E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
John Makely / NBC News
Ryan Andresen completed the requirements to earn his Eagle Scout award last year, but his Scoutmaster at the time refused to sign his Eagle scout application because of his sexual orientation.
Editor's note: An earlier version of this story from Reuters mischaracterized which group had recommended the Eagle Scout rank for Ryan Andresen. It was the local volunteer review board for a California council of the Boy Scouts.
A local review board for a California council of the Boy Scouts of America has challenged the national organization by recommending that an openly gay former Scout be awarded the top rank of Eagle.
"From what I understand, this has never happened before," Eric Andresen, father of former scout Ryan Andresen, told Reuters.
"It's the first in-your-face (challenge)," said Bonnie Hazarabedian, who chaired the Boy Scout district review board that signed off on Ryan's Eagle scout application and sent it to the Mount Diablo-Silverado Council to be forwarded to the national headquarters for final approval.
But John Fenoglio, scout executive for the local council, told the Silicon Valley Mercury News on Tuesday that he had ruled that Andresen's submission was still ineligible and would not be forwarded.
Ryan, 18, and his parents drew national attention in October after his Scoutmaster refused to sign his Eagle scout application because of his sexual orientation.
More than 462,000 people subsequently signed the Andresens' petitions at Change.org calling on the Scoutmaster to sign. Meanwhile, the Andresens pushed Ryan's application up the Boy Scout hierarchy in the San Francisco Bay area, where it landed before Hazarabedian.
Gay Scouts come out, rally around teen's Eagle Scout bid
"I don't think sexual orientation should enter into why a Scout is a Scout, or whether they are Eagle material," said Hazarabedian. "We felt without a doubt he deserved that rank."
In a statement emailed to NBC News on Tuesday, Boy Scouts public relations director Deron Smith said:
"The Eagle application was forwarded, by a volunteer, to the local council but it was not approved because this young man proactively stated that he does not agree to Scouting’s principle of 'Duty to God' and does not meet Scouting’s membership requirements. Therefore, he is not eligible to receive the rank of Eagle. "
Hazarabedian told Reuters she acted on Ryan's Eagle application because it was filed before his ejection.
Obama opposes Boy Scouts' policy banning gays
"It's gotten to the point that getting the Eagle doesn't matter so much. It's the message that counts. It's the desire that no other Scout should ever have to go through this," said Eric Andresen, who was a Boy Scout leader until his son was ejected.
Hazarabedian called the BSA anti-gay policy "something out of the Dark Ages."
In 1981 when Hazarabedian was a teenager, her friend's brother Tim Curran, a gay Eagle Scout, was the plaintiff in what became the landmark case in California upholding the right of the Boy Scouts, and private organizations in general, to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.
Hazarabedian said she recalls making posters and signing petitions in support of Curran and thinking, "By the time I have a son old enough to be a Scout, that will be years from now, they will have fixed this by then, they'll be more tolerant by then. But here we are, 2013, and the same thing is going on."
Watch the most-viewed videos on NBCNews.com
Ryan, who became something of a celebrity with national television appearances and strangers asking to be photographed with him, wants to focus on his last year of high school, his father said.
"We assume someday BSA will (change), and maybe at that time Ryan can retroactively get his Eagle award," he said.
This article includes reporting by NBC News staff and Reuters.
California 17-year-old Ryan Andresen is being denied his Eagle Scout award, a top scouting honor. A Boy Scouts official said Andresen is no longer eligible for membership because he does not adhere to scouting's principle of duty to God or the membership standard on sexual orientation.
Leave a Comment:
If you don't like the policies of an organization, don't join that organization. Why should the BSA have to change their policy? The people that are so against it are totally free to start up their own Scouting club/group. If that takes away from the Boy Scouts, then I guess society will have shown them what's deemed correct.
Because the BSA accepts tax payer funded things. When they hold their events at a public school, my taxes pay for that. If the BSA doesn't want to change their policy, fine, but the next time they want want to use ANY public spaces funded by my tax dollars, they pay for it out of their own pocket.
