Betrayed in the Name of Tolerance

Betrayal always hurts, and hurts most when it happens at the hands of people you trust. But what are you supposed to do, when it happens because of misguided ideals?

The recent policy change at the Boy Scouts of America forces us to take a look at the homosexuality issue with a magnifying lens. My husband and I would have preferred to tackle this with the children at a time WE, as parents and primary educators, deemed appropriate. However, just like everything else on the LGBT agenda that’s shoved down our throats, this appeared on our doorstep demanding attention and scrutiny NOW. So let’s do exactly that. As St. Paul exhorts us,

But test everything; hold fast what is good. – 1 Thessalonians 5:21, RSV-CE

The current policy states:

While the BSA does not proactively inquire about the sexual orientation of employees, volunteers, or members, we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals or who engage in behavior that would become a distraction to the mission of the BSA.

Contrast that with the policy change voted on on May 23, 2013. The BSA National Council approved a resolution, removing the restriction denying membership to youth on the basis of sexual orientation alone. The Council reiterated that “the policy for adult members has not changed” and is not under consideration, and reminded everyone that “kids are better off when they’re in Scouting”. This takes effect 1/1/2014.

gayscouts

Inclusiveness sounds benign enough when one takes it at face value, but what is it really all about? A retrospective might help:

Homosexuality, the Gay Lobby, and the APA

Once upon a time, homosexuality was listed in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. In 1973, gay activists and gay psychiatrists within the organization, lobbied to strike it off the list.

Barbara Gittings, Frank Kameny and John Fryer (in mask) at the Dallas APA Conference in 1972 (Source:  http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/dgkeysearchdetail.cfm?trg=1&strucID=1080888&imageID=1606137&total=541&num=320&word=title_id_list%3A1078769&s=1&notword=&d=&c=&f=&k=1&lWord=&lField=&sScope=images&sLevel=1&sLabel=Barbara%20Gittings%20and%20Kay%20Tobin%20Lahusen%20gay%20history%20papers%20and%20photographs&sort=&imgs=20&pos=321&e=w)

Barbara Gittings, Frank Kameny and John Fryer (in mask) at the Dallas APA Conference in 1972 (Source: http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/dgkeysearchdetail.cfm?trg=1&strucID=1080888&imageID=1606137&total=541&num=320&word=title_id_list%3A1078769&s=1&notword=&d=&c=&f=&k=1&lWord=&lField=&sScope=images&sLevel=1&sLabel=Barbara%20Gittings%20and%20Kay%20Tobin%20Lahusen%20gay%20history%20papers%20and%20photographs&sort=&imgs=20&pos=321&e=w)

Depathologizing homosexuality was the first “gay rights” victory. Dr. Robert Spitzer, considered by some as the father of modern psychiatry, authored the proposal for a new diagnostic category of “Sexual Orientation Disturbance“. It wasn’t perfect, but it was good enough for the gay lobby. They hailed Dr. Spitzer as their hero, that is, until 2001, when he published a study showing that some gays and lesbians can change their sexual orientation.

As to be expected, Spitzer suddenly became the target of much vitriol from the LGBT community, and eleven years later, he issued a “retraction“. NARTH explains what that retraction means and Spitzer’s reasons for doing it here.

Whether or not there is a “cure” for homosexuality is a debate that remains acrimonious. I’ve done quite a bit of reading on this especially the last few weeks, and will tackle it in another post. What we cannot afford to ignore no matter which side of the debate we’re on is the fact that people continue to hurt. In 1973 Frank Kameny wrote about being resentful and bitter, about being the victim of prejudice and insensitivity. Today we hear the same complaint.


Source: http://www.kamenypapers.org/correspondence/gayproudandhealthy.jpg

Here’s the thing. While there are many people who are hurting, and we who are trying our best to live authentic Christian lives bend over backwards to remedy the situation, and to let these people know they are LOVED, we are miles away from seeing eye to eye, because our interpretation, and THEIR interpretation, of what LOVE entails, are all too often worlds apart. Militant LGBT equate love with tacit approval, celebration, and validation. Anything less than those three is automatically a condemnation not only of their lifestyle but of their very persons. And because of this unresolved anger and bitterness, we have to be extra-careful how we respond, as individuals and as institutions, to what we have come to know as an unforgiving and unrelenting movement.

Why the BSA Caved, and What’s Next

Over the years, LGBT activists have been chipping away at institutions that continue to stand for traditional moral values. The BSA capitulation was just the latest notch on the proverbial belt, the culmination of years of lobbying and litigation. Notable cases along the way include BSA vs. Curran, BSA vs. Dale, and BSA vs. Pool and Geller.

In April 2012, Jennifer Tyrrell became the perfect conduit for a renewed assault on the BSA. This time, utilizing the power of social media, and with the help of veteran LGBT activist organizations like GLAAD, the freshly-minted Scouts for Equality, as well as our liberal-controlled media, the pressure finally reached its upper limit, as the BSA abandoned their own Scout Oath and Law, along with the Scouts and Scout Leaders who still believe and live every word of both.

I wish I could chalk it up to naïveté. Given the LGBT’s agitprop machinery, however, the policy change should not have come as a surprise to anyone, least of all those of us who have been aware of how this movement works. This year’s BSA decision is simply an echo of what happened within the APA in 1973. And no, we aren’t at journey’s end. A mere ten days after the resolution passed, Boy Scouts IN UNIFORM marched at a gay parade in Utah, for which they received a mild reprimand. What’s next on the agenda? Gay scout leaders and atheists. The campaign has already begun.

Early Self-Identification as LGBT: Who Benefits?

Why is it so important that open and avowed homosexuals be welcomed into the BSA? Sexologist Alfred Kinsey’s 1948 claim that 10% of the US population was gay has long been disproved. The most recent studies show that only 3.4% of the population self-identify as LGBT.

The BSA policy change ENCOURAGES and even FORCES young men still at this very tender stage to SELF-IDENTIFY as gay or bisexual. Same-sex attraction is not that unusual especially at an age when one is still figuring out one’s identity and purpose in life. Adolescence is a rough enough time, and there is no wisdom in encouraging them to “come out” early. People in their 20′s and 30′s still struggle with their identity. The only people that early self-identification benefits are those who are already part of the movement. What’s most troubling about all this is that early self-identification, coupled with aggressive recruitment and indoctrination from LGBT activists, will sooner than later lead to militancy and an embracing of the homosexual lifestyle, which is not a healthy lifestyle, to say the least.

In pandering to moneyed interests, the BSA has chosen to forget the BOYS they have promised to serve. As my son says, we’re not abandoning you, BSA. YOU abandoned us.

I’d like to close with this quote from Dorothy Sayers. This says it all.

In the world it is called Tolerance, but in hell it is called Despair…the sin that believes in nothing, cares for nothing, seeks to know nothing, interferes with nothing, enjoys nothing, hates nothing, finds purpose in nothing, lives for nothing, and remains alive because there is nothing for which it will die.


Next up: The BSA Policy Old and New: A Comparison.

4 comments

  1. Rogie says:

    This is indeed very sad, Stef. Lots of people are still clueless and think that it’s merely about what they call “equality”, a word itself that already got lost in translation.

    • stef says:

      Agree, Rogie. We are all equal in God’s eyes, but we are not all equal, and that’s a good thing. :)

Leave a Reply