Perspectives: The sexual identity merit badge

St. George News | image

OPINION – I was a girl scout. I sold the cookies, attended the meetings and loved wearing my uniform. Now, I am a mom and have two boys that are actively involved in the Boy Scouts of America program. I love what they learn as they earn each merit badge and I love what the BSA promotes and teaches.

I was taught to love all people. I was taught that we include everyone and that we focus on the things that unite us, not divide us.

The recent announcement by the BSA that they are re-examining and possibly changing their policy to allow openly-gay scouts into the program has me in a bit of a quandary. For over 100 years, 110 million scouts have benefited from the BSA program. This is a program that works; this is not an organization struggling to reinvent itself because the masses are protesting inequality and absurd teachings.

Sexual identity really has had nothing to do with scouting. To my knowledge, there has never been a merit badge devoted to sexual identity or sexual education presented or taught to the boys through their leaders. In fact, the BSA does not currently grant membership to “openly gay” homosexuals, but a private same sex attraction is just that – private.

And there is a difference.

Sexual preference is one thing, but being “openly gay” seems to catapult sexual preference into becoming a lifestyle, an agenda, a movement and a way of life. Hyperfocusing on one attribute means that other attributes get overlooked. I am Mormon. Am I “openly Mormon” or “openly heterosexual”? No. I do not define myself by just one part of who I am. I do not evangelize everywhere I go. I am not looking to be embraced and tolerated by everyone for my religious beliefs. I just believe what I believe and it’s private. When I join organizations outside of my religion, I do not derive my self-esteem from their acceptance of what I believe or my sexual preference.

The BSA motto includes these words: “On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country, to obey the scout law and to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”

These are boys we are talking about, not men, who on the average join scouting at the age of 9 and leave scouting by the time they usually turn about 16. Shouldn’t boys, heterosexual or homosexual, all strive to be morally straight? Do we automatically assume that homosexuals are sexually promiscuous and lack morality? The BSA is not promoting hatred or homophobia against anyone, it is only enforcing a morality code of keeping oneself morally clean. If 13-year-old boys across the nation, straight or gay, are having a tough time adhering to that part of the motto, maybe we have a bigger problem than tolerance.

As for openly-gay scout leaders professing their attitude of acceptance to young boys, sex should never be a discussion that they have with their scouts. Ever. It is inappropriate, just as I do not want a promiscuous male heterosexual glamorizing or justifying his sexual conquests either.

The Girl Scouts organization has been touted recently as the champion of progressive thinking on gay rights; but, in fact, it lays out very strict guidelines for what can be discussed about that subject and what is not appropriate. The BSA can accept everyone, yet also lay out the same strict guidelines.

In America, can you run a private organization as you wish? Will the BSA cave to atheists as well, altering their motto and creed so that God isn’t mentioned? Where does it end? Freedom of association means that we can join organizations that support like-minded ideals and when they don’t, we are free to start a new organization or not join at all.

Private organizations should not be compelled to comply as the result of bullying from small organizations or groups who seek to advance their own agenda of forced tolerance.

I am not a fan of bullying.

The groups lobbying for support of this change for the BSA are well below even 2 percent of the almost 3 million scouts at this time. Private companies and organizations in America are just that – private. If what the BSA taught wasn’t popular with the masses, then people wouldn’t be joining the organization in droves.

Also, by removing the national policy, the BSA is handing the responsibility to local chapters to “duke it out” in communities across America. Local chapters will have to defend, quite possibly in a court room, their own version of the BSA guidelines. This isn’t fair to the local chapters. It would fracture the national strength of this organization.

Right after the Superbowl last weekend, President Obama, in an interview with CBS’s Scott Pelley said, “My attitude is that gays and lesbians should have access and opportunities, the same as everyone else does, in every institution and walk of life.”

Millions of boys have loved the scouting program and, if you do the math, a very tiny portion of them probably did consider themselves gay at any given time in our history.

