In saner times, this needed no explanation. Today? Not so much.
See, the gay lobby which promotes decadent immorality and the 'normalising' of homosexuals are now focusing their laser-beam homo-eyesight on the Boy Scouts, intent on forcing gay men and boys into their ranks.
The Boy Scout Promise/Oath reads as follows:
On my honor I will do my bestThe Left never gives up do they? They're like a slow growing cancer, always ready to kill the host any opportunity they get.
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.
Even a U.S. Supreme Court challenge couldn't force the Boy Scouts of America to admit openly gay members and leaders. But these perverts have bided their time and infiltrated the organisation - and now their latest masterstroke to force the Boy Scouts to give up is to squeeze their major donors to stop funding them, until they change their policy.
And it's working. After 103 years of being "morally straight" they are about to become "morally corrupt", all so that a few flapping lips from disgruntled gays can be shut. All so that these morally deficient activists can get their 5 minutes of glory - their moment in the sun to be able to stand up and say that they were responsible for destroying the Boy Scouts as the world knew them.
For what is the purpose? If these gay activists are unhappy that the Boy Scouts don't admit gays, then why not start their own parallel organisation called Gay Boy Scouts and allow every gay boy, man and pervert to join? They wouldn't even need to have the words "God" or "moral" in their pledge! Instead of learning how to fish and tie knots they can teach boys the joys of being gay and embracing the color pink. They can have their resident peadophile show boys how to groom the next generation. Why, it would be a blast!
But no. This is not about homosexuals clamoring for admission into the Boy Scouts because they believe in its intrinsic values. It's not about the excellent hiking, camping, canoeing and cycling programs; or about teaching values and molding young boys into men, and into future leaders. Its all about destroying a Christian, anti-gay organisation. Because, which mother or father would willingly allow their young son to go on a week-end camping trip knowing that not only were there openly gay teenagers present (up to 18 years of age), but that they would also be away with an openly gay Scout leader?
The day the Boy Scouts gives into these perverts and changes their anti-gay policy is the day that the Boy Scouts of America dies a slow, painful death.
Parents aren't helpless should the ban be revoked. No, they should pull their kids and start boycotting EVERY one of the donors who have helped kill off the organisation. The good, moral and decent Boy Scout leadership should form their own Christian Boy Scout organisation which will once again be moral, decent and promote "normal" values and be ONLY open to decent Christian families.
The Girl Scouts of America has experienced a similar fate when they were overtaken by radical feminists which encouraged girls to 'explore' their femininity, abortion, lesbianism etc. As a result, concerned parents balked and the American Heritage Girls organization was the response! So, if you live in the USA, think twice about buying Girl Scout cookies as the money goes to the feminist directors to continue their evil deeds with little girls....
In the 1960's the hippies lived by the mantra: "The squeaky wheel gets the oil." Pity it's the frigging wheel that's the problem and no amount of gay-oil in this instance is going to fix it!
No, it's time to throw out the bloody wheel and start from scratch.
The Boy Scouts of America’s apparent decision to reverse a century-old policy to bar homosexuals from its ranks coincides with a sudden drop in major corporate funding that began last summer after a gay-rights blogger for the Huffington Post published a collaborative report that named the donors and chastised them for violating their own policy of not discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
At the same time, two prominent board members – including an adviser to the Obama White House – were carrying out a vow to change the policy from within.
Published in collaboration with The American Independent, the report called out Intel, United Parcel Service, United Way, Merck and others for contributing to an organization with a stated policy of banning homosexuals from membership.
The report came less than two months after the BSA affirmed its policy at the conclusion of a two-year examination of the issue by a committee of volunteers convened by national BSA leaders.
The Boy Scouts’ national headquarters in Texas said it is not granting interviews at the moment but invited questions submitted by email. Questions posed by WND were not answered, however.
At the time of the September report, shipping giant UPS insisted the Scouts’ policy would not impact its donations, which totaled close to $167,000 in 2010, the most recent year for which data was available for most companies.
However, bolstered by a petition drive by the homosexual-rights group Scouts for Equality, Intel – which led the way in 2010 corporate giving with $700,000 – announced that month it would stop funding Scout troops that adhere to the ban.
UPS followed Intel’s lead and also cut off its funding.
In December, Merck issued a statement saying it could not “continue to provide support to an organization with a policy that is contrary to one of our core beliefs.”
“We remain ready and willing to re-consider our funding position in the event that the BSA were to revise its policy,” the statement said.
At the moment, the Verizon Foundation, which donated more than $300,000 in 2010 is facing heat as more than 70,000 people have signed a petition asking the corporation to stop funding the Scouts.
The American Interest report said 23 of the top 50 corporate foundations, ranked by the Foundation Center in terms of total charitable giving, gave at least $10,000 each to the Boy Scouts in 2010.
Combined, they donated about $3.6 million.
Reversal
The Boy Scouts, with more than 2.7 million youth members and more than 1 million adult members, reaffirmed its policy on homosexuals July 17 upon the recommendation of an 11-member committee that had been meeting since 2010.