Nice, if someone doesn't think as you do or share your values they should be banned from a public places. Liberals...they are a scary bunch of intolerant hypocrits.
I think exercising make people to skinny. Anyone who exercises should have to pay money out of their pocket to use public parks, roads, sidewalks, etc. Wahoo!!!
no dontbefooled - they shouldn't be "subsidized" at public places. Big difference. What ItsAboutTime is saying is they need to pay for use of space, any space, just like everyone else holding a program or event.
Lol dontbefooled, tell me who do you think pays for those public parks, roads, sidewalks, etc? Taxpayers, that includes those who exercise in them.
The difference is that some of these federal facilities being used by the BSA for free are built on the taxpayer's dime and designed to be rented out as a source or revenue. The BSA has no shortage of income, and needs no financial aid, so why not use these facilities as they were designed to remain self-supporting financially viable? Renting them out for free or for $1/year undermines the way in which they need to function to fund maintenance and improvements. Since you made this a Liberal vs Conservative issue take a page from the Conservative book, unless you want more spending used on these facilities you should be all about charging EVERYONE who uses them.
Actually they've lost almost all of their corporate funding due to their bigoted policies. The BSA is definitely hurting for money.
The boyscouts make nearly $300 million a year, that's after the alocate money to cover all of next year's cost.
Read this article if the link doesn't get blocked skrekk, they have lost nowhere near all of their corporate funding. They also make millions from private donations, there are plenty of rich people out there who agree with the BSA's stance against gays. They've lost maybe less than 5% of it it sounds like, but unless the BSA shares that information we won't know. Huffington post - Boy Souts Get Big Money
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/boy-scouts-get-big-money-_n_1894248.html
Ha great point riverboy!! Cut spending unless it's for a bigoted hateful "private" organization - then just ignore it!! Genius.
Riverboy, that article is more than a little out of date. Several of the largest corporate donors have completely dropped their support in the past few months, including Intel, UPS and Merck.
There are still a few others who are funding the BSA in direct conflict with their corporate donation policy, like Wells Fargo, and a few like Verizon where we don't know if they're still proving any funding.
The article is only 4 months old, the BSA has been taking this stance since day one. Some corporations have stopped, and the article talks about those too. The BSA is not hurting financially at all, it may be less, but they are still amazingly profitable by business standards.
I'm just saying that a lot has happened in the past few months since this issue hit the MSM, and the article is out of date on several key points. Public pressure and awareness seems to be working and several of the biggest donors have dropped all support since the article was written. Several of the BSA board members have resigned too because of the bigoted policy.
Otherwise it was a very good article.
You're a fool... how dare you equate the BSA to Wesboro...
You're a troll that should be kept from this vine...
HarryOintex - Exactly, that is what the first amendment is all about. If you don't agree with BSA then don't support them. The rules have been out for about 100 years so it shouldn't have surprised the guy that BSA would support his eagle nomination when he announced he was "gay." If you don't like their rules you can always work for change but don't complain when you knew about it in the beginning.
IF the BSA is raking in their dough, good for them. However, this further supplements, that they can PAY whenever using tax payer funding buildings etc. THey can keep their 18th century mentality if they want, but I do not want to have my tax dollars used to pay for it in anyway.
dontbefooled
Anyone who exercises at a GYM PAYS for the membership, its not free. If they jog in a park, their taxes pay to use that park. The BOA does NOT pay taxes. BIG huge difference.
Just a point of law for all of you. You can't prevent a legal organization from using public facilities. It's called discrimination. Discrimination is a two way street you know. If you say that the BSA cannot use a state park because they don't allow gays to be a part of their organization, then you are discriminating against those that don't want to associate with gays. The U.S. Constitution allows private groups to inculde or exclude whomever they want, and showing prejudice against any group that falls under that category is...discrimination.
So basically, your discrimination argument doesn't work. Just FYI.
The problem is that the BSA has been receiving public subsidies and preferential treatment, relative to all other private groups (including the Girl Scouts).