Did the fact that the BSA did not accept openly gay scouts and leaders impact the earning of their merit badges? Has the program violated their self-esteem because it did not constantly address their sexual identity and force everyone around them to acknowledge and accept their sexual preferences? Did the BSA teach hatred and inequality in all of their meetings or teach people to be homophobic? The answer to each of these questions is no.

Sexual preference just simply is not the focus in a scouting program. The scouts are just trying to earn merit badges and build character, not politicize an agenda.

Because you do not embrace something does not mean you automatically hate something. Diverting the focus of scouting to hyperfocus on sexual preference does not translate to developing more love for mankind, more equality or inclusiveness.  The earning of many diverse merit badges teaches our young boys to be well-rounded and develop many skills and talents. In over 100 years, the BSA has never had to include sexual preference to determine that a boy could conquer the world and become his best self. Maybe boys that are homosexual can embrace the message that being homosexual isn’t the most important thing about them.

Kate Dalley is a news commentator and co-host of the Perspectives morning show on Fox News 1450 AM 93.1 FM. The opinions stated in this article are hers and not representative of St. George News.

Related Posts

Letter to the Editor: Perspectives column, ‘The sexual identity merit badge,’ makes one dizzy

ON Kilter: ‘Forced tolerance’ is a farce, bias in the Boy Scouts unpacked

Perspectives: Scouting’s connection to personal freedom


Email: [email protected]

Twitter: @STGnews

Copyright St. George News, LLC, 2013, all rights reserved.


Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!


  • Bill February 9, 2013 at 9:48 am

    The circles in logic here are astounding.

    Kate Daily states, ‘Sexual identity really has had nothing to do with scouting.’

    Then, she spends the rest of the piece making an argument that gays should be excluded.

    After she herself states, ‘Sexual identity really has had nothing to do with scouting.’

    I think Kate Dailey is more of a bigot than she thinks she is.

    • ken February 9, 2013 at 12:01 pm

      My thoughts also, Kate is a bigot!

      • Mike February 10, 2013 at 10:29 pm

        Ken, are you and Bill gay?

    • Kate Dalley February 9, 2013 at 4:27 pm

      I knew when I wrote this, someone would would in fact, refer to me as a bigot. When I say lets not hyper focus on sexual preference, that doesn’t mean to exclude them. In fact I say that the BSA should be open to everyone in my article. I don’t think a “bigot” would say that. I just think, like the Girl Scout organization, they should have strict guidelines that sexual preference is not discussed or taught or evangelized- straight or gay. It has no place in the BSA. Merit badges have nothing to with sexual preference and by hyper focusing on that, we are in essence telling boys that straight or gay, their sexual preference is the most important thing about them. And it’s not. So does saying that make me a bigot or a hater? Not once did I express hatred for anyone. I have an athiest friend. I do not embrace athieism but that does not automatically make me a hater of athieism. There are plenty of other qualities about my friend that I do embrace. One quality does not define who we are. And by making sexual preference this much of an issue, we are in essence doing more damage by telling young boys this is what defines them and their self worth. I have never been a bigot and have many friends that happen to be gay whom I love and admire. But what’s wrong with our society is that if some one voices any opinion contrary to political correctness you are deemed a hater. It’s an easy scapegoat answer to go as far as calling someone a hater because they don’t agree with you. And if that’s not bigotry at its finest, i don’t know what is.

      • Dustin F February 10, 2013 at 1:39 am

        Do you really not realize, Kate, that being “openly” anything simply means NOT hiding it? It means “to be out in the open” about it. It doesn’t mean “outspoken” it means “out of hiding” thus the term “out of the closet”. The BSA’s ban on “Openly Gay” boys and leaders is a ban on those boys and leaders who do not lie when asked who they feel an attraction to. And even very young children find girls pretty or boys handsome. It’s not about sexual activity, it’s about honest attraction.

