Lesbian cannot be Boy Scout leader

MSNBC reports:

A woman who was ousted as the head of her son’s Tiger Cubs pack because she is a lesbian on Wednesday delivered a petition with more than 300,000 signatures to the Boy Scouts urging them to end their longstanding policy banning gay Scouts and leaders, saying the organization’s recent decision to stick with the controversial membership standards will not end her campaign.

Jennifer Tyrrell, a 32-year-old, stay-at-home mother of four, was removed from her post as den master in April because she is a lesbian. She has been fighting since then to get the Boy Scouts to change its longstanding policy, starting an online petition calling for the change.

But on Tuesday, the private organization said it was keeping the ban on open or avowed homosexuals.

Laura Wood asks:

Never once, as far as I can ascertain, are the most basic facts about Tyrrell provided.

Is the little boy she calls her son truly her son? Where is his father? What does his father think about all this? Does she even know who he is? How long has she been with her lesbian girlfriend? Are the other children in the household the boy’s siblings?

No journalist has asked Tyrrell, ”Isn’t the purpose of the Boy Scouts to promote male bonding? Wouldn’t a boy being raised by lesbians benefit from male leadership? Or at least leadership by women who don’t have an aversion to men?”

A lesbian by definition is repelled by men. The purpose of the Boy Scouts is to form men.

Organizations still have some freedom of association. If Tyrrell wants a more lesbian-friendly group, she might try Big Brothers Big Sisters of America. They accept closeted LGBTs as big brothers and sisters, and they do not tell the families of the little brothers and sisters that they are turning their children over to LGBT role models.

After the media hysteria over Jerry Sandusky and Penn State, it is a wonder that any man volunteers to help young boys. If there is one lesson from that scandal, it is that any such person is automatically suspected of being a homosexual child molester. Penn State will probably have to pay $50M to lawyers because it did not proactively try to determine whether Sandusky was a homosexual.

Maybe soon the Boy Scouts will have to take asexual lesbian scout leaders because it will not be able to find men who are willing to be under homosexual suspicion all the time.

The liberal NY Times editorial said:

It is impossible to square the Boy Scouts of America’s values of openness, strong moral character and leadership with its announcement this week that reaffirmed a retrograde policy of barring gay boys from membership and gay or lesbian adults from serving as leaders.

No, it is impossible to square this opinion with last week's editorial that "Penn State’s leaders bear most of the blame" because they "failed to take any steps for 14 years to protect the children". This is backwards. The Boy Scouts have kids directly under their care, and they want the right to use their judgment in choosing suitable role models. Penn State had no kids under its care, and no knowledge of any crimes. If McQueary had witnessed a crime, then he should have stopped it and reported it to the police. But the jury did not believe McQueary, and I don't either. The only common thread in the NY Times editorials is that they want to destroy American culture like college football and Boy Scouts.

Just to be clear, I am not saying that LGBTs should be suspected child molesters. Just the opposite. I believe in innocence until proven guilty. However, the Penn State story shows that the liberal news media disagree with me. Nearly all of them say that Penn State should have treated Sandusky as a suspected child molester even before any such allegation had been made.

I post this because it is further evidence of the decline in public respect for the role of fathers today. 300,000 petition signers act as if it is some sort tragedy that the Boy Scouts prefer fathers as role models for boys doing scouting activities.