It’s that kind of thinking that has been used by the left for decades to sell pathologically onerous ideas to America.
Consider this scenario. America mourns a crisis, with real human victims and clearly identifiable good guys and bad guys.
But abracadabra, within a few years, the bad guys become the victims, America’s protectiveness is called a “phobia,” the media pound this message incessantly, the bad guys win, and everyone is looking around and saying, “What happened?”
The left keeps doing this – spinning really bad news (for them) into successful assaults on morality, security and Judeo-Christian Western civilization.
They insist illegal immigrants, even if they might be radicalized jihadists, enter America – the country attacked by Islamic terrorists on 9/11. When did non-citizens gain civil-rights protection under the U.S. Constitution?
Saul Alinsky would cheer about how progressives have flipped that issue and also their triumph in thoroughly corrupting the Boy Scouts.
The BSA just revised its national policy to allow a 9- year-old girl in New Jersey to pose as a boy as she joined a Cub Scout pack in Secaucus. The national board opened the door several years ago to open homosexual expression among boys and then their leaders.
The next step? A woman posing as a guy heading a Boy Scout troop. It’s coming, probably this year. And BSA national will cave, fearing a lawsuit.
So how does this lunacy happen considering the history of the Boy Scouts?
In the year 2000, the Scouts won a pivotal case at the U.S. Supreme Court. Boy Scouts of America v. Dale affirmed the right of this private organization to bar the expression of open homosexuality.
However, the Scouts were already reeling from publicity about decades of molestation incidents by some of their leaders. The true extent may never be known, but America was shocked by what was revealed by the Los Angeles Times in a massive file of incidents.
Another Los Angeles Times story described an abusive Scout leader who went on to become an AIDS researcher, with ties to the homosexual community.
He was never arrested. He was ousted from the Scouts, left town, and that was it. The five boys he repeatedly abused carry the scars for life.
Since such incidents occurred while the Boy Scouts still technically prohibited homosexuality among leaders and boys, the sheer volume was used to muscle in the homosexual agenda. “See? These were mostly straight guys, not homosexuals!” But no, it’s likely they were mostly closeted homosexuals.
This is what the left does – magnifies presumed hypocrisy and recommends its twisted replacement version of the truth.
And so the narrative that child molestation is unrelated to “gay” identity got a huge boost. And when that fails, they say, “It’s no big deal.” That’s been the party line of the homosexual lobby and helps open the door for proud homosexuals to waltz into youth organizations, camps and schools.
Except that it’s not true that open homosexual expression poses no threat to youth. Adult males who desire other male adults as partners are more likely than authentically heterosexual males to also be sexually attracted to boys.
Just a quick perusal of websites, magazines and homosexual-themed fiction reveals that the homosexual male subculture continues its perennial worship of the pubescent “boy” as an especially desirable object of sexual pursuit. Why would this be such a frequent theme if it were not common? And Milo says it’s OK – except when he doesn’t. He apparently experienced child sexual abuse.
The Scouts routinely covered up abuses in the ’70s, 80s and 90s. Then the truth emerged.
But Dale was seen as a standard to be smashed in the eyes of many, like Zach Wahls of Scouts for Equality, who, in typical homosexual fashion, makes his own rules, defiantly building a network of local troops that fully accept the “inclusive” national policies, since not all do (and that’s the somewhat good news). Wahls’ group is assisting more “LGBT people” to become Scout leaders.
Yet the Scouts for Equality map shows that fully “inclusive” troops are relatively rare, especially in the Midwest and South. Most troops still don’t advertise homosexuality as an explicit feature, and there are solid reasons for this.
Youth organizations attract in disproportionate numbers people who want to have sexual encounters with kids, and same-gender environments offer heightened access.
Yet “morally straight” has been redefined in Scouting, and many boys will not learn that homosexuality remains deeply disordered, sinful behavior.
The new Boy Scout approach ignores two realities of human interaction and male homosexual/transgendered behavior. One, is that those who engage in deviant behavior are often habitually deceptive.
I know this is a generalization, but it turns out to be largely true. They also, quite obviously, see nothing wrong with the homosexual life and will “sell” it to impressionable youth, even if there is no sexual contact.
We can guarantee, however, that there will be. And how frantically will BSA cover this up in a declining organization, terrified of expensive litigation, betting on the myth that homosexual identity poses no more risk to boys than a heterosexual one?
Two: It doesn’t take actual physical contact to corrupt the mind, heart and spirit of a child. Yet most parents do not want proud homosexuality for their boys. What Scouting parents are now doing is gambling their sons won’t be the ones targeted for repeated innuendos of attraction by a “gay” Scout leader or another peer. They are gambling that the presence of an emotionally disturbed girl who thinks she’s a boy will not sway the real boys to consider the destabilizing influence of “gender fluidity.”
It’s a time bomb, and the BSA is not facing reality – or worse. It’s possible some in leadership have a “Milosophy” that little harm is done.
Parents should keep their boys away.
Media wishing to interview Linda Harvey, please contact email@example.com.