• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boy Scouts file bankruptcy

COTO said:
Explain to us the key behaviours that surely distinguish a group of people who don't know the answers to the questions in #203 pp 1 from a group of people who do know the answers and simply want to hide the crimes from police.


Again, please enlighten us as to the specific efforts "to conceal it and make it go away" the BSA engaged in that the NYC DoE has not also engaged in.

I admit: if the BSA repeatedly took extraordinary measures to conceal crimes (e.g. physically threatening victims, obstructing police investigations, destroying documents, etc.) such that it constitutes a clear pattern of behaviour, I'll have to concede the point that they knew what they were doing was not in the best interests of the public.
Click to expand...
Again, pedophilia was a crime in every decade the BSA had to deal with it. They chose to hide it away, deny the whole thing, and pretend it wasn't happening.

There is no comparison to a institution that responds to the tax payer, must comply with subpoenas and can't just move teachers over to new schools when this whole things goes away.

You messed up in your comparison.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
 
Hatuey said:
Again, pedophilia was a crime in every decade the BSA had to deal with it. They chose to hide it away, deny the whole thing, and pretend it wasn't happening.

There is no comparison to a institution that responds to the tax payer, must comply with subpoenas and can't just move teachers over to new schools when this whole things goes away.
Click to expand...
You're repeating yourself without providing any of the details I've specifically requested in #220. If you're unable to unwilling to fulfill these requests, please just say so. I understand it may be prohibitively complicated and time-consuming.

By repeating yourself and not providing any details, I don't know whether you're unable/unwilling to expand your argument or whether you simply don't understand what I'm asking for.
 
COTO said:
You're repeating yourself without providing any of the details I've specifically requested in #220. If you're unable to unwilling to fulfill these requests, please just say so. I understand it may be prohibitively complicated and time-consuming.

By repeating yourself and not providing any details, I don't know whether you're unable/unwilling to expand your argument or whether you simply don't understand what I'm asking for.
Click to expand...
I don't answer to you. You're embarrassing yourself continually trying to compare an accountable institution to one that never was. If the teacher molests a kid, they go to prison once it gets reported. If a scout leader molested a kid, it got brushed over.

This is really simple stuff.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
 
Hatuey said:
I don't answer to you. You're embarrassing yourself continually trying to compare an accountable institution to one that never was. If the teacher molests a kid, they go to prison once it gets reported. If a scout leader molested a kid, it got brushed over.
Click to expand...
You're repeating yourself whilst ignoring every counterpoint I've raised over accountability, awareness, legal standards, historical context, and prevalence.

I can only hope the judicious reader will take the time to digest our entire debate before reaching a conclusion on which of us is embarrassing himself.

My regards, and thank you for the debate.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Your apparent support for allowing pedophiles/rapists and those who cover up for them to go without consequences is much worse than just pathetic.
Click to expand...

Nobody supports pedophilia or rape of these boys. The BSA tried to eliminate gay leaders and solve the problem; the left wouldn't let them.
 
Mashmont said:
The BSA tried to eliminate gay leaders and solve the problem;
Click to expand...
^^ Raging homophobic bias and ignorance on full display. ^^

Believing that by excluding openly gay leaders, Boy Scouts would be safe from assault is pure blind stupidity. Contrary to the beliefs of the uninformed (that includes you), gays are no more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexuals.

Mashmont said:
.... the left wouldn't let them.
Click to expand...
Thank your god for the left’s wisdom. :thumbs:
 
Mashmont said:
There's nothing you're going to tell me about 'earning' Eagle, friend. My dad was doubly hard on his own kids. Every requirement was filled to the letter and beyond.
Click to expand...

Stop hiding behind your daddy. I'm not talking about him, although I'm sure he's disappointed. If he was a Scoutmaster, as you claim, I have nothing but respect for him. Clearly, he and I share a level of commitment that escapes you. Eagles who don't give back, are the worst kind of Eagle. Either he failed you, or you have failed him. I'm guessing it's the latter.

And nobody pushed me through.
Click to expand...
Your lack of commitment to Scouting after allegedly obtaining Eagle rank would seem to suggest otherwise. What kind of Eagle scout takes his Eagle pin and never returns or gives back? I've come across a few like you over the years...and you're usually the same. type of people. Unfortunately, there are no surefire safeguards to prevent every poor-character scout from advancing, especially when their daddy is scoutmaster.


