PDA

View Full Version : Eagle Scouts return badges because BSA bans gays



Hubie
08-03-2012, 01:08 AM
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/02/13074659-eagle-scouts-return-badges-to-protest-policy-banning-gays?lite


Bill DeVos, a Scoutmaster in upstate New York, packed up his Eagle Scout medal, badge and knot, and mailed the awards to the Boy Scouts’ headquarters in Texas.

Though it was hard to part with the symbols of his Scouting achievements that harkened to his childhood, the 56-year-old father of two Eagle Scouts said he didn’t want them as long as the organization kept its ban on gay Scouts and leaders.

...

In doing so, DeVos, joined dozens of other Eagle Scouts who said in online postings that they have sent back their medals, badges or membership cards following the Boy Scouts’ announcement on July 17 that it would keep the ban on gays in place after a confidential, two-year review. DeVos was hoping to remain part of the Scouts organization and push for change from within, but others who returned medals said they were done with the organization.

A spokesman for the Boy Scouts of America, Deron Smith, said 50,000 Scouts earn the Eagle rank every year, and that a “few” had returned their medals, badges or certificates since July 17. When asked for a precise number, Smith said it would be hard to say since there was no standard way to return the items.

Good! The BSA is better off without them in their ranks. These people should start dressing as girls and join the Girl Scouts. I hear the GSA is into that.

NJCardFan
08-03-2012, 01:12 AM
This guy is just cluing himself with this? It's been the BSA's stance from day one.

Janice
08-03-2012, 01:27 AM
Doing us all a favor ...

txradioguy
08-03-2012, 04:16 AM
Yes...but where they HIS medals or someone elses he mailed back?

Adam Wood
08-03-2012, 07:58 AM
Yes...but where they HIS medals or someone elses he mailed back?I was just about to ask if he threw them over a fence....

txradioguy
08-03-2012, 08:36 AM
I was just about to ask if he threw them over a fence....

GMTA :cool:

LukeEDay
08-03-2012, 08:40 AM
I wonder if either he, or one of his sons is gay? *scratching head*

Pulpfishin
08-03-2012, 09:53 AM
I din't send them my Eagle Scout badge, but I did send them a check for $250!!!!!!!!

MountainMan
08-03-2012, 11:48 AM
My son is at the BSA camp this week.
His aunt posted last week on facebook, when the BSA came out with their report regarding their position on homosexual leaders, that she didn't want her son to EVER be involved with the BSA because of their "hateful policy". I posted back that when her nephew gets his Eagle Scout badge in a few years, I asked her if that means we can already count on you to not attend the ceremony? I then let her know that despite her bigoted and ignorant view, the BSA has NEVER taught the boys to hate ANYONE and that if she can't see the difference that maybe she needs to educate herself.

Elspeth
08-03-2012, 11:51 AM
I was just about to ask if he threw them over a fence....

Damn! Beat me to it!

Adam Wood
08-03-2012, 10:55 PM
My son is at the BSA camp this week.
His aunt posted last week on facebook, when the BSA came out with their report regarding their position on homosexual leaders, that she didn't want her son to EVER be involved with the BSA because of their "hateful policy". I posted back that when her nephew gets his Eagle Scout badge in a few years, I asked her if that means we can already count on you to not attend the ceremony? I then let her know that despite her bigoted and ignorant view, the BSA has NEVER taught the boys to hate ANYONE and that if she can't see the difference that maybe she needs to educate herself.I loved BSA camp. I could cover a dozen merit badges in a week. I swear I learned more in that week in the summer than I learned all year in school.

LukeEDay
08-04-2012, 12:44 PM
I was never in Boy Scouts. But I was in The Royal Rangers. It is the same thing as the Boy Scouts, but done through the church. It was a lot of fun going camping, earning badges and learning all kinds of cool things.

ASquareDealer
08-10-2012, 06:18 PM
What's so horrible about the idea of gays in the Scouts? I was in the Boy Scouts for several years myself as a kid and to be honest I wouldn't care if someone in it was gay as long as they didn't hit on me or harass me. All the gays whom I know already know off the bat that I am straight and thus respect my boundaries. Just because a fellow is gay doesn't mean he's going to want every male he sees, or harass someone of the same sex. Gays are just people who happen to be sexually attracted to the same gender....Otherwise no real difference between them, me or you. If they want to flaunt their sexuality, that is a different story and should not be allowed. Flaunting any sort of sexuality shouldn't be allowed in an organization like the Cub Scouts.

txradioguy
08-10-2012, 06:23 PM
What's so horrible about the idea of gays in the Scouts? I was in the Boy Scouts for several years myself as a kid and to be honest I wouldn't care if someone in it was gay as long as they didn't hit on me or harass me. All the gays whom I know already know off the bat that I am straight and thus respect my boundaries. Just because a fellow is gay doesn't mean he's going to want every male he sees, or harass someone of the same sex. Gays are just people who happen to be sexually attracted to the same gender....Otherwise no real difference between them, me or you. If they want to flaunt their sexuality, that is a different story and should not be allowed. Flaunting any sort of sexuality shouldn't be allowed in an organization like the Cub Scouts.


Color me shocked that you don't get it. :rolleyes:

Rockntractor
08-10-2012, 06:23 PM
What's so horrible about the idea of gays in the Scouts? I was in the Boy Scouts for several years myself as a kid and to be honest I wouldn't care if someone in it was gay as long as they didn't hit on me or harass me. All the gays whom I know already know off the bat that I am straight and thus respect my boundaries. Just because a fellow is gay doesn't mean he's going to want every male he sees, or harass someone of the same sex. Gays are just people who happen to be sexually attracted to the same gender....Otherwise no real difference between them, me or you. If they want to flaunt their sexuality, that is a different story and should not be allowed. Flaunting any sort of sexuality shouldn't be allowed in an organization like the Cub Scouts.

Start your own organization, nothing is stopping you.

CactusCarlos
08-10-2012, 06:27 PM
What's so horrible about the idea of gays in the Scouts? I was in the Boy Scouts for several years myself as a kid and to be honest I wouldn't care if someone in it was gay as long as they didn't hit on me or harass me. All the gays whom I know already know off the bat that I am straight and thus respect my boundaries. Just because a fellow is gay doesn't mean he's going to want every male he sees, or harass someone of the same sex. Gays are just people who happen to be sexually attracted to the same gender....Otherwise no real difference between them, me or you. If they want to flaunt their sexuality, that is a different story and should not be allowed. Flaunting any sort of sexuality shouldn't be allowed in an organization like the Cub Scouts.

I've got a better question: why don't gays form their own scouting organization instead of expending all the effort to infiltrate the Boy Scouts of America?

Hubie
08-10-2012, 06:48 PM
I've got a better question: why don't gays form their own scouting organization instead of expending all the effort to infiltrate the Boy Scouts of America?

The answer to that is simple: it's because their true goal is to silence everyone who dares think differently and force them under serious penalties -- up to and including jail time -- to conform.

ASquareDealer
08-10-2012, 06:50 PM
Start your own organization, nothing is stopping you.

