sodbuster Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/28/us/boy-scouts-policy/index.html I don't like the outside pressure on this issue, however as a member I welcome the potential change. , I've thought it hypocritical of the BSA to place such emphasis on one part of their oath "morally straight," while at the same time they ignore hte part of the oath regarding physical fitness. All jokes aside, in my experience, the biggest anti gay crusaders that I have witnessed in my scouting career have also been the biggest people I have encountered in my scouting career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 They're about to destroy the girls in cookie sales Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 I can see the first openly gay boy scout, with the scout leader handing him a rope. "Johnny, what do you make out of this?" "This? Oh, I could make a hat. Or a brooch. Or a pterodactyl." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) They don't ignore the part of physical fitness. Say for this upcoming National Jamboree, a Scout, Venturer, or leader has to be in a certain fit category... Really, they are pushing it big time. I think if one falls out of the range, they want intense medical backup... Actually discouraging the potential participant from attending unless they get in shape. And if they do get the medical backing, their activities may be limited. Anyway, the oath for a while now is worded: "Physically strong." Not "Physically fit" anymore, if that makes a difference... I suppose it does. BTW... I do welcome the change also. Edited January 29, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts