faithbasedboys.org ??? (not an unbiased post)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

You are entitled to this opinion. I, on the other hand, don't want my sons being told that anything goes. I do not want them being told it's ok to have relations with someone of the same sex or that if you don't feel like or want to be the gender you were born then you can just change that. I believe that if you are born a male, then that is what God intended you to be. That is not for us to decide.

 

And where is the BSA saying any of that? Their new position is it isn't anyone else's business. And it isn't.

 

I also don't want them to be influenced to believe that sex outside of marriage, adultery, lying, stealing, murdering, drunkenness, illegal drugs, etc. are right or good. Those are contrary to what I believe the Word of God teaches and I believe that, not the ever changing society we live in.

 

Your point? Out of curiosity, do you think no Boy Scouts or their leaders have ever had sex outside of marriage? Have told a lie?

 

I also believe that disagreeing with someone's behavior is not the same as hating them. My sons are taught that everyone is made in the image of God and therefore has inherent worth and dignity. Truly loving someone means that you want the absolute best for them and I believe that God knows what that is, not us. There is nothing to be gained by going against His created order except for a temporary happiness.

 

 

And at some point in time you have to be adult enough to realize that not everyone believes the same as you do, and that if their actions do not impact you directly then it really isn't any of your concern.

[Jan in SC]

 

 

My opinion = all TRUE Christians believe the ENTIRE Bible therefore all TRUE Christians believe homosexuality is a sin.

 

Ok- I will take the higher road and leave my true opinion in my head. It is so nice there, though it is not filled with nice words right now. I am a Christian and I need to be okay with where you are on your journey, or my journey is useless.

[Sahamamama]

On the other hand I'm troubled by a group that claims to represent a Christian viewpoint yet excludes certain groups of people. We do not bar gay people frm baptism. We do not deny them entrance into our churches. If they are part of the community of Christ why on earth are Christians coming up with ways to exclude them?

 

If you're not already aware, some churches do bar homosexuals from baptism. Some churches do deny them entrance into membership. In fact, some churches, my own included, consider homosexuals and the congregations that condone their lifestyle to be apostate, not "part of the community of Christ."

[Murphy101]

We have established BSA is not a Christian group, so please explain why a gay young man doesn't qualify as a Boy Scout.

 

One- it's doesn't have to be Christian to not want gays in it

 

Two- It's a PRIVATE group and can decide it's membership rules any way it wants and anyone who doesn't like it can go make their own group.

[Jennifer3141]

 

 

What is your stance on identical twins where one is gay and the other isn't?

 

The DNA of twins is not exactly the same. That would be a set of clones, not twins.

 

And billions upon billions of things happen to everyone's bodies/DNA everyday. For your point to be valid, all twins would have to die the same death as their twin (barring accident). So if your twin gets pancreatic cancer, then you should 100% die of pancreatic cancer. And that's just not how human bodies work.

[Cindy in FL.]

I disagree with this completely. While I do believe that we are born with predispositions or whatever you want to call them, and that is not sinful (just like Jesus' being tempted was not sin), it is sin to act upon them. It is one thing to be attracted to someone of the same sex and another thing entirely to act upon that attraction. I don't for a minute think that it would be easy to be in that situation, but we live in a fallen world and life is very difficult. Increasingly so, I think.

 

I have no problem with the term disordered, either. Homosexuality goes against God's order and is, therefore, disordered. Not the moral equivalent of a racial slur.

 

 

Being gay isn't a behavior, it is an identity. You can't really "disagree" with someone's identity. That is my thinking, and why I believing calling being gay being "disordered" is the moral equivalent to using a racial slur.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

 

One- it's doesn't have to be Christian to not want gays in it

 

No one said that was the case. However certain people have used Christianity to justify the exclusion.

Two- It's a PRIVATE group and can decide it's membership rules any way it wants and anyone who doesn't like it can go make their own group.

 

Or they can influence the PRIVATE group to do the right thing.

[Catwoman]

I have nothing to say on this topic except that I believe it is absolutely appalling and unbelievably arrogant that anyone believes they have the right to decide who is and who is not a "true Catholic" or a "true Christian."

 

I don't think anyone is entitled to judge another person in that way... and if they feel the need to do it, I think it is very unkind and judgmental.

[Luanne]

Being gay isn't a behavior, it is an identity. You can't really "disagree" with someone's identity. That is my thinking, and why I believing calling being gay being "disordered" is the moral equivalent to using a racial slur.

