Thoughts in a Haystack

I'm going to keep this as an open post to record the head explosions of the wingnuts to the decision of the Boy Scouts to allow kids, who already know they are gay, to be ... you know ... kids, instead of cultural and political footballs in the Righteous Right's campaign to drag us back to pre-Enlightenment times. Expect frequent updates!

Oh, here's one, from John Stemberger, founder of OnMyHonor.net:

He claimed that scouting groups now have two options: to "segregate" gay Scouts from heterosexual ones by putting them in separate tents, or "put homosexual boys with other boys and put them at risk."

At "risk" of what? Rape? But the Bible is okay with rape: Judges 21:10-24; Numbers 31:7-18; Deuteronomy 20:10-14; Deuteronomy 22:28-29, for example.

Now "boys being boys" was a common phenomenon in the Army when I was in. Scared and lonely kids tend to seek solace. Here's an idea! ... let's stop making kids scared and lonely and maybe they won't "huddle up" at night. As always, the Righteous Right imagines that what they hate is so attractive that no one can resist it. Maybe they should look into their own psyche.
_______________________________________________

Here's a nice one:

Jonathan Saenz, president of the Austin-based conservative advocacy group Texas Values, which organized one of the protests outside the annual meeting, called the vote a "tragic decision" that showed the Boy Scouts had "chosen to place sex and politics above its timeless principles."

He blamed national leaders who called for the vote and "willingly opened the door to allow homosexual advocates to overrun an organization that stands for a code of morality that these intolerant advocates reject." He predicted the vote could destroy the organization.

Because, of course, allowing a vote is a terrible thing. Wait a minute! Weren't the homophobes saying just a second ago that whenever the "homosexual agenda" was put to a vote they won? Voting is, apparently, a good thing only when they win.
_______________________________________________

And, again, from the Family Research Council:

It is clear that the current BSA leadership will bend with the winds of popular culture, and the whims of liberal special interest groups.

Because, of course, all those anti gay marriage votes a decade ago were just the winds of popular culture and the whims of wingnut special interest groups.
_______________________________________________

And another:

“My concern all along has been boy-on-boy sexual contact,” John Stemberger, an Eagle Scout and organiser of On My Honor, told the Dallas Morning News in April. “If this resolution passes, it will be open season for gay young men. How do we protect the Scouts who are not gay?”

Oh, I don't know ... maybe by telling the non-gay kids to just say no?
_______________________________________________

Bryan Fischer could not be far behind:

BSA now stands for Boy Sodomizers of America, because that's what will happen. Mark my words.

It's a little late for that, Bryan.
_______________________________________________

Okay, it is only fair to include some sensible things that are said, in this case by a parent, Wes Comer, a Pentecostal:

To be honest, I'm torn at this point. I'm not sure exactly what our decision will be.

If I place this situation in the context of my religious beliefs, I'm forced to ask myself, 'Would I turn a homosexual child away from Sunday school? From a church function? Would I forbid my children to be friends with a gay child?' I can't imagine a situation where I would answer 'yes' to any of those questions. So how can I in this one?

Yet he said was "extremely disappointed" in the entire debate, and suggested that the BSA "has dealt itself a mortal blow."

Yeah, but if it was violating your own sense of justice before the change, isn't it nobler to take that "mortal blow" than to continue as it was?
_______________________________________________

Back to the stupid, in the person of Rep. Jim Bridenstine of Oklahoma:

If the Left were truly tolerant, they would tolerate the Boy Scouts being who they have always been.

Umm ... Did you notice that 61 percent of the voting members of the BSA's National Council supported the change? Do "liberals" really make up 61 percent of the BSA's National Council? Or is that most Americans have become fed up with homophobes?
_______________________________________________

In the category of duh, there is Bishop Paul Loverde of the Arlington Catholic Diocese:

Overarching all of this will be our firm commitment to preserving the integrity of the Church's teaching on the authentic meaning of human sexuality.

As an organization founded on character and leadership, it is highly disappointing to see the Boy Scouts of America succumb to external pressures and political causes at the cost of its moral integrity.

Riiight! As if the Church of Pedophile Protectors is anyone to lecture the rest of us on the meaning of human sexuality!
_______________________________________________

Here's a good one:

He [Jonathan Saenz, president of the Austin-based conservative advocacy group Texas Values] blamed national leaders who called for the vote and "willingly opened the door to allow homosexual advocates to overrun an organization that stands for a code of morality that these intolerant advocates reject."

As before, when you win, democracy is a great thing ... when you lose, it is the worst thing in the world.

Expect more ...