I'm not gay. Feeling that there's really not much different between you, myself and a gay guy except for our respective choices in bedroom companions doesn't make you gay. I understand the idea of freedom of association but at the same time, I don't see why gays are a large issue on their agenda such that they'd explicitly say they do not want gays. Why not have a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy regarding all sexuality in general in an organization like the Scouts, which is supposed to be innocent? It's kind of sad that they'd be excluded from an institution like the Boy Scouts--one with a long, good history to the point that they'd need to be forced to create their own, which wouldn't garner nearly as much respect or prestige. What should the Boy Scouts care about who a person is sleeping with, as long as their conduct in the bedroom is within the law?. It's like the Irish Need Not Apply thing years ago...Discrimination is still discrimination, IMO--Whether you're discriminating against the Irish, the religious or gays.

I guess one is right though in the final analysis. They could always start their own organization. I simply sympathize because I think, while they do get pride parades and whatnot, gays have been treated generally horribly thorough history. Things like the "Flamers" and the Pride Parades and whatnot do NOT help their cause nor does pushing their sexuality in everyone's face, but at the same time, that's not all gay people. And it's sad that many dislike or hate gays in general because of a loud minority.

I just don't feel someone should be discriminated against because of who they are unless they're hurting others in the process or if they are acting inappropriate. I'm a liberal leaning person but I wouldn't disallow a conservative from being a part of anything I created. I wouldn't say "If you're a Republican you're not allowed."

Adam Wood
08-10-2012, 09:29 PM
What's so horrible about the idea of gays in the Scouts? I was in the Boy Scouts for several years myself as a kid and to be honest I wouldn't care if someone in it was gay as long as they didn't hit on me or harass me. All the gays whom I know already know off the bat that I am straight and thus respect my boundaries. Just because a fellow is gay doesn't mean he's going to want every male he sees, or harass someone of the same sex. Gays are just people who happen to be sexually attracted to the same gender....Otherwise no real difference between them, me or you. If they want to flaunt their sexuality, that is a different story and should not be allowed. Flaunting any sort of sexuality shouldn't be allowed in an organization like the Cub Scouts.
I'm not gay. Feeling that there's really not much different between you, myself and a gay guy except for our respective choices in bedroom companions doesn't make you gay. I understand the idea of freedom of association but at the same time, I don't see why gays are a large issue on their agenda such that they'd explicitly say they do not want gays. Why not have a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy regarding all sexuality in general in an organization like the Scouts, which is supposed to be innocent? It's kind of sad that they'd be excluded from an institution like the Boy Scouts--one with a long, good history to the point that they'd need to be forced to create their own, which wouldn't garner nearly as much respect or prestige. What should the Boy Scouts care about who a person is sleeping with, as long as their conduct in the bedroom is within the law?. It's like the Irish Need Not Apply thing years ago...Discrimination is still discrimination, IMO--Whether you're discriminating against the Irish, the religious or gays.

I guess one is right though in the final analysis. They could always start their own organization. I simply sympathize because I think, while they do get pride parades and whatnot, gays have been treated generally horribly thorough history. Things like the "Flamers" and the Pride Parades and whatnot do NOT help their cause nor does pushing their sexuality in everyone's face, but at the same time, that's not all gay people. And it's sad that many dislike or hate gays in general because of a loud minority.

I just don't feel someone should be discriminated against because of who they are unless they're hurting others in the process or if they are acting inappropriate. I'm a liberal leaning person but I wouldn't disallow a conservative from being a part of anything I created. I wouldn't say "If you're a Republican you're not allowed."You have a nice, idyllic view of this, and that's nice and kind of you and all of that, but unfortunately you're missing out (or just ignoring) some very real-world issues at play here.

You're new, so by way of introduction, I'll say that I'm fairly open-minded about gay people. I don't like homosexuality. I find it (the act of homosexuality, not so much the desires and whatnot) disgusting, honestly. But that's just the way things are. There is little hacks me off more than panty-waist liberals who get all bent out of shape over something that offends their overly-delicate sensibilities, so I would be a pretty severs hypocrite if I just got all bent out of shape over gay people engaging in behavior that offends me. Ergo, I tend to just say "fuck it; live and let live" when it comes to gay people. I don't particularly care whether gay people serve in the armed forces; I resigned myself to the idea that gay people are already in the military anyway, and I have the luxury of being an "armchair warrior" and say that if they can kill the enemy as well as the next straight guy (or gal), then I think I'd rather have their muzzles generally pointing in that direction.


Now, with all of that out of the way, the BSA is a bit of a special case. In the perfect, idyllic world that you portray, boys are sweet, innocent things from age 12-18, with never a thought of sex in their heads, and the (often) young to middle-aged adult males only have pure thoughts and intentions. Here in the real world, boys from age 12-18 have raging hormones and all manner of sexual confusion and wonder. And usually a hard-on. I know: I was once a boy, all the way from age 12 to age 18. Now, a lot of gay people won't admit it (though some of them will), but a whole lot of young men are "recruited" into the gay lifestyle by older men (usually from late 20s to early 40s, just about the age of your typical Scoutmaster). I've personally seen this go on at least a dozen times, and I've even had an older gay man try to "recruit" me when I was 17 or 18. Lots will try to deny that this happens, but there are plenty of reasonably honest gay people out there who will admit this is the truth when cornered.

That makes the BSA an incredibly fertile garden gay men who want to have boys who can be "molded" into other gay men, who then grow older and find a new batch of recruits.



Whether any gay people want to admit it or not (most don't now, though they were screaming this from the rooftops 20 and 30 years ago), homosexuality is a choice. It may not be a conscious choice, but it's a choice. And gays themselves have forced this to be the only possible choice: for many years, homosexuality was considered a mental defect, and then they screamed that it wasn't, so homosexuality was taken out of the DSM, and they proudly proclaimed that they were exercising their choice, but then when choice became inconvenient, they said that it was not a choice. But it can't not be a choice if it's not a mental defect, so it has to be some sort of genetic differentiation. But decades of very well-funded research has yet to find this elusive "gay gene." The reason that it hasn't been found is that it doesn't exist, because homosexuality is a choice. Of course, the gay lobby can't admit that now, because it would blow everything they hope to achieve in special rights for gays right out of the water. So they press on with this ludicrous "genetic gay" crap because it sounds good on Capitol Hill and it garners sympathy. After all, who can blame the poor gay people who can't help but bugger each other in the ass?




So, I'm sorry, but the BSA is just not the place to put unsupervised gay men with impressionable young boys. It's just too much of a risk, and the BSA has every right to, and is right in, doing what they can to mitigate that risk.


You (the Royal You) wanna be gay? Fine by me. Go be gay and bugger as many other willing guys in the ass that you want to. I find it utterly disgusting, but it's none of my business so long as it's two consenting grown-ups. But when you're engaging in, for lack of a better description, gay pederasty, then I'm sorry, but I draw the line when it comes to private organizations who don't want you doing that to their boys who are otherwise growing up to be healthy, hearty, well-rounded men who, statistically, go on to lead successful lives.