Tim-874396
Just FYI. Who said the BSA couldn't use public facilities? If they want to use them, let them pay for it like anyone else. If this organization wants to be a private organization, one that goes against the United States Constitution and discriminates against someone because of their sexual orientation, so be it. But we should not give it to them for free. They do not deserve 'preferential treatment either" do your homework and see just how much we give to support it at the federal, state level.
There is no discrimination argument. Its about having them pay for the facilities they use, period.
They have not been receiving public subsidies. Using a public facility, such as a park or school building, is NOT considered a subsidy. Any legal private organization is allowed to use public facilitites providing the follow whatever rules are set up to use that facility (scheduling, fees, etc).
If they are receiving "preferential treatment", that would be a different thing. I've never seen proof of such a thing, but people are claiming it. No organization should be given that in my opinion, for the simple reason that you can't have any problems if all groups have the same deal...
Sounds like you're a wee bit ignorant.
If I am a wee bit ignorant than a lot of people posting in here are complete idiots.
I am completely accurate in saying that the BSA receives no subsidies or funding from any level of government. I don't know why that rankles so many people, other than the fact that the "argument" they have been using is in fact null and void.
And so it begins...the foundation of this ridiculous restriction begins to crumble.
No...not really. They are a private organization, and under the Constitution of the United States they have a right to associate (or not associate) with whomever they please. I'm not questioning the morality of their stance, just the legal one. They have a right to exclude gays.
This board in CA that took this action will no doubt be dismissed of their responsiblities soon too I imagine.
No one here disputes that, but they should no longer receive any public subsidies.
Good luck with that. The council in question is rather large and not the only one to have refused to comply with the BSA's bigotry. The Northern Star Council in MN and several others have done the same thing. The BSA is losing this policy fight.
I've already answered the public subsidies non-argument in another post.
As to the CA and MN councils (and others), that may be true. I have no idea the depth of the refusal to comply by those councils. If it is just leadership I don't know that it will last all that long. Leadership constantly changes in councils. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few months.
At a deeper level, there are hundreds of Packs and Troops within each council. I'm curious what their collective take is on all of this, including the actions of their own council leadership against BSA policy. We will probably never know of course...
No matter what these councils do I don't see it changing BSA policy anytime soon. There are but a handful, and their disagreement doesn't change who can and can't be in scouts, or who can receive the Eagle Scout Award.
And you were entirely wrong.
skrekk - You seem like an intelligent and articulate person. I don't know why you want to keep holding on to this notion that the BSA is getting government subsidies. You can search the web for any scrap of information to back you up, but you will be wasting your time.
You've been given accurate and useful information, clearly explained, and you choose to ignore it. Isn't one definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? The results of your argument aren't going to be any different...
The BSA won't allow a young man to become an eagle scout, but they don't mind covering up what some of the leaders have done to some of the boys over the years. Recently released documents show the double standard of the BSA.
I don't really see what the lack of disclosure about sexual abuse has anything to do with a kid not getting his Eagle Scout Award because he is gay. They aren't related in any way, shape, or form. What double standrd are we talking about? I agree that the abuse coverup was wrong and I'm glad that the truth is finally out there. There was no coverup or abuse in the other case. Other than wanting to make the BSA look bad by bringing up the coverup (which does make them look bad), there's no logical reason for comparing it to the gay kid...
@Harry....I am sure this young man was not to terms with his homosexuality when he joined as a child. Even if he was he probably just wanted to fit in with the other boys his age. Yours is a ridiculous suggestion for a child. Sure as an adult I can refrain from joining a bigoted organization, but this is a child. He is a man now, but not when he joined. At best he was a confused kid trying to come to terms with his sexuality. More power to him for doing it in that homophobic, bigoted organization!
And by your standards it would be okay for The Boy Scouts not to allow blacks.....I mean if the blacks knew they weren't wanted they wouldn't want to join. How moronic. Sorry I am not usually so harsh, but your comments...really! 2012 here..catch up!
Then as he grew up and disagreed with them, he should have quit. Why should they change their standards?
private organization with private standards. don't agree? don't participate...
They should change their standards because being gay is a way you are born, you nitwits. You might as well ask the kid to change his eye color. They are asking a person to change what is fundamental to them as a person, from the time they were born and they are vilifying who that person is. Why don't you go join the Klan, they have their own standards and I am sure you two would thrive in their private organisation.
