The Gay Thread

Quote: SOOPOO

Maybe you and I disagree on just semantics. A man who has sex with young boys is either homosexual or bisexual. To me, once you have sex with someone of your gender, you can no longer be classified as ‘straight’.

HERE HERE!

He thinks no gay male ever married a female. He never heard of a "beard."

It was even a storyline on "Mad Men." Bob Benson offered an arrangement to Joan.

I don't want to get into semantics. I don't agree, but I doubt we will change each others mind.

So lets talk about the actual policy. When the BSA had a zero tolerance policy for gays that did not prevent abuse (or by your definition gays from joining) or taking place?

How would banning gays once again change anything about the abuse rates? (again they are virtually zero now that gays are allowed to be in).


Look at the Catholic Church for a non BSA example. Total gay ban, massive abuse rates.....
If you look at organizations in the Islamic world, similar cases.... Gay bans are often accompanied by high rates of abuse....

To take a secular example, the U.S. military. Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT) was policy until 2011. Gay people were technically banned, but you were simply not allowed to ask if somebody was gay (or tell people that you were gay). Its the kind of second class treatment that should not be tolerated in the modern era....

How has banning gay people from (insert organization) ever benefited society?

Simple answer. The BSA may have TRIED to ban gay men from being leaders, but they clearly failed. They may have succeeded back then banning OPENLY gay males, but clearly failed at preventing closeted gay males from being troop leaders.

Quote: SOOPOO

Simple answer. The BSA may have TRIED to ban gay men from being leaders, but they clearly failed. They may have succeeded back then banning OPENLY gay males, but clearly failed at preventing closeted gay males from being troop leaders.

Don't let him off the hook!! He pathetically won't even agree to this basic statement that you made earlier!!

Quote: SOOPOO

A man who has sex with young boys is either homosexual or bisexual. To me, once you have sex with someone of your gender, you can no longer be classified as ‘straight’.

My feeling is that there are idiots everywhere and that people that argue with idiots are idiots.

Quote: SOOPOO

To me, once you have sex with someone of your gender, you can no longer be classified as ‘straight’.

I've heard quite a few stories of people who delved into same sex situations, decided it wasn't for them and didn't do it again.

So you believe if someone tries broccoli once, but didn't care for it, they are defined for life as a broccoli lover? IN actuality, lots of people try lots of things once and don't go back for it again.

Quote: rxwine

I've heard quite a few stories of people who delved into same sex situations, decided it wasn't for them and didn't do it again.
.

Never did it, never even had
the tiniest desire. The fact
that it even occurs to
somebody is not normal,
unless you redefine normal.
Which of course Libs do
with everything. I don't
dislike homosexuals, in fact
I had lots of Gay friends
in Calif. However, I don't
trust them generally. Way
too many of them are weird
and skittish, they live right
on the edge of their emotions,
I don't know any straight men
like that.

My sister is laws first husband
was a closeted Gay and he
ended up in a long term
mental care facility. Even when
he outed himself he was and
still is in and out of there all
the time. Nice guy, just nuts as
hell.

Quote: SOOPOO

Maybe you and I disagree on just semantics. A man who has sex with young boys is either homosexual or bisexual. To me, once you have sex with someone of your gender, you can no longer be classified as ‘straight’.

If by young you mean you are at least five years older than the prepubescent child, then the attraction is diagnosed as pedophilia.

Quote: SOOPOO

Simple answer. The BSA may have TRIED to ban gay men from being leaders, but they clearly failed. They may have succeeded back then banning OPENLY gay males, but clearly failed at preventing closeted gay males from being troop leaders.

So how should closet gay people be banned?

Should you have to take a polygraph? Its probably the only way to truly know.

Even reference checks are only as good as they are, because back in the mid 1900s when being gay was frowned upon people who wanted to be secret were very good at doing so....

There is no realistic way to ban closeted gay people other than mandatory polygraphs.... (which is illegal, and even if it were not, is hugely expensive and beyond impractical for volunteer organizations....)
Besides the fact the fact that banning gay people is just ethically wrong....

Quote: Gandler

Besides the fact the fact that banning gay people is just ethically wrong....

Nothing wrong with banning gay males from what could be intimate situations such as camping and showering, etc with young males. the same as nothing wrong with banning straight males from the same with young females.

In fact either is smart for the protection of all involved.

As to the "tried it" comment no straight guy is going to go with another guy to "try it." The mere idea should be repulsive.

How many times do the libs on this board have to keep bringing this stuff up?