2012 Election | Boy Scouts | Mitt Romney | News

BigGayDeal.com

Mitt Romney Said In 1994 That Boy Scouts Should Include Gay People: VIDEO

94_romney

The Boy Scouts of America's habit of discriminating against gay members and troop leaders is again in the spotlight thanks to the allegedly patriotic group's decision to ban lesbian Jen Tyrrell from heading her son's group.

The incident has sparked a massive online movement (nearly 150,000 have already signed a change.org petition pressuring the Scouts to reverse their decision), garnered national news coverage and even earned Tyrrell a spot at the GLAAD Media Awards, where she told the crowd, "The Boy Scouts are supposed to have a platform of tolerance, acceptance, and support... Yet by continuing to dismiss gay youth and gay leaders from their organization, the Boy Scouts of America is failing these values, harming families and communities by sending a message that all are not welcome.”

Hoping to keep the issue center stage, and put the squeeze on strategically anti-gay Republican Mitt Romney, GLAAD is pointing to video of the presidential candidate backing gay Scouts inclusion in 1994, when he was running for senator against Ted Kennedy.

Says Romney in the clip, “I believe that the Boy Scouts of America does a wonderful service for this country. I support the right of the Boy Scouts of America to decide what it wants to do on that issue. I feel that all people should be able to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.”

Watch Romney's remarks, which he'll now have to explain, AFTER THE JUMP.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Seems like even that he was trying to have it both ways. Saying that should be allowed to do what they want, but favoring inclusion. Those are mutually exclusive

    Posted by: Steve | Apr 26, 2012 10:59:32 AM


  2. God help us if this pandering idiot becomes POTUS. He wants that job so badly that he'll do anything, say anything, step on anyone, and wreck the lives of large swaths of americans to do so.
    At least I knew where I stood from the beginning with dubya. With this man, we dont know.

    Posted by: stevenelliot | Apr 26, 2012 11:09:53 AM


  3. Seems to me that this is yet another glaring example of liberals not wanting to give any credit where credit may be due. He said gays should be allowed in the boy scouts -- what do you want him to do, ride on a BOY SCOUT float in a gay pride parade? Sheeeesh. Sometimes you are damn if you do, damned if you don't. There is no satisfying some of you people.

    Posted by: Todd Andrew | Apr 26, 2012 11:22:16 AM


  4. What's mutually exclusive about saying that the Boy Scouts of America should be free to decide how to run its own organization and favoring a particular course of action? Seriously, why is it so difficult for you left-wingers to understand the concept of freedom?

    Posted by: AG | Apr 26, 2012 11:27:38 AM


  5. Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up.

    Posted by: Andrew | Apr 26, 2012 11:33:26 AM


  6. Shake that Etch-a-sketch one more time.

    Posted by: PDX Guy | Apr 26, 2012 11:54:05 AM


  7. Shake that Etch-a-sketch one more time.

    Posted by: PDX Guy | Apr 26, 2012 11:54:05 AM


  8. Only damned if you do AND don't, Todd. Get a clue.

    Posted by: kpo5 | Apr 26, 2012 12:41:07 PM


  9. @Todd...try reading a little young man. Romney is a phoney & a master manipulator...with his eye on the prize and nothing else. He's says whatever is convenient at the time and contradicts himself on a regular basis.
    And..no, I don't want him on a float in the parade, thank you...but I do know the difference between a friend and a foe-ney.
    You're so missing the boat pal.

    Posted by: PAUL B. | Apr 26, 2012 12:56:19 PM


  10. "what do you want him to do, ride on a BOY SCOUT float in a gay pride parade?"

    Sounds like a plan!

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Apr 26, 2012 12:57:19 PM


  11. "Seems to me that this is yet another glaring example of liberals not wanting to give any credit where credit may be due."

    Before we start showering Mittens with rainbow credit badges, might want to ask him where he stands now. In 2012, as the Republican nominee.

    Where he stood on an issue in 1994, or five minutes ago, or five minutes from now, may have nothing in common with where he stands NOW. He'll stand on his head if he thinks it will lock down a couple of votes.

    Posted by: Ernie | Apr 26, 2012 1:09:09 PM


  12. Bingo ERNIE!!

    Posted by: PAUL B. | Apr 26, 2012 1:22:11 PM


  13. Todd Andrew, let him say it today, and I'll give him credit. No, I have a feeling we will be hearing him explain his "change of heart" on this issue before the day is out.

    Posted by: John K. from NJ | Apr 26, 2012 1:50:38 PM


  14. If Romney is supposed to get mucho credit for these words of 1994, can we give President Obama more praise for his full, vocal support of gay marriage in the 1990's, cons? (no, like Ernie said, what matters is now).

    Posted by: kpo5 | Apr 26, 2012 2:11:25 PM


  15. In the past (and maybe still) there was a Mormon principle of “Lying for the lord.” Basically what it said was that lies that either protected the Mormon church or advanced it aren’t a sin, “if it helps the LDS church, go ahead and lie.” Google it.

    So it’s a mistake to think Romney believed what he was he saying then or means anything he says now, why his “flip-flopping” isn’t the product of an evolving political philosophy but evidence he’ll basically say anything that will advance his (and by extension the Mormon Church’s) political power and influence.

    As Dustin Lance Black said, Romney’s true attitude toward gays is demonstrated by his continuing tithes to the Mormon Church, his secretive donations to NOM, and his signing of NOM’s political contract regarding gay rights. His appointment of a right-wing gay toady as press secretary (or whatever) is just a red herring. Don't be fooled by this political (and religious) opportunist. He's sell his mother (but not his Mormon Elders) to get elected.

    Posted by: Caliban | Apr 26, 2012 3:25:05 PM


  16. More on "Lying for the Lord."

    http://www.mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

    "Lying for the Lord refers to the practice of lying to protect the image of and belief in the Mormon religion, a practice which Mormonism itself fosters in various ways... "Lying for the lord" is part of Mormonism's larger deceptive mainstreaming tactics, and conversion numbers would drastically lower if important Mormon beliefs were fully disclosed to investigators. "

    Posted by: Caliban | Apr 26, 2012 3:34:18 PM


  17. TODD ANDREW,

    When do you TODD start to realize that you are an IDIOT, and simply stop posting your nonsense????

    If you cannot comprehend this basic analogy, you are truly lost!!!

    Posted by: Brains | Apr 26, 2012 5:16:56 PM


  18. When i was a kid growing up in my row house Irish-American neighborhood, a long time ago, boyscouts and their merit badges were considered dorks and regular guys didn't want to be part of it.

    Posted by: jack | Apr 26, 2012 6:39:14 PM


  19. This is so hilarious. He's always wanted to have it both ways, and always will. David Javerbaum's utterly hilarious piece in the NY Times "A Quantum Theory of Mitt Romney" might be the most perceptive short article ever written about a politician.

    Posted by: St. Theresa of Avila | Apr 27, 2012 1:48:48 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Catholic School Bans Gay Man From Graduation Keynote: VIDEO« «