Rockntractor
08-10-2012, 09:36 PM
You're new, so by way of introduction,

He isn't new, he is Caughtinthemiddle and we let him back in.

Adam Wood
08-10-2012, 09:39 PM
He isn't new, he is Caughtinthemiddle and we let him back in.Well, OK, new to me. But I gather I just expended a whole weekend's worth of nice on a fruitless effort....

Rockntractor
08-10-2012, 09:41 PM
Well, OK, new to me. But I gather I just expended a whole weekend's worth of nice on a fruitless effort....

Excellent pun though, I give you an 8.

Adam Wood
08-11-2012, 12:10 AM
Excellent pun though, I give you an 8.OK, now I'm totally lost.



Anyway, SquareD or whatever your name is these days, I'm sorry, but the world just doesn't need gay scout leaders. If homosexuals want to have a private organization of gay scout leaders leading gay kids out in the woods, that's fine with me. My guess is that such an organization won't last terribly long, though.

AmPat
08-11-2012, 11:09 AM
OK, now I'm totally lost.



Anyway, SquareD or whatever your name is these days, I'm sorry, but the world just doesn't need gay scout leaders. If homosexuals want to have a private organization of gay scout leaders leading gay kids out in the woods, that's fine with me. My guess is that such an organization won't last terribly long, though.
Just think of the fabulous uniforms and pink sashes. Oh, and the flair is to die for.

ASquareDealer
08-12-2012, 11:20 AM
You have a nice, idyllic view of this, and that's nice and kind of you and all of that, but unfortunately you're missing out (or just ignoring) some very real-world issues at play here.

You're new, so by way of introduction, I'll say that I'm fairly open-minded about gay people. I don't like homosexuality. I find it (the act of homosexuality, not so much the desires and whatnot) disgusting, honestly. But that's just the way things are. There is little hacks me off more than panty-waist liberals who get all bent out of shape over something that offends their overly-delicate sensibilities, so I would be a pretty severs hypocrite if I just got all bent out of shape over gay people engaging in behavior that offends me. Ergo, I tend to just say "fuck it; live and let live" when it comes to gay people. I don't particularly care whether gay people serve in the armed forces; I resigned myself to the idea that gay people are already in the military anyway, and I have the luxury of being an "armchair warrior" and say that if they can kill the enemy as well as the next straight guy (or gal), then I think I'd rather have their muzzles generally pointing in that direction.

I agree with your general stance on homosexuality. The idea of gay sex or gay acts is very unappealing, and I could never understand how a man couldn't be attracted to a woman. I simply cannot wrap my head around a gay guy seeing a beautiful woman and not recognizing her beauty or wanting her. My position towards whatever gays do in their bedrooms is more one of apathy than of revulsion; I don't care as long as I'm left alone and I'm not harassed and as long as no one is being hurt nor any illegal acts are happening. And I agree with you on gays in the military. As long as they can shoot straight, who cares?



Now, with all of that out of the way, the BSA is a bit of a special case. In the perfect, idyllic world that you portray, boys are sweet, innocent things from age 12-18, with never a thought of sex in their heads, and the (often) young to middle-aged adult males only have pure thoughts and intentions. Here in the real world, boys from age 12-18 have raging hormones and all manner of sexual confusion and wonder. And usually a hard-on. I know: I was once a boy, all the way from age 12 to age 18. Now, a lot of gay people won't admit it (though some of them will), but a whole lot of young men are "recruited" into the gay lifestyle by older men (usually from late 20s to early 40s, just about the age of your typical Scoutmaster). I've personally seen this go on at least a dozen times, and I've even had an older gay man try to "recruit" me when I was 17 or 18. Lots will try to deny that this happens, but there are plenty of reasonably honest gay people out there who will admit this is the truth when cornered.

That makes the BSA an incredibly fertile garden gay men who want to have boys who can be "molded" into other gay men, who then grow older and find a new batch of recruits.

I perfectly understand all the sorts of raging hormones that go on at that age. I'm 21 turning 22 myself so not too far removed from the teenage years. I also went to High School in an non co-ed Catholic High School. I've honestly never ever seen any sort of recruitment. If it happens I've never been a target, though in fairness, the only gays I've known were those in my own age group.

Now with the rampant horniness of the teenage years, I still don't see how a teen could be "recruited" into homosexuality. A young kid could be molested, for sure, and that sadly happens all too often, but a young boy who is molested isn't necessarily going to be gay...I know when I was in High School, even in our first year (which you figure we would've been 13-14) we all knew what being gay was. And I think a great portion of us knew what we liked in terms of sexuality. I don't see how a teenager, at least in today's world, could be "recuited" into liking men. They could be seduced, perhaps, by a pervert, into indulging gay acts...But I don't believe any of us has a choice in whether we like women or men. I certainly don't recall "choosing" to find women attractive at any point in my life; From as far back as I can remember--age 3 or so--I always liked girls. Now, that's just my subjective experience but using that...I don't see that there's a choice in being attracted to whatever you're attracted to.



Whether any gay people want to admit it or not (most don't now, though they were screaming this from the rooftops 20 and 30 years ago), homosexuality is a choice. It may not be a conscious choice, but it's a choice. And gays themselves have forced this to be the only possible choice: for many years, homosexuality was considered a mental defect, and then they screamed that it wasn't, so homosexuality was taken out of the DSM, and they proudly proclaimed that they were exercising their choice, but then when choice became inconvenient, they said that it was not a choice. But it can't not be a choice if it's not a mental defect, so it has to be some sort of genetic differentiation. But decades of very well-funded research has yet to find this elusive "gay gene." The reason that it hasn't been found is that it doesn't exist, because homosexuality is a choice. Of course, the gay lobby can't admit that now, because it would blow everything they hope to achieve in special rights for gays right out of the water. So they press on with this ludicrous "genetic gay" crap because it sounds good on Capitol Hill and it garners sympathy. After all, who can blame the poor gay people who can't help but bugger each other in the ass?


What do you mean it's not a CONSCIOUS choice? What sort of "choice" would it be? As far as I'm concerned, the only "choice" with regard to sexuality is choosing to act or not. What I mean is, I don't feel gays choose to find others of their own sex attractive, just as I don't choose to find certain women attractive. We can't force ourselves to be attracted to something our mind or body just isn't into.

But there is the choice to act on our desires or attractions. A gay person I don't feel chooses to be attracted to another man or woman, but they do choose to sleep with that person. Now, some feel they should NOT do it. That they should repress their desires or whatever. I feel this is wrong, personally. As long as you're not hurting anyone or doing something illegal I don't see why a person can't do what makes them happy.

I'm aware of the DSM calling homosexuality a mental defect and how it was changed in the '70s under pressure from gay activists and the like. I don't myself know the origin of homosexuality, but I've heard things about gays' brains being wired differently than straights. I don't know if that's true but it'd make sense. Others have said nature itself creates gays as a form of population control. Dunno if that's true either. I don't believe in a gay gene...Never did.

