Boyscout Leaders Only Exist To Molest Your Children.

As someone who is right-leaning, it disturbs me when I see blatant propaganda coming from the right wing.  I will get to Occu-Demos once again, but this one I cannot let slide:

On the site: Right Wing News, there was an article on the "absurdity" it is to allow a gay person be a Scout Leader (collective fake gasp, I'm sure).  I know many right-wingers, I come from a family of right-wingers, I do not know one person opposed to allowing Gay men to become Scout-Leaders, but let's get into it, shall we?

The article is titled: Gay Scoutmasters Will Lead The Boy Scouts On A March Into Oblivion.  Very propagandy-sounding, and it pulls no punches.  The first paragraph (which is a screen-shot to prevent any editing) reads:

That light blue text is a link, and I was expecting it to be a study (or at least some research) as to why teen-scouts will be "bad touched", but it wasn't.  What was the justification for this bold claim?  The NYT's article simply announcing the lifting of the ban.  So...  please, Right Wing News, where's the basis to the claim?

The people commenting were even more disturbing - for instance:

Great parenting.  Jerry Sandusky was married to a woman, leave your son with him...  right?

Here's another one:

Were they?  According to Wikipedia, homosexuals have not been allowed to join the Scouts since at least 1980.  The 2,000 cases you're referring to were revealed in 1994.  There was another case of "bad touch" in 2006.  If only you were an inmate at San Quentin Prison.

Here's the thing homo-haters: your logic is flawed.  If you think a gay dude is going to hit or make an advance at a straight dude - the Scouts may not be for you.  If you're afraid your son is going to accept that advance and you disown him after you find out he's gay: the Scouts probably aren't for you.

Not only is your argument against this incredibly left-winged, it lacks all forms of logic (keeping it in the left-wing category).  So, if we can't trust someone to be around another person they're physically attracted to, how can we ever trust straight people to meet with other straight people of the opposite sex, say - at church?  I've been to church plenty of times, and I never remember NOT containing myself around a woman I was physically attracted to.  I also have never experienced an orgy inside of a church...

So please, what is the legitimate Republican argument to be against this?  We need to embrace it.  Some may not accept it - but Republicanism does not require everyone to accept what you do.

Update

Did not mean to attack leftists at all.  My apologies.