Follow by Email

Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Why can't gays leave Boy Scouts alone?



Well, they're at it again. The homosexual privileges crowd is once again attempting to hijack the Boy Scouts of America. They're using an old political hack who happens to hold office in the Boy Scouts as a mouthpiece for their agenda. The president of the BSA, Robert Gates, proclaimed:

"We must deal with the world as it is, not as we might wish it to be... The status quo in our movement’s membership standards cannot be sustained. The one thing we cannot do is put our heads in the sand and pretend this challenge will go away or abate. Quite the opposite is happening."

Gay privilege organizations behaved predictably. They praised Gates' statement and then promised to push for more concessions. Chad Griffin, for example, stated:

"We welcome as a step in the right direction President Gates’ announcement that the organization will not revoke the charters of chapters that welcome LGBT Scout leaders and employees. But, as we have said many times previously, half measures are unacceptable, especially at one of America’s most storied institutions."

The issue should never be about who wants what or what percentage of the population believes in X, Y, or Z. The Boy Scouts of America stands for something. It stands for being, in part, "morally straight." You can't teach that convincingly if you change your moral code with every shift in public opinion. Moreover, the BSA has an obligation to protect our boys. We wouldn't want straight men taking a young group of Girl Scouts camping, would we? Does not this same principle apply to gay men and the Boy Scouts? We are told by the pundits that, in fact, it's the straight men we need to watch out for.

The statistics used to promote the lie that straight men are much more likely to molest boys (an idea that is ridiculous on its face) are so blatantly misrepresented that they deserve their own chapter in the history of propaganda. There are several facts to understand before the raw numbers will make any statistical sense. First, nearly all sexual abuse is committed by men, a fact that is a sad testament to the general moral inferiority of the male gender. I guess that's why the Boy Scout program needs to exist, though--young men need moral training. Secondly, only about three percent of the male population, as examined by multiple studies, is homosexual in orientation. Third, roughly one-third of sexual abuse cases involve boys. Using a simple ratio comparison, the ratio of female sexual abuse victims to straight men is 67:97 and the ratio of male sex abuse victims to gay men is 33:3. In context, gay men are almost sixteen times more likely to abuse their preferred victims.

You will not hear the facts in context from the mainstream media. You will not hear them from any politician wanting to go with the flow and avoid offending anyone, even when the safety of our young people is at stake. When placed in context, the data are clear. All most of you will ever hear is that twice as many straight abuse cases happen as gay ones. No proportionate analysis of the data will be tolerated.

It's like the old saw--there are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics. The media will manipulate the numbers any way they have to in order to create the image they wish to portray. Journalism is dead, and we were too busy nodding our heads to notice. In the meantime, the Boy Scouts are in danger of both a loss of their founding principles and a wave of molestation cases. We have to protect our youth, whether or not this makes us popular. Giving up our principles will not save the movement; it will destroy it.

UPDATE: Well, it seems that the only safe Boy Scout troops are those sponsored by conservative religious institutions. You know where to register your boys. Nothing is 100%, but the odds are in your favor.