NOM BLOG

Scouts' Honor: Help Defend Scoutmaster Values

 

National Organization for Marriage

Important action needed! See below for ways to make your voice heard!

Dear Marriage Supporter,

For over a century, the Boy Scouts of America have stood for honor and traditional Judeo-Christian values, and taught millions of young people leadership and life skills by faithfully applying those values in their own lives. It's not surprising that advocates of alternative "values," such as gay and lesbian activists, would challenge these traditional family values. Indeed, homosexual activists argue that the Boy Scouts should change their values and allow openly homosexual men to serve as scoutmasters with the responsibility of mentoring impressionable youth.

But thirteen years ago, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, the Supreme Court of the United states upheld the right of the Boy Scouts to make their own decisions about membership, despite a New Jersey law that would have required them to accept an openly homosexual Scoutmaster.

The Scouts won that fight, but only because they were able to demonstrate to the Supreme Court that they had a consistent national policy against having homosexual scoutmasters.

Today, in the face of relentless demands by homosexual activists, facing potential loss of corporate donations from companies themselves pressured by the powerful gay lobby, and even facing internal pressure from corporate CEOs on their Board, the Scouts are considering a proposal to abandon their longstanding national policy, and instead leaving the decision of allowing homosexual scout leaders to each individual council.

As we know from the marriage battle, capitulation is not a strategy for preserving our cherished values. When homosexual activists demanded "rights" and "benefits" many well-meaning policymakers responded with "civil unions" and "domestic partnerships," believing that this "compromise" would preserve marriage while providing tangible benefits for same-sex couples. Though many in the gay community lobbied for these changes, once enacted they quickly adopted a strategy of condemning them as "second class" and used them to successfully file lawsuits redefining marriage.

Even though their supporters have relentlessly pressured the Boy Scouts to admit openly homosexual men as scoutmasters with the responsibility of mentoring America's youth, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) now says the "compromise" the Boy Scouts are considering does not go nearly far enough.

They will settle for nothing short of capitulation – homosexuality-affirming troops in every locale across America, tolerating no exceptions, period. Any parent or young man who holds a traditional Judeo-Christian view of sexual morality will be attacked as bigoted and accused of discriminatory conduct. You can imagine the lawsuits that will follow.

The BSA Board of Directors will be voting very soon on this new policy proposal — perhaps as early as Monday — and they are seeking public input into their decision. We need to make it clear that compromising honorable values is no path to organizational victory.

Gay marriage advocates are pulling out all the stops on this one, and it is imperative that the Scouts hear from you today!

There are many ways to make your voice heard, but right now phone calls are the most important.

Please call the Scouts National Headquarters at 972-580-2000 or 972-580-2330.

The phone lines are flooded right now, so please keep trying if you have trouble getting through. When they answer the phone, simply tell them that you are AGAINST the proposed policy change.

In addition, we are reaching out directly to the members of the BSA Board of Directors who will be making this decision next week. Below is a partial list of board members — please call as many as you can and politely urge them to maintain their current policy with respect to homosexual scoutmasters, and not to sacrifice their longstanding moral beliefs in favor of political correctness or activist pressure.

This is a long list of phone numbers, but even a few phone calls could make a big difference! Please take a few minutes to make as many calls as you are able.

Togo D. West, Jr. (202) 775-1775
David M. Weekley (713) 659-8111
Rex W. Tillerson (972) 444-1000
Marshall M. Sloane (781) 395-3000
Roger M. Schrimp (209) 526-3500
Nathan O. Rosenberg (949) 494-4553
Matthew K. Rose (909) 386-4140
Robert H. Reynolds (317) 231-7227
Tico A. Perez (407) 849-1235
Arthur F. Oppenheimer (208) 343-4883
Scott D. Oki (425) 454-2800
Francis R. McAllister (406) 373-8700
Joseph P. Landy (212) 878-0600
Robert J. LaFortune (918) 582-2981
Larry W. Kellner (713) 468-4050
Stephen Hemsley (800) 328-5979
Aubrey B. Harwell Jr. (615) 244-1713
Earl G. Graves (212) 242-8000
T. Michael Goodrich (205) 328-9445 ext. 200
Jack D. Furst (972) 982-8250
R. Michael Daniel (412) 297-4989
John C. Cushman III (904) 393-9020
William F. "Rick" Cronk (925) 283-7229
Keith A. Clark (717) 763-1121
R. Thomas Buffenbarger (310) 967-4500
David L. Beck (801) 240-1000

 

Finally, once you've made as many phone calls as you can, please help spread the word by email and social media.

