May 31st, 2013
04:19 PM ET

Baptists plan exodus from Boy Scouts

By Daniel Burke, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor
[twitter-follow screen_name='BurkeCNN']

(CNN) - For Southern Baptist pastor Tim Reed, it was Scripture versus the Scouts.

“God’s word explicitly says homosexuality is a choice, a sin,” said Reed, pastor of First Baptist Church of Gravel Ridge in Jacksonville, Arkansas.

So when the Boy Scouts of America voted to lift its ban on openly gay youths on May 24, Reed said the church had no choice but to cut its charter with Troop 542.

“It’s not a hate thing here,” Reed told CNN affiliate Fox 16. “It’s a moral stance we must take as a Southern Baptist church.”

Southern Baptist leaders say Reed is not alone.

Baptist churches sponsor nearly 4,000 Scout units representing more than 100,000 youths, according to the Boy Scouts of America.

That number could drop precipitously.

The Southern Baptist Convention, the country’s largest Protestant denomination, will soon urge its 45,000 congregations and 16 million members to cut ties with the Scouts, according to church leaders.

The denomination will vote on nonbinding but influential resolutions during a convention June 11-12 in Houston.

“There’s a 100% chance that there will be a resolution about disaffiliation at the convention,” said Richard Land, the outgoing head of the Southern Baptists’ Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, “and a 100% chance that 99% of people will vote for it.”

“Southern Baptists are going to be leaving the Boy Scouts en masse,” Land continued.

Roger “Sing” Oldham, a spokesman for the Southern Baptist Convention, emphasized that local congregations make their own decision on the Scouts.

But he, too, said he expects Baptist delegates, which the church calls “messengers,” to voice their disagreement with the BSA's decision to allow gay youths.

“With this policy change, the Boy Scouts’ values are contradictory to the basic values of our local churches,” Oldham said.

Several religious groups with strong Scouting ties support the new policy.

“We have heard from both those who support the amended policy and those who would have preferred it would not have changed,” said BSA spokesman Deron Smith.

Faith-based organizations charter more than 70% of Scout chapters, providing meeting space and leadership, according to the BSA.

“There have been some organizations that have decided not to renew their charters with Scouting," said Smith, "but we can’t quantify the impact of the amended policy."

The National Jewish Committee on Scouting, the United Church of Christ, the Episcopal Church, the Unitarian Universalist Association and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which sponsors more Scout units than any other faith, all endorsed the change.

The National Catholic Committee on Scouting, which is run with oversight from a bishop, said Thursday that allowing gay youths in the Scouts does not conflict with church teaching. Each bishop will decide whether or not to allow churches in his diocese to charter Scout units, the committee added.

“We ask that Catholic Scouters and chartered organization heads not rush to judgment,” said Edward Martin, chairman of the National Catholic Committee on Scouting.

But the Rev. Derek Lappe, pastor of the Our Lady Star of the Sea Catholic Church in Bremerton, Washington, has already made up his mind.

“I do not feel that it is possible for us to live out, and to teach, the authentic truth about human sexuality within the confines of the Boy Scout’s new policy,” said Lappe.

The priest told CNN affiliate FOX16 that his parish will part ways with the Scouts and develop its own programs.

There may soon be an alternative to the Scouts for social conservatives like Lappe.

John Stemberger, founder of On My Honor, a group that opposed the Scouts’ change in policy, plans to convene conservatives in Louisville, Kentucky, in June to consider forming a new Scout-like group, which could be up and running by the end of 2013.

“Churches and Scoutmasters are looking for leadership and direction,” said Stemberg, an attorney in Orlando, Florida.

A number of conservative religious denominations already sponsor their own groups.

For instance, the Southern Baptists have the Royal Ambassadors, an explicitly Christian program founded in 1908 for boys in first through sixth grade. (A similar group called Challengers equips older boys in “mission education.”)

The name comes from the New Testament, in which the Apostle Paul tells Christians to be “ambassadors for Christ.”