FYI the Boy Scouts get a lot of money from the US government, ergo if they are going to continue their current stance on homosexuality they need to refuse that money.
I'm a nudist. I was born this way. Accept me in public. Grant me equal rights.
Roadkill, I'm fine with it. Just put down a towel when you sit.
"They should change their standards because being gay is a way you are born, you nitwits"
That's not totally true. The latest scientific findings say people are not always born gay or straight. Think of a scale. Some people are born 10s and say that is being 100% straight. If they are born that way there is no changing them. Others are 1s. 1 being gay. Those people are not going to be changed. Most people are in the middle. Depending on their experiences they will go one way or another. Not really consciousally choosing which though. I learned that 3 years ago when I was in my last semester of grad. schools and recently read a study that said further researched confirmed this. They found some people 100% are born gay, yet it does not account for all people that are gay.
Gays will do anything for attention(hint: the bright rainbow colors). I've found that if you ignore homosexuals eventually they'll go away and take their foolishness elsewhere.
That's an ironic stance, given we see you on every article that even mentions homosexuality.
It's ok, You can come out...What are you afriad of?
How does equal rights=attention?
That Martin Luther King Jr. guy was a real attention whore... all those speeches and parades! /s
That's gotta burn, Eng.
Do you think if we ignored all bigoted and intolerant people they would "eventually go away and take their foolishness elsewhere"?
not likely because if you don't believe in homosexuality you are a bigot, so I guess the same is true of the opposite, if you belive in homosexuality you are a bigot because you do not believe in somone else's right to believe differently., Yup, take peoples rights away, foolishness I guess.
Bruce, this cartoon has the proper response to your comment:
http://s1172.beta.photobucket.com/user/dmillerparker/media/glbt-religious-freedom.jpg.html
Actually Bruce is right. The use of the word "bigot" is pretty comical considering that anyone who thinks that anyone else's line of thought is wrong is, by definition, a bigot.
Can't BSA just start producing cool motorcyles again?
Gays in the Boy Scouts gives the name of Boy Scouts a "hole" new meaning...
If you don't like the rules of the Boy Scouts, then join another organization or create one. They shouldn't have to change their standards for people who don't like them. I don't know why someone who doesn't agree with them would want to join their organization anyway.
A boy joins the BSA at age 6. Most people become aware of their sexuality around age 11 or 12.
I suppose they could be cowards and leave...or they could show true character and attempt to change a discriminatory and bigoted organization that purports to instill "values" into young men.
I prefer the latter.
it's a private organization. why should they have to change because a member didn't like it when they "found" their sexuality?
BD - good question ! why should my tax dollars go to this "private" organization so they can continue their hateful intolerance of gay people ?
what tax dollars go to them? please don't cite decades old articles and studies. and if any of these private groups are receiving tax dollars, then yes, it should stop, or they should be forced to comply with public law. can't have it both ways.
that is correct BD, and if you do look it up (i don't have time while at work, i barely have time to respond to this) you will see that they do get local gov funding, state gov funding and at one time did get federal gov funding (its how they pretty much funded their annual jamboree for about 10 years in a row). i do not think they get federal gov funding anymore, i think that has stopped.
now if all the gov funding (on all levels) does stop, they that's fine and they can exclude anyone they wish for any reason they wish
if this funding continues, then they aren't really a private organization and since my tax dollars will go to them, then they need to fix a few things.
FYI Phoenyx13: They do not get government funding. If you mean by "funding" that they use government facilities, parks, school buildings, etc., that is not "unding in the legal sense. It is also not a "subsidy" in the legal sense. I detailed this out in post 14.14.
BSA is not a direct recipient of tax money (i.e. legal definition of funding). It is incorrect to say that.
hmm.. it seems to me Tim that if you do a lil research, you will find that at the very LEAST the Scouts Jamboree is funded by the government, has been for about 10 years..
but i thought you said they get no government funding ?
regardless, my point still stands - if they do get government funding (for ANYTHING) then they need to change their policies because those are my tax dollars they are using and they are no longer private.
if they do NOT get government funding (for ANYTHING) then they are free to discriminate as they wish
The BSA receives zero tax money from any governmental agency. Zero. The national Jamboree specifically receives zero tax dollars.