If the Boy Scouts repudiate their national policy and leave the issue up to each individual council, it is quite likely that any individual council which adheres to the old policy will find themselves facing a new lawsuit claiming they are violating their state's nondiscrimination laws. It will only be a matter of time before homosexuality will be embraced in scouting — voluntarily or by court decree — as the "new normal."

Don't let it happen.

Contact the national office today, and as many individual members of the national board as you can.

Contributions or gifts to the National Organization for Marriage, a 501(c)(4) organization, are not tax-deductible. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept contributions from business corporations, labor unions, foreign nationals, or federal contractors; however, it may accept contributions from federally registered political action committees. Donations may be used for political purposes such as supporting or opposing candidates. No funds will be earmarked or reserved for any political purpose.

This message has been authorized and paid for by the National Organization for Marriage, 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20006, Brian Brown, President. This message has not been authorized or approved by any candidate.

35 Comments

  1. Richard Ek
    Posted February 2, 2013 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

    Two of my brothers died of HIV/AIDS. Both of them, after diagnosis and during their illnesses, identified the youth leader, a bi-sexual man in college, who "introduced" them to homosexuality as very young teens. The youth leader accompanied my brothers and others on Scout camp outs. He was good at camping, survival skills and all other Scout leader attributes. However, in the dark of night in a tent he used his other skills and led my brothers down a path that led to their deaths AND the deaths of who knows how many of the young men they "knew." The heartache of our parents, siblings and all who knew these talented and handsome young men is still with us twenty years later. Am I against this idiotic idea of integrating openly homosexual leaders to mentor young boys and girls. Absolutely.

  2. zack
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 12:08 am | Permalink

    Ya know...I've been real gentle in my dealing with leftist advances. This is insane. Their push for these changes are borderline fascist. They willfully confuse tolerance with compulsory acceptance/agreement and set out to destroy anyone who wants to have a conversation because they know should they actually engage in such a thing, their message and movement would be destroyed.

    Ben Shapiro was correct, the age of civility is done. You have to punch back if you are to deal with leftists because they are by no means interested in having an adult conversation.

  3. OldKingBlog
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 10:11 am | Permalink

    Hi zack. Your post is dead-on and right to the point!

    I would add, however, that this latest push by the left is not so much fascist. Instead, it demonstrates the totalitarian nature of their ideology: in the name of freedom and progress everyone everywhere is to conform to their world-view and their notion of "values."

    And this push is also indicative of the left's broader agenda -- the creation of a society in which all restrictions on sexual behavior are to be removed. This attempt to "normalize" homosexual behavior is just a step toward this goal. In addition, this broader goal will mean that humans will be taught to view our earthly lives in purely libertine terms; the highest, or only real goal in life is to be the unrestrained pursuit of sexual pleasure. This is a throwback to the Sixties and the age of the hippies who really thought all the world's problems would disappear if we just "make love, not war."

    What's really sad is that this phony idealism is now accepted by large numbers of Americans. Folks, KNOW your enemy!

    And zack, I agree wholeheartedly with your conclusion!

  4. Seth Thayer
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    Wait, I thought NOM was a single issue group dedicated to "protecting" marriage. Now you are just advocating keeping gays out of the boy scouts? So are you just another gay hate group?

    Color me confused.

  5. leviticus
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    I'm making my calls our children won't be safe anywhere if we let this happen.

  6. Chris
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    Brian,

    Please elaborate as to why this has anything to do with same sex marriage, as per the tag on the post.

  7. Son of Adam
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    NOM is motivated by protecting children. And keeping marriage between a man and a woman is in the best interests of children. That also includes protecting kids from potential child molesters which is why they are focusing on the Boy Scouts of America. Also note that NOM had nothing to say about repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell.

  8. Chris
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

    NOM did have a lot to say about repealing DADT. Here is an old post: http://www.nomblog.com/12831/

    Also, Son of Adam, you make the mistake of conflating homosexuality with pedophilia; do some research and you'll find a child is more likely to be molested by a heterosexual than a homosexual.

  9. Randy E King
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    @Chris,

    You make the mistake in believing that dissecting sexual depravity into distinct flavors makes your favored bran more acceptable.

    Go sell crazy somewhere else!

  10. Son of Adam
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    That post had to do with religious liberty, not allowing gays to serve in the military, Chris.

    Also, statistics that show that homosexuals have same-sex contacts with children (those legally underage to consent to sex with a person who is not underage) at a rate 20% to 40% more than heterosexuals according to Paul Cameron, Ph.D. who has done more reliable research on this subject then anyone, and many other studies show similar information.

    If 2% of the population is responsible for 20% to 40% of something as socially and personally troubling as child molestation, then something must be seriously wrong with that 2%

  11. Will Fisher
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    SoA, please, encourage Dr. Cameron to testify in court, if you think he's credible.