        “I have an athiest friend. I do not embrace athieism but that does not automatically make me a hater of athieism. There are plenty of other qualities about my friend that I do embrace.” To determine whether you are a bigot towards someone doesn’t necessarily stop at whether you are friends with them or not. Do you, in your Mormonism, believe that these gay people are doing something morally wrong if and when they DO have sex with someone of the same sex? Do you believe that their acting on their attraction, even in private, is a sin, as your prophet would tell us? Do you believe that your atheist friends are wrong about what many consider one of the biggest questions in the universe? Do you believe that when they die they will suffer an eternity outside of the presence of your god, knowing that they could have made him proud and been with him?

        You may not HATE the person, but you do find distasteful, wrong, or immoral about a very important facet of them. No, a person’s sexuality is not THE MOST important thing about them, but it is a very important part of who we are. Just ask your children, who are a direct result of your heterosexual relationship with your husband (who I wouldn’t be surprised if you OPENLY talked about around the water cooler)

        • Mike February 10, 2013 at 10:32 pm

          Dustin, are you gay? You sound like a gay man.

  • Eric February 9, 2013 at 11:16 am

    “Am I “openly Mormon” or “openly heterosexual”?”

    Yes! You are! The term “openly” doesn’t mean that it’s something that defines your life, it means only that you don’t hide it. Do you talk freely about being a Mormon? Do you talk freely about a relationship with the opposite sex? Then yes, you are openly Mormon and openly heterosexual.

  • Annie February 9, 2013 at 12:52 pm

    I 100% agree with the article. If your child is “openly gay” before the age of 16 you have failed as a parent. No child should even be introduced to concept until they are at least that age of not older, it has become so accepted for kids to know about sexual things that the have no right knowing.

    • Snowfield February 9, 2013 at 5:05 pm

      I disagree that children should be kept in total ignorance about sex until 16 or older. Hormones are raging, information needs to be available to help them to not make foolish mistakes that could impact the rest of their lives.

    • Grant L February 10, 2013 at 10:47 am

      It’s naive to say teenagers are “introduced” to the concept of sexual orientation or “sexual things”. Biology … nature introduces kids to this reality.

    • Mike February 10, 2013 at 10:35 pm

      Well said Annie.

  • philiplo February 9, 2013 at 1:42 pm

    What was said: “I am not a fan of bullying.”

    What is implied throughout the writing: “If you, young man, ever let slip that you are attracted to people of the same sex then you can get your queer little 12-year old butt OUT of my scouting org.”

    Yeah, sure you’re not a fan.

  • zacii February 9, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    You cannot be a proponent of homosexuality and also promote a moral lifestyle.

    Homosexuality is immoral.

    The following quote: “On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country, to obey the scout law and to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”, is not compatible with homosexuality.

    Unless there is some other God besides the one in the Bible. In that case, maybe there is a place for gays and morals.

    • Matty "Skewed Review" Jacobson February 9, 2013 at 6:08 pm

      Well, this argument is only valid if you’re Christian. There are, indeed, many Gods outside the Bible. Just because you don’t pray to them doesn’t make them any less valid to the people who do. Just as you may not pray to Allah. But that doesn’t make Allah any less in the eyes of those who consider him God.

      • Mike February 12, 2013 at 2:30 pm

        Matty, you are one of the worst bigot …. I know. Stay on topic.

        Ed. ellipsis

    • Mike H February 9, 2013 at 7:15 pm

      So many people trot out the Christian ethic when arguing about the “morality” of homosexuals. But all the admonitions in the Bible are grouped with other bans that have nothing to do with sexuality. Just take a look at your clothing labels before you saddle up your morality high horse.
      of course the oft quoted Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
      Lev 19:19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee.
      I also hope if you are male that you haven’t cut your hair or beard, and/or if female no tattoos
      Lev 19:27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.
      28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you I am the LORD
      Just so you know, it is possible to be gay and live a moral life, though it is made much harder because straight religious “moral” society does everything they can to make it so. Most religions say it’s because any sex outside of marriage is immoral but then do all they can to make sure gays can’t marry.

    • Grant L February 10, 2013 at 10:53 am

      This is a view held by only a subset of Christians. Episcopalians, a MUCH older version of Christianity than LDS and some others homosexuality is immoral.

