Comments on: Obama Joins Corporate Outcry Against Boy Scouts’ Gay Ban

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:17:49 +0000

Please, the group is named the boy scouts. Not the queer up your boy scouts. Children need protection from preditors and twisted sexual agendas. We want marriges and babies.
Certainly you are not confused about babies being a good thing.

By: Luke Visconti

Luke Visconti — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:12:00 +0000

Please, we're hardly the only ones who feel this way—the entire country has been voting with its feet. The number of Boy Scouts has been dropping every year for quite some time now. They're evaporating. The organization only did this because its back is against the wall. The next big bulletin you'll see is the Republican party doing something to draw more than 22 percent of the nonwhite electorate to win the presidency. Go pin a medal on them. Luke Visconti, CEO, DiversityInc

By: Babybunny

Babybunny — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:44:01 +0000

This article is so typical of Diversity Inc.’s overly strident tone in its publications. For example, the Boy Scouts to exactly what you want them to. So, what’s your reaction? “What took so long?” Conveniently placed in the title of the article.

How clever — just think how hard the Boy Scouts will work to implement their policies that Diversity Inc. wants to accomplish, now that they’ve been “slapped in the face in writing” for doing something you approve of.

Just brilliant…

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:13:53 +0000

Agreed, grannybunny. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:52:47 +0000

What took so long was their inability to simply admit that they’re wrong. Further, or perhaps even first and foremost, is their loss of financial support. It’s typically always about money or its loss.

When will ‘they’ simply understand, accept, and admit that gay men engage in consensual relationships with other gay men (i.e., men of legal age), as well as the fact that homosexuality and pedophilia have nothing to do with each other? Further, why do theyfoolishly and stupidly believe that homosexuality is immoral, by definition, while heterosexuals who are immoral are simply exceptions to the rule? It’s no different than saying ‘all Jews are X, and only some gentiles are x.’ (e.g., (all) Jews are tight with money, while some gentiles are thrifty; (all) Blacks are lazy, while some whites are lazy). It’s illogical and bigotry wrapped in arrogance and prejudice with the intent to discriminate.

By: grannybunny

grannybunny — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:38:07 +0000

There’s a huge difference between lifting the ban/leaving the policy up to the local councils and taking an affirmative stand against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Would the Boy Scouts take the same half-hearted approach to discrimination based on race or religion? Half a loaf is better than none, but that’s all this is, and long overdue.