. Let the kid have his boy time and find something else to do with your kid that doesn't involve trying to bend the rules and making a big stink so that exceptions are made for you. I would have a problem with a guy joining the GIRL guides. There are good reasons to have groups that are only based on gender as there are differences between us and we like having our gender specific time. Seriously, what is wrong with just letting your kid be normal and not causing a big stink about a non-issue?
For the brief time that I was in Cub Scouts (1970's), one of the moms was the leader of our group. Being a woman does not mean you can't be involved...
My mother was my Den Leader in Scouts. Many moms actually went on camp-outs. Having parents involved makes a world of difference.
Lots of women are leaders. I am a pack committee chair and help plan and do every activity with our son. We have many female den leaders. We are a very family oriented pack and I think that's what makes it so great. We're a big family.
@switchblade
Nobody chooses to be gay. Being a homosexual is something you are born as. There is no changing or reforming it during your life. Anyone who thinks so is a complete imbecile.
What makes being a homosexual wrong? It occurs naturally. It is something within. Committing murder and becoming heavily intoxicated are all choices a person makes. They aren't things that we are born with. That's why they are considered 'wrong' and 'bad.' Also, what makes sex before marriage wrong? Nothing. There is nothing that makes sex before marriage wrong.
What is there to overcome? Nature? Why not just embrace what you are given? Why look down upon those who are different just because they are different? It's people like you that keeps this country circling that almighty drain.
Please tell me you are joking. Really? The last time they had an ejaculation? Unless they just so happened to rub one out a few seconds prior to the study it would have absolutely zero effect. It proves that most homophobes have homosexual tendencies but are too insecure with themselves to express. In turn they suppress their true feelings and attack what bothers them the most.
First off, the bible has not been here since the beginning of time. The bible was written by man millions of years after life had already inhabited this earth. The people that wrote the bible wrote it in their own views. The wrote everything based off of how they saw the world and how things were in the time period they lived in. Just because something is in a book that doesn't make it right. Unless there is definitive evidence of such writings in such book. I mean any book. Not just the bible.
Secondly, people don't feel bad about being a homosexual because of a book. They feel bad about being homosexual because of the religious propaganda that people like you spread. (For the record I am not saying all homosexuals feel bad about a homosexual. I am merely talking about the ones that do.) You talk down about something so natural. Something that happens to all species, not just in the human species.
All in all, you really need to take a good hard look at yourself and really evaluate the kind of person you are. Don't get me wrong, you have the right to do whatever you want (within legal boundaries). I'm just saying do you really want to spend your life looking down upon people that are different. Just let people be who they are and leave them alone.
....
You make claims without any support. What evidence do you cite that being homosexual is something you are born as? What evidence do you cite that it is 100% nature and 0% nurture?
Before I can even deal with anything else you say we must deal with this first.
There is no "gay gene".
Scientific studies have found weak correlations between genetics and homosexuality, but even those that have gone into studies attempting to find a cause have failed and been forced to admit there are many other factors at work.
So it is NOT proven that people that espouse homosexuality are born that way.
On the contrary, there are many indications that it is NOT something someone is born with. Twin studies are perhaps the most telling. Identical twins show only a slightly more likelihood of both being "gay" when one would expect 100% of identical twins would be gay if genetics/hormonal causes were at work.
What evidence do you have that heterosexuality is something you're born as or that it's 100% nature and 0% nurture?
As you said: "You make claims without any support."
Cite those studies!
Most scientists will also state that there is a genetic component to homosexuality.
So when did you choose to be straight?
Identical twins are generally physically identical. But they also can have markedly different personalities, psychological makeups, interests, ect. One would expect that to not be the case either with identical twins.
Most scientists would say there is a genetic component to ALL behavior. Nothing is 100% learned - nor 100% genetics.
The only sexual activity I have ever had is with a woman. If you choose to call me "straight" so be it. I have not seen evidence to convince me that there is anything different between people that engage in homosexuality and heterosexuality EXCEPT the behavior and the resulting effects of that behavior.
Similarly I do not think that people that smoke are essentially different than non-smoking people, except the fact that the one group smokes and by engaging in that activity there are effects on the body.