 

I disagree. Being gay is a choice, not an idenity like blue eyes or blond hair.

[Jennifer3141]

 

I disagree. Being gay is a choice, not an idenity like blue eyes or blond hair.

 

Ok. But when did you decide to be heterosexual?

[Murphy101]

To be clear:

 

My reference to RC who don't believe x, y z was not slandering.

 

Someone previous was bothered about groups using the words Christian, even tho it excluded some Christians. My only point was it could be more specific than that. It could be RC and there'd bound to be a RC out there that didn't agree with it.

[Cindy in FL.]

Chocolate Reign,

 

Obviously this thread has morphed to include more than just a discussion of the BSA's decision on allowing gays. It seems that the BSA desires to hold their members to high standards with regard to their character (at least historically). Since the leaders and the members are fallible human beings, I would presume that each and every one of them is a sinner. I am adult enough to realize that not everyone agrees with me. However, this earth belongs to my Heavenly Father and it matters to Him what people do, so it matters to me. I will stand for the truth regardless of what people think of me for doing so.

 

All that being said, my whole point since you seemed to miss it somehow, was to say that I am not willing to put my sons' moral education into the hands of people with whom I disagree on such a grand scale. I did not say that my sons could/would never be in the Boy Scouts. If the leader were someone who I respected and agreed with on foundational issues, then I would be fine with that.

[Catwoman]

I disagree. Being gay is a choice, not an idenity like blue eyes or blond hair.

 

I have had many gay friends over the years, and I can honestly tell you that they did not choose to be gay. They simply were gay.

 

Have the gay people you have known felt that they had made a choice to be that way? Because the only people who I have ever heard say that being gay was a choice, were heterosexuals.

 

 

[Guest inoubliable]

 

I disagree. Being gay is a choice, not an idenity like blue eyes or blond hair.

 

That's not even an opinion. That's just dead wrong information you've been given.

[Cindy in FL.]

 

You don't have to "choose" to be who you are. Heterosexuals are simply being who they were created to be. Homosexuals choose to be other than they were created to be.

 

 

 

Ok. But when did you decide to be heterosexual?

[Pawz4me]

My opinion = all TRUE Christians believe the ENTIRE Bible therefore all TRUE Christians believe homosexuality is a sin.

 

I respect your right to have an opinion even if I vehemently disagree with it (or in this case the implications of it).

 

My opinion -- A true Christian is a follower of Christ. So a true Christian takes what He said first and foremost. And He said this:

 

Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.

 

He is all about love. Homosexuality (or eating pork or wearing mixed fibers or women speaking in church or the zillions of other things that Bible says are sins) doesn't matter much in the face of love.

 

So my opinion is that you can focus on sin. That's pretty much what the Pharisees did, and Jesus had a few things to say to and about them. Or you can do what Jesus said and modeled for us and focus on love. Love is inclusive, not exclusive. I believe Jesus demonstrated that quite a few times. I know which one I think "true" Christians should give priority to.

[Catwoman]

To be clear:

 

My reference to RC who don't believe x, y z was not slandering.

 

Someone previous was bothered about groups using the words Christian, even tho it excluded some Christians. My only point was it could be more specific than that. It could be RC and there'd bound to be a RC out there that didn't agree with it.

 

OK, now I'm embarrassed because I hadn't even read your post before you just mentioned it. :blush:

 

I was actually referring to a few of the judgmental "Christian" posts, but added the Catholic part so it wouldn't look like I was pointing to a specific person. Even after all these years on this forum, I am still amazed at how there are people who believe that their definition of "Christian" is the only possible reality.

 

OOPS!!!! Sorry, Martha!!!!

[Guest inoubliable]

You don't have to "choose" to be who you are. Heterosexuals are simply being who they were created to be. Homosexuals choose to be other than they were created to be.

 

Using AiG for science?

[Jan in SC]

It is appalling to me that people are speaking about a group of people as if they aren't people, you know, with feelings. Even if you disagree with it, can you not find a way to discuss it without degrading someone?

It's rude!

[Catwoman]

 

You don't have to "choose" to be who you are. Heterosexuals are simply being who they were created to be. Homosexuals choose to be other than they were created to be.

 

I guess some of us believe that gay people are exactly who they were created to be.

 

And we accept them just the way they are, without question.

 

Clearly, we will have to agree to disagree on this issue.