If you have "research" to the contrary, I guess you could post it and let me see what you are using as evidence.
To save time, I will once again let you know that the usage of public property is NOT considered funding or subsidy, in case that is the basis for your claim about the Jamboree...
It is a shame that we were brought up to feel things like the Boy Scouts were right and moral, instead they are a pile of BIGOTS! Stop this right-wing organization from existing on American soil. Maybe we should all look at what groups and churches and political groups really are. Have we scooped what the Girl Scouts are doing?
The Girl Scouts are a great organization, inclusive of gays, transgendered, atheists, etc.
The GSA is totally unlike the dumb bigots at the BSA.
Guess the Girl Scouts don't believe in God then, though they may belive in gods.
Why would a god produce something it would only later deem offensive? Sounds like a pretty ineffectual deity.
Roger, you DO know that since you say that scouts shouldn't be allowed to exist because of what they believe that makes you a....bigot, right?
Don't cross the gays. They're vicious.
Vicious, like telling your story, and *gasp* filing a petition.
Don't cross dumb bigots, they will drag you to death behind their truck.
I knew there was a ban on gay Boy Scout Leaders, I had no idea the ban was on the brave young men who declare their sexuality. I'd be more worried about the typically not gay pedifile BS leader than I would an openly gay boy scout. . Sign the thing and give him the award he has earned.
Maybe the Boy Scouts should ban homophobes, instead.
USA Scout (BSA) membership was 2,100,000 (approx) in 1965. For the year ending December 31, 2011, BSA has lost over 589,057 registered Cub Scouts since 1998. Total membership in BSA's traditional programs has declined by approximately 25% (900,169 members), since 1997!
You could be beating a failing organization to get another notch in your leather acceptance chart. Isn't that what the Gay movement has been doing. Trying to clean up it's image?
Make you 'empowered' does it?
The BSA's ignorant bigotry is precisely why they've been losing members. Who wants to join a club of dumb bigots?
well, it seems at least the guy in the article wants to be recognized and awarded by this private organization of dumb bigots...
He wants recognition for what he earned with hard work and perseverance. You just want recognition for being a bigot and a troll.
yea and all the wetbacks want recognition for jumping the fence and getting away with it too
Nice racism there, nun ya.
it is what it is and its not racism if thats what they are and that is what an illegal is
"Wetback" is in and of itself a racist term.
Are you trying to qualify for the "I'm not racist but" meme?
So this kid is brave?BUll.A sexually active person who should not be a member of this organization.You don't want public dollars helping them?What about public dollars for abortions?You really want a pissing contest like that? It's THEIR group.Don't like it? Don't join it.
We have no idea if he is active. In Moraga, he probably wasn't. Sexual orientation in no way implies he was active.
yes pained1, we should have that contest. BSA gets federal dollars which is used directly to fund their organization and support their bigotry against homosexuals.
PP does get federal funding, but are audited constantly to ensure that none of those federal dollars goes to abortions (See Hyde Amendment, I believe).
So you are not making an equal comparison, which doesn't surprise me at all. my tax dollars go to BSA ? yes ! that doesn't make them private anymore, they get federal PUBLIC funding, so they need to act accordingly, you can't have it both ways.
try again ?
Phoenyx13, the Hyde amendment not supporting abortion at PP is a fallacy. While federal dollars do not directly pay for the proceedures themselves, they indirectly allow PP to keep their doors open and offer low cost abortion. PP wouldn't be able to pay their overhead expenses through abortion revenues alone, they have to rely in government funding for their other medical services just to keep the lights on. there is no way that any orgranization or business can offer a service at below market value and stay in business. my point is not anti or pro abortion, its none of my business or anyone elses, but i do get tired of that spin.
but i do agree, if BSA is getting federal funding, tehn they need to comply with federal equal rights laws. if they are not geting federal dollars, then they can do whatever they like in their private organization.
