Being gay doesn't automaticlly make you a pedophile. But why take the chance. You don't have opposite sex teachers go into the locker rooms? I would think it's the same. If a female is interested in females the she should be barred from interacting with females. Even though they are interested in females they are still biologically female so that would preclude them from working with the males as well. therefore no placement is appropriate. Everybody has the right to live their life how they want to just don't be offended and hurt if you are excluded from certain things because of the choice you made.

Just don't allow a gay leader to be with my grandson when he is showering, changing clothes or in the toilet.

Jeanne
Most pedophiles are men and would not consider themselves gay. Gay men are not after children, they are looking for partners their own age. Lesbians are not interested in children either. Please stop equating gay and pedophile as the same thing.

Scott - being heterosexual doesn't automatically make you a pedophile either. Using your logic no one should be allowed to work with kids. The male lifeguard at a swim pool? He might be watching the girls a little too much. The women at the day care - gosh they might have to change a young boys diaper. Your logic seems a bit flawed, in my opinion.

Scott & Ken are you serious? Gay isn't a choice. Nor has it anything to do with being interested in boys. The paranoia makes it seem as if you're insecure.

Scott - seriously? "If a female is interested in females the she should be barred from interacting with females." So since I am a male who is attracted to females, I should
not have any co-workers who are female?

Opening up the organization to "officially" accepting gays might be beneficial for the safety of all the boys as the organization's leaders (like the Catholic Church) are largely made up of pedophile gays already. Secrecy in these types of organizations only fuels the perverted desires of these types of predators much in the same way they are attracted to descrete meetings with boys on the internet, etc.

@steve, it's not as much a question of legality, it's a question of morality and the question of, what is the right thing to do?

If it's communist to want organizations to accept people regardless of sexual orientation, and not discriminate, then I'm glad we have a communist president. ;)

Obama's involvement in this is too deflect attention away from the real issues:
Jobs
Debt
Government spending
Benghazi Presidential leadership failure
Etc

It is not king Obama's place to even have a public opinion on this subject. He should be ashamed for even opening his mouth in front of a camera.

I agree C. It is just another distraction with help from his buddies a CBS. Low informed viewers are guided to stay low informed and emotional about issues that are private.

Steve ® -

Yeah, if the president wasn't a "true communist" - communists kill gays because they hate them - then he would have waited until AFTER the Super Bowl to bring this up.

I understand your point fully...

Steve ® -

And who would know more about "low informed viewers" than Steve."

@Steve, Interesting theory of the First Amendment. So, according to you, the right to free speech only applies to folks who agree with you and doesn't apply to the President. I never noticed that particular language in the Constitution.

Have we learned nothing from the Catholic Priest scandals? This would open the door to homosexual recruiting and indoctrination. Has no one heard of North American Man Boy Love? Of course what will happen is that Boy Scout membership will drop to nothing and it will be one more dead organization that once supported American civil and religious values.

It is apparent when homosexual politics enter an organization it dominates all other aspects. Could there not be one organization where adolescent boys are allowed to find themselves without a declaration or scrutiny of their sexuality? Look again, we constantly hear that it is girls who need help to achieved but in reality it is boys who are now disadvantaged in education vs girls and are drugged and disciplined at appalling rates.

Steve is right that this is a communist urge - or more more precisely totalitarian - in that those who love the state and will to power want to destroy all outside the state.

@red...You have to stop equating pedophilia with homosexuality, they are not one and the same. your suppositions are just plain wrong and based on incorrect beliefs. The pedophile priests were allowed to continue because the church leadership protected them. BSA does not protect pedophiles and makes every effort to identify them before they can infiltrate scouting.

Communism is better than extreme right-wing-ism. If we don't agree with the right wing bourgeois extremists then we are communists? Long live the proletariat!

@Lyle Ruble - Did you not read the article? "Late in 2012, the Los Angeles Times undertook a review of 1,600 confidential BSA files and found hundreds of instances where allegations of child molestation went unreported." Hundreds of instances where instances of molestation went unreported. How is it that the BSA does not protect pedophiles? I know in reality they were protecting their won organization by avoiding the obvious scandal that they now have to deal with.

Robert - The president should have no public opinion on this case. It is alarming that he opened his mouth and it is a threat to our free republic. I am not as willing as you to give into to complete government control and pressure. Obama has more than a few words pressuring down on the BSA.

Dominic Joseph Radanovich wrote: "
Communism is better than extreme right-wing-ism. If we don't agree with the right wing bourgeois extremists then we are communists? Long live the proletariat!"

Yes Dominic, the citizens of the former Communist bloc had such a great life style, making new friends as you waited two hours to get one roll of toilet paper, sharing a night of fun with your neighbors because you only had enough heat for one apartment.

Dominic, totalitarianism is terrible, whether it moves from the right, through fascism, or from the left with socialism/communism.

That is why most Conservatives believe in smaller, more effective government to do the things that NEED a government to get done, and NOTHING MORE!

"Robert - The president should have no public opinion on this case. It is alarming that he opened his mouth and it is a threat to our free republic. I am not as willing as you to give into to complete government control and pressure. Obama has more than a few words pressuring down on the BSA."

So Steve, your opinion really is that the Constitutional right to free speech only applies to you and those who agree with you, and that those who disagree with you "should have no public opinion." The Founding Fathers would be quite shocked at your distortion of their handiwork. I am not as willing as you to give up my Constitutional rights. It is your distortion of free speech that is the threat to a free society, not the President's recognition that a discriminatory organization SHOULD do the right thing and end the discrimination. Imagine the outrage from your side if the government tried to ban stupid or baseless speech.

Steve - Well, the president of the United States is the honorary president of the Boy Scouts of America so that alone should allow him some input.

Randy, many of the United Way chapters have stopped donating to the Boy Scouts. The United Way does not have "charities", they are a loose coalition of charities that provide funding through larger type fundraising efforts. The local chapters make the decisions on where those monies go. The Boy Scouts do not have to listen to a word the United Way says. Conversely, the United Way does not have to provide funding. It would be the same if they denied membership based on other criteria as you mentioned, race being an obvious one. As a private organization, they would have that right. And, if my son were in the Boy Scouts, I could make the decision to pull him out.

While I think the Executive board should listen to all parties, they are the ones that should make an UNINFLUENCED decision and live with the consequences.

make that "if my son were in the Boy Scouts, I WOULD make the decision to pull him out."

My bad. Back when I decided to stop donating to the United Way, the BSA was a recipient of United Way funds. It's a matter of terminology.

Now, I donate to charities directly so that I have control over who gets my money.

Randy, I also donate directly to the charities. I have a number of reasons for that, but mostly there are charities I do not want my money to go to.

So now is the Boy Scouts supposed to let girls in and visa versa? Where does it end... Private organizations can do what they want. If you or united Way decide to stop donating because of a specific policy, that is your choice. As they receive no tax dollars to support them, Obama or other any entity of the government can tell them what they should do. And Randy, I don't see many caucasians in the NAACP. Is that somehow different?

Brian Dey -

I believe the topic is "Lifting the Ban on Gays in the Boy Scouts."

Start your own blog if you want to discuss girls in the boy scouts...

Yep, and for this reason I never donate to United Way, only to the Boy Scouts

Actually Brian, that is a valid point. It is not our choice, or the gay community to decide, it is the executive board. While we are all sitting here pontificating our reasons that the boy scouts should or should not lift the ban on gays, it ultimately is up to the boy scouts executive board, WITHOUT any pressure from outside groups other than some words of advice. If the United Way as a whole or the LDS or other groups decide to pull funding, that is something they need to take into consideration.

John wilson- Again, common logic would have pointed you to where I was going with that statement. If the Boy Scouts are pressured into allowing gays, what is next? I know sometimes things must be spelled out for you.

There's the mindless racial analogy. Hey Jack, homosexuality is a BEHAVIOR and Atheism is a belief.

Question: Why would atheists want to join an organization that has honoring God as part of its oath? Answer: To destroy the organization.

@red....You are categorically wrong about homosexuality as being a simple behavior. Whether to engage in any sexual behavior is a choice, but the sexual orientation is well documented to be something one is born with. Atheism, deism, agnosticism, etc; are all functions of cognition. One is not born an atheist or anything else. It is a process of socialization, acculturation, teaching and experience that determines whether one chooses to believe in something greater than oneself. If you're a rational being then relevant evidence would lead us all to be atheists.

Question: Why would atheists want to join an organization that has honoring God as part of its oath?

Answer: Because most Scouts join the Cub Scouts at an age when they just want to have fun with other boys and learn woodcraft and have the sort of positive experience that scouting was supposed to be about. The lack of belief in a Supreme Being has really only become an issue with some very punctilious candidates for Eagle Scout who realize their own beliefs almost on the cusp of adulthood and don't want to lie about it. When I was eight, I'd say "God' and pray all the time without a clue, because it was something that was expected of me. Once I realized how serious this issue was, I stopped doing that.

I think the BSA is doing a disservice to longtime members of good character by turning them away over religious belief. It's doing the same thing to young men who just happen to be homosexual. When it comes to the Scouts themselves, I think they are supposed to be chaste and celibate regardless of their orientation.

Randy1949 -

"...I think they are supposed to be chaste and celibate regardless of their orientation."

I don't know about that; as a former Eagle Scout I must confess that I wasn't.

A very thoughtful, sensitive and factual post... I like that!

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: "...I don't know about that; as a former Eagle Scout I must confess that I wasn't..."

I'm calling you on this one John (if that is your real name). There is no such thing as a "former Eagle Scout". Once awarded it is a lifetime designation. I just checked with a friend of mine that is an Eagle Scout. No Eagle Scout is "former".