      And if your definition of morality stems from your interpretation of the bible, then do you also advocate that a virgin who is raped should be required to marry the rapist, as is mandated in the bible?

    • Grant L February 10, 2013 at 11:11 am

      Somehow my comment got messed up. The intent of my message was to say that Episcopalians, who follow the SAME bible you do, do NOT see homosexuality as immoral. Not all Christians share the same perspective on what is considered “moral”.

    • Mike February 10, 2013 at 10:39 pm

      Well said Zacii

  • Curtis February 9, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    Sexual identify may not have anything to do with scouting, but it certainly has something to do with being a Scout — otherwise why the discussion ??

  • Matty "Skewed Review" Jacobson February 9, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    Just for the record, “sexual identity” means whichever gender a person identifies with. I, for example, identify as a male. Just thought I’d clear that up.

  • Mike H February 9, 2013 at 7:30 pm

    I think I can figure out what Kate might be saying but it’s tough as most of it is delusional. Only heterosexuals that are bent on believing homosexuality is limited to sex and sexual activity can delude themselves into thinking that having gay kids in BSA is introducing a sexual component.
    You would have to be truly delusional to believe that even a child of 7-8 doesn’t have some type of definition of who they are attracted to. I’m sure if you think way back you can recall the innocent little crushes you had on little boys in your classes. Did those crushes involve the idea of one or the other inserting something? I would hope not. But I can recall having similar crushes on boys at that age, the most I ever thought of was holding hands or maybe even kissing, but when it came to below the waist… yeah gross, that never even figured in.
    I can also recall being in the throws of puberty a few years later and discovering that my understanding had changed a bit.
    The thing with the BSA isn’t so much my wanting them to teach homosexuality (I agree they shouldn’t be teaching that type of thing, though I wouldn’t be averse to them teaching some morals and safe sex), I would just prefer they don’t kick kids out when they express that they are attracted to other boys. I remember Boy Scouts quite well and I can remember all the tales the other boys would tell about girls and the things they claimed to have done with them. If you don’t think that goes on then you are truly deluded. Also things happen in those tents that you would hate to even think about; blue darts and comparisons spring to mind and those are mild. And yes this went on even though “gay” boys weren’t allowed in.
    Wake up Ms. Dalley the 21st century is calling.

  • Russell Farrell February 10, 2013 at 6:57 am

    On the East Coast in the basement meeting room of Our Lady of Pompeii Church in East Haven, Connecticut, I was a avid scout for a number of years way back in the 60’s. My fellow scouts & I in Troop 8 learned much about basic survival, how to ‘be prepared’, constellations in the sky and comraderie with each other along with many other useful teachings. We also made trouble taking out canoes under a full moon at Boy Scout camp and bending over and showing our butt cheeks at night to passing cars on a two lane highway walking home from scout meetings. (Called ‘mooning’ in the day.) I don’t even know what point I am trying to make, other than it takes all kinds. We were far from highly moral Boy Scouts, yet the impressions that the BSA organization imprinted upon us were overall very beneficial.. I am eternally grateful and applaud the BSA in whatever future direction they proceed.

  • Grant L February 10, 2013 at 10:43 am

    “Private organizations should not be compelled to comply as the result of bullying from small organizations or groups who seek to advance their own agenda of forced tolerance.”

    I wonder what the authors perspective would be on the BSA, as well as other “small” organizations compelling the LDS church in the 70’s to allow black people into the church and to hold the priesthood. Was this “forced tolerance” equally wrong? Would she have argued against this as well?

    “I am not a fan of bullying.”

    Such as when a national organization kicks a kid out of the group for admitting to be gay? Or denying a 15 year old his Eagle Scout level for being gay? This doesn’t rise to the level of bullying too? I think the author might consider removing the blinders that narrow her view on the world and consider what life is like in another persons shoes.