I wanted Eagle on my own since the time before I was in scouting.
Click to expand...
I do not doubt that. That's not the same thing as earning it, though.

But since you made up your tale about being a scoutmaster just for this thread, you wouldn't understand.
Click to expand...
:lamo
Bless your heart. You're trying so hard.


It just really offends me you would make up something like that just to take a pot shot at scouting and the conservative Christians in it.
Click to expand...
:lamo
What really "offends" you is the truth. The bottom line here is that you are an apologist for child molestation.

When Fake Christians use/pervert the Bible to rationalize their conservative social agenda, and their own perverse and/or immoral behavior, they only smear the image of Christianity, and of real Christians. The FACTS are not up for debate on this issue. The FACTS show that child predatory behavior in Scouting has been a DECADES long problem that has been KNOWINGLY concealed by BSA....and that almost LITERALLY ALL known offenders over the decades have been white males who professed to be both heterosexual and Christian. You KNOW you can't refute a word of my previous remarks, and that's why you're not even trying. Deflection is always your "go-to" move, when you lose an argument.
 
COTO said:
You're repeating yourself whilst ignoring every counterpoint I've raised over accountability, awareness, legal standards, historical context, and prevalence..
Click to expand...

So, without knowing exactly how many posts you've written regarding the above counterpoints, I have reviewed some of them and...I must say I find them specious, at best.

Since when have pedophilia and child sexual assault NOT been uniformly considered morally reprehensible, if not illegal? We're talking about 300+ documented cases/allegations that all took place over the last few decades. It's not as if we're talking about late 19th/early 20th century, here.

To what "historical context" are you referring?

Do you have any prevalence over time data that indicates an increase or decrease?

To what legal standards are you referring?
 
All brought to you by the Obama Supreme Court. Look, there's lots of discussion about gay being pedophiles, or not, but the incidents did go down significantly when the BSA banned them, and screened for them. Correlation? So the left went to court, got the SCOTUS to reverse. We can argue about the anecdotes all day, but it would be nice to see real world statistics with regard to abuse and time-lines. In the 80's this was a real problem for the BSA, and they tried to do something about it, and it seemed to work, notwithstanding isolated incidents, banning homosexual teens and adults most assuredly got results, then the SCOTUS got involved, whoosh, you have to let them in. Incidents were back, coverups ensued, and right now, we are where we are. Another thorn to the business model was allowing girls to be in the BSA, and whoever thought that was a great idea was smoking something I'd like to try.. I know leftist's don't get this thought process, but boy scouts are different than girl scouts. They're historically centered around different activities, you know, boys like to hunt, shoot, camp, blow things up, creepy crawlers, etc.. Girls, not so much, they prefer crafts, dressing up, having tea party's, etc..

Who knows, and perhaps we'll never know in my lifetime whether one single thing was the demise, but, one has to wonder if allowing girls into the BSA, and turning a blinds eye to homosexual inclusivity played a leading role.

To the discussion on whether gays, and lesbians can be pedophiles. Dear lord, of course they can, and are, just like heterosexual men and women can be likewise, who incredibly shallow must your critical thinking be to consider otherwise. Is pedophilia exclusive to one over the other, the jury is still out, and frankly it doesn't even matter. Protecting kids should be the goal, and if that means excluding certain traits in men and women, gay or not, we should all be supportive of that, or at least an honest attempt.

As to the argument the left isn't all about abolishing gender roles, and gender completely, I say.. Um.. what? Have you been living under a rock the past two decades.

Tim-
 
Last edited:
ultmd said:
So, without knowing exactly how many posts you've written regarding the above counterpoints, I have reviewed some of them and...I must say I find them specious, at best.

Since when have pedophilia and child sexual assault NOT been uniformly considered morally reprehensible, if not illegal? We're talking about 300+ documented cases/allegations that all took place over the last few decades. It's not as if we're talking about late 19th/early 20th century, here.

To what "historical context" are you referring?

Do you have any prevalence over time data that indicates an increase or decrease?

To what legal standards are you referring?
Click to expand...
You're going to have to read most of what I've written to understand my argument.