You WOULD expect them to have the same personalities, if there was a claim that someone is born with a particular personality and can't change it.
Dean Hamer, a gay researcher, attempted to link male homosexuality to a stretch of DNA located at the tip of the X chromosome, the chromosome that some men inherit from their mothers. Regarding genetics and homosexuality, Hamer concluded: "We knew that genes were only part of the answer. We assumed the environment also played a role in sexual orientation, as it does in most, if not all behaviors. . . . Homosexuality is not purely genetic. . . . environmental factors play a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay. . . . I don't think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay." Hamer further writes: "The pedigree failed to produce what we originally hoped to find: simple Mendelian inheritance. In fact, we never found a single family in which homosexuality was distributed in the obvious pattern that Mendel observed in his pea plants." When the study was
duplicated by Rice with robust research, the genetic markers were found to be nonsignificant. Rice concluded. "It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer's original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer's et al, we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position XQ 28."
Simon LeVay, in his study of the hypothalamic differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men, offered the following criticisms of his own research, "It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I
didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain."
There are others who say being "gay" or "lesbian" is a choice.
Lesbian activist Camille Paglia said: "Homosexuality is not 'normal.' On the contrary it is a challenge to the norm...Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction...No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous..."
Lesbian activist and biologist Dr. Anne Fausto-Sterling, referring to the "born gay" argument, said: "It provides a legal argument that is, at the moment actually having some sway in court. For me, it's a very shaky place. It's bad science and bad politics.
You're confusing sexual orientation with sexual behavior.
And it sounds like you get all your information from anti-gay hate groups like NARTH.
You confuse behavior with orientation.
Congratulations.
The only thing different is the individual's sexual orientation.
Dean Hamer's studies have shown there is a genetic factor in homosexual orientation. He said it's not the only exclusive factor though. Only that genetics do play a part. Of course, Hamer also postulates there is a "god" gene. So I would take what he says with a grain of salt.
And there are gays and lesbians who say it's not a choice.
1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
12Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
Scripture trolling has no value or relevance!
"Look beyond differences that might separate you from others and accept them for who they are."
Boy Scout Handbook (11th ed) p. 370
Does not say accept people for whatever they want to do and openly espouse.
(You need some evidence that it is "who they are" and the scientific evidence is not there.
What a childish response. Scientific evidence? As a scientist I doubt you even know the meaning of the phrase. This is philosophical and ideological debate. We are not measuring the growth rate of boy scouts exposed to homosexuality vs those who are exposed to heterosexuality.
The whole point of that section was regarding people who were different. In life we have to deal with people who are different from us on a daily basis. In my line of work, just because someone is gay/Muslim/macho/nerdy/atheist/feminist does not mean I don't get to deal with them. I have heard plenty of their musings about life, morals, etc. I don't always accept everything they say or do, however, I do accept them for who they are as individuals. I believe it's my acceptance and respect for them which makes me an effective leader/or team member.
It's a skill I can trace back to scout camp when I met all these new boys from different schools. Some in my patrol were into this, others into that. Some had bad social skills, others were not athletic, and some were just strange. There was also one who now is openly gay. I recall having a strange feeling he was, but at that point I'm not even sure he was sure he was gay. The point being is that we teach our boys acceptance; Find out who's good at what, look beyond our differences and solve problems together. To kick out a parent who is gay is like kicking out a weak kid. In today's world I honestly think it's the adults that need a lesson on acceptance. So what, as long as a gay person or a non religious is respectful of other and reflect the scout oath and law...who cares. Scouting has lessons that everyone can use.
Everyone loses - but what right does the woman have to insist that SHE be a member of the Scouts? Her son can remain a Scout, and get all the benefits of that fine organization - without his mom looking over his shoulder at every turn, suppressing his natural reactions to events.
When I was a Scout, I would have hated the idea that either my mom or my dad be there at every turn. Once in a while at a camping trip, okay. But at every troop meeting? NO WAY !
Lighten up, lady, and stop harming your boy by making him the victim of your need to get in peoples' faces with your sexual orientation.
Oh, yeah - I'm gay.