The estimated 31,000 Royal Ambassadors pledge “ to become a well-informed, responsible follower of Christ; to have a Christlike concern for all people; to learn how to carry the message of Christ around the world; to work with others in sharing Christ; and to keep myself clean and healthy in mind and body."

While not as outdoorsy as the Boy Scouts, Ambassadors do camp and play sports, said Land, who was a member of the group during the 1950s. But instead of merit badges for archery and bird study, young Ambassadors earn patches for memorizing Bible verses and mission work.

Southern Baptists said they are preparing for a surge of interest in the Royal Ambassadors at their upcoming convention in Houston.

“We really have an opportunity here to strengthen our RA programs,” the Rev. Ernest Easley, chairman of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Executive Committee, said in a sermon last Sunday, “and to get the boys in a program where they’re going to be protected, where there’s a high moral standard and where they will have an opportunity to learn about camping, missions, evangelism in the local church.”

- CNN Religion Editor

Filed under: Baptist • Belief • Christianity • Church • Gay rights • gender issues • Politics • United States

soundoff (10,821 Responses)
  1. Michael J.

    The Baptist exodus is not a solution to the problem. It IS the problem.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:39 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Michael J.

      You said, "The Baptist exodus is not a solution to the problem. It IS the problem."
      That depends on what you consider to be "the problem".

      I'd consider their silly beliefs to be a problem. Maybe not the problem, but certainly a problem. I'd consider the BSA not (yet) allowing gay adults, or atheists of any age, a problem, but the baptists high-tailing it out of here likely won't change that.

      What do you consider to be the problem?

      June 1, 2013 at 11:48 pm |
  2. Loquay

    So, the Baptists feel their version of the Boy Scouts (the Ambassadors) upholds a 'Christlike Concern for all people' .. Well, how hypocritical can they get?!! Married to an straight Eagle Scout, amd I say good riddance to the Baptist leaders. I feel sorry for all the children denied the scouting experience, as well as becoming the next generation groomed as religious zealots.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:30 pm |
    • whatever

      So is your husband a zealot? Or did you just make that up?

      June 2, 2013 at 12:31 am |
    • John

      I hope everyone leaves scouting that isn't gay, I fear for every 14 year old scout that shares tent with a scout that "knows" he is gay, run children run. Can you imagine scouting when the only boys that enroll are gay? Yikes that day is coming

      June 2, 2013 at 12:58 am |
    • Non believer

      So John, you're afraid you would act gay ?
      My my. Coming out on CNN.

      June 2, 2013 at 1:13 am |
  3. Rational

    Good riddance, baptists. You are the dinosaurs (apologies to dinosaurs).

    June 1, 2013 at 11:30 pm |
  4. John

    "You are the Truth from foot to brow. Now, what else would you like to know.? Rumi