The quick 'n dirty version is three points:

- The number of alleged sexual assaults is so tiny compared to the number of participants in BSA programs that even if we assume an astronomical number of unreported assaults for every reported one, the overall rate of assault still falls short of baseline rates, such as the rate of sexual assault in NYC high schools. My posts quantify this. @Hatuey's counterargument is that although the reported rate of sex assaults in NYC high schools is literally 24,000 times higher than what's bringing down the BSA, and although the NYC DoE has limitless taxpayer money to fend off lawsuits alleging mishandling of sexual assaults, the NYC DoE must stand whilst the BSA falls because it's theoretically "more accountable".

- Answers to what sexual assault is/isn't, how serious it is, how common it is, how to best handle it, how likely offenders are to repeat, how to respect privacy of accusers and the accused, etc. are not common knowledge. People struggle with them and disagree even today, with 20:20 hindsight following scandals such as that in the Catholic Church. Reporting sexual assaults isn't mandatory except for specific professions. Most of these professions were added recently. Employees sign statements informing them of their legal obligation to report, and (as of 2016) undergo yearly training on how to identify and handle assaults and abuse. The knowledge, hindsight, regulations, and training of today were not extant at the time these assaults were alleged to have taken place. The BSA staff almost certainly handled the situations in the way they thought best with their scant knowledge of sexual assault. Their organization should be subjected to modern regulations, not sued out of existence.

@Hatuey's counterargument is that because pedophilia is illegal, human beings are born knowing the answers to all of the above questions, hence failure to identify sexual assault and report it to police is proof of a conspiracy within the BSA to protect the organization whilst knowingly destroying lives. Mandatory reporter status, legal statements, and yearly training for mandatory reporters exist solely as a means of wasting huge sums of time and money since human beings are born knowing how to address any illicit behaviour, no matter how foreign, deviant, or obscure.

- If there's any proof that sexual assaults were a widespread (or frankly, noticeable) problem in the BSA, or that BSA staff took extraordinary measures to conceal crimes (e.g. physically threatening victims, obstructing police investigations, destroying documents, etc.) such that it constitutes a clear pattern of behaviour, I haven't seen it. @Hatuey's counterargument is "I don't answer to you." and repeating points he's already made in an endless loop.

So there you have it. The Cliff Notes version. :coffeepap
 
RaleBulgarian said:
^^ Raging homophobic bias and ignorance on full display. ^^

Believing that by excluding openly gay leaders, Boy Scouts would be safe from assault is pure blind stupidity. Contrary to the beliefs of the uninformed (that includes you), gays are no more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexuals.


Thank your god for the left’s wisdom. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Yoohoo, this issue is BOYS, not children in general. Male molesters of boys by definition are gay. So your "homophobe" cow bell doesn't work. Banning gays in the seminaries worked for the Catholic Church. Virtually zero new abuse cases since the rule was instituted in 2005. The same policy was working for the BSA while they were allowed to do it.

Why do leftwingers want gays to continue molesting boys? That's my question.
 
Mashmont said:
Yoohoo, this issue is BOYS, not children in general. Male molesters of boys by definition are gay. So your "homophobe" cow bell doesn't work. Banning gays in the seminaries worked for the Catholic Church. Virtually zero new abuse cases since the rule was instituted in 2005. The same policy was working for the BSA while they were allowed to do it.

Why do leftwingers want gays to continue molesting boys? That's my question.
Click to expand...
Assuming that all men who sexually assault boys are homosexuals is wrong. Do some simple research to educate yourself. No doubt you’ll still be a homophobe, but at least you’ll be an informed homophobe.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Assuming that all men who sexually assault boys are homosexuals is wrong. Do some simple research to educate yourself. No doubt you’ll still be a homophobe, but at least you’ll be an informed homophobe.
Click to expand...

NAMBLA disagrees with you. They say it's ludicrous to think pederasts of boys are anything BUT gay. They should know.

The issue of love between men and boys has intersected the gay movement since the late nineteenth century, with the rise of the first gay rights movement in Germany. In the United States, as the gay movement has retreated from its vision of sexual liberation, in favor of integration and assimilation into existing social and political structures, it has increasingly sought to marginalize even demonize cross-generational love. Pederasty - that is, love between a man and a youth of 12 to 18 years of age - say middle-class homosexuals, lesbians, and feminists, has nothing to do with gay liberation. Some go so far as to claim, absurdly, that it is a heterosexual phenomenon, or even "sexual abuse." What a travesty!

