response 151 of 174:

Nov 22 21:23 UTC 2000

  I find it amusingly true to form that Rane chastises Brian's omission
  of Republicans and conservatives from the list in #146, then proceeds
  to place "churches" in a list right after "communist cells, militias,
  and the KKK" in what is an even more biased list except that in this
  case it conforms to Rane's biases (or would if Rane had biases..  Sorry,
  it's sometimes hard for me to remember that Rane is perfectly objective
  and consistently scientific in all of his opinions.  In fact it's probably
  not even fair to call them opinions, as they are clearly objective fact...)

  I wish I could conclude that it was Rane's attempt at subtle irony, but
  subtlety is not a trait I associate with Rane..

response 153 of 174:

Nov 23 00:18 UTC 2000

jor> You're suggesting they were conservative protestors?

I wish people could have a mature conversation without getting all het up
about telling other people which words they can or can't use when. I'm not
gonna get my wish either, jor.

response 155 of 174:

Nov 23 18:37 UTC 2000

Re #151: there was no significance to the order in which I listed types of
organizations that discriminate. Those were the first discriminatory
organizations that came to mind, which might or might not be a subtle
reflection of some biases I have, but still, it is an objective list of
discriminatory organizations. If you want to add more and reorganize the
order, please be my guest.

response 157 of 174:

Dec 12 21:19 UTC 2000

I must awaken this item and comment on brighn's text in #139:
"positive gay role models will indeed increase propensity towards
homosexuality, just as negative heterosexual role models will."

Hmmm, who comprises a "negative heterosexual role model"?  Richard Nixon?
Jessie Jackson? Bobby Riggs? A serial rapist? A father who molests his
daughter?  The problem here is that bad people who are heterosexual
are not categorized as bad heterosexuals. They might be bad Republicans
or liberals or bad tennis players or just bad people. Their sexual
orientation is largely irrelevant.  But let a person be homosexual, and
their entire identity is subsumed into this one trait. Such is the way
of stereotypes and discrimination -- as exemplified by the Boy Scouts.

I've never met a homosexual who was somehow converted by the actions
of a negative heterosexual role model role model (the stereotype that
homosexuals were molested as children is false).

Is a child exposed to homosexuals (as positive role models) more likely
to become homosexual? Despite the environmental factor, there is no evidence
to support this (most environmental factors are at a young enough age
that this isn't likely). What is likely is that a gay teen will come out
and identify as gay if s/he has positive gay role models.

It follows that to reduce the chances of children coming out as homosexual,
society should stuff homosexuality into a closet and throw away the key.
Why not just ban homosexual content from books, newspapers and TV? Make gay
groups illegal (some public schools have go to extraordinary lengths to do
so). Heck, we round-up homosexuals and put them in concentration camps!
All this just to ensure that Johnny never hears about homosexuality.
Or at least never hears anything other than negative and false stereotypes
about homosexuals.

This way when Johnny makes it to high school and realizes that he's not
like his peers, that he's like those awful homosexuals about whom he's
heard nothing but terrible things, he can take daddy's gun and blow out
his brains.

This response is dedicated to the memory of Michael, a wonderful kid at
a summer camp where I worked, who took his own life nearly 17 years ago
during the Reagan years. A Reagan Whitehouse commissioned study (confirmed
by a follow-up study under the Bush administration) would later reveal
that 30% of teen suicide attempts were by gay teens who were uncomfortable
with their sexual orientation. One can conclude that confused gay teens
account for 5-54 times as many suicide attempts as would be expected.

response 159 of 174:

Dec 13 01:14 UTC 2000

I am aware of studies which show that the rate of suicide *attempts* among
homosexual teens may be as high as 30% (e.g., G. Remafedi, J.  Farrow,
Risk Factors for Attempted Suicide in Gay and Bisexual Youth, 87
Pediatrics 869-871 (1991)), and very recently, D. Kaplan, et al, Suicide
and Suicide Attempts in Adolescents 105 Pediatrics 871-874 (2000)  (A
statewide survey of students in grades 7 through 12 found that 28.1% of
bisexual and homosexual males and 20.5% of bisexual and homosexual females
had reported attempting suicide.))

However, from a psychological standpoint, there is an enormous difference
between a suicide attempt and a completed suicide. The more attempts a
person survives, the less likely they are to succeed (save by accident).
Most people who want to commit suicide succeed on their first attempt, and
very few survive the second.

I am not aware of any studies which indicate that 30% of all teen suicide
attempts are by gay teens, although Leeron may have misspoken. The
baseline suicide attempt rate is 5% for boys and 13% for girls, with 2.7%
of attempts requiring medical treatment for the attempt. The suicide
attempt rate for gay teens is generally considered to be three times that
of heterosexual teens. (See Remafedi, supra, Remafedi G., Adolescent
homosexuality: Psychosocial and medical implications. 79 Pediatrics
331-337 (1987)). 

response 161 of 174:

Dec 13 18:33 UTC 2000

The point of #157 was not to delve into suicide. It was to point out
that attempted suicide rates among gay teens are disproportionately
high. This is undoubtedly a result of social ostracization and
discriminatory policies such as the BSA's exclusion of homosexuals
regardless of their qualifications.

More specifically my point was that since it is impossible to keep
homosexuality a "secret" from children, and since it is likely that
children who are homosexual will ultimately discover their true self,
it would be wiser for the BSA to provide them with positive gay role
models than to make children fear that they are freaks of nature,
making their lives miserable and them more prone to attempt suicide.

response 163 of 174:

Dec 13 20:20 UTC 2000

Would it necessarily have to be a 'priority'?

response 165 of 174:

Dec 13 23:23 UTC 2000

re #160: The suicide rate is positively correlated with diagnosed mental
         illness, drug use, and alcohol use. Diagnosed mental illness is
         the best predictor - about 50% of teens who attempt suicide are
         already receiving counseling. (Many, however, are only in
         counseling because of a prior suicide attempt.)

response 167 of 174:

Dec 14 21:25 UTC 2000

It is interesting how people, and even groups, can perpetually have sex on
their minds while continually denying that they have sex on their minds. 

response 169 of 174:

Dec 15 07:50 UTC 2000

This also gets into a "separate but equal" situation.  In order to justify
excluding black people from mainstream society, supposedly comperable
organizations were created, and they were told they could have their own
schools, their own colleges, their own bathrooms, and so forth.  However, the
"colored" facilities weren't equal to those for whites in any way, shape, or
form, and had some pretty devistating effects.  In addition to the facilities
being in vastly inferior physical condition, the segregation also served as
a constant demonstration to black people that they could not participate as
equals in mainstream society.  While black children had black role models who
could be leaders in the black society, those role models were not permitted
to become leaders, or even equal participants, in mainstream society, thus
conveying a similar message to black children.

In #162, albaugh seems to be advocating "separate but equal" treatment for
homosexuals.  As such, gay boys in the gay boy scouts could have their
"positive homosexual role models," who were leaders of their homosexual
organization.  The secondary message would be that those leaders, while
supposed to be the role models for the gay kids, were unfit to be leaders in
the mainstream boy scounts, and by extension in the rest of mainstream
society.  Once again, "separate but equal" would be anything but.

response 171 of 174:

Dec 15 16:09 UTC 2000

I don't know, I've been suspicious of hetrosexuals since that hetrosexual
president, Nixon, lied to the nation.  Then that hetrosexual former football
player, O.J. Simpson murdered his wife and got away with it due to some vast
hetrosexual conspiracy.  So then the hetrosexuals blew up that building in
Oklahoma, and burnt down the compound in Waco, and now all those hetrosexuals
in Florida have stolen the election!  Oh, I know there are some honest
hetrosexuals, but I'm not sure I can ever fully trust another hetrosexual.

So if you seriously try to imagine someone saying that, who do you visualize?
Someone gay, right?  The way the culture works right now, pretty much only
a gay person would be expected to be forming positive or negative stereotypes
about "hetrosexuals".  So if the BSA provides "positive heterosexual role
models" it must be doing so for gay scouts, proving that non-gays aren't all
that bad.  Does booting out the gay scoutmasters contribute to being "positive
heterosexual role models?"

As far as the mainstream population goes, there are no hetrosexuals.  Nixon
was a politician and a Republican.  Simpson was black, an athelete, a
millionaire.  Tim McVey was a rural, right-wing extremist hick.  Janet Reno
is a female, Democratic, government official.  Their (presumed) hetrosexuality
doesn't enter into the stereotypical pictures we draw.  So you can't really
be a "hetrosexual role model" of any flavor.

response 173 of 174:

Dec 15 17:23 UTC 2000

Free love, man!  ::)