Now, even if it is a choice...I say again so what? Why should I be up in arms over something that would never effect me, that isn't harming anyone? I think it's very dangerous ground to start calling things we find icky "mental defects." Because if you label something as a mental defect, than you'd want to "treat" it, so you can "cure" it. That's the kind of thinking, IMO, that led to the ugliness of eugenics--Getting rid of the undesirables, the unwanted, the icky people. For the eugenicists, prostitutes, the poor, the slow, drunks and others were the icky people, the dead weight of society, who in order to create a better society should be treated or sterilized. It's a very dangerous road to go down....All of us have our own sexual things and whatnot and what happens if someone prudish comes along and says that our private bedroom practices are the result of a metal defect?

I'd only support such efforts in the case of behaviors that clearly harm people, such as pedophilia. From what I've seen, pedophiles in large measure do not choose to like young children and feel on a level it is wrong to like children. Yet they are compelled to act on their desires the same way an alcoholic is compelled to drink. That I would support all sorts of therapy for.



So, I'm sorry, but the BSA is just not the place to put unsupervised gay men with impressionable young boys. It's just too much of a risk, and the BSA has every right to, and is right in, doing what they can to mitigate that risk.


You (the Royal You) wanna be gay? Fine by me. Go be gay and bugger as many other willing guys in the ass that you want to. I find it utterly disgusting, but it's none of my business so long as it's two consenting grown-ups. But when you're engaging in, for lack of a better description, gay pederasty, then I'm sorry, but I draw the line when it comes to private organizations who don't want you doing that to their boys who are otherwise growing up to be healthy, hearty, well-rounded men who, statistically, go on to lead successful lives.

I don't feel scoutmasters or the like should be gay...I'm talking about a kid who wants to join. If a kid, a teenager, whatever, wants to join and he happens to identify as gay, I don't feel the kid should be excluded. I really doubt a teenager or kid is going to engage in pederasty. An adult man perhaps, but there's the thing of all gay men not being pedophiles. I don't feel gay men are all pedophiles. Some definitely are. It is questionable to a degree that an adult gay male would want to join an organization of young men, though.

Gina
08-12-2012, 11:50 AM
I don't feel scoutmasters or the like should be gay...I'm talking about a kid who wants to join. If a kid, a teenager, whatever, wants to join and he happens to identify as gay, I don't feel the kid should be excluded.
This brings up one of my issues about gay people. Why would a kid have to announce that he's gay? Just to see if they'll let him in? Normal people don't go somewhere and say "hi I'm Joe and I'm (gay, straight,) whatever." It all seems like attention-getting behavior to me. Maybe some people like to be made to feel bad.

I don't announce what I do in the bedroom, and I sure don't want you to either.

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 11:51 AM
........ the BSA has NEVER taught the boys to hate ANYONE and that if she can't see the difference that maybe she needs to educate herself.

What emotion would you categorize a ban on gay people with? What message does it send to young people? How do you think it affects the gay boy who is in the BSA already?

How noble are we to view an organization which maintains that it serves a vital role in the nurture of young men but seeks to deny that service to young gay men?

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 11:56 AM
I've got a better question: why don't gays form their own scouting organization instead of expending all the effort to infiltrate the Boy Scouts of America?

Gay people do not infiltrate society, gay people are a part of society. One cannot maintain that the BSA is part and parcel to American society and then view it as exclusive and apart. The court has ruled that the BSA is a private religious club which has the right to discriminate. The Mormon Church, which has undue influence in the BSA, had every right to discriminate against blacks as well and did. That doesn't mean that it was right or immune from criticism for having done so. Just because the BSA won the right to discriminate against gay boys while pretending to be open to all boys, doesn't mean that it should.

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 12:08 PM
Now, a lot of gay people won't admit it (though some of them will), but a whole lot of young men are "recruited" into the gay lifestyle by older men (usually from late 20s to early 40s, just about the age of your typical Scoutmaster). I've personally seen this go on at least a dozen times, and I've even had an older gay man try to "recruit" me when I was 17 or 18. Lots will try to deny that this happens, but there are plenty of reasonably honest gay people out there who will admit this is the truth when cornered.

Yes Adam, it's the huge secret that we all swear to on our 18th birthday when we get the secret handshake and decoder ring. Or by putting "recruited" in quotes did you mean something other than the ridiculous notion that some young men magically have their sexual orientation changed by a Hermie moment? What the fuck are you talking about? Somebody tried to seduce you when you were 17 or 18? Imagine that! Welcome to the world of every 17 or 18 year old girl who doesn't have a face that scares small animals. When some guy tries to pick up Sally Seventeen is he "recruiting" her? When I was 17 our next door neighbor creeped me out with what I thought was a sexual advance, and boy did I go running away from her! What does any of this have to do with the BSA's discriminatory policy?

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 12:10 PM
That makes the BSA an incredibly fertile garden gay men who want to have boys who can be "molded" into other gay men, who then grow older and find a new batch of recruits.

Kracka, is you crazy?

AmPat
08-12-2012, 12:33 PM
What emotion would you categorize a ban on gay people with? What message does it send to young people? How do you think it affects the gay boy who is in the BSA already?

How noble are we to view an organization which maintains that it serves a vital role in the nurture of young men but seeks to deny that service to young gay men?
Huh??? "Emotion?" Why does a decision have to have an emotional driver? Why do gays always have to ascribe emotions to everything in life?

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 12:41 PM
Huh??? "Emotion?" Why does a decision have to have an emotional driver? Why do gays always have to ascribe emotions to everything in life?

So you're saying it's an arbitrary policy?

AmPat
08-12-2012, 12:47 PM
So you're saying it's an arbitrary policy?
Is that the only possible option or do you have another possible answer? Think lib, you can do it. Burn some of that manure powering your fertile mind.

Bailey
08-12-2012, 12:47 PM
I've got a better question: why don't gays form their own scouting organization instead of expending all the effort to infiltrate the Boy Scouts of America?

thats what gays and liberals do, they dont start their own groups they join good upstanding Christian groups and try to subvert them.

txradioguy
08-12-2012, 01:48 PM
Huh??? "Emotion?" Why does a decision have to have an emotional driver? Why do gays always have to ascribe emotions to everything in life?

It's not just Gays...it's Liberals in general.

LukeEDay
08-12-2012, 02:24 PM
The Boy Scouts are a private club, so live with their decision.

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 02:58 PM
The Boy Scouts are a private club, so live with their decision.

Their decision is still open to criticism. The Klan is a private club too. The difference is that the Klan never maintained that it was open to all boys when it wasn't, and the Klan doesn't expect to get a free boat slip at Berkeley marina.

LukeEDay
08-12-2012, 03:06 PM
Their decision is still open to criticism. The Klan is a private club too. The difference is that the Klan never maintained that it was open to all boys when it wasn't, and the Klan doesn't expect to get a free boat slip at Berkeley marina.

Actually, the Klan is a Democratic Organization.

Thorn
08-12-2012, 03:08 PM
I just don't get it. What benefit would there be in having gay scout masters?

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 03:15 PM
I just don't get it. What benefit would there be in having gay scout masters?