Do you have some proof?

"as a former Eagle Scout I must confess that I wasn't."

Me neither, John Wilson. I'm afraid I could never really aspire to all the tenets of scouting, nor did I ultimately agree with them entirely. It's why I fell away in my teens. But it was the stated ideal -- clean in thought, word and deed. Scouts aren't supposed to be seducers, no matter what their orientation.

The Anti-Alinsky -

“There is no such thing as a "former Eagle Scout". Once awarded it is a lifetime designation. I just checked with a friend of mine that is an Eagle Scout. No Eagle Scout is "former". Do you have some proof?"

Wow!

I am being called out… then I suspect I better get my flintlock cleaned, loaded and ready, talk with my friends on planet Kolob and do some extensive research.

YOU made the inane statement, “I just checked with a friend – you have a friend? – of mine that is an Eagle Scout. No Eagle Scout is a “former”. Do you have some proof?” [That is a truly unimpeachable source [Opinion] for making such an inane statement. FYI: even journalists are required to produce at least 2-credible, on-the-record sources.

It would seem to me that you should PROVE your statement, preferably with some “real world” documentation.

You magnify the colossal inanity of your statement by becoming overly exercised, and challenging a statement of mine over an adjective…

Just for S’s & G’s:

http://boingboing.net/2012/08/06/associated-press-as-dozens-of.html

So John (if that is your real name), are you saying you've turned in your Eagle Badge? I'm going to call you on that one too, let's see the resignation letter.

And John (if that is your real name), does turning in your badge really constitute a "former" being places in front of Eagle Scout? And how many of those people removed all references to being an Eagle Scout from their resumes?

John Kerry threw some medals (only GOD knows whose they were) away, but does that mean the medal holder has been scratched from the list?

But to be honest, the "former" was just a lead in to the real question, do you have ANY proof that you, at any time in your life, were and Eagle Scout, or for that matter a member of Mensa? I will not be able to believe it until I see it.

The Anti-Alinsky -

I'm waiting patiently for your PROOF that, "No Eagle Scout is a “former”.

Patiently waiting...

Patiently waiting...

Patiently waiting...

Indeed it does. However it also earns the right to be held up to criticism.

Randy
Agreed they are not immune from criticism.

Nor should they be subject to government interference. Obama need to understnad his role as president and shut his pie hole.

Mr. Lundt, The President fully understands his role and has as much a right to open his pie hole as you do. There is no exception to the First Amendment for presidents or for folks who disagree with your views. Indeed, as President, he has an ethical obligation to stand up for what is right and to call out discriminatory practices. Objecting to such practices is not government interference.

Would the uniforms be pink?

Move to LA or Minneapolis.

1) I don't think these teenage boys, some of whom have been in scouting since they were Cub Scouts WANT to be gay. I think they reach the age of puberty and discover that they have feelings for the same sex rather than the opposite. It isn't a matter of choice.

2) The ban is on gay scouts and leaders period. It doesn't distinguish between practicing homosexuals and celibate homosexuals. Are you saying it would be all right to remain closeted and be a Scout? Because that is hypocrisy, something I don't think the BSA is in favor of.

That has not been proven and there are plenty of gays that are that way because of choice.

Mike is exactly right!

Archbishop Rembert Weakland

Mike Talin -

The United States of America is special because it functions under the rule of LAW and the Constitution, not a book of superstitions... and, private organizations cannot do anything they want to do…

Brian Dey -

And your proof for that would be what?

@Brian Dey....You are wrong. Homosexuality is not a choice, it is proven that gays are born that way. You had better do some more research.

I agree with your entire last entry Mike. How will anybody know how you feel if everybody is afraid that somebody will be offended? Somebody somewhere will be offended no matter what you say so just say it. Now with that said, If there can be gay bars why can't their be gay scouts? Just like the those bars people would have a choice to patronize or not patronize. Has anybody noticed that any post that doesn't side with the rainbow side is "Flagged as inappropriate"?

John Wilson sez::::::private organizations cannot do anything they want to do…

Err, John, the Supreme Court disagrees with you. Ruling with adherence to the first amendment which states:::

Congress shall make no law respecting ....the right of the people peaceably to assemble

Gays need to start their own youth organization.....

@Red, we aren't talking about government inference here. we are talking about a valuable, but in many ways backwards organization finally (perhaps) coming to its senses and abandoning a baseless superstition and harmful discrimination because it finally understands that it is the right thing to do despite the fact that some folks choose to misconstrue the Christian Bible as encouraging irrational hate and discrimination.

red –

‘Private organizations cannot do anything they want.’

They have to abide by tax laws, state and federal; they have to abide by city ordinances, health codes and almost all the laws and rules of social conduct all Americans must follow. They do have some leeway regarding their “standards of acceptance” into their organization; however, in no meaningful way, at all, may “private organizations do anything they want.”

That overly broad, self-delusional and stunningly inaccurate statement simply demonstrates that you are way out of your element here on the Patch, but equally so with humanity.

John Wilson- I know of several teenagers who claimed to be gay becauuse they were not accepted into any other group. Later in life, not far removed from school, they were happily involved in heterosexual relatonships, and some eventually married. What proof do you offer that all homosexuals are wired biologically to be gay?

Also, if I am to believe the literal meaning of the Bible, than homosexuality is a sin, and sin is based on human choice.

Lyle- Here is a good read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/homosexuality--choice-born-science_n_2003361.html

@Brian Dey....It is not uncommon for adolescents to experiment with alternative identities. This seems to begin in early middle school and can manifest itself in many ways. The drive for peer acceptance is strong and the worst condition for a member of this group is to find oneself isolated and alone. To claim that this identity experimentation phase of human development is somehow a proof for being gay is a choice, is an absurdity. Although someone may have a gay sexual orientation, they can choose to not act on such an attraction, which constitutes choice; just as someone who is straight decides not to act on their sexual orientation.

As far as biblical justification is concerned; there are prohibitions (commandments/mitzvahs) on men to refrain from masturbation, laying with other men, having sex with another man's wife, and to remain single and not marrying. All of these proscriptions are founded on sound practical reasons for the time and people's limited understanding. As time has passed, we have modified our views and don't subscribe to such previous commandments. The only one that is still of high relevance is the prohibition from sleeping with another man's wife. The question one must ask, if one is gay and its not a choice, did G-d make a mistake? to maintain the concept of G-d's beneficence and inerrancy, then being gay must be a choice.

@Lyle
In order for homosexuality to not be a choice, like race, you must be able to prove that homosexuals have an across the board biological difference from their heterosexual counterparts. The science does not produce those results; instead, it simple points out that certain genes may make people more prone to homosexual behavior. Not unlike any other behavior that people might be prone to because of their genetic make up. Since genetic make up is purely a game of chance, it is a broken world that creates adverse genetic combinations. It is then up to the individual make the correct choice. If am born with a predisposition to addiction, it is my choice whether to let the addiction control me. God allowed the existence of free choice and does not make any one a homosexual. We are all born with different behaviors that desire to drive a wedge between us and God; it is our choice to accept or deny that wedge.

Lyle- The one thing common amongst the varing sects of Christianity is that God provided man with the ability of free choice. Therefore, to proclaim that any deficiancy in man is a mistake of God is absurd. At least in our Christian culture, that would be akin it beinga mistake of God for those with disabilities, or depravity.

Let me preface this by stating that both of my sons participated in scouting and that I did as well. I never thought back in the days I was involved as this being an issue. Nor did I with my children, and it was never in my thought process of allowing my childr to participate. To be honest, I think that the vast majority of members and parents don't have an issu one way or another about the policy.

But my thought pattern on this topic is not in agreement with the policy, nor any disagreement. Where I have come down is that the organization has the right to have the policy. The market will dictate if it was a good or poor decision, and should in no way be changed because of the government. I think you will find that I am pretty consistent with my beliefs when it comes to Constitutional issues.

Setting that aside for a moment, I believe that science is still figuring this one out. On one hand, there may be some biological truth thatbeing homosexual is a result of genetics. But it is also safe to sa that it may be the result of environment and culture as well.

@J.B. Schmidt....Philosophers have been debating the concept of free choice for millennia. Hard and Soft Determinism completely rejects the notion of free choice based on simple cause and effect relationships. It appears to be free choice because the actor is unable to discern the causality. From a Christian theological perspective, free choice is necessary to support the concept of life after death and the notions of reward and punishment. In fact, the original sin, as interpreted by Christianity, was the exercise of free choice and choosing wrongly. The question necessarily comes down to why would the Creator create humans with such a fatal flaw?

Other interpretations encompasses the notion of free choice as a means by which humans take on the role of becoming co-creators through the process of trial and error. Without free will, then the species would become static and incapable of change, condemning them to sure extinction. To accept without questioning is following blindly and is not exercising free will and free choice.

@Lyle
"From a Christian theological perspective, free choice is necessary" or is it the philosopher that needs to rationalize an existence without free choice in order to justify his unbelief.

Based on your post, I am not sure what you are arguing. Are you claiming that there is no free choice and as such, from birth we are destined to be one way no matter what happens over the course of our lives? Or are you accepting the notion of free choice and thus giving into the position that homosexuality is a choice?

@J.B. Schmidt...I am a believer of limited free will. I reject determinism and humans have agency. Sexual orientation is one of the things that are not given to choice but is bestowed at birth.

"LGBTQ" - What is "Q"?

Questioning? Queer?

Queer would seem to be covered by L and G. Not sure what "Questioning" would be, but I can't think of any other options that begin with a Q either, so maybe so.

How many more letters can we anticipate adding on there to represent those who feel their sexual orientation is being unfairly dissed?

@Bob McBride....It stands for Queer. This has been added to the current movement. It is a term of empowerment adopted by members of the community.

Queers demanded fair representation. The otherwise mainstream gays were discriminating against them. The "T" is even starting to come into question, as many want both the TG and TS instead of just plain T. Silly Fellas.

Thanks for the clarification, Lyle. I suppose all the bases have to be covered, including terms once considered derogatory and subsequently rechristened as ones of empowerment when utilized by members of the "community" itself. Sort of the gay "N" word.

"Just plain wrong and denying the benefits of scouting to a significant portion of male youth"

1) gay youth are not a "significant portion" by any measurement.
2) denying scouting? Why? How? Are you alleging there is a ban on all scouting unless its BSA? What a ridiculous thing to propagate. If they want gay scouts, form a gay scout group.

Done. End of debate. You have no right to pressure an organization to do anything it doesn't want to do, either by law, or public shame.

Lyle Ruble -

It is indeed unfortunate that you choose to introduce facts, many facts, into what was otherwise a highly inflamed, biblical and prejudicial discussion regarding males who were born gay - the science is clear on that - and just want to have the option of becoming a boy scout.

@Edward Willing....You're such a hypocrite. People don't have the right to pressure the BSA, but you think its perfectly fine to pressure women's clinics that provide full service reproductive tights.

Obviously you know little or nothing about scouting. BSA personifies the meaning of scouting.

Agree with some of Lyle's first paragraph here. Like so many things in our society we have introduced sexuality where it does not belong. There should be places - like Scouting where sexuality can be secondary.

I object to Lyle's knee jerk reference to suburban and urban kids. There are urban Boy Scout troops and what a great asset it would be if more "urban" fathers (especially) could participate and develop the masculine self-image and reliance of the boys. (hmm see how that focus on boys in adolescence works?)

Of course Lyle then jumps the shark and blames the resistance on some shadowy religious group. Oh those eeeevvvviilll Mormons. Just think, the Archdiocese of Milwuakee wouldn't be bankrupt if they had not welcomed active uncelibate gays into the priesthood.

To enable the Boy Scouts to survive the National Council should reaffirm the ban.

So if we are really dealing in facts, why are we stating that all homosexuality is genetically determined? I personally know homosexual women who - I guess the politically correct phrase is - left the homosexual lifestyle.

For some it clearly is a choice and we don't need to push that choice on adolescents.

jbw, the boy scout troop where I grew up was pretty mixed. Some of the people that became the village potheads and other trouble makers did join, but by about age 13 they were out. Some of the top students were in the boy scouts, others weren't. The few years I was in you knew who wouldn't stay very long because they developed other interest and were not as involved due to time constraints.

My post was dated after yours but I support your comment 100%

Archbishop Rembert Weakland

Zabular Cranton -

Ditto that... I support bigotry, intolerance, and monumental stupidity too!

Sieg heil!

I do agree. And I don't care to see same sex PDA. For me it's like this..People don't want to be around cigarette or pot smokers. They should do that in the privacy of their own home, right? I would say it's a matter of mutual respect. Why try to push it in the face of the public?

Really Zabular? Any right thinking American? Who is to say what right thinking is? I'm pretty much a conservative guy, but I have no problem with gay people. The ones that are in my circle of friends (and family) are of such demeanor as to not make it obvious. You would not know unless they told you. I also see many people of the so called heterosexual persuasion that are filthy and disgusting.

It IS sad it's being corrupted by sexual orientation issues.

Your side made it an issue, the cries foul as though they're the reasonable ones.

Shameful. You want gay scouting, form gay scouts. Leave BSA alone.

Here we go Lyle: Please ID your position on how people become gay if it isn't a communicable disease?
Further, as a single parent woman if BSA allows gays I would not view involvement in scouting as an asset in provision of positive or appropriate male role models.

Edward Willing -

I never thought "equality" had a "side."

@Edward Willing....Raising issues of sexual orientation is not one side or the other. The BSA has every right to determine whether they will continue to discriminate based on sexual orientation. The change, if it comes, will be based on an acknowledgement that previous beliefs concerning gay scouts and leaders are no longer valid.

Forming gay scout troops is an antithesis to the basic principles of scouting that emphasize inclusion and good citizenship. Whereas, the LGBTQ community wants to be accepted as anyone else in our society, why would they want to further isolate themselves?

@vocal local...Most studies now confirm that people are born with a gay sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is not a part of scouting and many single moms see scouting as a positive experience.

So Lyle, its a great organization that has been able to operate with respect and kept sexuality out the experience, but lets change it now. Lets force sexuality in BECAUSE!!!!!

Let it join all the other organizations that liberals have taken over and turned to crap.

@red -- Unless I'm wrong, the straight kids aren't supposed to be 'practicing' heterosexuals either. They can be upfront about liking girls and remain Scouts in good standing, but if a kid is honest and admits to liking other boys, he's out, even if he's never acted on these feelings.

This above all, to thine own self be true, and it will follow as the night the day: thou can'st not be false to any man.

red –

Your inane inability to even discern the difference between sex and sexuality is just another cogent example of why ‘it is the obvious recognition that you lack even the remotest antecedents of any cognitive ability...’

Furthermore, your sole contribution to this blog is to expatiate upon your overly emotional and incoherent hatefulness toward liberals, while the discussion here clearly revolves around equal opportunity for gay males to obtain the recognized right to join the BSA.

Just one more short step backward and you would qualify as an amoeba proteus…

Jaime Lannister -

Yeah, like that has never happened in the Boy Scouts or Catholic Church before...

Bad idea. Just as bad as women CO's in men's prison. Nothing good will come from it. By then it will be too late for some kids. You never thought the priest would do it either and they weren't even claiming to be attracted to the same sex. I don't think people are born gay just like I don't think people are born paedophiles. It's a choice and a bad idea.

@WaitingForTheSpark....Nothing in the Scout Oath will have to be changed. Sexuality or sexual orientation is not a part of scouting, never has been nor should it.

But religion is, and that is why, like you stated before, the policy is in place. If somebody wants to start a LGBTABCD organization like scouting, noe one is stopping them. They have always been open and upfront on this policy and if they feel they need to change it, it is there decision; and their's alone.

@Lyle

Then they shouldn't have to change their policy to make gays happy. (It's weird to type a redundant phrase...)

@Brian Dey....Religion is a non issue in scouting. As a matter of fact the Scout Oath only refers to G-d, not a particular religious orientation or observance. The only people that have problems with this aspect are atheists and possibly agnostics. Being gay does not preclude atheism, therefore you're arguing up the wrong stream.

Not really, Lyle. Doesn't the language require a belief in a Supreme Being? That leaves out Buddhists along with the atheists and agnostics. It's a matter of honesty when it comes to qualifying for Eagle Scout, and some atheists care just as much about honesty and honor as the devoutly religious do.

I know MORAL gay people. I also know immoral straight people. What is your point?

never has been nor should it.

But it has to change!!!

It has to formally accept homosexuality. Then it will be forced to add homosexual behavior to the scouting manual like the schools are now teaching homosexual sex acts in early grades. Leaders will get tolerance training and then training encouraging them to guide boys to homosexuality.

""""In another situation, a 16-year-old girl who was questioning her sexual identity was referred, by her school counselor and without her parents’ knowledge, to the organization Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG).""""

http://catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0049.html

@Jake....The scout leader who does what "Syl" did is not suitable to be involved in scouting, not because he was gay, but because he was a pedophile.

Lyle,
You failed to see "no children" of his own or .... think deeper Lyle, Not even related

@Jake...I know of quite a few leaders that were childless. Having children shouldn't be a prerequisite. I guess I really don't see your point. Homosexuality and pedophilia are not necessarily connected.

Jake -

EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL... it's just sort of what AMERICA IS REALLY ALL ABOUT...

So because I have no children, I am a pedophile? Jake, yer an arse.

Truth. As sickening as that is, there's some wit behind that statement, I must admit.

tracy rogers -

Yeah, lets keep them out of church, the priesthood and politics too!

John Wilson,

That is up to the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. They made the mistake of repeatedly placing child molesters in situations where, not only could they act on their fantasies, they could do so in a role of authority. THAT is what the Boy Scouts are concerned with. Granted, if the Boy Scouts put a gay Scoutmaster into those situations, nothing would likely happen. But, in the rare case that a Scoutmaster was openly gay AND a child molester, and they acted on it, how would that play out in the courts. Also, how would that affect enrollment. The Boy Scouts have always had a strong moral foundation. How would parents react if they allowed openly gay scouts and scoutmasters in? Many would not want allow their sons in because they don't want them exposed at that age.

Conversely, many parents would not allow their son to join if they did keep the ban. But that is the standard today, and their enrollment seems to be healthy enough.

It's a tough decision, but it is up to the executive council.

@Mike....The current argument is not about requiring scouts or scout leaders to openly come out about their sexual orientation. There have been incidents where scouts who have gone through and completed all the requirements for eagle scout and then denied that rank based on their sexual orientation. Other boys have been denied the right to participate because a parent or guardian was openly gay.

The antiquated thinking that somehow homosexuality is communicable has dominated thinking and put up false expectations that all gays are pedophiles, which is blatantly untrue. To answer your question about whether a pedophile is simply "born that way", probably not. Pedophilia is seen as a recognizable psychiatric disorder and is not acceptable under any circumstance. Legally, socially, and ethically; people who perpetrate sexually on children are criminals and as such are discriminated against.

As far as young males coming out, this usually doesn't occur until sometime during the period of early adolescence. By then they could have been involved in scouting for close to seven or eight years. The boys develop close bonded relationships with their peers and it is difficult to hide or remain in the closet in such circumstances. The various troops I was involved with were sponsored by secular organizations and not religious congregations. As such, we had a much wider diversity of scouts and parents. It is worthy to note that today young people are more tolerant of diversity.

Lyle Ruble -

You are correct; from the DSM-IV:

Pedophilia is classed as a paraphilia, of which DSM says:

"The Paraphilias are characterized by recurrent, intense, sexual urges, fantasies, or behaviors that involve unusual objects, activities, or situations and cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

p571-2:

302.2 Pedophilia
The paraphilic focus of Pedophilia involves sexual activity with a prepubescent child (generally age 13 years or younger).

The individual with Pedophilia must be age 16 years or older and at least 5 years older than the child. For individuals in late adolescence with Pedophilia, no precise age difference is specified, and clinical judgment must be used; both the sexual maturity of the child and the age difference must be taken into account.

Individuals with Pedophilia generally report an attraction to children of a particular age range. Some individuals prefer males, others females, and some are aroused by both males and females. Those attracted to females usually prefer 8- to 10-year-olds, whereas those attracted to males usually prefer slightly older children. Pedophilia involving female victims is reported more often than Pedophilia involving male victims.

Some individuals with Pedophilia are sexually attracted only to children (Exclusive Type), whereas others are sometimes attracted to adults (Nonexclusive Type.

DUCT TAPE ALL ORFICES

TOM, you missed your calling. You're absolutely the funniest guy on Patch. Is there still that comedy club out in Waukesha just off of Hwy T? If so, you should consider seeing if they have an "Open Mike" night. Even though your name's not Mike, I'd be willing to bet they'd give you a shot. This stuff is just too good to be confined to the world of Patch comments.

Very Good Bob McB., you hit the nail on the head. Unless we are going to have Coed Scouts of America the answer should be a straight No. Why did we have Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts instead of one joint group in the first place? Quite possibly the answer to that will solve the issue at hand.

Historically, we have Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts because Lord Baden-Powell created the Boy Scouts first without any thought of the girls. Juliet Gordon Lowe established the Girls Scouts here in America, and I think it was Lady Baden-Powell who created the Girl Guides in Europe and the UK. Both were kind of an afterthought.

Back when I was a Scout, there were some joint co-ed activities between Boy and Girl Scout troops.

Daniel S. –

“Why did we have Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts instead of one joint group in the first place?”

Largely because Americans are, and always have been, conflicted, frightened, intimidated, ashamed, guilty, hypocritical, puritanical and filled with anxiety when it comes to any type of open and healthy discussion regarding sex or more appropriately, sexuality, growth and human development. Concurrently, add to that the authoritarian and paternalistic behaviors – built into our culture by religions for centuries – of a male dominated society, and we can see fairly clearly, given that milieu, why we do not have a Coed Scouts of America.

Any more questions, with patently obvious answers you care to ask?

Why did we have separate organizations?

Well not for the reasons Clueless John lists..

---Largely because Americans are, and always have been, conflicted, frightened, intimidated, ashamed, guilty, hypocritical, puritanical and filled with anxiety when it comes to any type of open and healthy discussion regarding sex or more appropriately, --

We should all be honest and avoid viewing the world through lefty glasses and note the many studies which show that boys and girls learn differently. Boys and Girls schools were successful in fostering achievement and what we have now in what we call "public education" is a war on boys. Boys are disciplined, drugged, and their problems are ignored. They have always dropped out at a higher rate than girls, but now the problem is gargantuan. Boys are now a minority of college entering freshmen, dental students, law students and soon women will receive the majority of PhDs. Somehow 'making a level playing field' actually meant disadvantaging boys.

Boy Scouts served as an analog to the tribe transitioning boys to men, something which our society desperately lacks.

In the 1970s I, a girl, was a member of the Boy Scouts. I don't think Explorer rules have changed since then. Our Waukesha troop was about half and half boys/girls. We had coed events: trimming trees, hiking, camping, canoeing, and bowling. Our chaperones were men or a married couple.

red -

Unfortunately some men feel threaten by the fact that women are now allowed to compete in many more arenas, typically designated as "men only" by the male dominated society; on top of that, they are typically outperforming their male counterparts, leaving red feeling fearful, uncertain and castrated.

Therefore it is time to return to the good old days, when men were men and women were women, you know, the 18th century. Change is so very anxiety producing and threatening, so we must return to our man caves.

Now, gays want to marry, adopt children, join the Boy Scouts, and worst of all, be treated as equals.

Red, sadly, you are an analog watch in a digital age…

So Mr. Everknowing and all righteous thinking John Wilson (Oz for short), does that mean that all types of sexuality are to be treated fairly in society? Where do YOU draw the line and for what reasons?

Well, I'll start to worry about that when the BSA covers up misconduct on the part of leaders and merely transfers them to a different troop. That's what the Catholic Church has been criticized for, not simply for having gay clergy.

Based on your explanation, Lyle, you've still got instances where openly gay scouts could be bunking with other scouts.

In order for this to work, we either have to assume everyone's going to be understanding of the inclusion of openly gay kids in the existing overnight arrangement or that the openly gay kid and his family are going to be accepting of the scout being treated as a "special needs" individual. I don't think either of those assumptions are realistic. The only practical way of dealing with this issue without creating a situation that, in fact, works to the detriment of normalizing the inclusion of openly gay individuals in the Boy Scouts, is to do away with overnight stays altogether.

@Bob McBride....With the emphasis on scouting principles of good citizenship, inclusion and diversity; to focus on sexual orientation is a clear mistake hurting scouting and the purpose of the organization. The LGBTQ community is attempting to focus attention on those social structural issues that isolate and discriminate based on non issues, such as sexual orientation. We would no longer tolerate discrimination based on race, religion, gender, etc. Why would we continue to discriminate against 6% of the population based on sexual preference?

As far as bunking gay and non gay scouts together, it is not a problem. To automatically assume that sexual contact is going to be a result is mostly fantasy, not fact. Of course it is possible, but under the rules and control that adult leadership provides, the probability is very low. Adult leaders are there to protect the scouts and protecting them from sexual advances and sexual perpetrators is of the highest priority. Just as we will not allow scouts to participate in any other risky behavior.

Is 'bunked' a code word for something else. It sounds like it could be. Lyle, you are such a sly one!

Lyle,

You're mixing principles with practicality. The principle may be a good one. The practicality of the situation is going to require a level of understanding and acceptance, both on the part of the parents of non-gay scouts and openly gay scouts (and the scouts themselves), that isn't realistic. There's a reason why, when mixed sex groups of adolescents spend places overnight, the sleeping arrangements differ significantly from those that exist when a single sex group does the same thing. Fantasy or not, parents do not want their kids put in a situation where there's a perceived chance of sexual interaction. Introducing openly gay kids into the equation is going to create those same sorts of concerns.

In addition, there will be a need to minimize the chance of being subject to legal action - justified or not. The only sure-fire way to eliminate both the legal liability and the chance that you'll continually have parents dissatisfied with the handling of sleeping arrangements is to eliminate the overnight stays altogether. You know as well as I do that ultimately it's going to come down to that if the BSA should decide to allow openly gay scouts.

If the greater good is seeing that openly gay kids be accepted into the Boy Scouts, then the elimination of that portion of the program should be considered not only a necessity, but an acceptable one.

@John
You are confusing equality of outcome with equal opportunity. There is nothing stopping the gay community from organizing a Scout style group. Therefore we have an equality of opportunity. However, to the contrary the gay community is saying that the Scouts cannot exist as they wish; which is denying equal opportunity considering we are to allow LGBTQXYZ to exist as they wish. In doing so the LGBTQXYZ community is claiming that there must be an equality in outcome. Equality in outcome is in no way American.

@J,B. Schmidt....Using your logic is the same logic that was used to justify separate but equal racial segregation.

@Lyle
Because the personal choice of sexual partner is exactly like being born to a distinct race? Had those blacks simply chosen to be white, slavery never would have happened.

J. B. Schmidt –

I submit that your rather confusing and long ago debunked argument was put to death with the decision of Brown v Board of Education in 1954, and subsequent rulings regarding "separate but equal."

“Equal opportunity is all that is clearly being asked for here.”

“Equality of outcome isn’t even in this equation.”

Nothing more really needs to be said.

AND THE LINE WILL START FORMING AT THE REAR

@John Wilson
Your response lacked clarity and failed to follow a logical progression of thought. The decision of Brown v Board of Education has nothing to do what I said as it is based on race distinction. The desire to be gay is a choice.

You are demanding that at the end of the day all men be allowed to be boy scouts. That is equality in outcome, when all is said and done all men be MADE equal. That is completely contrary to the history of the US. The US is designed based on equality of opportunity, all men are allowed to create their own version of boy scouts. There is a monumental difference.

@J.B Schmidt....Where are you getting - "being gay is a choice"? All evidence leads to the opposite conclusion; people are born gay and/or bisexual. People do have a choice if they engage in homosexual activity just as straights have a choice whether they engage in heterosexual activities. No one in scouting advocates scouts to engage in sexual activity, whether straight or gay.

John Wilson wrote: "The ban should be completely lifted, only if you still want America to stand for supporting equal opportunity and justice for all..."
So John, you are saying that anyone should be able to join any organization, no matter what the principles they were founded on? Does that mean as non-Catholic I should be allowed to join the Knights of Columbus? Or as a man I should be allowed to join the Red Hat Society?