    Alan Watts: What to tell children about God and The Universe

    There was never a time when the world began, because it goes round and round like a circle, and there is no place on a circle where it begins. Look at my watch, which tells the time; it goes round, and so the world repeats itself again and again. But just as the hour-hand of the watch goes up to twelve and down to six, so, too, there is day and night, waking and sleeping, living and dying, summer and winter. You can’t have any one of these without the other, because you wouldn’t be able to know what black is unless you had seen it side by side with white, or white unless side by side with black.
    In the same way, there are times when the world is, and times when it isn’t, for if the world went on and on without rest forever and ever, it would get horribly tired of itself. It comes and it goes. Now you see it; now you don’t. So because it doesn’t get tired of itself, it always comes back again after it disappears. It’s like your breath: it goes in and out, in and out, and if you try to hold it in all the time you feel terrible. It’s also like the game of hide-and-seek, because it’s always fun to find new ways of hiding, and to seek for someone who doesn’t always hide in the same place.
    God also likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside God, He has no one but himself to play with. But He gets over this difficulty by pretending that He is not Himself. This is His way of hiding from Himself. He pretends that He is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, all the plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way He has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when He wakes up they will disappear.
    Now when God plays hide and pretends that He is you and I, He does it so well that it takes Him a long time to remember where and how He hid Himself. But that’s the whole fun of it-just what He wanted to do. He doesn’t want to find Himself out too quickly, for that would spoil the game. That is why it is so difficult for you and me to find out that we are God in disguise, pretending not to be Himself. But when the game has gone on long enough, all of us will wake up, stop pretending, and remember that we are all one single Self-the God who is all that there is and who lives for ever and ever.
    Of course, you must remember that God isn’t shaped like a person. People have skins and there is always something outside our skins. If there weren’t, we wouldn’t know the difference between what is inside and outside our bodies. But God has no skin and no shape because there isn’t any outside to Him. . . . The inside and the outside of God are the same. And though I have been talking about God as ‘He’ and not ’she,’ God isn’t a man or a woman. I didn’t say ‘it’ because we usually say ‘it’ for things that aren’t alive.
    God is the Self of the world, but you can’t see God for the same reason that, without a mirror, you can’t see your own eyes, and you certainly can’t bite your own teeth or look inside your head. Your self is that cleverly hidden because it is God hiding.
    You may ask why God sometimes hides in the form of horrible people, or pretends to be people who suffer great disease and pain. Remember, first, that He isn’t really doing this to anyone but Himself. Remember, too, that in almost all the stories you enjoy there have to be bad people as well as good people, for the thrill of the tale is to find out how the good people will get the better of the bad. It’s the same as when we play cards. At the beginning of the game we shuffle them all into a mess, which is like the bad things in the world, but the point of the game is to put the mess into good order, and the one who does it best is the winner. Then we shuffle the cards once more and play again, and so it goes with the world.

    ~Alan Watts

    June 1, 2013 at 11:26 pm |
    • Michael

      Thanks for sharing this. Alan Watts always blows my mind. I could listen to his lectures all day. 🙂

      June 1, 2013 at 11:43 pm |
    • Kevin

      This is the biggest load of whacky weed smoking cr*p I've ever heard.

      June 2, 2013 at 12:59 am |
    • Everyone has a choice, mine is to believe...

      That is so wrong. I felt confused reading it. Imagine the poor child hearing it. The Bible makes so much more sense than that. The Bible has hope. That had no hope. Many of the posters on here all they can spew is how Christian's are harbingers because they say that something is wrong. Yet, all they are spewing is hate. None of you make any sense to yourselves, and how sad for you all. Please, please seek the Light.

      June 2, 2013 at 1:06 am |
    • Non believer

      No person who actually does not believe has a choice to believe.
      What a load of crap.

      June 2, 2013 at 1:16 am |
    • Dippy

      Everyone...it's Christians, not Christian's. Why is it you religious zealots don't know basic writing skills? Too much time on your knees, not enough time in the classroom.

      June 2, 2013 at 1:26 am |
  5. Cynthia

    Dear pastors, do you regularly conduct sessions to investigate if any of your members had slept with a woman who is having a period? You have to, because according to the Bible – you have to stone these people to death.

    Also Paul/Saul reaafirmed the commitment not to allow eating meat with blood still on it. But I am sure you love your juicy steaks – and for that reason, you need to put yourself and your congregants who love juicy steaks up the stake. But you won't because just as you choose to ignore the environmental laws of the Bible, just as you choose to give a million silly excuses to blame worsening climate change as an act-of-god, to allow the big busineesses supporting your cause to continue killing children with famine and droughts.

    I mean, how coul you be so choosy as for what reasons you choose to focus and what you choose to ignore. Aren't you playing-god, or playing-god, dictatng which sin has been kept by Peter's vision and which had been "ignored"? Are you, or Peter or Paul, blaming the Law-Giver of being wishy washy and couldn't decide about what laws to make?