[Cindy in FL.]

Nice. You know what I use as a guide in life? The Bible. If you disagree with what it says, then you ultimately have a problem with God, not me.

 

 

 

Using AiG for science?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

You don't have to "choose" to be who you are. Heterosexuals are simply being who they were created to be. Homosexuals choose to be other than they were created to be.

 

You say that even though homosexuals have said time and time again that they have not made that choice?

 

[Cindy in FL.]

I agree with you here, Cat. I have always enjoyed your posts and feel like you are a very kind, encouraging, and loving person. We will have to agree to disagree on this one, though!

 

 

 

I guess some of us believe that gay people are exactly who they were created to be.

 

Clearly, we will have to agree to disagree on this issue.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Nice. You know what I use as a guide in life? The Bible. If you disagree with what it says, then you ultimately have a problem with God, not me.

 

Odd. I use the same Bible but have reached different conclusions.

[Guest inoubliable]

Nice. You know what I use as a guide in life? The Bible. If you disagree with what it says, then you ultimately have a problem with God, not me.

 

I thought your Jesus was all about the "love one another" thing.

[Guest]

I respect your right to have an opinion even if I vehemently disagree with it (or in this case the implications of it).

 

My opinion -- A true Christian is a follower of Christ. So a true Christian takes what He said first and foremost. And He said this:

 

 

 

He is all about love. Homosexuality (or eating pork or wearing mixed fibers or women speaking in church or the zillions of other things that Bible says are sins) doesn't matter much in the face of love.

 

So my opinion is that you can focus on sin. That's pretty much what the Pharisees did, and Jesus had a few things to say to and about them. Or you can do what Jesus said and modeled for us and focus on love. Love is inclusive, not exclusive. I believe Jesus demonstrated that quite a few times. I know which one I think "true" Christians should give priority to.

 

 

He also said:

 

Matthew 19:17

New King James Version (NKJV)

 

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good?[a] No one is good but One, that is, God.[b] But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.â€

 

17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

 

[Cindy in FL.]

Yes, I sure do. My mom was an alcoholic. Many would say that she was born that way, and to a point I would agree. I could agree that she had a genetic makeup which predisposed her to alcoholism. However, every single drink she took was a conscious decision on her part to do something wrong. She would say that she couldn't help it, etc. She could have, she just took the easier path.

 

Homosexuals may not choose to be attracted to the same sex, but they sure choose to act on those feelings.

 

 

 

You say that even though homosexuals have said time and time again that they have not made that choice?

[Cindy in FL.]

He is. We disagree with what that means, though. Loving someone might just mean telling them a truth that they don't want to hear.

 

 

 

I thought your Jesus was all about the "love one another" thing.

[Guest]

6 He answered and said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:

‘This people honors Me with

their

lips,

But their heart is far from Me.

7

And in vain they worship Me,

Teaching

as

doctrines the commandments of men.’

[

a

]

8 For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men[b] —the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.â€

9 He said to them, “All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

 

 

He also said:

 

Matthew 19:17

New King James Version (NKJV)

 

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good?[a] No one is good but One, that is, God.[b] But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.â€

 

17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

 

 

So you are following all of the laws in the Old Testament?

[Cindy in FL.]

Well, we will just have to see how it all shakes out in the end. If and when we meet in heaven, I'll be happy to hear the "I told you so" from you if you wind up being right on this one.

 

 

 

Odd. I use the same Bible but have reached different conclusions.

[Guest inoubliable]

He is. We disagree with what that means, though. Loving someone might just mean telling them a truth that they don't want to hear.

 

Got it. You follow the book as closely as it fits your own views.

[justasque]

Homosexuals may not choose to be attracted to the same sex, but they sure choose to act on those feelings.

 

Or they may choose not to act on them.

 

Under the previous BSA policy, they would have been excluded from the BSA regardless. The new policy is more in line with churches such as the Catholic church, which does not, in my experience, bar gay kids from CCD classes, CYO sports, Catholic high schools, and other Catholic youth activities.

 

The BSA says, "We are unaware of any major religious chartered organization that believes a youth member simply stating he or she is attracted to the same sex, but not engaging in sexual activity, should make him or her unwelcome in their congregation.

This proposal reinforces Scouting's belief that sexual conduct by any Scout, heterosexual or homosexual, is contrary to the virtues of Scouting and is reflective of the beliefs of most of our major religious chartered organizations.