There are reasons the Boy Scouts have had the ban. I'm sure morality plays a big factor, but what about limiting opportunities that could lead to undesired situations. IF gay scout leaders were KNOWINGLY allowed in, and one molested a scout, there would be all sorts of hell to pay for the Boy Scouts. Yes, I know that being gay and a child molester are two different things, but it is possible to be both.

On the other side, what would be the reaction to an openly gay scout sharing a tent with another gay scout, or even one that is not? Many parents would liken that to a boy and girl sharing a tent.

It is not going to be an easy decision, and it is one that the executive board will make.

The Anti-Alinsky –

Reductio ad absurdum and flagrantly engaging in fear mongering should be beneath you… apparently not. That the executive board will make the final decision is also so incredibly trite.

FYI: The Pope is Catholic...

Once again, Mr. Omnipotent one (a.k.a. John wilson), as an organization, they are fully acting in accordance with the Constitution. If gay families don't like it, they have a fair and equal right to have their own scouts. If the Boy Scouts feel a necessity to allow gays, they will. But neither you or I have the ablility to legally challege their stand.

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: "Reductio ad absurdum..."

John (if that is your real name), coming home from the bar at midnight and trying to blog are not good ideas.

Lyle Ruble -

I think we may argue for a very long time – and achieve nothing – about whether homosexuality is genetically based or a personal choice.

Far more important issues for our society, regarding homosexuality, is how we are going to live with, treat them, address their issues, as well as our own, as they are here, in all facets of our society.

“As a result of Hooker's finding, the APA removed homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychological Disorders in 1973. In 1975 it then released a public statement that homosexuality was not a mental disorder. In 1994, two decades later, the APA finally stated, "...homosexuality is neither a mental illness nor a moral depravity. It is the way a portion of the population expresses human love and sexuality" [2].

D.F. Swaab conducted the next noteworthy experiment in 1990. This experiment became the first to document a physiological difference in the anatomical structure of a gay man's brain. Swaab found in his post-mortem examination of homosexual males' brains that a portion of the hypothalamus of the brain was structurally different than a heterosexual brain. The hypothalamus is the portion of the human brain directly related to sexual drive and function. In the homosexual brains examined, a small portion of the hypothalamus, termed the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), was found to be twice the size of its heterosexual counterpart [2].”

http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html

@John Wilson...Agreed. I was still in practice when the APA came out with the change. I am waiting to see what the DSM-V is going to say.

J.B. Schmidt –

I cited Brown v Board of Education to illustrate an analogy between that case and the current discussion regarding homosexuality. While the primary issue of the case was African-American’s integration into white schools, one of the salient underlying issues was the quality of education in black schools, as well as the paucity of numbers of black schools, as contrasted with white schools: EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY!

Let me be very clear: I AM DEMANDING EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR EVERY CITIZEN IN AMERICA…

YOU, are the other hand, offered the diversion, “You are confusing equality of outcome with equal opportunity.”

My post is clear, and I challenge you to prove that I ever asked for/demanded “equality of outcome.”

That is YOUR CONSTRUCT, YOUR DIVERSION and YOUR CONFUSION… sadly, that is the one thing you do extremely well here on the Patch… insert your words and ideas into your reply to a post, and then accuse the original poster of having said them.

To repeat the major portion of my original post:

“Equal opportunity is all that is clearly being asked for here.”

“Equality of outcome isn’t even in this equation.”

Nothing more really needs to be said.

@John Wilson
The equality to create a group is an opportunity that all have access to. Are you not demanding that the outcome (entrance into a specific private organization) be equal for all?

J.B. Schmidt –

I am DEMANDING EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN.

The OUTCOME would be whether YOU were retained, earned badges, up to and including the Eagle Scout and other leadership awards.

ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS have the same OPPORTUNITY to JOIN THE ARMED SERVICES; ALL AMERICANS will not earn the MEDAL OF HONOR.

Furthermore, if you are not allowed into the armed services, you will never have the opportunity to earn the MEDAL OF HONOR.

Strange, how you disingenuously conflated and parse” opportunity to outcome…”

@John
You are right. I just read that I was battling a MENSA member. Sorry to waste your time. With your knowledge, can you get me into the local Le Leche League as it appears they are not giving the equal opportunity join their group.

If the BSA is traditionally Christian, it needs to give up the pretense of inclusiveness and tell the Jews and Muslims to get lost. It already discriminates against Buddhists by insisting that a Scout believe in a Supreme Being.

I believe the way it was in the USA was this. Government cannot discriminate. Somewhere along the way, things went haywire. If I want to start a club with requirements for membership, is it not my right of Freedom in the USA to discriminate? It is my organization, not yours. If you do not fit the requirement, you cannot join. There is so much discrimination that goes on based on a wide variety of factors, why is one type ok and others not? Wait till we have a President and the First Man of the White House . . . . and why do we have the First Lady, who's the 2nd one? I know, it's about the pedestal, they are really nothing special, though some attempt to make it so for some unusual reason; as if they are superior beings, which they are not. Sadly, some in that office allowed that thought to go to their head.

@Daniel S. -- If you want to be upfront about the aims of your organization, you can set requirements all you like. For instance, the North Shore Women's Club can require you to be a woman. When it gets iffy is if the North Shore Women's Club has an unwritten rule about being white and Christian. Or even if the rule is written . . . then everyone can see the club for what it is and judge accordingly.

The BSA purports to exist for the betterment of all boys, not just some. Other organizations have moved with the times, like the YMCA, which is an all-purpose physical fitness and community resource for everyone, not just young Christian males. It's up to the BSA to make that choice -- inclusion or not.

I'm curious about their official policy on gay membership. As I understand the issue, the Boy Scouts have no issue with members being gay, but they do have a policy against having gay people serving as scout leaders. Has that policy changed since the issue was last in the news?

@CowDung -- When I mentioned the issue of homosexuality disqualifying a Scout from attaining Eagle, I was told that Eagle is considered to be a 'leadership' ranking and thus the exclusion. I don't know if they'd kick you out of the Cub Scouts for coming out of the closet. It was never an issue back in my day, because no one was out of the closet. Ever.

Daniel S. –

I’m really not sure you why you wanted to subject the readers of this blog to this quaint oath and law, however, if you deem it appropriate, perhaps you will enlighten us.

“To do my duty to God” I’m an areligious person so that does not apply

“To obey the Scout Law” That depends upon what those “Laws” are

“And morally straight” Very ambiguous, might mean a permanent erection

My duty, as an American citizen is to obey and respect the Constitution and the laws that the Supreme Court has derived from it. I’ve searched for some time now, however, I’ve never been able to find even the word “God” much less anything pertaining to “do my duty to God” in it. One could say there is an inherent contradiction here…

Who's laws are they? Hahahah, that's a good one!!! Does Murphy own Murphy's laws? How about the law of gravity?

As noted above, the Boy Scouts may discriminate as a matter of law because the Constitution allows them the freedom to assemble in the first amendment. How about as a citizen you respect that explicit right?

Just as an atheist club should not be forced to accept Christian members.

And Mensa should not be forced to accept those who cannot discern a private organization from the State.

red -

Mensa would not allow a flat-earthier such as you anywhere near our organization; this is not discrimination, either rational or irrational, it is the obvious recognition that you lack even the remotest antecedents of any cognitive ability...

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: "...Mensa would not allow a flat-earthier such as you anywhere near our organization..."

So now your Mensa too? Again, I would like to see some proof.

I believe him about MENSA. All it takes is $30 per year and a sufficiently high score an any of several IQ tests, including SATs. At least that's what it cost back when I looked into it and decided it wasn't worth the money. The discussion on the MENSA groups was no more intelligent than the other places i was frequenting.

Randy1949 -

I was a member of MENSA for 5-years; I left the organization largely because there were just too many other activities that were consuming my life, family, school and employment being the greatest… and, I really did require a much more balanced lfe.

You are incorrect about MENSA accepting ACT/SAT scores. I found my group generally stimulating, creative and informative; I do suppose that it matters very much who the group members are, geographical location and backgrounds.

“Mensa offers mensa proctored tests from time to time, and on national test day. They will give you a proctored test for usually around $50. Mensa no longer takes the ACT/SAT scores into consideration for joining. If anyone is telling you they got in using those tests after mensas cutoff date they are lying.”

“Go ahead and just take the test if you are interested in joining. The nice thing about an IQ test is you can't study for one, so just go in and take it.”

“Mensa stopped taking ACT scores in 1989 and SAT scores in 1994. Anyone who got in with those tests alone had to have taken them before those years.”

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070831093815AAnA7Br

http://www.iqlift.com/Mensa-Requirements.html

@John Wilson -- I did my looking into the requirements for joining MENSA in the early 80s, when they did indeed accept a combined SAT score.

So Randy, did you take the test and join Mensa. If they took John Wilson (if that is his real name), you should have been able to get in.

Anti-Alinsky -- At the time I looked into the matter, I would not have had to take a test. All I would have had to do was submit my combined SAT scores (that's SAT, not ACT -- big difference) send them my money and I'd have been admitted. I could also have submitted certified results of several standard IQ tests.

After some thought, I didn't bother. It really wasn't worth $30 a year to go to a monthly meeting of super-intelligent people.

Morality encompasses much more than ones supposed sexual inclination. Actually, it refers more to being law abiding and forthright in life.

THE LEADERS COULD BE CALLED THE RUMP RANGERS

Red has no problem with Gays forming their own youth organizations.

