Mixed complaints against Boy Scouts

I pointed out last month that the Boy Scouts for attempting to avoid suspected sexual predators, with some arguing that they tried too hard and others that they did not do enough.

Spencer Davenport writes:

The Washington Post Editorial Board displays a raging case of cognitive dissonance when it comes to the Boy Scouts.

In today’s WP, “protecting our boys” is the second editorial posted on their website. The editors lash out at the Boy Scouts’ leadership for covering-up numerous cases of pedophilia by “accused child predators” since the 1940s. The Los Angeles Times and New York Times filed suit to force the release of “thousands of Boy Scout documents” that “sketch out years of tragic, life-rending mistakes leaders apparently made when confronted with evidence of abuse”.[ Boy Scouts must prove children’s welfare comes first, October 27, 2012]

Last July, the WP editors slammed the Boy Scouts for excluding homosexuals from their ranks. After reviewing the “exclusionary” policy, an “11-member special review committee reached a unanimous decision” that “homosexuals ‘open or avowed’ are still unwelcome in the Boy Scouts”. Perhaps the leadership was actively “protecting our boys”. The Scouts’ leadership was realistically trying to prevent future problems that have plagued the Scouts in the past.

Boy Scouts reaffirm their intolerant ban on gays,  July 19, 2012

The upshot of this is that liberal do-gooders, CPS authoritarians, and the gay lobby are all teaming up to give us govt lists of suspected abusers, and your privacy and individual rights will be invaded like never before.