Pederasty is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilization - and not only in the West! Pederasty is inseparable from the high points of Western culture - ancient Greece and the Renaissance.

https://www.nambla.org/
 
Mashmont said:
NAMBLA disagrees with you. They say it's ludicrous to think pederasts of boys are anything BUT gay. They should know.

The issue of love between men and boys has intersected the gay movement since the late nineteenth century, with the rise of the first gay rights movement in Germany. In the United States, as the gay movement has retreated from its vision of sexual liberation, in favor of integration and assimilation into existing social and political structures, it has increasingly sought to marginalize even demonize cross-generational love. Pederasty - that is, love between a man and a youth of 12 to 18 years of age - say middle-class homosexuals, lesbians, and feminists, has nothing to do with gay liberation. Some go so far as to claim, absurdly, that it is a heterosexual phenomenon, or even "sexual abuse." What a travesty!

Pederasty is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilization - and not only in the West! Pederasty is inseparable from the high points of Western culture - ancient Greece and the Renaissance.

https://www.nambla.org/
Click to expand...
No surprise that you would use the worst possible source to support your willfully ignorant and dishonest assertions. Akin to posting an article from the Aryan Nation to prop up a belief in white supremacy.

The truth;
“ A study from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2011 informs us that most of the clergy sexual offenders were “situational generalists” or men who simply abused victims to whom they had access and with whom they had the opportunity to develop trust.”

“most of the clergy sex offenders during the last half of the 20th century, according to the John Jay Report, viewed themselves as more likely to be heterosexual than as homosexual.”
No, homosexuality is not a risk factor for the sexual abuse of children | America Magazine

“Although the majority of clergy abuse victims are males, homosexuality cannot be blamed. First, many of the pedophile priests report that they are not homosexual. This is also true of many non-clergy sex offenders who victimize boys. Many report that they target boys for a variety of reasons that include easier access to boys ... pregnancy fears with female victims ... homosexuals in general have not been found to be more likely to commit sexual crimes against minors compared to heterosexuals. Sexual orientation is not predictive of sex crimes.”
What causes sex abuse? Research conflicts with Catholic leaders
 
RaleBulgarian said:
No surprise that you would use the worst possible source to support your willfully ignorant and dishonest assertions. Akin to posting an article from the Aryan Nation to prop up a belief in white supremacy.

The truth;
“ A study from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2011 informs us that most of the clergy sexual offenders were “situational generalists” or men who simply abused victims to whom they had access and with whom they had the opportunity to develop trust.”

“most of the clergy sex offenders during the last half of the 20th century, according to the John Jay Report, viewed themselves as more likely to be heterosexual than as homosexual.”
No, homosexuality is not a risk factor for the sexual abuse of children | America Magazine

“Although the majority of clergy abuse victims are males, homosexuality cannot be blamed. First, many of the pedophile priests report that they are not homosexual. This is also true of many non-clergy sex offenders who victimize boys. Many report that they target boys for a variety of reasons that include easier access to boys ... pregnancy fears with female victims ... homosexuals in general have not been found to be more likely to commit sexual crimes against minors compared to heterosexuals. Sexual orientation is not predictive of sex crimes.”
What causes sex abuse? Research conflicts with Catholic leaders
Click to expand...

Worst possible source? Nambla are folks who make no bones about what they do and what they want. They say it is absurd to say they are not gay, when there is no advantage for them to say that. Whereas the gay left folks have a direct interest in spreading the lie that male pedos of boys aren't gay. The left spends all day claiming the opposite of everything known to be true. A few examples:

1. Trump colluded with Russia --a total lie
2. Kavanagh assaulted a girl in high school - a total lie
3. Earth will end in 12 years due to climate change - a total lie
4. Socialism works and capitalism doesn't. - A total lie.
 
Mashmont said:
Worst possible source? Nambla are folks who make no bones about what they do and what they want. They say it is absurd to say they are not gay, when there is no advantage for them to say that. Whereas the gay left folks have a direct interest in spreading the lie that male pedos of boys aren't gay. The left spends all day claiming the opposite of everything known to be true. A few examples:

1. Trump colluded with Russia --a total lie
2. Kavanagh assaulted a girl in high school - a total lie
3. Earth will end in 12 years due to climate change - a total lie
4. Socialism works and capitalism doesn't. - A total lie.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, worst possible source. NAMBLA consists of a very small group of sick wannabe pedophiles that do not represent the homosexual community. A completely worthless reference.