    Look first at the plank in your own eyes, before you inspect the speck in the gay boy souts' eyes.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:25 pm |
  6. Sailor101

    I applaud them for having the moral conviction to stand behind what they believe in, I wish others would do the same instead of caving to PCism.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:25 pm |
    • LinCA


      You said, "I applaud them for having the moral conviction to stand behind what they believe in, I wish others would do the same instead of caving to PCism."
      Standing up against discrimination of gays isn't about political correctness. It's about decency, and the Southern Baptists have none.

      June 2, 2013 at 12:33 am |
    • Arthur Bryant

      It has NOTHING to do with being "PC". It has EVERYTHING to do with the denial of equal rights, discrimination and bigotry – and it's obvious from your noxious post that you support both discrimination and bigotry, and that you do NOT support equal rights.

      June 4, 2013 at 2:46 am |
  7. TerriB

    I know this post will be graphic, but that is my point. I think when people, regardless of opinion, think of "gay," they deliberately avoid thinking about what these people do, and for good reason: it's not pleasant. But the bottom line is, they insert their erected penises into the anus and rectum of other men. I am NOT trying to be vulgar. I am saying that it is overlooked, but it should not be, because when you really sit and think about it, there is just something inherently wrong with that. Visualize it, ok? Just visualize someone you know doing that. Visualize it. Sorry this is gross and hits hard, but that is my entire point. Stop thinking of "gay" as just some word. What gay adolescents and gay men do (sticking their erected penises into the hole where feces comes out), is just very hard to accept for some people. I think if more people really thought about what these people do, they would have some second thoughts about feeling comfortable with their children in the same space. I am not trying to be vulgar, cute, or vindictive. I am just saying what I think many, many, people ignore, and that is the act of what gay men do (penis into rectum). Visualize it, then see if you really are comfortable with it.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:23 pm |
    • DA

      But when a man does what you described to a woman it's OK?

      June 1, 2013 at 11:27 pm |
    • OTOH


      1. Sounds like you are hetero, right? Why would you want to bother thinking about those things?

      2. Not all gay men do that.

      3. Plenty of heteros do that.

      4. The personal aversion you feel is the same that gays would feel if you put up a graphic description of va.ginal s.ex.

      I'm hetero, but that's the way I see it.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:36 pm |
    • Doobs

      Wow, you put a LOT of thought into that. Why so obsessed with what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom?

      June 2, 2013 at 1:15 am |
  8. Kris

    Dear Baptists: Don't let the door hit you on the way out. The behavior of far too many Baptists shows them to be haters of the first order and I seriously doubt the Boy Scouts (Or anyone else) will go into mourning at their absence.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:19 pm |
    • DA

      How true! Hate disguised as faith.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:25 pm |
  9. Kris

    Dear Baptists:

    June 1, 2013 at 11:07 pm |
    • Athy

      We're waiting...

      June 1, 2013 at 11:15 pm |
  10. realbuckyball

    Ho'mo'se'xuality as an "orientation" was unknown in the history of human ideas until the late Nineteenth Century.
    There was no, (supposed), "lifestyle" until the Twentieth Century. The idea of "orientation" arose when Psychology began to develop as a science. All men were as'sumed to be straight, and only straight, all women straight, and only straight.
    There was also no notion of a continuum of se'x'ual behaviors, (bis'exuality), as science recognizes today.
    Any "different" behavior was seen as "deviancy" from an absolute inherent norm, which the person was assumed to inherently possess, completely by virtue of birth gender.

    In Ancient Israel class and status distinctions were extremely important.

    The injunction in Biblical times, (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13), was against (as's'umed), STRAIGHT men, (and only men), (as they ALL were assumed to be straight), engaging in same-se'x behaviors. (There is a mistaken use of the Sodom and Gomorrah myth in this context also, which is misguided, and I'll deal with that last).