They already have an organization for the youth, its called NAMBLA

Their parade vehicle could look like the OSCAR MEYER WEINER WAGON but have a twinkie instead of a weiner

Randy1949 –

You may want to consider – if you are dedicated to this process – “After some thought, I didn't bother. It really wasn't worth $30 a year to go to a monthly meeting of super-intelligent people.”

The qualifying score for admission is an IQ of 130-132 on a RECOGNIZED IQ TEST. A psychologist will review this test and a determination will be made; you may be required to take additional testing to be admitted.

One very commonly used IQ test is the Stanford-Binet.

Binet Scale of Human Intelligence
IQ Score Original Name
Over 145 Genius
130 - 144 Superior
120 - 129 Bright or Smart
110 - 119 High Average
90-109 Average or Normal

You might also consider the following:
Member dues
The Mensa membership year begins April 1 and ends March 31.
Annual dues are $70 unless specified in a multi-year or life plan.
By accepting membership in American Mensa, members agree to abide by all the requirements of the Constitution of Mensa, the Bylaws of American Mensa, Ltd., and the resolutions adopted by the American Mensa Committee, as required by section III.C.1.a. of the Constitution of Mensa.

"SAT prior to 9/30/1974
from 9/30/1974 to 1/31/1994
after 1/31/1994 1300
1250
N/A!

N/A = These tests no longer correlate with an IQ test. Note that the acceptance date applies to the date you took the test, not the date you join Mensa. You can still join Mensa by using older scores.

A 1966 SAT = N/A!

Again, I wish you well…

Jory Pradjinski -

GWB, the Neocons, TP/GOP, destroyed the Constitution with the Patriot Act, calling anyone who challenged the government a "Traitor", starting an unnecessary war with Iraq, helping Wall Street, the banks, Fannie and Freddie and AIG rob, rape, pillage and plunder the citizens of America, under the guise of "Free Market", "Ownership Society" and, of course, the spurious "Job Creators" which almost bankrupted America.

As the great Nazi Pope Ratzinger – who is now leaving the “Don we now our gay apparel crowd”, a clue to the Supreme Court judges who are elected for life; you do not have to die on the bench, you can retire – said, “Once a Nazi, Always a Nazi!”

When did the Boy Scouts start awarding “religious awards?”

@John Wilson....The religious awards Jory is referring to is done individually by a scout and his clergyman/woman. It is voluntary and doesn't impact any of the scout rankings. The Scout Council doesn't control the award, the clergyman/woman does. The council makes the award based on a certificate issued by the affected clergy.

Also, when I was leaving the troop, Jory was coming in and I know he worked very hard to meet the scouting needs of our local troop. His withdrawal from scouting was a loss.

Lyle Ruble –

If what you say is accurate, then the BSA really has no control over any of the this “awarding” – extra BSA activity – and I don’t see how they can be hammered for that… that would also explain why I have no direct knowledge of this practice, as I never had anything to do with the clergy…

This would not be the first time that religion was responsible for making an environment intolerable for a good person…

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: "When did the Boy Scouts start awarding “religious awards?”"

When I was in, religious awards where, like Eagle Scout or Order of the Arrow, a badge of honor. While the emphasis on Religious awards varied from troop to troop, I don't know any troops that were not aware they existed.
http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Awards/ReligiousAwards.aspx

Another reason I find it hard to believe that John Wilson (if that is his real name) was ever an Eagle Scout.

The Anti-Alinsky –

“When did the Boy Scouts start awarding “religious awards.?”

Answer: NEVER!

I really thought Lyle made that more than abundantly clear.

English, IF not a second language, can be a very precise communication tool…

“The religious emblems programs are programs CREATED BY THE VARIOUS RELIGIOUS GROUPS to encourage youth to grow stronger in their faith. The religious groups—NOT THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA—have created the religious emblems programs themselves. [CAPS ARE MINE]

The Boy Scouts of America has approved of these programs and allows the recognition to be worn on the official uniform, but each religious organization develops and administers its own program.”

The religious emblems programs should be presented to youth members and their families as an optional program for them to complete through their religious organization. Religious instruction should always come from the religious organization, not from the unit leader. Parents need to be informed of these programs and told where to get the information for their particular faith. Interested in making a presentation on the religious awards? Find sample scripts at www.praypub.org”.

http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Awards/ReligiousAwards/faq.aspx

John (if that is your real name), maybe you better re-read the salient points Lyle made:
1)" It is voluntary and doesn't impact any of the scout rankings."
2) "The Scout Council doesn't CONTROL the award, the clergyman/woman does. 3) "The council MAKES THE AWARD based on a certificate issued by the affected clergy.
(number and emphasis added)

In plain English, the Boy Scouts do not create or administer the program, but they do approve them AND accept them as part of the uniform. ( http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/512-879_WB.pdf ) Even the various faiths I checked out describe it as a SCOUTING medal given to SCOUTS!!!
http://www.nlas.org/rountabl.htm
http://www.usscouts.org/advance/boyscout/religious.asp
http://www.catholicscoutingstl.org/awards/pope-pius-xii-medal-and-booklet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_emblems_programs_%28Boy_Scouts_of_America%29
http://www.jewishscouting.org/awards/etzchaimaward.asp

I know you are going to spin this, but it just shows more of your arrogant ignorance and the fact that you were probably never a Boy Scout, let alone an Eagle Scout!!!

BTW-I just checked the j_wils@live.com account and still nothing from you. How long does it take to make one up???

The Anti-Alinsky –

Thank you for additionally confirming my original statement.

“When did the Boy Scouts start awarding “religious awards?”

Answer: NEVER

"Religious groups award" these Bible thumping awards; the Boy Scouts only ALLOW them to piggyback their delusional “awards” by allowing Boy Scouts to wear them on their uniforms. They count NOTHING toward any "legitimate merit badge" in the Scouts, and only serve to identify you as a member of an alternate reality group. In reality, rational people call this enabling delusional ideation and wishful thinking…

Again:

“The religious emblems programs are programs CREATED BY THE VARIOUS RELIGIOUS GROUPS to encourage youth to grow stronger in their faith. The religious groups—NOT THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA—have created the religious emblems programs themselves.

The Boy Scouts of America has approved of these programs and allows the recognition to be worn on the official uniform, but each religious organization develops and administers its own program.”

For someone who BELIEVES in an invisible man in the sky, who monitors all his thoughts and behaviors, angels and devils, you certainly present an incredibly vacuous amount of evidence on anything… Finally, no one really cares what you believe; that sounds worthy of repeating, no one really cares what you believe…

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: "Thank you for additionally confirming my original statement."

Johnny (if that is your real name), I did nothing of the kind. Show me where you can get one of these awards yourself. They are all done through a group such as Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts. The fact that they are written and administered by a religious leader only makes sense. Who do you think wrote the requirements for the Drafting merit badge, Farmer Smith? And who do you think wrote the requirements for the Farm Mechanics merit badge, Draftsmen Dave? Each was written by someone with some expertise in the field, just as with the religious awards are.

John (if that is his real name) also wrote: "They count NOTHING toward any "legitimate merit badge" in the Scouts, and only serve to identify you as a member of an alternate reality group."
So John (if that is your real name), anything Boy Scout related must apply towards merit badges? What about the Order of the Arrow? There are no requirements for merit badges in order to become a member.

Finally, John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: "Finally, no one really cares what you believe; that sounds worthy of repeating, no one really cares what you believe…"

Back at ya Johnny (if that is your real name).

The Anti-Alinsky –

The significant difference here is merely that I know the difference between a BELIEF and a FACT.

Apparently, you do not, even after being buried under a mountain of evidence.

Hence, your BELIEFS are of absolutely no consequence…

C'est la vie.

I know this for a fact John (if that is your real name), I just checked the j_wils@live.com account and you STILL haven't proved that you were an Eagle Scout, member of Mensa, or even a Boy Scout!

The only thing I have gotten from you is something claiming that you are the King of the World (not surprising).

And I thought your account was at outlook.com, not ameritech.net. Are you lying to us AGAIN???

@Anti-Alinsky -- I'd tell you to ease up on him except that John was pretty quick to doubt me when I mentioned submitting SAT scores for Mensa admittance. It turns out one could do that back when I got my info, which was around 1980. A Verbal/Math SAT score of over 1300 got you in back then. Even now, the MENSA site mentions submitting the results of quite a few proctored exams -- IQ tests, etc. -- so for all I know, my 1966 SAT scores might still be valid for admittance.

Randy1949 –

I think it may be clear that things change over time; IQ like stupidity remains relatively constant over one’s lifetime. I do think that you might want to look at the definition of “proctored” exams before you go too far down that road… “…so for all I know, my 1966 SAT scores might still be valid for admittance”. [This, already have been completely debunked.] FACTS are FACTS.

Additionally, both the SAT/ACT has changed significantly since 1966; you may BELIEVE that they have not, however the FACTS do not support that BELIEF.

“Mensa stopped taking ACT scores in 1989 and SAT scores in 1994. Anyone who got in with those tests alone had to have taken them before those years.”

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070831093815AAnA7Br
http://www.iqlift.com/Mensa-Requirements.html

Current MENSA qualifications may be gleamed from the following.

http://www.us.mensa.org/join/testscores/qualifyingscores/

I would trust that this would terminate these rather strange meanderings into what is and is not acceptable for membership in MENSA.

@John Wilson -- I don't know about 'debunked'. It says here: "SAT prior to 9/30/74 1300" http://www.us.mensa.org/join/testscores/qualifyingscores/

So, if i took the SATs in 1966 and exceeded 1300 by a comfortable margin (which I did) that ought to do it, assuming I could dig up my documentation.