Get back to me when you are able to provide information from studies conducted by respected researchers/psychologists/psychiatrists that support your absurd beliefs.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
No surprise that you would use the worst possible source to support your willfully ignorant and dishonest assertions. Akin to posting an article from the Aryan Nation to prop up a belief in white supremacy.

The truth;
“ A study from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2011 informs us that most of the clergy sexual offenders were “situational generalists” or men who simply abused victims to whom they had access and with whom they had the opportunity to develop trust.”

“most of the clergy sex offenders during the last half of the 20th century, according to the John Jay Report, viewed themselves as more likely to be heterosexual than as homosexual.”
No, homosexuality is not a risk factor for the sexual abuse of children | America Magazine

“Although the majority of clergy abuse victims are males, homosexuality cannot be blamed. First, many of the pedophile priests report that they are not homosexual. This is also true of many non-clergy sex offenders who victimize boys. Many report that they target boys for a variety of reasons that include easier access to boys ... pregnancy fears with female victims ... homosexuals in general have not been found to be more likely to commit sexual crimes against minors compared to heterosexuals. Sexual orientation is not predictive of sex crimes.”
What causes sex abuse? Research conflicts with Catholic leaders
Click to expand...
81% were boys. Paragraphs of garbage analysis overturned by one simple fact. Who abuses pubescent boys? Homosexuals.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Assuming that all men who sexually assault boys are homosexuals is wrong. Do some simple research to educate yourself. No doubt you’ll still be a homophobe, but at least you’ll be an informed homophobe.
Click to expand...
"People who abuse boys aren't homosexuals"

We've entered the satire portion of this debate.
 
phattonez said:
Years of allowing perverts into their ranks because that's compassionate, and then they get loads of lawsuits for abuse. No one could have predicted this!

The solution is obvious for anyone plainly looking at the facts. Stop tolerating deviant sexuality!
Click to expand...

They were forced to do so by the government.
 
phattonez said:
I'm summarizing your disingenuous argument. Men who abuse boys are homosexuals.
Click to expand...
Lie. You are deliberately misrepresenting what I posted.

I did not say, or imply, that homosexuals haven’t/don’t sexually abuse boys.

I said;
RaleBulgarian said:
Assuming that all men who sexually assault boys are homosexuals is wrong.
Click to expand...
Straight men have/do sexually abuse boys.
 
Hicup said:
All brought to you by the Obama Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
The Obama Supreme Court, huh? You mean the "Obama" court that had 5 conservative republican justices on it throughout each of Obama's 8 years in office?

Geez, what a moronic argument.

Some of the stuff that pops out of the minds of righties these days is just so simple-minded and nonsensical...it's ALMOST funny. The only reason it's not funny, is because you people clearly believe the nonsense that's been planted in your brains courtesy of the fakenews you people watch/read.

In this case, the USSC during the Obama years had nothing to do with anything that has happened to BSA.

Look, there's lots of discussion about gay being pedophiles, or not
Click to expand...
There is no question about it. You are dissembling, here. Such "discussions" may certainly take place among the ignorant and the uneducated. But in academic and professional circles, there is a MOUNTAIN of credible RESEARCH which PROVES that there is ZERO increased correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia, as compared to heterosexuality.. That is a myth. Gays are no more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals. To even hint otherwise, is to be dishonest (or, just plain ignorant).

...but the incidents did go down significantly when the BSA banned them, and screened for them.
Click to expand...
This argument is also a fabrication, of course. It's a FoxNews/right wing talking point that is not backed up by facts.

So the left went to court, got the SCOTUS to reverse.
Click to expand...
Another lie. Link, please. The FACT is that BSA repealed it's ban on gays because of corporate pressure. Corporations (which have been the life's blood of BSA's finances for decades) had stopped donating to BSA because of their discrimination against gays. That's why BSA changed. It had nothing to do with the "Obama Supreme Court". There was no USSC decision during the Obama era that even impacted this issue.