I am a pack leader and first of all the boy is 7 so he is in a pack not a troop. The writer failed to get the terminology correct. We have never had an issue come up and to tell you the truth I don't think it would be an issue. We are a big yet close knit pack and we have people from all walks of life. We have single moms and dads, lots of ethnicity and mixed race families and even some families who consider themselves non-believers, but they do understand that we are a faith based organization and it will be a part of our programming. I honestly don't think if we had someone want to be a leader who was gay that it would be any problem. The truth is it is so difficult to find parents that want to step out and lead that we would all be so grateful that they would be willing to take on the role and help. I would be proud to have such a dedicated leader in our pack. If someone did complain to me my first response would be to ask if they are willing to take their place as a leader because more than likely they would not.
As an Eagle Scout, I recognize that the lessons to boys do not mesh with they stance on creed or sexuality.
"Look beyond differences that might separate you from others and accept them for who they are."
Boy Scout Handbook (11th ed) p. 370
In fact the bigotry against gays and atheists comes from the BSA national office in Texas, not from the local organizations.
Is that a fact? I looked at the bylaws and no where did I see anything pertaining specifically to not allowing homosexuals being leaders.
I have no problem with atheists joining our pack...they know our religious connection. If they are uncomfortable they can choose to leave, but to me I see it as an opportunity to let them learn what it is to have faith in God.
Well, I hope they let the radish people in as well. They are a little bitter with the skin on, but other wise they add a nice tang to the troops.
I bring shame of the boy scouts leading for continuing to do the unjust. "Separate is not equal.." has already been decided. Although, at the private "non-profit" cannot still seem to conform to this. I commemorate this woman and her friends who are fighting the good fight but bringing this issue to the national level. The LGBT and allies will continue to bring this issues to the table until the ethical legal protections are passed.
A message to you biggots who lack sympathy: Your losing! Get an adequate sex education. A prescribed sex education at the high school level might just work. If not, there is always jail time and fines which can go towards humanitarian causes such as the education of human sexuality and its significance in human evolution and history. Your actions will have consequences.
1Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
Leave that biblical rhetoric in church. There's separation of church and state. You can be guaranteed that msnbc is more like the state. :)
I guess Jesus, with his hanging out with prostitutes and heathen tax collectors and such, is SOL?
A fool's vexation is presently known; But a prudent man concealeth shame.
@grounded123 are you sure your working towards your supposed "Christian love?" Its okay I can make a comparison and say @!$%# your hated rhetoric. Your religion you promote is full of prejudice. Please stop wasting the world's paper by printing bull-@!$%#. Maybe an e-book bible can help you religious nuts?
If religious books are not widely circulated among the masses in this country, I do not know what is going to become of us as a nation. If truth be not diffused, then error will be. If God and His Word are not known and received, the devil and his works will gain the ascendency. If the evangelical volume does not reach every hamlet, the pages of a corrupt and licentious literature will. If the power of the gospel is not felt throughout the length and breadth of this land, anarchy and misrule, degradation and misery, corruption and darkness will reign without mitigation or end.”
― Daniel Webster
They're available all over the place.
Do something about the fact that so many who try to push theocracy on the rest of us tend to act on the "sin, repent, repeat" hypocritical version of faith and the rest of us might see more reason to look into joining the faith.
Let me check my bookshelf for a minute (and my eReader)...
Yep, got my "religious books" right here and here.
Oh, now we get to the heart of it. By "religious books" Daniel Webster means ONLY the Bible and ONLY God and/or Jesus. Spread the "religious texts" but only the one deemed worthy and everyone must convert or they'll be pawns of Satan! Everything else gets put under the heading of "corrupt and licentious" texts.
Convenient, that.
Narrow minded, too, especially since the predominant topic here is the Boy Scouts of America which supports faiths other than Christianity. Guess the Boy Scouts are "corrupt and licentious" regardless of their stance on homosexuality then!
That quote is such a great example of the intolerance perpetuated by modern Christianity. It's enough to make one wonder if "Christians" have forgotten about the gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John, where Jesus is a compassionate, tolerant, individual who accepted everyone, poor or rich, sick or well, Jew or Gentile, fed the masses without a single thought for himself, and who sacrificed himself for ALL.
Don't answer that, it's rhetorical. Jesus taught tolerance, love, and acceptance, yet supposed "good Christians" spew hate "in His name".