    She is right. The BSA is a private organization and they have the right to exclude gay individuals should they choose to, a right upheld by the nations highest court. But history has clearly illustrated the impact on organizations that practice intolerance. The struggle for blacks to obtain equal rights, women to obtain equal rights. I wonder what the authors thoughts would be if women where still traded like chattel, forced into marriages and denied the right to vote, own a business or seek a redress of grievances in the courts. Would she still disagree with “forced tolerance”?

  • Grant L February 10, 2013 at 11:04 am

    “I am Mormon. Am I “openly Mormon” or “openly heterosexual”? ”

    By stating in a public article that you are Mormon is the very definition of being “openly Mormon”.

    So do you disagree with the legal requirement that you cannot use religion as a basis for hiring? As a basis for owning a business? As a basis for renting an apartment? Should a “private” business owner or apartment owner be allowed to exclude Mormons just because they are Mormon?

  • Bike Guy February 10, 2013 at 2:55 pm

    I have read many articles about the Scouting dispute but this has to be the most incoherent.
    First some factual errors:

    – The Girl Scouts are quite different from the Boy Scouts and do not discriminate against gay teens or adults. All or welcome. The Girl Scouts have strict guidelines on how to approach sexual issues but these apply equally to all with no distinction between gay or straight.
    – The 2% figure is imaginary. I am proud to say that a solid majority of Americans want the ban against gay adults and teens removed (over 55%):

    The author seems to think that gay people asking for the ban to removed are “hyper-focused” on their sexuality. Huh? If someone tells you that you can’t eat in their restaurant because you are black and you complain about it, who created the “hyper focus” – the black patron or the restaurant? I am having trouble with your logic.

    The only reason our sexual orientation has become an issue is because religious conservatives, and above all Mormons, make it an issue. We are a two-dad family with mostly straight friends living in a welcoming community. Our sexual orientation is among the least important aspects of who we are and only becomes an issue when we face discrimination. You imply that by maintaining the ban, “The BSA is not promoting hatred or homophobia against anyone, it is only enforcing a morality code of keeping oneself morally clean.” Perhaps your religion believes that gays are morally unclean but mine does not.

    The Boy Scouts was never meant to be a Christian organization. Lord Baden Powell founded the Scouts as a universal organization 
and explicitly non-sectarian. The Scouts elsewhere (UK, Canada, France, Mexico, etc.) do NOT discriminate against gays. 

The Scouts were meant for ALL families, not just religious conservatives and their interpretations of morality.

    I was a Boy Scout in NYC in the 60s and 70s and tolerance was the rule of the day: We were all sorts of religions and races. The focus was on nature and the outdoors. Given it was NYC we were a mixed group – Jews, Chinese, Protestants, Blacks – and we didn’t meet at a church. I never thought of BSA as primarily a religious organization.

    The divisions in the American Scouting family began in the 1990s when the Mormons completed their stealth takeover and hijacked the BSA. Given the patriarchal structure of their religion, Mormons do not sponsor Girl Scouts troops. Today Mormons, who are less than 2% of the US population, make up more than a third of Boy Scout troops. There are far more gays in the US than Mormons: 6% of Americans under 30 self-identified as gay or lesbian in the last election. How would Mormons feel if the ban were the other way around?

    The Mormons rarely form mixed groups and have made the Boy Scouts a subset of their religious practice. This is a shame and completely subverts the universal message of scouting. Mixed, non-sectarian groups are far closer to the original spirit.

    The Mormons have decided that their sectarian views must dominate the Scouts and that liberal religious interpretations are unwelcome. Mormons, let us recall, have a recent history of racist exclusion and kept African-Americans out of their churches until 1978. Isolation and exclusion seems to be a Mormon hallmark:

    We can each believe the other is immoral. I believe that people who drive giant gas-guzzling SUV’s are immoral. But I don’t have any desire to keep them or their kids out of the Scouts. I believe that the American way is for us all to live and work together despite our disparate beliefs. This is America, not Iran.

    We are both former Scouts and, if the ban is lifted, we will rejoin and will have no objection to our kids hanging with Mormon or Baptist parents or their kids. That is the true Scouting spirit.