FYI: BSA does not receive tax dollars. They receive no funding whatsoever by any governmental agency. They do not receive subsidies either.
That's a lie. Sounds like you're pretty ignorant on this topic.
LOL. Saying it is a lie is easy. Prove it skrekk. Prove that the BSA receives subsidies.
OK, well let's get some facts right here. First of all, it wouldn't be a "chapter" that made the decision to act on the Eagle application; the BSA operates through its regional "councils", which are in turn, divided into "districts". While the story doesn't make clear which of those it's referring to, I'm guessing that since the application was approved in San Francisco proper, it was probably a council action. Now, as to the actual application; while I disagree with the original decision of the Scoutmaster, I'm not sure what can be done at this state. The reason, is that the young man has already turned 18 years of age. However, the Eagle award requirements are that ALL needed components - including the approval of the Eagle Board, the Unit Leader and the council's Eagle coordinator - must be completed BEFORE the Scout's 18th birthday, although the actual award may be presented after the Scout turns 18. There's no wiggle room in the age requirements, so it would take a special dispensation by the National Council to allow this to happen; and I don't see that occurring here.
But let's talk about the actual issue involved here; although actually, there are two separate issues here: the question of openly gay Scout leaders, AND the question of openly gay Scouts. Despite what you might think or have heard, the motivation behind the Scouts' policy is NOT one of homophobia; it's one of boundaries. While the Boy Scouts do try to help their members deal with many of the difficulties and pitfalls of growing up, sexuality is not - and never has been - part of that equation. The position of the BSA has always been, that questions and concerns of a sexual nature, are best dealt with in a family, religious or educational setting, but not in the Troop. In fact, as a Scout leader, my concern would be more directed towards a "straight" Scout who was sexually active, than it would toward a boy who might be discovering that he has an attraction toward his own gender.
Simply put, sex is not part of the Scouts' program, and if you try to introduce it, you're out - gay or straight, it don't matter. In the years that I have been associated with the BSA - boy and man - I have undoubtedly worked alongside many boys and leaders who were gay, but who had the good sense to realize that the Boy Scouts is not the place to be discussing your sex life.
As far as all the self-appointed members of the "moral police", who believe that the BSA should be somehow "forced" to change its membership policies, why don't you try that argument elsewhere, and see how it flies? Let's suggest, say, to the VFW and the American Legion, that they need to start accepting draft dodgers and conscientious objectors into their organization. Yeah, I wanna be there when you make that argument. How about if we put pressure on the Academy of Motion Pictures, to allow anybody who went to the movie theater last year, to vote for the Oscars? Or maybe, the NAACP would be improved with some members who also belong to the KKK?
Look, while I do feel sorry for this young man, and I think that his Scoutmaster behaved abominably - in fact, if he were the leader in charge of one of MY Troops, he's be out the door - but the fact remains, that this young man wanted to make a statement about his sexuality, in a forum where that's inappropriate. He chose to make an issue of his sexuality, because he wanted to make a point; in that, he was successful, but he could not have been unaware of the possible consequences when he did it.
Am I biased? Heck, yes! I'm an Eagle Scout myself, in addition to having been a Scout leader in several different Troops over the past few decades, I'm currently a Unit Commissioner, and I hold the distinction of having been the youngest Scoutmaster, in the 102-year history of the BSA! I also know that whatever success or recognition I may enjoy as an adult, is due - in large part- to the lessons I learned as a Scout and Scout leader. And in all that time since I first put on a Cub Scout uniform - almost 50 years - I have never heard anybody speak a single word denigrating gays, atheists, or any of the other narrow-minded factions that seek to destroy this American institution; maybe - just maybe - it's because one of the things that the Scouts teaches is tolerance - a lesson which some of you could stand to learn!
All evidence to the contrary.