  12. zack
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    @chris

    "Also, Son of Adam, you make the mistake of conflating homosexuality with pedophilia; do some research and you'll find a child is more likely to be molested by a heterosexual than a homosexual."

    Irrelevant to the point at hand. I would not put a man in charge of a group of girls on a scouting trip if I knew there was a chance he would do something, no amount of trust nor reassurance will dissipate that concern. As such, I do not feel comfortable putting a gay man in charge of a group of impressionable young men. It's the same thing.

  13. Marc Paul
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    Paul Cameron is a disgraced researcher. Subject to censure by professional bodies.

    Try again.

    Or please please cite him in a legal case, call him as a witness, please please let him appear and be scrutinised.

  14. Teri Simpkins
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 5:29 pm | Permalink

    Here we go again with putting forth information that was already proven wrong by readily credible sources. Son of Adam, if Paul Cameron is the best your side has to offer in March, be prepared to lose. Kinda like the idiot Prop 8 put up for your side that did a great job for us and failed completely for you.

  15. Son of Adam
    Posted February 3, 2013 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

    You all talk a good game, but you still haven't backed up any of your claims with anything other than the urban mythology supported by the main stream media. The research done by the likes of Paul Cameron and others are attacked solely for their findings, not their flaws.

  16. zack
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 1:09 am | Permalink

    I do not trust any adult to control him/herself around children. The idea is to eliminate the potential for lust, and if I cannot trust a grown man around young girls during a camping trip, why should I trust a gay man around young boys in the same setting?

  17. Susan Rosenthal
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 1:22 am | Permalink

    If NOM and its allies are so concerned about protecting children and promoting traditional views of sexuality, why is there is no criticism of the Catholic Church and the way it handled sexual abuse Both the church and the Boy Scouts overlooked and covered up sexual abuse. Yet there is no mention of this subject here on the blog. The Church is always portrayed in a positive, almost reverential liight. The coverage is never balanced with negative material.

    When the Catholic Church and the BSA cover up abuse, not a word is spoken on the blog. However, when the BSA discusses admitting gays, this issue suddenly rises to great importance.

  18. Son of Adam
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 3:44 am | Permalink

    Clearly, NOM's purpose is striving to prevent such abuses from occurring in the first place.

  19. Good News
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 8:41 am | Permalink

    So then you admit Susan, that this eventual change in the Boy Scouts policy is not the best thing for our children. You are right.

  20. Andrew
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    Thanks for the numbers. I've called several and will call more -- to encourage them to take a stand for EQUALITY. It is time for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation to end, and I am encouraged to learn that the Boy Scouts are beginning to see the end game.

  21. Randy E King
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 9:58 am | Permalink

    @Andrew,

    Why is this always about sex with you?

  22. Son of Adam
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    I for one hope that the BSA does not cave in to the Gaystopo ane put our children at risk under the false pretenses of "equality."

  23. Good News
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    Any and every child can be taught to enjoy homosexual sex Andrew. We are trying to protect the 90 to 98 percent of our children who are “not born that way” from being encouraged into unhelpful habits and or struggles.
    And we are for the EQUALITY of all children, that they might all have noted in their family tree (as every other human being in the history of mankind has had), a male and a female at their origin; regardless of whoever might be raising them. And that in the name of equality, whenever possible, we try to give our children a mother and a father.

  24. CRSmith
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

    Every time we turn around the gays are looking for more rights. When will decent people stand up and say "enough already"!

  25. Clark Herlin
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    The Boy Scout Oath says "morally straight". No form of homosexual activity is morally straight. The Oath means what it says. The BSA should not change for the vocal minority. Besides, they have a right to exclude whomever they want, because they are a private organization.

    Just because someone, such as myself, disagrees with the Liberal-homosexual agenda, does not mean we must become disagreeable.

  26. Mark
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    I have spent 9 years in Scouts with my sons as a Scout Leader. The focus has always been on the safety of our children.
    I find it totally UNACCEPTABLE that the BSA may be willing to expose our children to this country's most dangerous Predators.
    My support and involvement will end IF this ban is lifted in any way.

  27. Chairm
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    Two issues here.

    1. Guarding against sexual exploitation of boys.

    2. Guarding against undermining sexual morality.

    Do the gay activists make sound moral arguments in favor of the proposition that same-sex sexual behavior is ever moral? Nope.

    Do they retreat to a demand for moral neutrality? Only tactically, but the lack of a sound moral argument means there is no middle ground between what they assert as morally okay and what is actually moral.