    The Boy Scouts of America has a choice. They can gradually shrivel into the Boy Scouts of Mormons and Baptists or can reclaim their place as the Boy Scouts of America, in all our wonderful and diverse glory.

    Let us hope that BSA leaders choose the wider path and welcome all families. We will be happy to meet and get to know Mormon families at the Jamboree in Utah. I know that once you know our family, your fears and bigotry will evaporate. It is always so.

    Lord Baden Powell defined the universal spirit of Scouting. In Powell’s words:

    “Buddha has said: ‘There is only one way of driving out Hate in the world and that is by bringing in 
Love.’ Scouting’s aim is to produce healthy, happy, helpful citizens, of both sexes, to eradicate the prevailing narrow self interest, personal, political, sectarian and national, and to substitute for it a broader spirit of self-sacrifice and service in the cause of humanity.”

    • Mike February 10, 2013 at 10:50 pm

      Bike guy….your an idiot. Reading your post makes me hate you and I don’t even know you. Go jump off a cliff.

      • Dsull February 11, 2013 at 7:42 pm

        I thought it was well written, and documented.
        Maybe the problem is with you. When you throw a stone into a pack of dogs, the one hit yelps. What part of his post brought your ire?

        • Mike February 12, 2013 at 2:34 pm

          I bet you and Matty are a couple…..

    • philiplo February 11, 2013 at 8:35 am

      Bike Guy… +1000!

  • Average Joe February 10, 2013 at 3:14 pm

    In the summer, I go to Sand Hollow a lot, sometimes with the boat and sometimes just to swim. I’ve seen ski boats loaded with young teenage girls (no boys) and an adult male operating the boat. I was told these are Mormon Ward activities. One time, I pulled my boat out of the water and next to one of these boats that had been loaded with young teenage girls. The girls, all in bikinis, were wiping the boat off while the lone adult male was standing back watching them. Looked to me like he was checking out those young teenage bods, not supervising the work.

    Kinda makes you wonder about those creepsters on those church activities. I bet this guy, who I bet was an ardent church guy, who seemed to be staring a little too hard at those young girls sporting bikinis was not gay.

    Think about that the next time you send your young daughter on one of those boating outings. Have her at least put on shorts before she wipes down the boat for the boat guy.

    • Mike February 13, 2013 at 4:38 am

      Sounds like you were attracted to the boat driver.

  • Brian Asvitt February 10, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    The way this writer Kate Dalley “thinks” is so convoluted that it’s hard to tell what she is saying. Referencing the first comment : “The circles in logic here are astounding”. I agree. The most deplorable issue here is this columnist’s lack of writing ability.

    I’d like to see an alternative to the Boy Scouts. I have a big problem with the huge salaries the “nonprofit” BSA executives give themselves while complaining that there is not enough money for the boys. Every year they conduct a “Friends of Scouting” shakedown and never tell you that much of the money goes to these overpaid “leaders”. The BSA is also rife with infighting and politics.

    The reason for the change on the gay issue boils down to nothing more than dollars and cents. Big corporate sponsors have been cutting off the donations. Personally, I think the BSA’s decision to stop discriminating against gays is long overdue.

  • Matty "Skewed Review" Jacobson February 11, 2013 at 5:37 am

    By the way, being “openly gay” doesn’t mean “talking about having sex with men.” It’s just odd how much people think that. Sounds to me like the one with the sexual obsession isn’t the gay person who wants to openly discuss things like his FAMILY (which, for some reason, it’s OK to do if you’re straight). It seems like the one who’s so concerned the heterosexual person who just can’t seem to get her mind off gay sex. I see only one pervert in this argument, and that’s the pervert who’s so disgusted by something that she can’t stop thinking about it (or talking about it or writing about it).

  • Zeke February 11, 2013 at 8:55 am

    Hhmmmmm……….. can’t stop writing about. Let me see……….How many comments does this make for you Matty??

  • San February 11, 2013 at 9:37 pm

    I just found this very well written commentary on the BSA Gay quandary. Well said, Kate!