I don't think that the sexual orientation of the scout master is a recommendation either way. However, the BSA ban is not merely on gay scout masters, it's also on gay scouts. They like to leave that part out because they don't want to be seen as discriminating against gay youth, and because it doesn't play into their boogey man stupidity, but it is the case.

txradioguy
08-12-2012, 03:16 PM
I just don't get it. What benefit would there be in having gay scout masters?

Better access to what turns them on.

Thorn
08-12-2012, 03:23 PM
Better access to what turns them on. I meant: what is the benefit to the BSUSA or to the young men who belong to the organization?

Can we also endeavor not to fall prey to the idiocy that gay men are predators looking to molest boys and teens?

txradioguy
08-12-2012, 03:48 PM
I meant: what is the benefit to the BSUSA or to the young men who belong to the organization?

Too easy...the answer is it doesn't benefit them.


Can we also endeavor not to fall prey to the idiocy that gay men are predators looking to molest boys and teens?

Not idiocy.

Thorn
08-12-2012, 04:01 PM
Not idiocy. Can you back that claim up with any evidence or is it merely an assumption?

Bailey
08-12-2012, 04:25 PM
Can you back that claim up with any evidence or is it merely an assumption?

Well anyone that sleeps with a member of their own sex will stoop to younger men if the chance arose.

txradioguy
08-12-2012, 04:32 PM
Can you back that claim up with any evidence or is it merely an assumption?

One thing you'll learn about me here...I don't make wild statements I can't back up.



Boy Scout files reveal repeat child abuse by sexual predators

Los Angeles Times review of Boy Scout documents shows that a blacklist meant to protect boys from sexual predators too often failed in its mission.

For nearly a century, the Boy Scouts of America has relied on a confidential blacklist known as the "perversion files" as a crucial line of defense against sexual predators.

Scouting officials say they've used the files to prevent hundreds of men who had been expelled for alleged sexual abuse from returning to the ranks. They've fought hard in court to keep the records from public view, saying confidentiality was needed to protect victims, witnesses and anyone falsely accused.

"It is a fact that Scouts are safer because the barrier created by these files is real," Scouts Chief Executive Robert Mazzuca said in video posted on the organization's website in June.

That barrier, however, has been breached repeatedly.

A Los Angeles Times review of more than 1,200 files dating from 1970 to 1991 found more than 125 cases across the country in which men allegedly continued to molest Scouts after the organization was first presented with detailed allegations of abusive behavior.

Predators slipped back into the program by falsifying personal information or skirting the registration process. Others were able to jump from troop to troop around the country thanks to clerical errors, computer glitches or the Scouts' failure to check the blacklist.

In some cases, officials failed to document reports of abuse in the first place, letting offenders stay in the organization until new allegations surfaced. In others, officials documented abuse but merely suspended the accused leader or allowed him to continue working with boys while on "probation."

In at least 50 cases, the Boy Scouts expelled suspected abusers, only to discover later that they had reentered the program and were accused of molesting again.

One scoutmaster was expelled in 1970 for sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy in Indiana. Even after being convicted of the crime, he went on to join two troops in Illinois between 1971 and 1988. He later admitted to molesting more than 100 boys, was convicted of the sexual assault of a Scout in 1989 and was sentenced to 100 years in prison, according to his file and court records.

In 1991, a Scout leader convicted of abusing a boy in Minnesota returned to his old troop — right after getting out of jail.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-boyscouts-20120805-m,0,5822319.story

You were saying?

Thorn
08-12-2012, 04:36 PM
Well anyone that sleeps with a member of their own sex will stoop to younger men if the chance arose.

What an incredibly erudite and consequent argument. :rolleyes:

Thorn
08-12-2012, 04:39 PM
One thing you'll learn about me here...I don't make wild statements I can't back up.




http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-boyscouts-20120805-m,0,5822319.story

You were saying? I see an article about sexual abuse, true, but not one that builds a case that gay=pedophile. In fact, I'll wager that the vast majority of the men referenced in this story are or were married men with children. Now, I'm no expert, but I'm fairly confident that if you're sleeping with women that kinda disqualifies you from being gay.

Rockntractor
08-12-2012, 04:42 PM
I just don't get it. What benefit would there be in having gay scout masters?

How odd, Mr. Thorn types like a short person, kind of reminds me of another short person we had here.

Thorn
08-12-2012, 04:57 PM
How odd, Mr. Thorn types like a short person, kind of reminds me of another short person we had here.

Interesting. How exactly do short people type?

Rockntractor
08-12-2012, 04:59 PM
Interesting. How exactly do short people type?

Kind of strained like your sitting on a phone book to reach the keys, carry on.:smile-new:

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 06:13 PM
You were saying?

Are you really this stupid? You just be if you think that article supports your position. By your logic, white heterosexual females shouldn't be allowed to teach school.... except that even that isn't as stupid as what you are attempting here.

Novaheart
08-12-2012, 06:19 PM
Well anyone that sleeps with a member of their own sex will stoop to younger men if the chance arose.

People like you often tell more about themselves than they would like to when they post such as this. I have always been surprised at the number of gay basher males who put forth the argument that adult heterosexual males can't be trusted around girl scouts. Can you be trusted around girl scouts, Bailey? Do you project your inner ephebophile on to others?

Odysseus
08-13-2012, 09:39 AM
People like you often tell more about themselves than they would like to when they post such as this. I have always been surprised at the number of gay basher males who put forth the argument that adult heterosexual males can't be trusted around girl scouts. Can you be trusted around girl scouts, Bailey? Do you project your inner ephebophile on to others?

Attempting to personalize this into an attack on Bailey is despicable. As a parent of two daughters, I would not send them out alone with a male adult, nor would any sane parent. One of the arguments against the presumption of gays being more inclined to sexual conduct with children is that the majority of pedophilia incidents occur between heterosexual men and girls, so obviously there is a danger there, assuming that gay activists are telling the truth (of course, this is only part of the truth, as molestations of boys by men make up roughly one-third of the total, while gay men make up roughly 1-2% of the population, so the overrepresentation of gay men in case involving children by a factor of 200 should be of concern to any honest researcher). And, there is a great deal of evidence that supports the BSA position:



In fact, a number of studies performed over a period spanning more than half a century — many of which were performed by homosexuals or their sympathizers— have shown that an extremely large percentage of sexually active homosexuals also participate in child sexual molestation.
This is not "homophobia" or "hatred," this is simple scientific fact.
For example;

Homosexual Alfred Kinsey, the preeminent sexual researcher in the history of sexual research, found in 1948 that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.4
A very recent (2000) study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that "The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2-4% of men attracted to adults prefer men. In contrast, around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys. Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 620 times higher among pedophiles."5
Another 2000 study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that". . . all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories" for sexual activity;' These age categories were fifteen and twenty years old.6
Yet another recent study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that "Pedophilia appears to have a greater than chance association with two other statistically infrequent phenomena. The first of these is homosexuality . . . Recent surveys estimate the prevalence of homosexuality, among men attracted to adults, in the neighborhood of 2%. In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30-40%."7
A 1989 study in the Journal of Sex Research noted that " . . . the proportion of sex offenders against male children among homosexual men is substantially larger than the proportion of sex offenders against female children among heterosexual men . . . the development of pedophilia is more closely linked with homosexuality than with heterosexuality."8
A 1988 study of 229 convicted child molesters published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 86% of pedophiles described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.9
In a 1984 Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy article, sex researchers found that "The proportional prevalence of [male] offenders against male children in this group of 457 offenders against children was 36 percent."10
Homosexual activists Karla Jay and I Allen Young revealed in their 1979 Gay Report that 73% of all homosexuals I have acted as "chicken hawks" — that is, they have preyed on adolescent or younger boys.11
In a 1992 study published in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, sex researchers K. Freud and R. I. Watson found that homosexual males are three times more likely than straight men to engage in pedophilia, and that the average pedophile victimizes between 20 and 150 boys before being arrested.12
A study by sex researchers Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg found that 25% of white homosexual men have had sex with boys sixteen years and younger.13

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6506


As you wrote above, "People like you often tell more about themselves than they would like to when they post such as this." What will your inevitable denial of these studies tell us about you?