Funny you should bring that up given that it appears to be the KKK and racist Southern Baptists who ran the Boy Scouts in southern states for many decades, where segregated troops were the norm. Can't have those dirty black kids playing with our wholesome white boys. Sounds like bigots never change their stripes.
good grief, he's trying to make a point. a gay joining or participating in a private group that doesn't approve of gays, but expects them to change on their behalf is silly. it's like an athiest joining some church. or someone anti-gun joining the NRA. a private organization has every right, whether you agree with them or not, to determine their own membership and standards. it's a private organization, joining is a choice, and so is not joining or participating.
He joined before he ever knew he was gay and has behaved in a very honrable way the entire time.
then he has to make a big boy decision and leave the group, not try to force them to recognize him. it's like me staying in church after i decided i was an atheist. behavior is irrelevant if it goes against his convictions.
It may very well be a private organization but we all have the right to express our disagreement with the stance. That's exactly what is happening and it is working according to the article. One of it's own groups is choosing to defy the rule. Good for them.
I thought being a "gay" pedophile was a requirement for being a Boy Scout leader. And that they'd be proud to make this sweetie pie an Eagle Scout. Actually, it's not funny. This kid has been brought up to live a life of shame, embarrassment, and high risk for some devastating diseases. Give him the #^@%ing badge and let it go.
Is that the same requirement for a priest entering the catholic church? This kid should be brought up in world free of shame and embarassment brought upon by bigots who think they have the right to do so. As for disease, yes.. no devestating diseases in the heterosexual world at all.
Nope, none
not aids bump a rump unless it came from somone gay upstream
A lot of straight people have anal sex you nitwit. Are you 14 or something?
Must be sad to learn that the majority of AIDS cases worldwide are heterosexual males.
men meh Thats not what causes aids you nit whit. Ive been around as long as aids and had a freind survive it through such a coctail of drugs from out of this country illegaly,the cure almost killed him. He cured himself, he got it from a transfusion befrore they started testing blood for it. So go back to school and learn before opening your pie hole. Anal sex is just one way of transmitting it so you must be 14 and havent finished school yet
alls well you need to get your facts together as well go to sleep
nun ya
Yawn... save it. There are plenty of ways for HIV to be transmitted. The last time I checked, it didn't discriminate if you were gay/straight. It just destroys you.
So you admit that AIDS isn't a "gay disease".
Considering every study of the worldwide epidemic supports what I said? I think its you who needs their nap.
Come on BSA, create a safe trolling environment for these people.
Does this include churches, schools, places of employment, neighbors parks... because those are also 'environment's save for trolling right?
Sarcasm
People are what they are someone does not ask to be gay it is something that just happens! leave those people alone! We as a Nation have many more pressing problems to worry about than this BS
Congratulations Ryan. You deserve your Eagle rank.
Still a free country here isn't it? If the boy scouts don't want gay boy scouts and leaders, then they should be able to not have gay boy scouts and leaders. Gay kids and leaders should go out and start a gay boy scout club. Easy and simple solution. Why does everyone have to have everyone elses beliefs, opinions, and PC crammed at them? The solutions are so easy....
I was a cub scout and a boy scout and I grew up to be gay. Do you want me to give my badges back too?
Absolutely true - as private organizations the BSA and the KKK are both free to be as bigoted as they like.
But that doesn't mean they have a right to be free from ridicule for their backwards and benighted policies.
Only if you want to. You grew up to be gay.... were you pushing a gay agenda in the boy scout meetings? Doubt it. Now, go think of how to get loose from your paper bag some more. I was personally tossed out of the cub scouts when I was a kid. We were very very poor, mom worked two or three jobs at a time, and my principle thought it would be good for me to be in a fine organization like the cub scouts and boy scouts. Went to the first meeting and was told my mom had to buy me a shirt and junk... didn't get it and they were going to toss me out but for some reason did not. About the 3rd meeting I went to they gave me the giant cookie can to bring back full for the next meeting. Mom didn't have time to cook, and we couldn't afford boxes of cookies, so I brought it back empty. The lady was burning mad at me, and tossed me out of the Cub Scouts. I didn't get plastered on NBC news... just told them to shove it and left. Easy solution. They just need to start their own gay boy scouts and have fun with people who want to be together. Easy solution...
Actually I grew up to be a straight white guy, but like most bigots you think that anyone who supports equal rights for a minority must themselves be a member of that minority.
That's what black scouts were forced to do because of bigots like you.
And very odd that you think all non-gays want to be together, or that all gays want to be together. Maybe what you really need is to found your own scouting group for dumb bigots? Or do you agree that the BSA already fulfills that role?
Your pack leader was a douche. My Mom would have helped your Mom out.
Schrekkk, first, please please please would you people go look up the definition of "bigot". It would really help in your angry hate filled judgemental phrasing. Really. Second, that is how you get people to understand... by hate speech and ridicule? Very constructive. Next, if the Boy Scouts or KKK or Black Panthers or anyone else makes a decision, then that is their decision. If they are not out hurting anyone, then why is it your place to "ridicule" them for their personal beliefs? Isn't that what gay people are fighting all the time, peoples ridicule? You folks just don't think through your own hypocrisy. If I am a Chicago Bears fan, and I walk up to a bar on a Saturday night that says "Green Bay Packer fan bar", and I go in wearing my big Chicago jersey and yell out "Lombardi sucked!" and then wasted my night fighting with Packer fans trying to convince them that being a Packer fan was just awful, and they dumped beer on me, called me names, and pelted me with cheese curds and bratwurst all night... and then I went onto the view the next morning complaining that those Packer fans were just terrible people and were nasty to me all night. I might get Whooopppeee to call them racist, and Joby to agree they are terrible and football is terrible. but I would be kind of stupid in the end. What I could have done would have been to turn around and either go to the bar that said "Chicago Bears fan bar" or "Any football fan welcome here bar" across the street. Or started my own Bears bar. Then I could have had a really fun Saturday night and avoided all the problem. Or something like that.
Nice that your mom would have helped me out. But the one I had showed me the door. Never looked back, never cared, had more fun out playing with my real friends.
So what is the jerks name that refused to sign his Eagle Scout papers? The article names everyone else why leave him out?
they have never allowed gays get over it its not anything new start your own club tolerance my butt. next thing you know their will be a new woodsman badge. lol
Never allowed gays? That's strange, given that the World Scouting Movement was founded by a gay dude.
skrekk lol your funny no it wasn't founded by a gay you moron
Nun, you're reported for CoH violations.
Also, you may want to educate yourself on the World Scouting Movement.
so proves your a pud and I was a scout dill weed when it was for the edjucation and growth of men
nun ya, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
Skrekk - There is no proof that the founder of Scouting was gay. And who knows, maybe he was. But don't go ruining the rest of your intelligent posting by playing that game. It accomplishes nothing, you know?
Sally, shouldn't half of the people in here be suspended for a day? Damn, if calling someone a moron will get you tossed then I'm as guilty as anyone...
actually sally im still here and i havent attacked anyone personaly so bite me
You were suspended for a day...and your post is exactly 43 mins after that 24hr ban expired.
No @!$%# you're still here.
Oh, and attacking the mods while saying you aren't attacking anyone? Not very intelligent.
The issue is not about the boy being a certain orientation. The Boy Scouts have decided to be a religious-based organization and as such, have decided who they include or exclude in their membership. The bigger issue is the groups who are forcing their way in and trying to force the Boy Scouts to accept a certain type of member when the Supreme Court has ruled they are an independent body and can exclude whomever they want. Activists should start their own group and leave them alone. This person knew the rules and is trying to force their hand. Whether or not I agree with the orientation does not factor in here, this is about trying to bully this organization. Sort of like forcing Muslims to be accepted into the Jewish Anti-Defamation League!
Actually the BSA is explicitly non-sectarian. Given that there are many denominations like the Episcopal church which don't hate gays, the BSA's anti-gay policy seems to be a violation of their charter.
Religion and Homosexuality are not two mutually exclusive things.
Err too stupid, I had to erase it
the girl scouts doesn't allow boys start that going sounds like discrimination to me
The Girl Scouts however don't care if you are Lesbian or not.
are we sure????
Yes they do.. I led both my troops. Had a gay girl in one of them...she was as welcome as any.
And the GS allow male leaders...
They even have a badge "my dad is a GS leader"