Former CIA chief, U.S. Defense Secretary, and current President of the Boy Scouts of America Robert Gates has finally decided to wave the white flag of surrender … to political correctness.
That’s right, the man – a Republican I might add – who directed the entire Defense Department under President Barack Obama has, in matters concerning who will supervise young boys on campouts, decided he’s no match for the homosexual lobby. In a recent address at their annual meeting in Atlanta, Gates called for the BSA to get in line with the times and go ahead and allow homosexual scoutmasters.
And, apparently, lawsuits.
Former Cub Scouts den leader Jennifer Tyrrell, who was ousted from Scouting because she is openly gay, wears a button on her uniform shirt that reads "We Support All Boy Scouts" as she responds to a reporters question Thursday, May 23, 2013. Credit: AP
In a speech at their annual national meeting, Gates, playing the part of the reluctant Pontius Pilate washing his hands, said, “We must deal with the world as it is, not as we might wish it to be … any other alternative will be the end of us as a national movement."
So basically, unless the Boy Scouts allow gay scoutmasters to sleep in tents with young boys they will no longer be nationally relevant. Is this really what we’ve come to?
As an Eagle Scout and father to an almost-scouting-age son, I am saddened to see this once venerable organization continually acquiesce to the whims of political correctness, especially in a manner that clearly puts children at risk.
This has, of course, been a long time coming. Despite winning a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2000 that allowed private organizations to exclude persons from membership if “the presence of that person affects in a significant way the group's ability to advocate public or private viewpoints,” the BSA moved to allow openly gay youth in 2013.
Allowing openly gay scoutmasters, however, would be a far greater tragedy because the policy would knowingly put children at greater risk for sexual abuse.
Yes, I realize the homosexual lobby has vehemently fought the perception that their ranks participate in the crime of child molestation at a greater proportion than their percentage of the population. The Southern Poverty Law Center even calls this accusation a “harmful and baseless myth,” calling researchers who disagree with the politically correct line “discredited,” their work thoroughly “debunked.”
Given the SPLC’s track record at “discrediting” and “debunking” people who point out facts they don’t like, please excuse me if I’m dubious.
Let us reason together.
When it comes to homosexuals and child sexual abuse, there are three inconvenient yet incontrovertible facts that must be dealt with:
- The vast majority of child abusers are male.
- Almost one-third of children abused are male.
- Homosexuals make up 1-3% of the adult population.
Therefore – and I do understand that this probably seems entirely too logical for liberals to follow – homosexuals commit the crime of child molestation at a much higher rate than the rest of the population.
Now having said that, please don’t get me wrong. Does this mean that every homosexual is a child molester? Of course not! Does this even mean the majority of homosexuals, even the ones who would choose to serve as Boy Scout leaders, would molest children? Not at all!
However, and this is important, the presence of homosexuals as Scout leaders would invariably result in more boys being molested than otherwise would occur.
Duh, right? It’s not rocket science folks, it’s really just good old-fashioned common sense. Well, not according to the homosexual lobby, which tries to get around the whole boys being molested by men thing by calling the molesters something, anything, besides the homosexuals they are.
They call them “fixated,” or childlike-grown men stuck in a “Peter Pan existence.” These “fixated” offenders, you see, can’t really be homosexual or heterosexual because they aren’t interested in adult sexual relationships. They also call them “regressed,” or temporarily attracted to children because of stressful conditions. “Regressed” offenders, don’t you know, can even be “heterosexual,” some even being married with children of their own!
Voila – see what they did there? Offenders who commit obviously homosexual acts (by definition, sexually attracted to people of the SAME SEX) have just been transformed into something else entirely.
Hey, homosexual lobby, “fixate” on this – Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
You can call them “fixated” offenders. You can call them “regressed.” Heck, you can call them canaries for all I care. You can even call me simple-minded for making this simple observation – I don’t care if he’s married with eight kids, a man who preys on young boys is a homosexual, period.
Again, we all understand that most homosexual men don’t and wouldn’t prey on young boys. However, since a greater percentage of them obviously do, subjecting young boys to men who are attracted to the same sex is absolutely insane.
And even if my premise is entirely wrong. Even if the quack PC-loving psychologists are correct and homosexuals don’t offend at a greater pace than their proportion of the population, this is STILL a horrible idea.
Well, let’s say I wanted to become a Girl Scout leader? I’m not sure if Girl Scouts camp out or not like I did in my Boy Scouting days, but suppose they do, and suppose my wife was OK with my “sudden desire” to spend a few nights a year in a tent with young girls? Were I go to sign up, would they let me in? SHOULD they let me in?
It’s a hypothetical question, of course. If you don’t know the answer, I don’t know what I can do for you. Likewise, if you don’t understand the folly of allowing men who are admittedly attracted to the same sex occasional 24-hour access to pre-pubescent and teenage boys, you have allowed Political Correctness to completely fog your brain.
Don’t worry, you’re not alone. Esteemed “leaders” like Robert Gates, who really should know better, are right there with you.
TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.