While, if this resolution is passed, no youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of stating their sexual orientation alone, Scouting expects appropriate behavior from all members, which includes sexual conduct, regardless of sexual orientation."

[Cindy in FL.]

I'm not sure I understand you here. My beliefs are informed by the Bible. I don't pick and choose or twist the Bible to fit with my beliefs.

 

 

 

Got it. You follow the book as closely as it fits your own views.

 

[Crimson Wife]

 

I think that's where everybody is on the same page on this issue. Boys Scouts should be about friendships, character and skills. Leave a child's sexuality out of it and let them get on with being a kid.

 

 

For many people, part of someone's character *IS* their s*xual behavior (gay or straight).

[Guest]

So you are following all of the laws in the Old Testament?

 

 

 

Let's not get into that. There is a difference between ceremonial and moral laws.

 

 

Here's a couple of New Testament verses for you, regardless:

 

Matthew 19:4-6

New King James Version (NKJV)

 

4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made[a] them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’[b] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?[c] 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.â€

 

 

Romans 1:24-28

King James Version (KJV)

 

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

[Cindy in FL.]

I hear you. There is a difference between practicing and non-practicing homosexuals. I failed to acknowledge that and lumped them all together. I see that the BSA is allowing non-practicing homosexuals and I don't disagree with that stance. I don't disagree with that within the church, either.

 

 

 

Or they may choose not to act on them.

 

Under the previous BSA policy, they would have been excluded from the BSA regardless. The new policy is more in line with churches such as the Catholic church, which does not, in my experience, bar gay kids from CCD classes, CYO sports, Catholic high schools, and other Catholic youth activities.

 

The BSA says, "We are unaware of any major religious chartered organization that believes a youth member simply stating he or she is attracted to the same sex, but not engaging in sexual activity, should make him or her unwelcome in their congregation.

This proposal reinforces Scouting's belief that sexual conduct by any Scout, heterosexual or homosexual, is contrary to the virtues of Scouting and is reflective of the beliefs of most of our major religious chartered organizations.

While, if this resolution is passed, no youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of stating their sexual orientation alone, Scouting expects appropriate behavior from all members, which includes sexual conduct, regardless of sexual orientation."

 

[Alexigail]

I just think that regardless of whether it's a sin or not, we should all be kind and accepting of one another because we're ALL sinners. I've committed terrible sins in my life, much worse than any of these little boys could have. Even if it's a sin, it's not THE sin and if Christ is stronger than sin, how can we deny a person the right to try and sort out their own feelings and their own relationship with Him? Christ said: "But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." These are innocent children we're talking about not perverts of any kind.

Maybe this is moot because this isn't even a religious issue. But:

Little kids have enough to worry about.

How can a person ever "choose" (if that's indeed what they're doing) to be anything other than what they feel they are if they're outright rejected for it? A child should never feel unsafe or that they are unnatural.

[Guest]

Or they may choose not to act on them.

 

Under the previous BSA policy, they would have been excluded from the BSA regardless. The new policy is more in line with churches such as the Catholic church, which does not, in my experience, bar gay kids from CCD classes, CYO sports, Catholic high schools, and other Catholic youth activities.

 

The BSA says, "We are unaware of any major religious chartered organization that believes a youth member simply stating he or she is attracted to the same sex, but not engaging in sexual activity, should make him or her unwelcome in their congregation.

This proposal reinforces Scouting's belief that sexual conduct by any Scout, heterosexual or homosexual, is contrary to the virtues of Scouting and is reflective of the beliefs of most of our major religious chartered organizations.

While, if this resolution is passed, no youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of stating their sexual orientation alone, Scouting expects appropriate behavior from all members, which includes sexual conduct, regardless of sexual orientation."

 

 

 

We'll see if it goes further than this. Only time will tell.

[Luanne]

Nobody is perfect (obviously), but I try to live as close as possible to what the Bible says is the way to live. We aren't expected to follow Old Testament traditions. You aren't going to find me in my backyard sacrificing a lamb... sorry, isn't going to happen.

[Guest]

I just think that regardless of whether it's a sin or not, we should all be kind and accepting of one another because we're ALL sinners. I've committed terrible sins in my life, much worse than any of these little boys could have. Even if it's a sin, it's not THE sin and if Christ is stronger than sin, how can we deny a person the right to try and sort out their own feelings and their own relationship with Him? Christ said: "But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." These are innocent children we're talking about not perverts of any kind.