    Why ?
    It had to do with cla's's structure, and male status. A male, who held the highest position in society, and held the highest class status, was seen to be "feminized" by penetration, and designated as a social inferior, (female), by a male of lower cla'ss status, and thus his status was lowered, to that of a woman.
    THAT is the reason the culture forbade it. It had NOTHING to do with se'x. It was status, and only status. This concept remains very much, (subliminally and overtly), in place today. This law code, in Leviticus, (the latest law code to be written), is the ONLY place this appears in the Old Testament. The author of Leviticus was very interested in the "equality of all" before God. It was that author's agenda. He also said strangers, and others from outside Israel were all to be treated with equal rights and dignity, which was a departure, from other texts and codes. It is ironic, indeed, this equality has been turned on it's head, to treat ga'y people, less equality. The author of Leviticus WANTED all people treated equally, and that is why he wrote the injunction into the text, in the first place, to PREVENT inequality. The ideal society for this author was classless, and that could not happen if a male penetrates a male, and makes him thereby, a lower class. It's about class, not se'x.

    This cultural origin was true in the Old Testament culture, as well as the New. That is the reason it ended up in the Bible, and the ONLY reason it was there.

    The law in the Old Testament : "You shall not lay a male as with the laying of a woman, it is an offensive thing". (note: the correct translation is NOT, "it is an abomination"). (The word "toi-va" is used, and in archaic Hebrew, EVERYWHERE else is translated, "an offensive thing").

    Why is this important ? Because there are levels of "offensive things", and levels of meanings of "offensive things".

    There were a number of levels of offensive things in the Old Testament.

    #1. was something which was offensive to God, and this was the worst.
    #2. was something which was offensive to other peoples and cultures, (for example the same word is used with reference to some foods being "offensive" to other cultures, (as hagas might be to Americans), or for example the Egyptians didn't eat, with non-Egyptians, as that was "offensive", or in today's language, "bad manners".
    #3. was something which was just generally "offensive", with no further relational attribution.

    So it can be "offensive" to some people, but not everyone, and is relative to the situation, or to god, or just in general.

    The injunction against male same s'ex behavior is the third kind of offensive. It's not related to either God or anything, or anyone else.
    (There are other verses around it that are stated to be offensive to God, but not this one).
    So in this text, it is offensive to the authors of the text, and that specific culture, (only).

    Same-se'x behaviors (upper class man penetrated by same class or lower class men), was forbidden, for class reasons.
    Equal class men, doing non-penetrating activity, or women together was not forbidden.
    ( Woman with woman, in general, was not addressed, and the class issue was not important.)

    So what does this tell us ?
    It tells us the laws were written into the Bible by HUMANS, for human culturally relative, and internally referenced reasons.
    The laws in the Bible REFLECTED their OWN culture, of the times, and did not "inform" the culture.
    The direction of information flow is crucial. Every Biblical scholar knows this. The Bible was informed by the culture, NOT the other way around.
    There are no "ultimate" claims possible from culturally relative, historically rooted, human local customs.

    The other main text used to justify the fundamentalist nonsense about ho'mo'se'xuality, is the Sodom and Gomorrah myth in Genesis.

    Hospitality of Abraham : In Genesis 18, there is a myth about the hospitality of Abraham, as that was an important cultural value, in a society where a wandering desert dweller could get lost, and die.

    The myth is followed closely by it's counter example of in-hospitality in the Lot myth, (Sodom and Gomorrah). It is not about se'x. It's a counter example to the hospitality story, of in-hospitality. The context is important.

    Another great irony that some religious fundies use the Bible to keep g'ay people away from their "table", and feasts, using the very texts that the Bible intended to teach hospitality.

    ref ; Drs. Shawna Dolansky, and Richard Elliott Friedman, "The Bible Now", "Who Wrote the Bible"

    It would really help if religionists got their facts straight, and learned about their Bible.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:05 pm |

      Please check facts of history, hindu gay ism, filthy hind lover ism has been part of hindu religion since the hindu dark ages, from Zoroaster to Plato to all the way King James of England were hindu gandu, filthy hind lovers, and it is very well recorded in history.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:13 pm |
    • David Aronold

      you my friend are a complete and utter idiot as well as a moron

      June 1, 2013 at 11:19 pm |
    • mama k

      @Islambot you completely misunderstood what reaklbucky had defined as orientation. Learn some more English, then maybe you won't look like such an ass.