I'm well aware that things change over time and that the SATs no longer correlate to IQ tests (in fact is says that at the MENSA site) but they certainly did back in 1966. Why are you so eager to assume 1) untruthfulness and 2) lack of intellect in people who don't always agree with you 100%?

Randy, I am beginning to think that John Wilson (it that is his real name) doesn't read any of the material he sites, otherwise he might have noticed the link for qualifying test scores was broken. However, maybe to clear up your issue with John (if that is his real name), Mensa lists a minimum ACT Composite score of 29 (accepted before September 1989), SAT minimum score of 1300 (through Sept, 1974) or SAT of 1250 (Sept, 1974 through Jan. 1993). I have to dig through some old records, but I do believe I may qualify for Mensa.
http://www.us.mensa.org/AML/?LinkServID=005EB3F7-B83A-44BA-B4FFD5114A1AC31D

John Wilson (if that is his real name) is beginning to sound like Ed Schultz. He takes one "fact" to argue one side of the coin, then the exact opposite "fact" to argue the same side.

Plus, he is just as big of a drama queen as 'ol Ed.

My bad. Hit a typo. It should read SAT of 1250 (Sept, 1974 through Jan. 1994).

The Anti-Alinsky –

The correct translation of “Les Rois Du Monde” is “Kings’ of the World”.

"Les Rois Du Monde" is a 2000 song performed by Philippe d'Avilla, Damien Sargue and Grégori Baquet. It was the second single from the 2000 French musical Roméo et Juliette, de la Haine à l'Amour, featuring as the fourth track on the album of the same name. Released on July 2000, the single achieved a huge success in France and Belgium, topping the charts for many months.

The song was written and the music composed by Gérard Presgurvic.

I currently have 13 different personal email accounts and 3 corporate email accounts. under att.net, ameritech.net, outlook.com, yahoo.com, gmail.com, hotmail.fr, freenet.de, etc. These are all used for significantly different purposes.

[It is probably incomprehensible to you that one can have more than one email account.]

I did send you a “Test – 1” email @live.com and clearly told you “NO!”

No one can logically argue a BELIEF; only FACTS are open to the usual cannons of empirical evidence and logic. Hence, I cannot argue your BELIEFS… no one can…

You are free to BELIEVE anything you want... it simply isn't rational, logical or provable... [Besides, you simply want to keep this superfluous non-issue alive, so you can continue to add inane "add-ons" and keep this stupidity going forever.]

Are you an only child?

Randy1949 –

It is clear that you could have used your 1966 SAT score to be accepted into MENSA up until 1994. You cannot use that today to gain entrance into MENSA… it is simply unacceptable since 1994. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

No, you cannot just dig it up and send it in and be accepted; they will no longer accept it… period. I gave you specific criterion for MENSA in the following link. Other than that, you are simply SOL. Please simply read the link in its entirety before you go off on tangents…

http://www.us.mensa.org/join/testscores/qualifyingscores/

In my first response to your mention of MENSA, I gave you current FACTS; I did not question your truthfulness or lack of intellect. I merely stated, hey, Randy1949, here is the situation as it is TODAY. If correcting your understanding regarding MENSA and providing you with CURRENT FACTS pertinent to entrance into MENSA is perceived as an attack on your truthfulness or lack of intellect, there is a significant problem here. Furthermore, you do not have to agree with me, 100% or otherwise; however, I do the FACTS on my side to fully support my position.

As I see it, your initial post presented information accurate and true in the early 1980’s; I informed you that information from the 1980’s is no longer accurate or true, and supported that with FACTS relevant for admission into MENSA in 2013.

That’s it, that is all that was and is THERE…

@John Wilson -- I did read the entire page that applied to qualifying test scores, including the part at the bottom applying to the N/A for SATs after 1994. It reads:

"These tests no longer correlate with an IQ test. Note that the acceptance date applies to the date you took the test, not the date you join Mensa. You can still join Mensa by using older scores. "

Note --"You can still join Mensa by using older scores."

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: "I did send you a “Test – 1” email @live.com and clearly told you “NO!”"
Yes John (if that is your real name), and I also picked up on your “Les Rois Du Monde” quote with your signature.
(Even Schmitzy would have figured that out)

And you have yet to answer NO! to what?
NO! you don't have any evidence that you were ever an Eagle Scout?
NO! you don't have any evidence that you were ever in Mensa?
NO! you don't have any evidence that you were even in Boy Scouts?
Maybe it's NO! that John Wilson is not your real name?

NO! to what Johnny (if that is your real name)?

Here's a belief for you John (if that is your real name): I believe that you were never an Eagle Scout or a member of Mensa.
Here's a fact for you John (if that is your real name): You have yet to PROVIDE any evidence that you were an Eagle Scout or a member of Mensa!

Wait, maybe it's up to me to look for proof that you were never an Eagle Scout or Mensa. You've tried that stunt before, maybe you can try to pull it off again.

John (if that is his real name) also wrote: "Are you an only child?"
Way to keep it civil John (if that is your real name). Assuming you are using your real name you just blew Rees Roberts' theory about real name and civility out of the water!

Randy wrote: @John Wilson -- I did read the entire page that applied to qualifying test scores, including the part at the bottom applying to the N/A for SATs after 1994. It reads:
...
Note --"You can still join Mensa by using older scores."

Interesting isn't it Randy. He quotes the same sources as you, yet comes to a different conclusion. The key sentences is the link I provide CLEARLY states:
"American Mensa accepts scores from approximately 200 different standardized intelligence tests*. Often potential members have taken acceptable tests at other times in their lives and don't realize THEY MAY ALREADY QUALIFY for membership." (emphasis added)
It then list the time frames when the SAT or ACT was taken.

Randy, If I can find my old test scores I think I will go ahead and apply for one year. It would be worth 30 buck to say I WAS a member of Mensa just to PO Johnny (if that is his real name) something fierce.
And unlike Johnny (if that is his real name), I would be able to prove it!!!

The Anti-Alinsky

"Often potential members have taken acceptable tests at other times in their lives and don't realize THEY MAY ALREADY QUALIFY for membership."

I suspect the operatve word in CAPS is MAY...

My best wishes for you... go for it!

The Anti-Alinsky -

"NO!"

That would be my final response to all your childish games and silly rants...

Randy1949 -

" Note --"You can still join Mensa by using older scores.""

Perhaps you overlooked the certification process for submittal and further documentation and qualifications... further, a 1996 SAT would correlate with NOTHING…

However, as I told AA, I wish you both the best… go for it!

"Perhaps you overlooked the certification process for submittal and further documentation and qualifications... further, a 1996 SAT would correlate with NOTHING…"

To be fair, John, the part about having your high school or college submit your test scores in a sealed envelope was on a different page, but I read that too. Of course they won't just take your word for it.

However, since you and I interpret Mensa's qualification page exactly the opposite, I've contacted Mensa for clarification. I'm sure they wouldn't want any ambiguity in their public information.

Randy1949 –

“However, since you and I interpret Mensa's qualification page exactly the opposite, I've contacted Mensa for clarification. I'm sure they wouldn't want any ambiguity in their public information”

What they probably want more than anything is your $$$

There is a table ABOVE the SAT section on that URL.

This is my interpretation of that table.

SAT Prior to 9/30/1974 you had to have a 1300 score or higher for admission into MENSA

READING DOWN TO THE NEXT BOX

SAT From 9/30/1974 to 1/31/1994 the score was reduced to 1250

AFTER 1/31/1994 “N/A” [I’m reading that as they simply STOPPED ACCEPTING ANY SAT DOCUMENTS FOR ACCEPTANCE INTO MENSA.] In addition, they do CLEARLY show the N/A in this box.

The following sentence is a bit confusing.

“N/A, these tests no longer correlate with an IQ test. [No Dah!] Note that the acceptance date applies to the date you took the test, not the date you join Mensa. [You can still join Mensa by using older scores].”

The “You can still join Mensa by using older scores.” Is total nonsense, a printing error or someone engaging in mental intercourse? Logically, you simply cannot state that AFTER 1/31/1994 your SAT is N/A and will not be accepted, and, a sentence later state you can still join by using older scores!

Clarity is a wonderful thing…

"There is a table ABOVE the SAT section on that URL.

This is my interpretation of that table."

Here's my interpretation of that table, John Wilson. If you took the SAT prior to 9/30/74, your intelligence is in the 98th percentile and you are eligible to join Mensa. Between 9/30/74 and 1/31/94 the method of scoring the test changed such that a score of 1250 put you into the 98th percentile. After1/31/94 the test itself changed such that it no longer correlated with an IQ test (in other words, it reflected achievement and one could study for it) hence a SAT taken after that time does not reflect intelligence as much as it does diligence, and it is N/A, as explained below. A number of the college preparatory tests change after differing dates.

"The “You can still join Mensa by using older scores.” Is total nonsense, a printing error or someone engaging in mental intercourse? "

If an organization like Mensa has printing errors or 'mental intercourse' on its information page concerning the test results one may submit for admission, that doesn't speak very well of the organization, now does it?

Here's where I'm tempted to ask what your Verbal SAT score was.

John Wilson wrote: "The Anti-Alinsky -

"NO!"

That would be my final response to all your childish games and silly rants..."

That's what I figured John.

Randy1949 –

You do make some interesting observations, although the SAT has always measured achievement, proficiency – Math & Verbal skills – not IQ. Correlation seems to be the real issue here. [There is a high correlation with breathing and human life, although you could be in a permanent vegetative state (i.e. Coma).]