Maybe this is moot because this isn't even a religious issue. But:

Little kids have enough to worry about.

How can a person ever "choose" (if that's indeed what they're doing) to be anything other than what they feel they are if they're outright rejected for it? A child should never feel unsafe or that they are unnatural.

 

 

We are to be kind. But we are to call sin what it is, not accept it as not sin. That's what people are missing.

 

Gotta run for now!

[WishboneDawn]

I'll give my opinion and then I'm leaving the thread.

 

As a Christian I have no problem with the BSAs new rule. We're all sinners. We're all on the journey and none of us finished so to exclude one group of children because they consider themselves gay in that very turbulent point in life seems bizarre. I don't think one has to accept homosexuality to seem something wrong with that exclusion.

 

As a Christian, I'm not that bothered by the TRUE Christian claim today. It's an easy claim to make but a ridiculously hard one to support. I'd be interested in discussing the claim further in another thread Luann (PM me if you like. I often think we need a social group for Christians to talk about things across denominations) but without that discussion I find it rather light and meaningless in this thread.

[Guest]

I'll give my opinion and then I'm leaving the thread.

 

As a Christian I have no problem with the BSAs new rule. We're all sinners. We're all on the journey and none of us finished so to exclude one group of children because they consider themselves gay in that very turbulent point in life seems bizarre. I don't think one has to accept homosexuality to seem something wrong with that exclusion.

 

As a Christian, I'm not that bothered by the TRUE Christian claim today. It's an easy claim to make but a ridiculously hard one to support. I'd be interested in discussing the claim further in another thread Luann (PM me if you like. I often think we need a social group for Christians to talk about things across denominations) but without that discussion I find it rather light and meaningless in this thread.

 

 

 

Great suggestion. Is there not a Christian thread here?

 

Really have to go. Seriously!

[Luanne]

You say that even though homosexuals have said time and time again that they have not made that choice?

 

 

 

Just because they say that, doesn't automatically make it true. They have been conditioned to respond that way.

[justasque]

For many people, part of someone's character *IS* their s*xual behavior (gay or straight).

 

 

The BSA clearly states, "Any sexual conduct, whether homosexual or heterosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting. ... Membership ... requires the youth member to (a) subscribe to and abide by the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Scout Law, ... and © demonstrate behavior that exemplifies the highest level of good conduct and respect for others and is consistent at all times with the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Scout Law."

[Crimson Wife]

We have established BSA is not a Christian group, so please explain why a gay young man doesn't qualify as a Boy Scout.

 

 

The BSA law references being "morally straight" and one of the BSA values is being "clean". The controversy is over whether that excludes individuals who identify with a homos*xual lifestyle and are vocal about it rather than keeping their private life private.

 

It isn't only Christians who have an issue with homos*xual behavior. There are plenty of non-Christians who do as well.

[poppy]

Nobody is perfect (obviously), but I try to live as close as possible to what the Bible says is the way to live. We aren't expected to follow Old Testament traditions. You aren't going to find me in my backyard sacrificing a lamb... sorry, isn't going to happen.

 

It's really not that hard to keep kosher. Lots of people do it.

[Catwoman]

I agree with you here, Cat. I have always enjoyed your posts and feel like you are a very kind, encouraging, and loving person. We will have to agree to disagree on this one, though!

 

 

No problem at all, Cindy -- we can't agree on every single thing, right? :)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

 

 

Let's not get into that. There is a difference between ceremonial and moral laws.

 

 

Here's a couple of New Testament verses for you, regardless:

 

Matthew 19:4-6

New King James Version (NKJV)

 

4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made[a] them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’[b] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?[c] 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.â€

 

 

Romans 1:24-28

King James Version (KJV)

 

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

 

 

Let's not get into that? I guess you know when you don't have an answer. Good game.

[poppy]

The BSA law references being "morally straight" and one of the BSA values is being "clean". The controversy is over whether that excludes individuals who identify with a homos*xual lifestyle and are vocal about it rather than keeping their private life private.

 

It isn't only Christians who have an issue with homos*xual behavior. There are plenty of non-Christians who do as well.

 

And there are a whole lot of Christians who have zero problem with it. It's not a Christian/not Christian issue at all. There are other religions which disapprove of homosexuality too. Muslims tend to be very anti-gay - not all, of course. But there are several Muslim countries where homosexuality is a crime punishable by the death penalty.