Bailey
08-13-2012, 10:48 AM
People like you often tell more about themselves than they would like to when they post such as this. I have always been surprised at the number of gay basher males who put forth the argument that adult heterosexual males can't be trusted around girl scouts. Can you be trusted around girl scouts, Bailey? Do you project your inner ephebophile on to others?

I dont hang with Girlscouts but its been known that gay men hang with boys all the time. So I guess in your view it would be ok for Men to walk through Girls locker rooms in HS?

Zathras
08-13-2012, 11:15 AM
Attempting to personalize this into an attack on Bailey is despicable.

Well, when your argument is shredded like a tree in a woodchipper, Nova's only response available is to attack the person doing the shredding. Of course he could help himself by backing up his arguments with facts but, since he never does this, we're going to see more of this from him everytime it happens.

FlaGator
08-13-2012, 11:38 AM
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/images/redfox/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Novaheart http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/images/redfox/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?p=520598#post520598)
People like you often tell more about themselves than they would like to when they post such as this. I have always been surprised at the number of gay basher males who put forth the argument that adult heterosexual males can't be trusted around girl scouts. Can you be trusted around girl scouts, Bailey? Do you project your inner ephebophile on to others?



I would question the motives of any man who went to court to gain access to girls in the Girl Scouts. "No you can't" should be an acceptable answer to someone with good intentions.

Adam Wood
08-13-2012, 11:44 AM
Yes Adam, it's the huge secret that we all swear to on our 18th birthday when we get the secret handshake and decoder ring. Or by putting "recruited" in quotes did you mean something other than the ridiculous notion that some young men magically have their sexual orientation changed by a Hermie moment? What the fuck are you talking about? Somebody tried to seduce you when you were 17 or 18? Imagine that! Welcome to the world of every 17 or 18 year old girl who doesn't have a face that scares small animals. When some guy tries to pick up Sally Seventeen is he "recruiting" her? When I was 17 our next door neighbor creeped me out with what I thought was a sexual advance, and boy did I go running away from her! What does any of this have to do with the BSA's discriminatory policy?All 17- and 18-year-old girls get hit on, lavished with gifts, and shack up with middle-aged men? I don't think so.

AmPat
08-13-2012, 02:01 PM
I dont hang with Girlscouts but its been known that gay men hang with boys all the time. So I guess in your view it would be ok for Men to walk through Girls locker rooms in HS?
I have liked girls for over 45 years, To date I have no desire to be a Girl Scout leader.

txradioguy
08-13-2012, 02:57 PM
Are you really this stupid? You just be if you think that article supports your position. By your logic, white heterosexual females shouldn't be allowed to teach school.... except that even that isn't as stupid as what you are attempting here.

It does support my position and backs up what I was saying to Thorn.

What factually is wrong with the LA Times article?

CactusCarlos
08-13-2012, 03:12 PM
Now, I'm no expert, but I'm fairly confident that if you're sleeping with women that kinda disqualifies you from being gay.

Oh, but it wouldn't prevent a person from engaging in homosexual behavior now would it?

Thorn
08-13-2012, 08:07 PM
Oh, but it wouldn't prevent a person from engaging in homosexual behavior now would it?

The answer to your question is manifest in the porn industry.

CactusCarlos
08-13-2012, 08:57 PM
The answer to your question is manifest in the porn industry.

And in prison. So, no one is born gay they choose to be engage in homosexual behavior and refer to themselves as gay.

Thorn
08-14-2012, 10:39 PM
And in prison. So, no one is born gay they choose to be engage in homosexual behavior and refer to themselves as gay.

And? I'm not seeing a point here.

Odysseus
08-15-2012, 09:02 AM
And in prison. So, no one is born gay they choose to be engage in homosexual behavior and refer to themselves as gay.

We don't know that no one is born gay, only that in some cases, it is a learned behavior. There may be a genetic predisposition, but genes alone do not determine behavior. Calhoun's study on overcrowding showed that at a certain critical mass, sexual behaviors became increasingly chaotic, resulting in greater incidence of homosexuality, among other tendencies. (http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/...en/index.html#):



In a 1962 edition of Scientific American, the ecologist John B Calhoun presented the results of a macabre series of experiments conducted at the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH).1 He had placed several rats in a laboratory in a converted barn where – protected from disease and predation and supplied with food, water and bedding – they bred rapidly. The one thing they were lacking was space, a fact that became increasingly problematic as what he liked to describe as his “rat city” and “rodent utopia” teemed with animals. Unwanted social contact occurred with increasing frequency, leading to increased stress and aggression. Following the work of the physiologist, Hans Selye, it seemed that the adrenal system offered the standard binary solution: fight or flight.2 But in the sealed enclosure, flight was impossible. Violence quickly spiralled out of control. Cannibalism and infanticide followed. Males became hypersexual, pansexual and, an increasing proportion, homosexual. Calhoun called this vortex “a behavioural sink”. Their numbers fell into terminal decline and the population tailed off to extinction. At the experiments’ end, the only animals still alive had survived at an immense psychological cost: asexual and utterly withdrawn, they clustered in a vacant huddled mass. Even when reintroduced to normal rodent communities, these “socially autistic” animals remained isolated until death. In the words of one of Calhoun’s collaborators, rodent “utopia” had descended into “hell”.3

Bailey
08-15-2012, 09:24 AM
The answer to your question is manifest in the porn industry.

From what I read on the subject a lot of straight men star in gay porn for the money. So i guess its a choice after all.

MountainMan
08-15-2012, 12:17 PM
From what I read on the subject a lot of straight men star in gay porn for the money. So i guess its a choice after all.That is a bit of an odd subject matter to be reading isn't? Is there something you want to tell us Bailey? :nono:

Thorn
08-15-2012, 10:52 PM
From what I read on the subject a lot of straight men star in gay porn for the money. So i guess its a choice after all.

Yes, straight men can and do engage is same sex encounters and still continue to identify as straight.

Thorn
08-15-2012, 10:53 PM
And in prison. So, no one is born gay they choose to be engage in homosexual behavior and refer to themselves as gay.