    I too was a proud Girl Scout, for years, and loved every minute of it. In retrospect, my Brownie Leader was definitely gay. Later on, my junior high school coach was gay (but careful not to advertise it). Both of those sweet ladies supported me through a horrible childhood.

    I’m a heterosexual, LDS, mom now of a ‘straight’ boy scout. I have no issues with him admiring people who live with integrity and teach honesty. Having grown up in CA I can tell you; it doesn’t ‘rub off’ on you. What is the hang up? Like a lot of recent articles have said; good enough for the Marines, good enough for the BSA!

    ime to rethink what matters!

  • jeeperz February 12, 2013 at 12:21 am

    IDK … scouting, overnight camping in the woods, most parents would think it outlandish for a male high school football coach to take the female cheer-leading squad on an over night camping trip. In my opinion, It would not be appropriate no matter how stellar the character of the coach. All of the gay friends that I have had told me that they were molested as adolescents by adult or older males. I can’t imagine my friends acting in such a way but I just don’t think it would be appropriate for them to take my son camping. Big difference between Marines who are 18+ years old and young boys.

  • Matty "Skewed Review" Jacobson February 12, 2013 at 5:35 am

    I had to draft a response. I’ve about had it with people assuming that all gay people want to do is talk about sex with children. Check it out if you’re so inclined. Thank you!

  • Gunther February 12, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    Using a legitimate news site to advertise a personal blogsite is tacky. Very tacky indeed.

    • Mike February 12, 2013 at 5:21 pm

      Well played Gunther. Matty Jacobsen is so tacky in all his articles. What a self centered pro gay bigot.

  • Concerned Reader February 13, 2013 at 2:47 am

    Why don’t you get a life and stop trolling this page like the ignorant moron you are. People are trying to have actual conversations here and all you can add to this conversation is insults and ignorance. Are you really that bored or that hateful that the only thing you can think to do over the past few days is stalk this page and make smart-ass remarks to anyone who opposes your views?

    • Mike February 13, 2013 at 7:58 pm

      CR, you are such a redneck closet “gay man or woman”, well lets just call it how it is FLAMER…..much better. You cant even expose your self. Be proud of what you believe in. my name is mike hansen, I live in st. george, im a “D”, i like to hunt, fish, and do man things. So dont tell me what to do. You f%#@.

  • Kate Dalley February 13, 2013 at 6:33 am


    I wasn’t even going to respond to this but I must say just a few things. My article does not obsess over sex. Yours does. My article is about when the discussion of sexual preference is appropriate and it is not appropriate within the boundaries of an organization that teaches merit badges a few hours a week. Your article in the link above references , sex again and again in just about every paragraph. Mine does not. Your pervert comments are overreaching and bizarre. I have many friends that are gay. Yes, even a best friend that has been a friend for over 30 years. Mattie, YOU tried desperately to make my article about sex. And, you missed the entire point. I didn’t focus on sex for a reason. Our sexuality does not have to be the focus part of every thing we do. Which one of us mentioned whips, chains, XXX, naked guys going at it, cameras… Who has sex on the brain? Hmmmm. Matty, I know you mean well. Not everyone in this world thinks gay people are perverts though, including me. Because I disagree with the point you are trying to make does not make me a pervert. Because I do not embrace something does not make me hate something and have disdain for it. But, the point here is, does the Boy Scouts organization have to include addressing sexual preference as part of its focus and foundation to teaching merit badges?
    Kate Dalley

    • ken February 13, 2013 at 12:26 pm

      Then why respond? If your heart is pure then there is no need!

    • mark boggs February 13, 2013 at 5:48 pm

      “But, the point here is, does the Boy Scouts organization have to include addressing sexual preference as part of its focus and foundation to teaching merit badges?”

      The more important question is will it discriminate based on that? That seems to be the issue, not whether or not they will discuss homosexual or heterosexual sex acts.

  • Mike February 13, 2013 at 8:17 pm

    Editor(s) That was fast. Good job. Im done now. Goodnight

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.