Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Christians don't have a problem with "gays" either.
The issue is Sodomy. The abomination.
The person can repent and there are MANY testimonies of those involved in this grotesque act considered "gays" that now are repentant Christians.
So, as I believe lesbians use other methods, would you have no problem with them? Or if you don't approve of toys and mother's little helper would all the women with a toy in the drawer have to repent?
Personally I was only a christan as a child because it was what we did but I never liked the control. I don't even like the pagan forms where there are too many rules you have to follow, and thus are Eclectic Wiccan.
How can religion be called 'good' and 'proper' if it demonizes people who do not *choose* to follow it because of what they *choose* to do in the privacy of their lives? That's the real abomination.
I don't have kids...if I did...I'd be there without asking twice. My Troop already has more then enough help. I'd have to leave the area to be one. Maybe 30 miles away.
Trying to talk single Mom's I know into letting their sons join the Scouts.
It works both ways. Homosexuals will do what some heterosexuals will do. In some cases both are attracted to "young stuff" if they can get away with it they will act on their attraction. Gays are not exempt in the area of poor judgement and selfish needs...nor are straights...It's about conduct.
And boundries. Once upon a time we accepted fourteen year old brides as normal. I have a number in my family tree. Today we do not because fourteen year olds are not adults.
No matter what one 'feels' it is ALWAYS their responsibility to act properly and within boundries regardless. If we recognized this we would not need to have to enumerate each circumstance. When perception of boundries get messed up or are never taught then the bad stuff is just waiting to happen.
A fourteen year old also holds the responsibility to act properly as well. They are not adults but they are not babies either.
That seems logical and fair. There is a problem though. The gay community would find these restrictions to be an insult against the gay community. We are led to believe that all gays are poor suffering and persecuted people who are ALL good. Nasty exists and the gay world is not exempt. Frankly it would not be openly gay males that might be the problem but the "uncle Billy" types who appear straight but are not. The ones that will cause the damage are the ones that are unseen.
I wonder if gays would comply to the same rules as were mentioned regarding Girl Scouts where it is stipulated that there be no over night supervision by those of the opposite sex?
Honorable conduct might depend on what part or segment of gay culture the subject is part of. There are some gays who are capable of mature good conduct...and then there is the debauched crowd of coke snorting hedonists...where there is a culture of anything goes. The gay world is not a uniform entity..There are all types.
Supporters of gay rights have this notion that all gays are the same - Just like racists of old assume that all blacks are the same.
First off, there is a large diversity of age here, from kids in first grade to teens in high school. I don't see why if you allowed men who were judged by background checks to be allowed to lead girlscouts you would be allowed to ban someone who was gay simply because of that. If the man had reason to be suspected other than that of having interest he shouldn't be anywhere around children period.
And if you allow men to supervise girls in an overnight situation you can't say gay men are not allowed.
The real point is honorable conduct is a human question, not a gay/straight one. Or a druggie/clean one. Its about individuals.
I don't think that most supporters of rights for a singled out minority assume they are all angels, but you cannot use that some might not be acceptable as a reason to ban all, you have to look at INDIVIDUALS.
You also have to look at the age of the kids. Someone who is great with twelve year olds might not do wo well or have the patience to work with a bunch of seven year olds. These are the things which should have some judgement calls, not smacking labels on people which are too broad a stroke.
You don't want anyone but macho men (like you) leading the scouts but you are complaining that you'd have to leave your area.
Uproarious.
If I had kids, I would do that most likely. For me now, I'm just a washed up Devil Dog.
These yuppies wouldn't listen to me...they all know much better.
Though....when caught in a meat grinder and in a world of s***....you'll pray for guys like me to be with you.
I've been seriously thinking about teaching kids all I know...if they want to learn.
Maybe I will come up with a single Mom to date as well.
Only time will tell.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