I'm not sure I want to crawl into their heads and claim I know why they do what they do.

Hawkgirl
08-16-2012, 01:05 AM
Can you back that claim up with any evidence or is it merely an assumption?

Unless you are naive, it is pretty much an accomplishment for the gays and the lesbians when they "flip" a straight person. Perhaps you live in a cave, or you don't know any gays.

Hawkgirl
08-16-2012, 01:08 AM
Yes, straight men can and do engage is same sex encounters and still continue to identify as straight.

I think the word is Polyamourous...or bi. With the exception of a rape, if a straight guy has sex with another man, he's not straight.

Thorn
08-16-2012, 02:02 AM
I think the word is Polyamourous...or bi. With the exception of a rape, if a straight guy has sex with another man, he's not straight.

And, by the same token, if a man is having sex with a woman, he's not gay.

Novaheart
08-17-2012, 09:28 AM
Attempting to personalize this into an attack on Bailey is despicable. As a parent of two daughters, I would not send them out alone with a male adult, nor would any sane parent. One of the arguments against the presumption of gays being more inclined to sexual conduct with children is that the majority of pedophilia incidents occur between heterosexual men and girls, so obviously there is a danger there, assuming that gay activists are telling the truth (of course, this is only part of the truth, as molestations of boys by men make up roughly one-third of the total, while gay men make up roughly 1-2% of the population, so the overrepresentation of gay men in case involving children by a factor of 200 should be of concern to any honest researcher). And, there is a great deal of evidence that supports the BSA position:



In fact, a number of studies performed over a period spanning more than half a century — many of which were performed by homosexuals or their sympathizers— have shown that an extremely large percentage of sexually active homosexuals also participate in child sexual molestation.
This is not "homophobia" or "hatred," this is simple scientific fact.
For example;

Homosexual Alfred Kinsey, the preeminent sexual researcher in the history of sexual research, found in 1948 that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.4
A very recent (2000) study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that "The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2-4% of men attracted to adults prefer men. In contrast, around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys. Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 620 times higher among pedophiles."5
Another 2000 study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that". . . all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories" for sexual activity;' These age categories were fifteen and twenty years old.6
Yet another recent study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that "Pedophilia appears to have a greater than chance association with two other statistically infrequent phenomena. The first of these is homosexuality . . . Recent surveys estimate the prevalence of homosexuality, among men attracted to adults, in the neighborhood of 2%. In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30-40%."7
A 1989 study in the Journal of Sex Research noted that " . . . the proportion of sex offenders against male children among homosexual men is substantially larger than the proportion of sex offenders against female children among heterosexual men . . . the development of pedophilia is more closely linked with homosexuality than with heterosexuality."8
A 1988 study of 229 convicted child molesters published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 86% of pedophiles described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.9
In a 1984 Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy article, sex researchers found that "The proportional prevalence of [male] offenders against male children in this group of 457 offenders against children was 36 percent."10
Homosexual activists Karla Jay and I Allen Young revealed in their 1979 Gay Report that 73% of all homosexuals I have acted as "chicken hawks" — that is, they have preyed on adolescent or younger boys.11
In a 1992 study published in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, sex researchers K. Freud and R. I. Watson found that homosexual males are three times more likely than straight men to engage in pedophilia, and that the average pedophile victimizes between 20 and 150 boys before being arrested.12
A study by sex researchers Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg found that 25% of white homosexual men have had sex with boys sixteen years and younger.13

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6506


As you wrote above, "People like you often tell more about themselves than they would like to when they post such as this." What will your inevitable denial of these studies tell us about you?


All of your Paul Cameron bullshit has been professionally debunked. Interesting that you are still pumping it. The deceptions should be obvious to an intelligent and objective person, which clearly you are not.

But as an aside, it's funny how Kinsey is a disproven moron when it suits your ilk , but a valuable resource when you want to use his work. You are without integrity.

Novaheart
08-17-2012, 09:32 AM
Unless you are naive, it is pretty much an accomplishment for the gays and the lesbians when they "flip" a straight person. Perhaps you live in a cave, or you don't know any gays.

Flip schmip. People don't flip. They do experiment, but they don't flip. I had a male roommate once who practically bragged about having sex with lesbians. I'll translate that for you: he would go to the sleeziest bar in town, get roaring drunk with other alcoholics (and I suspect that drugs were involved as well) and then end up in some sexual situation which may or may not have included some woman trying to get pregnant by a handsome blond haired blue eyed drunk.

Novaheart
08-17-2012, 09:36 AM
From what I read on the subject a lot of straight men star in gay porn for the money. So i guess its a choice after all.

This post makes no sense. Just because someone is willing to pay a heterosexual bodybuilder to make gay porn doesn't change the "actor's" sexual orientation, anymore than a lesbian being a whore or a concubine in some Arab's haram makers her heterosexual. People do things for money that they wouldn't do for free. Have you ever heard of someone mining iron ore for fun or romance?

Bailey
08-17-2012, 09:55 AM
This post makes no sense. Just because someone is willing to pay a heterosexual bodybuilder to make gay porn doesn't change the "actor's" sexual orientation, anymore than a lesbian being a whore or a concubine in some Arab's haram makers her heterosexual. People do things for money that they wouldn't do for free. Have you ever heard of someone mining iron ore for fun or romance?



No it makes perfect sense, if you are not gay but can suck it up as it were(pun or no pun may have been intended :D ) and have sex with a man then why cant you delude yourself into doing it instead of for money?

Odysseus
08-17-2012, 10:25 AM
All of your Paul Cameron bullshit has been professionally debunked. Interesting that you are still pumping it. The deceptions should be obvious to an intelligent and objective person, which clearly you are not.

And here we go again. First, a blanket dismissal, followed by an ad hominem attack. I will address the former, first.

Paul Cameron is not cited as a source for any of the articles listed. Using him as a straw man is may feel good, but it doesn't address the findings of the other studies cited. Nor does it have anything to do with Calhoun's overcrowding study, which I also referenced. If you have objections to the studies in question that are based on facts, then by all means, feel free to explain them, but if this is the best that you have, then you might as well give up. This leads to the second part of your response. Neither of us is "objective", in that we both have opinions on the subject, but you are far less objective on this issue than anyone here. It is obvious that any failure to fully embrace your lifestyle offends and angers you. Given how close you are to the issue, this is understandable, but it does not exempt you from the requirement to argue facts, rather than simply dismiss any disagreement as bigotry or religious fanaticism. If you cannot even acknowledge that there are significant drawbacks to homosexuality, then why should we take your claims of the positives at face value? If you cannot present your arguments without insulting and demeaning the people who disagree with you, why should we listen? If you cannot convince with argument, then your insults simply demonstrate that your arguments are invalid. It's just smoke on the battlefield that you use to try to obscure your maneuver, but it doesn't work.


But as an aside, it's funny how Kinsey is a disproven moron when it suits your ilk , but a valuable resource when you want to use his work. You are without integrity.