The policy states: “While the BSA does not proactively inquire about the sexual orientation of employees, volunteers, or members, we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals or who engage in behavior that would become a distraction to the mission of the BSA.”
But last week, the national office signaled a reversal ahead of its national board meeting next week.
Speaking for the BSA National Council, Director of Public Relations Deron Smith explained the organization is discussing allowing, the local, chartered organizations that oversee Scouting to establish their own requirements.
BSA members and parents “would be able to choose a local unit which best meets the needs of their families,” Smith said.
He said BSA leadership “has always been in an ongoing dialogue with the Scouting family to determine what is in the best interest of the organization and the young people we serve.”
Under the proposed policy, the BSA, he explained, “would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization’s mission, principles or religious beliefs.”
The BSA has more than 290 local councils nationwide that oversee more than 116,000 local organizations. Individual Scout troops are sponsored by religious and civic organizations.
While there have been major cuts in funding in recent months since the Scouts reaffirmed their policy, the organization has faced boycott and censure for more than a decade, particularly since the U.S. Supreme Court sided with them on the issue in 2000.
In 2002, for example, the United Way chapter of Ventura County, Calif., stopped its allocations to the Scouts after funding the group for 57 years.
The resistance also has come from within as many homosexual scouts and family members, and some local councils, have engaged in activism.
As WND reported in 2003, the Scouts’ Cradle of Liberty Council in Philadelphia drew national attention when it added “sexual orientation” to its policy of nondiscrimination.
In contrast to its current stance, the national office at that time was resolute.
In an interview with WND, BSA national spokesman Gregg Shields declared: “No council is allowed to depart from Boy Scouts policy.”
“We have a national policy that has been in existence since we were formed,” he said in 2003. “The Boy Scouts have taught traditional, American family values. A known or openly avowed homosexual would not be accepted for membership nor would an atheist.”
‘Change from within’
Amid the spotlight on major donors, the prominent homosexual-rights group Human Rights Campaign has warned it plans to downgrade its non-discrimination ratings for corporations that continue to give the BSA financial support.
Meanwhile, two corporate CEOs on BSA’s national board, Randall Stephenson of AT&T, who is next in line to become BSA national chairman, and James Turley of Ernst & Young have said they would work to end the ban.
Last June, Turley vowed he “will work from within to seek a change” to the BSA policy.
“As I have done in leading Ernst & Young to being a most inclusive organization, I intend to continue to work from within the BSA board to actively encourage dialogue and sustainable progress,” Turley said.
Stephenson was praised for publicly opposing the Boy Scouts’ policy and explained he would remain on the board, which he’s in line to lead in 2014, because he could have more influence.
Turley was nominated to President Obama’s Export Council in 2010, and has been a promoter of Obama’s economic policy.
Turley and his wife, Lynne, were guests at a state dinner hosted by President Obama for British Prime Minister David Cameron at the White House last March.
As with previous U.S. presidents going back to President William Howard Taft in 1910, Obama became the honorary president of the BSA shortly after taking office in 2009.
His induction, however, was conducted behind closed doors in the Oval Office with no notice in any official communication.
Obama also did not attend the BSA’s 100th Anniversary Gala in Washington, D.C. in 2010.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins has pointed to attacks on Scout funding sources by activist homosexuals as a major influence on the organizations decision to reconsider its policy.
“The Boy Scouts of America board would be making a serious mistake to bow to the strong-arm tactics of LGBT activists and open the organization to homosexuality,” he said.
“What has changed in terms of the Boy Scouts’ concern for the well-being of the boys under their care? Or is this not about the well-being of the Scouts, but the funding for the organization?”
Perkins emphasized the Boy Scouts has been “a force for moral integrity and leadership in the United States.”
“Sadly, their principled stances have marked them as a target for harassment by homosexual activists and corporations such as UPS, which are working to pressure the Boy Scouts into abandoning their historic values.”
Source
So tired of this gayness, many men have sucked cock since time immemorial, it was done descreetly.
ReplyDeleteNo need to be organised and jump on a multicoloured float with confetti showers and fags writhing and twisting in feather boas, to music by the village people.
Let's admit it, from the impis of shaka, to the sopranos in prison, to the turkish baths of istambul and the roman legionairs. Men will engage in some extra curricular activity, its happened for aeons. It was kept descreet, and didn't damage society. In greece it was considered part of education, to be the younger half of a pedastrist relationship, in afgahnistan its still practiced, the pedastrist eventually marries his younger partner off to his daughter.
So this has gone on forever, its never damaged society, untill the fag brigade started squeeling about rights and adoption, and making will and grace.
Men engaging in activity with other men has happened secretly, the men were married had families, everything was normal, society was stable, wives had suspicions, but they were fine with it. It was contained.
Now this militant fag brigade are just pushing it in everyones faces.Men were men, even if they liked a bit of cock on the side, now its effimante fairies, squeeling and giggling worse than women, hell some women are more manly than the most vociferous of the fag brigade.
This open organised in your face fagness is what is destructive to society.
Famous line from the sopranos, said, that every one knew what went down when they went to proson, the wives accepted it, the men knew it, but it was never discussed, it was an accepted secret.