      @David A – perhaps you can explain what you find wrong. Otherwise, so far, it's just hot air.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:54 pm |
    • realbuckyball

      Indeed. I see you refuted NOT ONE of the points made.
      The fact is they are bigots. They chose to make an issue of s'ex.
      Did they make an issue of any of all the other things the BS do that are against the OT law ? No.
      They are obsessed with s'ex. They are ho'mophobes. Why ?
      Because they are latent g'a'ys.
      Saul of Tarsus, ( the founder of their cult) said they were free from the old law. Yet they capriciously pick and choose
      what they want to use to keep certain people in their place, (like Saul did with women).
      They are hypocritical bigoted ho'mophobes.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:57 pm |

      mama, I may look like an ass, but I cry like a baby too. 😯

      June 2, 2013 at 1:05 am |
  11. sean

    Well all I have to say is that the boy scouts will be better for it. Congratulations!

    June 1, 2013 at 11:02 pm |
  12. Hector

    The world would be so much better without all this churches that teach intolerance and guilt. If you want to be free send your church to the trash can.

    June 1, 2013 at 11:00 pm |
    • doe_john2

      First, think about the millions who are helped by, yes, churches.

      Second, look up the definition of intolerance ... "lack of toleration; unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, persons of different races or backgrounds, etc."

      Aren't you guilty of this yourself, by your very view of churches that disagree with your position?

      June 1, 2013 at 11:08 pm |
    • Non believer

      Good people do good things.
      Churches or not.
      Dump the churches.

      June 2, 2013 at 1:26 am |
  13. adella

    when is this church going to condemn those who eat shellfish?

    June 1, 2013 at 10:48 pm |
    • X Pentecostal


      June 1, 2013 at 10:49 pm |
    • doe_john2

      You people really should get a new line ... and a better understanding of the Bible [things like context and progressive revelation].

      June 1, 2013 at 10:59 pm |
    • skytag

      doe_john2, if you believe the Bible is anything more than a comforting collection of fairytales and myths it is you who needs a greater understanding of the Bible.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:03 pm |
    • doe_john2


      Thank-you for your intelligent and thoughtful response. You've opened my eyes and because of your truth and insight I'm going to throw away my faith and Bible. I'm glad that you are right and carry 'divine' truth despite what millons over 2000 years have believed ... even people much more intelligent than me and you. I appreciate your help. I think you are wasting your potential on this site and should set your sites much higher.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:12 pm |
    • OTOH

      "despite what millons over 2000 years have believed"

      If length of time and numbers are your benchmarks, Hinduism is over 7,000 years old and undoubtedly has had oodles and oodles more people believe in it over the millennia.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:21 pm |
    • ..

      Nthing worse than a sarcastic Christian. Unless it's a boring, sarcastic Christian. The Andrew Dice Clay of the BB, doe_john2, has spoken.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:24 pm |
    • doe_john2

      Listen, you called me on it and it is true. I was dumb and was being sarcastic.

      I should not have been that way and am not proud of myself. I honestly apologize for that 'Sky'

      June 1, 2013 at 11:27 pm |
  14. X Pentecostal

    It truly amazes me how so called "Christians" can take one or two things out from the Old Testament Law and make it a fact or rule pertaining to abomination, However in my experience, 99% of the same people seem to forget the rest of the abominations that are mentioned in the Old Test. Law. Now, tell me that is screwed up or what?? Fact is it is sickening.

    June 1, 2013 at 10:40 pm |
    • doe_john2

      Perhaps you should read the Bible instead of speaking to it ignorantly ... try reading Romans 1 ... yes, that is in the New Testament.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:00 pm |
    • skytag

      doe_john2, I've read the entire Bible. In fact, I spent almost 40 years of my life as a practicing Christian, until I finally had the courage to face the fact that I was tired of trying to rationalize the chasm between what I believed and everything life, science, and history have to tell us. No amount of biblical knowledge can change that reality. All it does is make you better at rationalizing.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:06 pm |
    • OTOH


      Yes. Same here.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:23 pm |
    • doe_john2


      I am not sure when you became disillusioned, but I am truly sorry that happened. I know I've wrestled at time as well and Christ even noted that it is harder for those who haven't seen to believe than those who have.

      I look at the same things you do – history, science and life and cannot help but see God. I'm reminded of Christ's question to Peter in the Gospel of John when everyone was leaving Him when they realized He wasn't what they thought He was going to be ... "Are you going to leave to?". Peter's response, "Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words that give eternal life. We believe, and we know you are the Holy One of God"

      It is not easy to maintain a faith in a world that hates God ... was happening 2000 years ago, and beyond, and continues today, but we are promised the crown of life if we persevere through.

      I also take comfort that Christ continues to seek the one lost sheep, to bring them back into the fold. I trust you will encounter Christ again and you will remember the 'life' He brings.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:24 pm |
  15. blakenaustin

    Can't blame them. In fact, I commend them for showing some personal integrity. What a foolish capitulation this organization made to the relentless pressure from the far left media last month.

    June 1, 2013 at 10:27 pm |
    • jazz guitar man

      Come on you really believe the BSA caved to far left media pressure. Really you give the far left media that much credit? You're willing to grant them that much power? NOT.

      The reason the BSA changed their POV is because of pressure from corporate sponsors. Many of their board members are leaders at major corporations. These leaders didn't wish to be associated with the existing BSA policy. Also state after state is making SSM legal. The tide has turned. The BSA just went with the tide.

      You need to accept that your POV on this topic is now the minority.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:34 pm |
    • lionlylamb

      BSA? What about GSA? Are we gender neutral or spiritually awkward? Indentured minds would really want to see social equities among all the sexes!

      June 1, 2013 at 10:43 pm |
    • JR

      You give WAY too much credence to the "far left"'s influence in the media. Perhaps the BS just decided that discrimination is just plain wrong. Because it IS.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:44 pm |
    • JR

      What about the Girl Scouts, lionlylamb? What is your complaint with them?

      June 1, 2013 at 10:55 pm |
  16. idapo

    We are in a immoral avalanche that is picking up speed.
    Thank goodness for those with the moral courage to take a stand for the godly virtues the Boy Scouts claim to cherish – like the Baptist church and others.
    We must stand for truth and righteousness in a society of lies and "politically correct" perversions.

    June 1, 2013 at 10:20 pm |
    • jazz guitar man

      While I disagree with your POV about gays, I agree that it is best that people with different views try to avoid associating with each other. Each side should stay out of each others business. This is what is occuring now and to me it is great for all concerned.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:29 pm |
    • JR

      If you don't know by now that gay people were born that way, you need to go back to school, and I mean, not your mother's home schooling.
      It takes more morality to stand up to bigotry than it does to bash gay people, you coward. God made them that way; ask yourself why.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:30 pm |
    • jazz guitar man

      JR, while it is nice that you accept gays as 'normal' people I cannot support the points you make. For example, just like the many religious people here you claim to know what this so called 'god' thinks? How 'he' feels? That is folly. No human can speak for 'god' (and no book written by men can either).

      June 1, 2013 at 10:39 pm |
    • JR

      Jazz, please show me where I calimed I knew how God thinks or feels.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:04 pm |
    • JR

      Additionaly, jazz, your using quotes around the word normal is telling, as is your assumption that I am religious...and, quite simply, I couldn't care less if you support my views or not.

      June 1, 2013 at 11:08 pm |
  17. Mark

    It is both amusing and disconcerting how some of you attempt to explain away everything via science. Has science itself not "evolved"? Science is as much art as science. How many times have the absolutes of science been disproved and replaced? Jesus the Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Don't believe? Some day you will. Every knee will bow and every tongue confess that "Jesus Christ is Lord". You can rant, rave, deny, intellectualize all you want, but the Truth will prevail. Do yourselves a favor that will last for an eternity, accept Him for what He is, Lord.

    June 1, 2013 at 10:20 pm |
    • jazz guitar man

      Mark, that is the most arrogant post of the day. Sorry, but I'm not going to take your advise. I'm 100% willing to take my changes that your POV is complete and total folly.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:23 pm |
    • mama k

      But before you do – be informed – a good place to start perhaps would be this page:


      June 1, 2013 at 10:23 pm |
    • mama k

      Cat still got your tongue, Mark? There was a lot more than science in my posts below.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:24 pm |
    • Mark

      Mama k, it was directed at says, not you.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:27 pm |
    • Mark

      Jazz guitar man: truth isn't arrogance, it is truth. Arrogance is saying you will "tale your chances".

      June 1, 2013 at 10:34 pm |
    • jazz guitar man

      Saying it is you and only you that no the truth is the height of arrogants. But thanks for making me laugh!

      June 1, 2013 at 10:36 pm |
    • mama k

      OK – no problem, Mark.

      I'm still reeling from the depth and enlightening quality of your replies to my posts below:

      "Spare us your pseudo-intellectual rants.",
      "It would appear "you know" nothing."

      June 1, 2013 at 10:37 pm |
    • Mark

      Jazz guitar man: I'm not giving you my opinion. And I am not laying claim to have some inside track on the truth. I share with you what the Bible says, you can choose to believe or not believe as you choose. You don't like the message, don't shoot the messenger. I share because I care and because Christ directed us to share the "good news".

      June 1, 2013 at 10:43 pm |
    • mama k

      I wonder which one of the ~40,000 sects colors Mark's version of the Word...

      June 1, 2013 at 10:50 pm |
    • JR

      Mark, in sharing Christ's good news, could you direct me to the part where Jesus said anything, anything at all about gays?

      June 1, 2013 at 11:16 pm |
  18. JEP

    It is so sad that the ignorance of religion will keep some kids from participating in a club they really want to join. I think BSA should withdraw any affiliation with churches that it has. And let's get a politician that has the balls to get rid of a church's tax exempt status. They should have to pay taxes like everyone else.

    June 1, 2013 at 10:17 pm |
    • jazz guitar man

      I would hope that recent events at the IRS would convince people of both political parties that all organizations should be taxed.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:20 pm |
    • Eddie Hurley

      that is just your will not everybody's else

      June 1, 2013 at 10:33 pm |
  19. jazz guitar man

    What I find funny is when people quote scripture as a way to convince others, especially when I see pro-gays doing it against anti-gays. Don't you people on both sides realize that you're not going to convince anyone. Each side is going to support the scripture that suits their POV and agnostics, well you might as well site Mad Magazine (is that still around?).

    The BSA made a choice. The SBC made a choice. I see no harm in either one. Just people with different views that have decided not break ties. A win \ win for all.

    June 1, 2013 at 10:11 pm |
    • ericpone

      Some SBC made a choice. Not everyone in the SBC is lockstep.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:19 pm |
    • jazz guitar man

      Eric. Most organizations are NOT run by the lay but instead leadership. Often this leadership isn't even picked by the lay. So the official views, as decided by an organizations leadership, are the only ones I care about.

      There are many in the BSA that feel the BSA leadership was wrong with this policy change (one I support 100%). I say 'so what', since there opinion has no official ramifications. Members of a group that do NOT support the core policies of said group should leave that group. It really is that simple.

      June 1, 2013 at 10:26 pm |
  20. Patriot

    Far prefer this headline...
    Boy Scouts plan exodus from Baptists.

    June 1, 2013 at 10:10 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.