Here is where I am tempted to question your understanding of, [and] the purpose(s) of the SAT.

In statistics, dependence refers to any statistical relationship between two random variables or two sets of data. Correlation refers to any of a broad class of statistical relationships involving dependence.

Perhaps, prior to 9/30/74, there was a more reliable correlation between the SAT and IQ, and that is what they are inartfully attempting to state. I am reasonably sure that MENSA in Texas should be capable of clarification in that matter. [Concurrently, the mere submission of 1966 SAT scores does not guarantee acceptance in MENSA.] The real question for me is if they will consider a SAT from 1966 for admission; I am sure they will accept your $40.00.

My thinking would be that the older a test, in general, the more likelihood issues would be found with it as our knowledge/experience increases. I have found that to be generally the case.

The SAT, plus HSGPA has a high correlation with success in college. In 1966, the highest score one could receive was 1600, it is 2600 today.

@John Wilson -- I am in awe of your gift for pedantry and stating the obvious, as if the person with whom you are conversing has been living in a cave for the past fifty years. I'm not the one attempting to speak for Mensa by using either current or former membership in that organization to tell another poster that Mensa would not admit a 'flat-earther' such as himself. I'm sure they'd take his money, and if he could present the proper documentation or pass their test, he'd be in. Despite your prejudices, one finds intellect on both sides of the political spectrum.

The Anti-Alinsky –

“Randy, If I can find my old test scores I think I will go ahead and apply for one year. It would be worth 30 buck to say I WAS a member of Mensa just to PO Johnny (if that is his real name) something fierce.
And unlike Johnny (if that is his real name), I would be able to prove it!!!”

Rarely have I seen such a mature post.

PROCESS:

1) MENSA only accepts the Original test or a notarized copy, usually required to be sent directly from the testing facility. This will cost you approximately $25.00.
2) You will need to fill out an admission form
3) You will be required to send $40.00 for the Qualifying evidence review fee
4) The first year fee is $70.00.
5) There is no guarantee that you will be accepted, as a psychologist will review your data and make a determination. [All non-refundable fees]

I sincerely wish you the very best on your attempt to secure a MENSA membership.

Anyone who would embark upon such an endeavor, particularily with the fond and unrealistic hope of [“… just to PO Johnny (if that is his real name) something fierce.”] has to be close, if not actually certifiable.

Might I suggest you investigate or at least do a modicum of research on EQ?

I have provided a link if you might be so inclined.

L'amour-propre ne peut pas vous être donné avec le morceau de papier…

http://psychology.about.com/library/quiz/bl_eq_quiz.htm

http://www.us.mensa.org/join/testscores/qualifyingscores/

Randy1949 –

Everyone has prejudices, biases and various proclivities; it is important for all of us to recognize those within ourselves, address them in a rational and reasonably mature manner and dampen their decidedly negative affect on our human interactions. Sometimes we use them with our language, purposefully, to make a salient observation.

To be sure, there is intelligence, reason, logic, intellectual and emotional maturity on all sides of the political continuum. That said, it might also be noticed that it is not always apparent in the verbiage, and positions conveyed on the Patch.

Please tell me you are not playing Don Quixote and chasing windmills or an “injustice hoarder” attempting to alleviate all the perceived injustices on planet earth.

Pot, Kettle Johnny

The Anti-Alinsky –

Alternatively, more reasonable, cost-efficient and fun:

The Mensa Home Test is a fun way to discover if you are Mensa material. While this timed test will not qualify you for membership, it does offer an equivalent score that correlates to your IQ range and provides a strong indication of your likelihood for success should you choose to take our admission test.

For only $18, you can take the Mensa Home Test online now, and it will be scored immediately. It won't give you the experience of taking a supervised test in a controlled environment, but it will give you a better understanding of the types of questions you'll find when you take the Mensa Admission Test.

Please note, the online Mensa Home Test only supports the following operating system/browser combinations:

• Windows/Internet Explorer (IE 8 or less, currently incompatible with 9)
• Windows/FireFox
• Mac/Safari

GOOD LUCK!

http://www.us.mensa.org/join/testscores/qualifyingscores/

@John Wilson -- "The “You can still join Mensa by using older scores.” Is total nonsense, a printing error or someone engaging in mental intercourse? Logically, you simply cannot state that AFTER 1/31/1994 your SAT is N/A and will not be accepted, and, a sentence later state you can still join by using older scores!"

Before you talk about printing errors, total nonsense or mental intercourse, you might want to take note of the reply I got from Mensa:

"Thank you for your email.

Mensa accepts the SAT for admission with the following guidelines:

SAT taken prior to 9/30/74-- a score of 1300 is required.
SAT taken between the dates of 9/30/74 and 1/31/94-- a score of 1250 is required.
The SAT is not accepted if taken after 1/31/94."

My thanks to Mary Spencer of American Mensa for her reply to my email.

@Alinsky -- I hope you can dig up those old test scores.

Randy 1949 –

To be both fair & forthright…

Apparently, your interpretation regarding submitting SAT scores for “admission” from 1966 with a score of 1300 or above is accurate; I would also add that submitting does not mean acceptance, as it will still have to be “reviewed by a psychologist at MENSA” for a $40.00 fee, plus a $70.00 annual fee, plus the application.

I received an email from Mary Spenser MaryS@americanmensa.org today 2013.20.02.

I sincerely hope you read all the qualifiers and procedures closely.

Furthermore, ETS [Educational Testing Service] does NOT have 1966 test results readily available; test results from 1966 are archived on microfiche – IF they have not been lost; most test results fron 1980 back are on micrifiche – you may contact ETS, have them conduct a search for $30.00. At that point, you may have them forward your scores to you or MENSA.

Good Luck!

The Anti-Alinsky –

Oops…

I sent you an email earlier and it stated, in part, “[The SAT goes back to 1926, and the ETS has most tests after 1980 archived on microfiche, so that should really be fun.]”

That should read, “[… most tests BEFORE 1980 archived on microfiche…]”

Randy cannot see himself sitting around talking with a group of “super-intelligent people.”

You merely desire admission into MENSA to “PO John Wilson.”

Somehow this all seems so icky to me…

@John Wilson -- "I received an email from Mary Spenser MaryS@americanmensa.org today 2013.20.02.

I sincerely hope you read all the qualifiers and procedures closely."

I infer that you also emailed Mensa. How droll. I did read all the qualifiers and procedures closely. It seems that if I locate the original and am willing to part with it, that will be enough for admission consideration, unlike what you so steadfastly maintained. If I'm unwilling to part with the original, a notarized copy will do. Failing that, I can contact my high school or the ETS.

I'm afraid you misquoted me to Anti-Alinsky there. I enjoy hanging around and discussing things with intelligent people, and I currently do that very thing. It merely wasn't worth $30 per year to me back in 1980 and it isn't worth $70 now. I just don't like to see Mensa membership, current of former, used to put down another person here. You really have no idea how well 'flat-earther' red would perform on the admissions test or has performed on tests in the past.

Randy1949 –

No, Randy, I do not believe I misquoted you to AA or anyone.

“All it takes is $30 per year and a sufficiently high score an any of several IQ tests, including SATs. At least that's what it cost back when I looked into it and decided it wasn't worth the money. The discussion on the MENSA groups was no more intelligent than the other places i was frequenting.”

As you never actually joined MENSA I am wondering what “MENSA groups” you were monitoring or frequenting?

5:22 pm on Tuesday, February 12, 2013
“After some thought, I didn't bother. It really wasn't worth $30 a year to go to a monthly meeting of super-intelligent people.”

Both of the above quotes are of your own writing. To me, they unequivocally demonstrate some pre-conceived idea(s) about above average IQ folks, somewhere along the line that they just sit around discussing esoteric topics and how one might find the last digit of Pi.

Finally, I would submit that “FLAT-EARTHERS” would not do well at all on achievement or IQ tests. [You may not like the term – the motivation for all your angst – however, all too many of them walk among us.] I base my opinion purely on my own personal experience in giving and scoring tests, along with my personal observations of these people, both prior to and after testing. You really do need a sound KNOWLEDGE BASE, language skills, science, and the scientific method, and the ability to do abstract and analytical thinking. I know, how droll.

@John Wilson -- "As you never actually joined MENSA I am wondering what “MENSA groups” you were monitoring or frequenting?"

A special interest group newsletter not unlike this one ( http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/American_Mensa_Tolkien_Special_Interest_Group ) although I believe it was for Science Fiction, and it was completely in print, because this was back in 1980, when there was no internet. The letters of comment in particular, I found no more stimulating than in the non-Mensa newsletters I subscribed to.

One of the rationales for a group like Mensa is that high IQ individuals often find themselves stultified by the conversation of plain old regular folks. I haven't found that to be the case.

Randy1949 –

Your last post brought to mind the story of the 3-blind men and the elephant. The first blind man grabbed the tail of the elephant, and exclaimed, “I know what an elephant is!” The second blind man grabbed the trunk, and behaved similarly. The third blind man grabbed a leg, and he too behaved similarly.

More to the point, a specialized, monthly article in written form only, from 33-years ago hardly gives one any realistic sense to the depth and expansiveness of the International Organization, called MENSA, much less the vast variety of their meetings, projects, stimulation, conventions and global people you would have the opportunity to meet, Skype, email or even vacation with.

Mensa was founded on October 1, 1946, and has enjoyed phenomenal growth ever since; but I have to admit that I am biased… and I enjoy all rational humans…

http://www.iqmindware.com/i3/mensa-high-iq-societies/what-is-mensa/