The article cited Kinsey. I merely quoted it because I didn't want to omit its citations, which would have been dishonest. I consider Kinsey a flawed researcher with an agenda, but some of his data is useful. Sorry if that's too nuanced a position for you. In the case of the citation, keep in mind that Kinsey's interviews were conducted with prison populations, so they will tend to skew higher for illegal acts, such as molestation. It's also why his estimates of the gay population were off . Obviously, a prison population is much more likely to skew towards homosexuality than the general population, both because of the enforced absence of the opposite sex, and the fact that because homosexuality was illegal, you would find a higher percentage of homosexuals among those who had been arrested for anything. If you poll a prison population for any illegal conduct, you will find a higher percentage of it in prison than outside, simply because of the filtering of the sample through the legal system. This isn't meant as a judgment, it simply explains the disparity in the numbers. However, those numbers had other impacts, and that's where Kinsey's work is problematical. Where Kinsey tends to fall apart is in his theories, most of which were based on the skewed research and filtered through his own personal agenda. In his defense, he always sought to expand his research pool in order to gain a more representative sample. Like many pioneers, he was working in uncharted territory and often made mistakes that later generations of researchers corrected. In this regard, he is a lot like Freud, whose value is not in the dogmatic repetition of his theories, but in the recognition that he was the first to seek a means of codifying mental illness as other doctors were doing with physical illnesses.

As for my integrity, you took an entire list of citations of studies, tarred them all with your comment about a researcher who was not cited and had no input into those studies, and then cherry-picked one citation in order to attack me. I don't think that my integrity is is in question in this exchange

txradioguy
08-17-2012, 10:32 AM
And here we go again. First, a blanket dismissal, followed by an ad hominem attack.


Nova's jsut sensitive right now cause all of his silly BS is getting shot down.

Novaheart
08-17-2012, 12:36 PM
If you have objections to the studies in question that are based on facts, then by all means, feel free to explain them........

It's been done. It's tiresome. It doesn't work, as is clear from the fact that you are still promoting this bullshit.

Novaheart
08-17-2012, 12:39 PM
No it makes perfect sense, if you are not gay but can suck it up as it were(pun or no pun may have been intended :D ) and have sex with a man then why cant you delude yourself into doing it instead of for money?

Let me know how that works out.

Hawkgirl
08-17-2012, 12:46 PM
Flip schmip. People don't flip. They do experiment, but they don't flip. I had a male roommate once who practically bragged about having sex with lesbians. I'll translate that for you: he would go to the sleeziest bar in town, get roaring drunk with other alcoholics (and I suspect that drugs were involved as well) and then end up in some sexual situation which may or may not have included some woman trying to get pregnant by a handsome blond haired blue eyed drunk.


You are ignorant. I know gay people who brag about flipping. I know a few who were in bad heterosexual relationships who are now with gays. You should subscribe to Showtime and watch The Real "L" Word, a reality show depicting the lives of lesbians. Then come back and tell me that gays don't enjoy "flipping". I watched it a few times during a free promotion and it's a big game for them.

FlaGator
08-17-2012, 12:58 PM
It's been done. It's tiresome. It doesn't work, as is clear from the fact that you are still promoting this bullshit.

Question, why do homosexual want marriage so badly when civil unions could give them the exact same rights with out stepping on anyone's moral toes?

Novaheart
08-17-2012, 01:18 PM
Question, why do homosexual want marriage so badly when civil unions could give them the exact same rights with out stepping on anyone's moral toes?

Because civil unions don't give us the exact same rights. It's not stepping on anyone's moral toes and in fact is none of anyone's business except the couple getting married. Look at how the issue is used by Republican politicians; that tells you all you need to know about it.

Novaheart
08-17-2012, 01:22 PM
You are ignorant. I know gay people who brag about flipping. I know a few who were in bad heterosexual relationships who are now with gays. You should subscribe to Showtime and watch The Real "L" Word, a reality show depicting the lives of lesbians. Then come back and tell me that gays don't enjoy "flipping". I watched it a few times during a free promotion and it's a big game for them.

Well gee, if they say so on TV and you know some people who do it then it must be so. Is your sexual orientation about to change? If so, let me know so I can document it. There is a difference between living as a heterosexual and then coming out as gay, and being a heterosexual and changing into gay. The former happens (though less so as time marches on) and the latter doesn't. You're still thinking with your genitals- sexual orientation is inside your brain, not your crotch.

Adam Wood
08-17-2012, 02:27 PM
http://i1.cpcache.com/product/28014430/dont_hate_me_because_im_a_l_kids_tshirt.jpg?color= White&height=460&width=460http://i1.cpcache.com/product/28014147/dont_hate_me_because_im_gay_tote_bag.jpg?color=NA&height=460&width=460


These are up at a lot of the pro-gay-marriage sites and such. Obviously, there's plenty of gay people out there who do indeed enjoy "flipping."

FlaGator
08-17-2012, 02:44 PM
Because civil unions don't give us the exact same rights. It's not stepping on anyone's moral toes and in fact is none of anyone's business except the couple getting married. Look at how the issue is used by Republican politicians; that tells you all you need to know about it.

What rights does does a marriage give you that a civil union does not?

Since marriage is considered a basic building block of society, who is and is not allowed to get married is not just the concern of those involved. It is a societal concern and with you like it or not that is the way it is. Society has a say so on anything that may negatively affect its future.

wasp69
08-17-2012, 03:13 PM
This brings up one of my issues about gay people. Why would a kid have to announce that he's gay? Just to see if they'll let him in? Normal people don't go somewhere and say "hi I'm Joe and I'm (gay, straight,) whatever." It all seems like attention-getting behavior to me. Maybe some people like to be made to feel bad.

I don't announce what I do in the bedroom, and I sure don't want you to either.

Queers are mentally and emotionally stunted people. They're overgrown children looking for attention any way they can get it, which is why most of them are drama queens.

wasp69
08-17-2012, 03:20 PM
Can we also endeavor not to fall prey to the idiocy that gay men are predators looking to molest boys and teens?

http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/3OXY6adAhw9w2YFJbawlDA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTMxMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/Sports/ap/201206222314836404336-p2.jpeg

Yeah, because that kind of thing never happens, does it?

wasp69
08-17-2012, 03:26 PM
Yes, straight men can and do engage is same sex encounters and still continue to identify as straight.

Then they would be liars, wouldn't they?

It's really very simple: You either engage in homosexual behavior, or you do not. I can claim to be a Labrador Retriever, but reality states that I am not.

wasp69
08-17-2012, 03:30 PM
It's been done. It's tiresome. It doesn't work, as is clear from the fact that you are still promoting this bullshit.

Sorry your bullshit didn't stick to the wall, you seem to have such passion and feeling for homosexuals and their unfettered access to children.

wasp69
08-17-2012, 03:34 PM
Because civil unions don't give us the exact same rights. It's not stepping on anyone's moral toes and in fact is none of anyone's business except the couple getting married. Look at how the issue is used by Republican politicians; that tells you all you need to know about it.

Such bullshit. You have plenty of rights that don't require a marriage license, you don't need special rights and you sure as Hell don't need to run your lifestyle choice down the throats of civilized people.