Gay Boy Scouts

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby assateague » Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:15 am

ohioboy wrote:
jehler wrote:
ohioboy wrote:
assateague wrote:As was said, everybody is welcome. But technically speaking (and that's what we're doing here), you may not join the organization unless you are a Christian. Period.

So is that discriminatory?

To the best of my knowledge, nobody ever said gays could not attend Boy Scout events, only that they couldn't join. How is what I said any different?


why dont you try to "watch" your local girl scouts.


"no. its ok. i'm just watching." nno!:

Bet your ass I went and watched the local Girl Scouts before inlet my daughter get involved, I was allowed


no, just roll up with a coke. sit down. cuffs before the coke gets warm.



Why? What law is being broken? Or are you saying the Girl Scouts are discriminatory because they don't allow guys?
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland


Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby ohioboy » Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:00 pm

assateague wrote:
ohioboy wrote:
jehler wrote:
ohioboy wrote:
assateague wrote:As was said, everybody is welcome. But technically speaking (and that's what we're doing here), you may not join the organization unless you are a Christian. Period.

So is that discriminatory?

To the best of my knowledge, nobody ever said gays could not attend Boy Scout events, only that they couldn't join. How is what I said any different?


why dont you try to "watch" your local girl scouts.


"no. its ok. i'm just watching." nno!:

Bet your ass I went and watched the local Girl Scouts before inlet my daughter get involved, I was allowed


no, just roll up with a coke. sit down. cuffs before the coke gets warm.



Why? What law is being broken? Or are you saying the Girl Scouts are discriminatory because they don't allow guys?


no laws being broken.

you telling me it would not attract some attention if a random guy walks in? or comes to an even at a pizza place and just watches?

as far as attending/joining-its a liability thing. you have to see that.
User avatar
ohioboy
hunter
 
Posts: 2354
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: MoCo, MD

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby Glimmerjim » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:13 pm

assateague wrote:As was said, everybody is welcome. But technically speaking (and that's what we're doing here), you may not join the organization unless you are a Christian. Period.

So is that discriminatory?

To the best of my knowledge, nobody ever said gays could not attend Boy Scout events, only that they couldn't join. How is what I said any different?

I don't actually know the policies, AT, but I seriously doubt a stranger could just show up at the meeting place and hop on a bus headed for a camp-out.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10885
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby Glimmerjim » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:20 pm

boney fingers wrote:The NFL is tax exempt, but they wont let me join.

But that could have something to do with running the 100 in 11 minutes! Not including the beer break....... then it's 11 minutes 13 seconds! :lol3: :lol3:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10885
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby WTN10 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 6:05 pm

This discussion has affirmed to me that ohioboy has lost grip with reality.
2014 Season Totals:
Mallards: 243
Redheads: 114
Woodducks: 119
Grebes: 36
Blue Geese: 134
Snow Geese: 178
Hawks: 4
User avatar
WTN10
hunter
 
Posts: 14149
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:02 pm
Location: Western Tunisia

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby ohioboy » Sat Jul 13, 2013 6:58 pm

WTN10 wrote:This discussion has affirmed to me that ohioboy has lost grip with reality.


looooong time ago.

was it the fact that i said a lawyer word?
User avatar
ohioboy
hunter
 
Posts: 2354
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: MoCo, MD

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby WTN10 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:17 pm

No, it was when you equated having membership criteria with discrimination.
2014 Season Totals:
Mallards: 243
Redheads: 114
Woodducks: 119
Grebes: 36
Blue Geese: 134
Snow Geese: 178
Hawks: 4
User avatar
WTN10
hunter
 
Posts: 14149
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:02 pm
Location: Western Tunisia

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby boney fingers » Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:34 pm

Glimmerjim wrote:
boney fingers wrote:The NFL is tax exempt, but they wont let me join.

But that could have something to do with running the 100 in 11 minutes! Not including the beer break....... then it's 11 minutes 13 seconds! :lol3: :lol3:


13 seconds to drink a beer?, maybe in my younger days.
boney fingers
hunter
 
Posts: 882
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:30 pm

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby Glimmerjim » Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:02 am

boney fingers wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
boney fingers wrote:The NFL is tax exempt, but they wont let me join.

But that could have something to do with running the 100 in 11 minutes! Not including the beer break....... then it's 11 minutes 13 seconds! :lol3: :lol3:


13 seconds to drink a beer?, maybe in my younger days.

As a kid we used to do the supercharge thing. 13 seconds was last place. 4 seconds might put you in contention! :lol3: :beer:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10885
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby cartervj » Sun Jul 14, 2013 10:20 am

shotgunning a beer is what we called it :beer:
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7366
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby High Sierras » Mon Jul 15, 2013 1:10 am

Glimmerjim wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote: As a Tax Exempt organization they are reaping monetary benefits from all tax-payers.