    Do they defend sexual exploitation of children? Well, on this blogsite in the comments Teri and others have tried to downplay the homosexual predominance in the abuse of boys by men. Instead we read that sexual abuse is not about sexual attraction.

    Teri should be cited at the next court case on the SSM idea. She will display quite readily the pro-gay bigotry that drives most of the SSMers.

  28. Randy
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    This is just another example of the gay community showing themselves as the real bullies. They will try to shove their agenda down anyone's throat and if anyone doesnt agree with their agenda. They will call them every name in the book.....

  29. Joe
    Posted February 4, 2013 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for posting this list. According to the woman who answered the phone, Mr. Oki is "no longer on the Board of Directors of the Boy Scouts".

  30. Alphadove
    Posted February 5, 2013 at 1:52 am | Permalink

    Do you want The Boy Scouts (your son, grandson,nephew,cousin, brother) to become a 'smogasboard' for the LGBT lobby? Then do nothing!!!! Wikipedia; The word is used to refer to any situation which invites patrons to select whatever they wish among lots of pleasant things. Don't even doubt, it will happen!!

  31. Guy
    Posted February 5, 2013 at 2:22 am | Permalink

    @ Chairm

    Well, on this blogsite in the comments Teri and others have tried to downplay the homosexual predominance in the abuse of boys by men. Instead we read that sexual abuse is not about sexual attraction.

    Only because there is strong evidence to support this. See (http://wakingupnow.com/blog/protect-children-2) and visit the other links on the page for more information. If you disagree, then please cite data of your own.

  32. Chairm
    Posted February 5, 2013 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    Guy, try to be more specific. Teri made an assertion. She has not backed it up. Neither have you.

  33. Victoria
    Posted February 6, 2013 at 1:08 am | Permalink

    The fact that the Boy Scouts is considering allowing homosexuals in is outrageous and dangerous. The Girl Scouts are already allowing transgenders in. The Conservative, moral people need to rise up against this madness. The LGBT crowd will stop at nothing to corrupt every level of society. Soon they'll be demanding that the Catholic Church and the Latter Day Saints allow gay marriages.

  34. Chairm
    Posted February 8, 2013 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    Teri Simpkins said:

    "Kinda like the idiot Prop 8 put up for your side that did a great job for us and failed completely for you."

    Well, you ought to be more specific, Teri, and just name names.

    Meanwhile, the SSM side brought forth an expert witness (Gregory Herek of the University of California) who testified that his own survey of openly homosexual persons revealed that a significant portion chose their sexual orientation.

    About 20% of the adult homosexual population are choosers, women more than men. Sex difference is significant on multiple levels when it comes to the expert that the SSM side put on the stand.

    Selective Immutability
    http://opine-editorials.blogspot.com/2010/01/answering-ted-olson-selective.html

    Extrapolating Choice
    http://opine-editorials.blogspot.com/2010/01/extrapolating-choice.html

    The changeablity, and the choice factor, appears more common among women; more women than men reside in same-sex households (which is a more inclusive category than registered relationships). This pattern holds as well for licensed SSMs. Add to this the preliminary evidence that more individuals who register partnerships (SSMs, civil unions, domestic partnerships) have been previously married (to the other sex natch) than have never been married. Add also the evidence that most children, by far, living in same-sex households were attained via the old fashioned way -- previous procreative relationships (typically marriages or marriage-like cohabitations). It adds up. Choice is very significant. And choice of behavior stands out most of all.

    http://opine-editorials.blogspot.com/2010/01/extrapolating-choice.html?showComment=1264564853871#c9136694483573194257

    The changeablity, and the choice factor, appears more common among women; more women than men reside in same-sex households (which is a more inclusive category than registered relationships). This pattern holds as well for licensed SSMs. Add to this the preliminary evidence that more individuals who register partnerships (SSMs, civil unions, domestic partnerships) have been previously married (to the other sex natch) than have never been married. Add also the evidence that most children, by far, living in same-sex households were attained via the old fashioned way -- previous procreative relationships (typically marriages or marriage-like cohabitations). It adds up. Choice is very significant. And choice of behavior stands out most of all.

    Perhaps you consider Gregory Herek to be an idiot or perhaps you object to his research findings or perhaps you think Olson an idiot for asking him to testify that 1 in 5 are choosers according to that expert witness' own research. I dunno. Your comments, presumably immune from the charge of hateful, must have some good reasoning to use the term "idiot" to describe witnesses at the Prop 8 trial.

    Meanwhile, the issue is the Boy Scots and the pro-gay bigotry that has motivated the attack on that organization.

  35. Chairm
    Posted February 12, 2013 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    So, Teri and Guy still have not backed up the assertion made by Teri. Time is up. Another lost round for Teri.