But we know the evil cabal, who knew that bringing out this dark side of society would end up destroying society, their mantra was, liberation and freedon sexually and the exact opposite is the result.
Their constant indoctrination is relentless from priscilla queen of the desert to, patric swayze in to wong foo. Their pressure is constant, untill they have convinced every male they are gay and every women they're lesbians.
Way back when people were fine with who they were, if a man was married with kids and liked a bit of extra activity on the side, he still believed he was a man, with an unusual fetish, but none the less a man, now adays, its a bunch of hairless metro sexual, black orphan adopting eyebrow plucking oprah watching semi fagotted pussy whipped "males"
Men in turkey still put on leather pants and cover themselves in olive oil and wrestle, considered normal, now the feral fag brigade are actually forming fag tour groups to go and see this long lived tradition, to try and fagotise something that has never been openly fag if fag at all. If the participants of this traditional wrestling did it cause the enjoyed having another blokes hands down his pants, so what, it was accepted and kept secret, the men never admitted that they liked having another mans fore arms brushing up against his man parts, now the fag brigade want to bring it out into the open, they want to discuss feelings and have oprah confessions, they want to make the men come out the closet, all because they want to have their mills and boone fag novels enacted in real life.
They just want to destroy humanity and society.
At least the organisers of the turckish oil wrestling chased the fag brigade away, they didn't allow those pervs of tradition defile something, even if it is homo erotic, the turks did the right thing chase those fags away, if the want to they can start their own olive oil leather pants fag wrestling tradition, then after the match they can sit and discuss feelings over a cup of chai tea, while oprah babbles oprahisms in the background
Exactly. I don't care if people are gay. Just don't shove it down our throats and try and change how civilisation has always worked, just so that they can feel good and accepted.
ReplyDeleteWho funded the gay movement?, its the same group who funded womans lib, and the lesbian movement
ReplyDeleteThat group doesn't want society as it used to be
They redefining humans, a sought of perversion of god's creation
This whole gay and lesbian lable is wrong, 1stly the research that's comming out shows that men engage in extra manly activity for other reasons, nothing to do with loving men.
In men homoism is more about physicality than emotional love.
Society was happy with things the wat it was, the greeks would wrestle naked, imagine if that was done today, the fag brigade would probably protest that its humiliating.
The turks are still happy keeping everything nicely covered up, they don't need pride parades in major arterial roads to be happy.
The upper echalons of masonry, so I've heard also dabble in man action, all very secretively of course.
To me this gay movement has one purpose, and it isn't freedom, its the opp.
Broke back mountain which I've never seen is an example of the gay movements intrusive destructive behaviour, those cowboys, have been doing that kind of stuff for ages, their wives either suspected or didn't know, but the family unit was stable, children didn't get abused, everyone was happy. None of those cowboys needed to prance around on a moving float to announce how happy and gay they were.
Bikers is another example, but because of modern society they didn't have to get married to survive, that's where the leather stereo type comes from, those bikers didn't need the militant rainbow flag to feel like they belonged.
This gay movement with its flags and parades is a masterfull plan to destabalise society.
They so insiduous that eventually men won't be able to shower with out thinking they gay.
I have a mate that says the sight of another naked male revolts him, so I asked him, if you were an indian in the amazon, then you would have a difficult time coping, cause all the men in your tribe would be completely naked.
This is how the attack is distorting human thinking. Teen age boys now find it uncomfortable showering infront of each other.
In japan parents believe that their kids from as young as 4 should be properly socialised by attending the public bath houses.
Girls go with women, boys with men. Researches have noted that because modern japanese have bathrooms in their homes, public bath house visits are declining, and more socially unadjusted kids and adults.
Imagine in the west if 5 year old kids were naked in the presence of naked adults, the out cry would be huge.
We slowly being dehumanized.being morphed into borg and mindless machines.
The plan is so convoluted its difficult to unravel.
I don't think we can win.
My take is that there are numerous reasons for this gay push - it's about destroying Western men and their maleness. To effeminate them. Now with the push for women to be allowed in combat roles, it's further humiliation of the western male. That's why if you have male kids let them be MALE!
DeleteWe know that blacks always say that gayness is a white thing, when they do, we must remind them that shaka encouraged a bit of man love in his impi militias, to keep the militia cohesive, so much for gayness neing a white thing.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the gay militant movement is a white thing, black bros like keeping it on the down low-hahahaha
You don't see many black men gyrating on the pride parade floats.
Yes the gay movemt is anything but sexual freedom, and yes its primary target are white men.
Men are losing touch with their maleness, but that need is still there, and it rises up in weird scenarios
I love being hairy, I'm going bald but I don't care, I am male I am hairy, I like shaving my face when I do, I will not be a nuetered hairless drone. Women are being conditioned to find men like will from will and grace attractive.
Women are divided, they want men like that, but don't want to divide mirror time with them.
Society is trully being effed up fundamentally.
We need to start a back to basics movement. Its not only gullible stupid ppl being taken up by these new philosophies, its university educated ppl, that's why I prefer the more unlearned types, salt of the earth type of ppl.