We can argue about the anecdotes all day, but it would be nice to see real world statistics with regard to abuse and time-lines. In the 80's this was a real problem for the BSA, and they tried to do something about it, and it seemed to work, notwithstanding isolated incidents, banning homosexual teens and adults most assuredly got results, then the SCOTUS got involved, whoosh, you have to let them in.
Click to expand...
Wrong again. YOU (and people like you) can "argue anecdotes all day", because that's all you ever do. The rest of will argue the FACTS. And the FACTS show that BSA has been maintaining a secret "P file" (i.e. "Perversion File") for OVER 100 YEARS! It shows that BSA has been kicking out adult male leaders at a rate of "2 per DAY" across the country, for over 100 years now. And the FACT is that the VAST majority of known, credible accusations and cases occurred in the 80's and 90's...when you claim, without ANY evidence, that "BSA...almost assuredly got results" before "SCOTUS got involved". So, let's be clear, everything you've argued, thus far, has been ignorant and/or dishonest.

Incidents were back, coverups ensued, and right now, we are where we are.
Click to expand...
Again...a COMPLETE LIE.

Another thorn to the business model was allowing girls to be in the BSA, and whoever thought that was a great idea was smoking something I'd like to try..
Click to expand...
So, it's clear to me that you don't really know anything about BSA. But the FACT is that adding girls to BSA was ENTIRELY about supporting their business model. BSA is a fairly bloated organization that is over-staffed with underworked employees. That's just a fact. I've been an active participant for a long time now, as a Scoutmaster and at the Council level as well. The move to add girls was ENTIRELY about maintaining revenue streams that will support the existing bureaucracy. Fewer boys are joining BSA these days. And the single largest participant in scouting (i.e. the Mormon Church) has pulled out virtually all of it's troops from BSA due to the new rules. That decision (by the Mormon Church) removed almost half a MILLION dues paying scouts from BSA in one-fell-swoop. And THAT is ENTIRELY the reason why BSA decided to allow girls to join. Trust me, I know what I'm saying.
 
Hicup said:
I know leftist's don't get this thought process, but boy scouts are different than girl scouts. They're historically centered around different activities, you know, boys like to hunt, shoot, camp, blow things up, creepy crawlers, etc.. Girls, not so much, they prefer crafts, dressing up, having tea party's, etc..
Click to expand...
A predictably stupid comment. Clearly, you have no freaking idea what you're talking about. You have a point of view that is based on your ideology, and little else.

More FACTS for you:
  • --There are 135 total merit badges available in BSA. Hunting is NOT a merit badge. "Blowing things up"...is NOT a merit badge. "Creepy Crawlers" is NOT a merit badge. But "Art", "Basketry", "coin collecting", Family Life", Cooking", "Pottery", "Reading", etc. etc....ARE merit badges. So anyone who thinks Scouting cannot accommidate girls...is talking out of his backside, I'm afraid.
  • --For DECADES now, Scouting has already been COED in EVERY other country in the world....EXCEPT for the U.S. (i.e. BSA) and Saudi Arabia. Yes, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia were the ONLY countries where scouting has NOT been coed for DECADES already.
  • --Girls who join BSA today will be joining ALL-GIRL troops that will function independently from boy troops. There are no plans to have boys and girls in coed troops
.
Who knows, and perhaps we'll never know in my lifetime whether one single thing was the demise, but, one has to wonder if allowing girls into the BSA, and turning a blinds eye to homosexual inclusivity played a leading role.
Click to expand...
BSA is in deep trouble, for sure. But not because of those issues, which are "problems" primarily in the minds of ignorant, homophobic conservatives who think homosexuality and pedophilia are "correlated" (as you suggested, yourself).

No, the reason BSA is in trouble, and will probably barely resemble its current self in about 10 years...is because of the FACT that BSA actively protected pedophiles and child molesters within its ranks for DECADES. And that heinous policy can be directly "correlated" with thousands of sexually abused children over that time. And for that alone, BSA really SHOULD be held fully accountable. Institutions are not more important than the lives and well-being of people.

Is pedophilia exclusive to one over the other, the jury is still out,
Click to expand...
Again...PURE IGNORANCE.

The "jury" on this has been "in" for a long time now. The answer is "NO", there is no correlation between "one or the other". NONE. Any suggestion to the contrary is either ignorance...or ideology-based lies.

Full stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom