No one, certainly not I, would suggest that all sexual behavior is healthy or without risk. Some homosexuals engage in behaviors that are quite destructive. Some heterosexual behavior is violent, unhealthy and life denying. HIV infection, for example, knows no boundaries based on sexual orientation, and in our society, children are far more at risk of being molested by heterosexual men than they are by homosexual persons. Yet no one has ever suggested that heterosexuals might not be proper choices to be school teachers or scoutmasters.
Heterosexual misconduct is viewed as an individual deviation from a collective good.
But all homosexual conduct is viewed as inevitably a manifestation of something that is both evil and dangerous to be around. So we have a strange anomaly in this particular court case. An Eagle Scout who has served scouting nobly and well without a single breach of propriety is removed because of who he is, notwithstanding all he has done. Certainly the government may demand that a person not be penalized for who he is when his record contravenes all he is miscast to represent. If the Supreme Court should decide in favor of the Boy Scouts of America in this case it would be symptomatic of the fact that the definitions, stereotypes and prejudices of the past are still operating and that the profound ignorance on which they are based is still encouraged to flourish.