High Sierras wrote: So...are you saying that a charity not paying income on donations is reaping monetary benefits from taxpayers? How? As a tax exempt organization the Boy Scouts are not paying income taxes on the donations they solicit. doesn't sound like much of a monetary benefit to me. Just like the Sierra Club or Planned Parenthood. Do you think they are reaping monetary benefits from all taxpayers too? Should we recind Planned Parenthood from tax exempt status because it violates my concience by spending my taxpayer money to pay for an act I find morally repugnant? How about Ducks Unlimited? I'm sure some vegan out there thinks what DU does to promote the murder of featherpersons should not be tax exempt either...
As I stated before, HS, you are well-versed in the subject of this debate and nave made many good points. In re say Planned Parenthodd or DU, though, I have never heard of them stating that blacks, Asians, homosexuals, transvestites, sword-swallowers or bird call imitators are not allowed to become members or utilize their services. That is the gist of this debate.

The gist of this debate is not about who PP allows to join or not; the gist is about the freedom of association, which apparently gets rescinded when a protected minority decides they want in, and bangs their tin cups on the sidewalk loudly enough. As far as Planned Parenthood ‘allowing’ the entire LDS congregation in to run the program for them… you can bet the folks at PP don’t want a bunch of pro-lifers getting into the organization hierarchy and changing the mission of PP from comdoms and abortions to marriages and adoptions. And as a private, tax exempt organization, they have a right to say “no, we don't want your kind in here. Thanks for the offer, but no”. If anyone should loose their taxpayer funded status, it’s Planned Parenthood, which gets millions of taxpayer dollars directly from the US Dept of health and human services to pay for services a lot of taxpayers consider a violation of their conscience and morally repugnant.

Glimmerjim wrote:And I do further believe that any tax-exempt organization is reaping benefits from tax-payers. It takes funds to run the govt., and the citizens are the only source of this income. Exempting a certain group from it allows them to reap the benefits of the society while absorbing none of the costs. Perhaps you can provide me with the error in my thinking along these lines. I am frankly running just on my conception of common-sense with no research or appreciable amount of prior knowledge contributing to it.

Exactly. Tax exempt charities are not citizens. No one is making an ‘income’ off the donations; they are being used to pay for the numerous expenses to run the charity. Exempting a non-profit soup kitchen from paying income taxes on the donations they receive allows them to provide more food to the poor. Allowing the local Goodwill store to take in donated clothes and household goods without having to pay taxes on the stuff they take in allows them to keep that money and use it to stretch the work in their charitable programs. Allowing the BSA to not pay taxes on the donations they receive allows them to spend more money on tents, canoes, backpacks… all the myriad things the boys need to be active in the outdoors. No one is squirreling away some vast fortune off of the backs of the taxpayers in a non-profit tax exempt organization… most of the ones I’ve worked for or have been exposed to are usually one or two fundraisers from going bankrupt, if you believe what their fundraising chairs say.

If you think the BSA is “reaping the benefits of society”, can you please explain to me where these fantastic benefits are being kept? And if you really think they are “absorbing none of the costs”, please explain how.
Glimmerjim wrote:Can you provide other examples of tax-exempt organizations that have mandates on which citizens can become members and which can't based on inclusion in a group to which we already designate anti-discriminatory laws?

I shouldn’t have to. Both the US Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court have ruled in separate cases that the Boy Scouts of America, as a private organization that does not take taxpayer funds, has a right to demand certain standards of behavior to be part of their program.

Why do you feel that a private organization, with a track record over a hundred years running on taking in boys and turning out productive young men, should have it’s tax exempt status revoked because they have standards of behavior? Why are you not advocating the gays and atheists (if they really just want their boys to have the same opportunities, which I contend is NOT the reason they bullied their way into the Scouts...) instead start their own outdoor program, base it on the fundamentals of the BSA they like, minus any inconvenient (to them) standards of behavior? They can even be a tax exempt charity too. When did it become fashionable in this country to try and force all Americans to bow down to all of this liberal “all-inclusivism” crap? Where is the individualism that we once celebrated in this country?
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby slowshooter » Mon Jul 15, 2013 4:09 am

High Sierras wrote:Why do you feel that a private organization, with a track record over a hundred years running on taking in boys and turning out productive young men, should have it’s tax exempt status revoked because they have standards of behavior?


This is the issue. It's a long lived organization. IIRC, it's been sued repeatedly for the preferential treatment that it has gotten from the Feds and states over the years. The behaviour around benefits that it exhibits today is not the same behaviour that it exhibited around preferential treatment even 10 years ago.
All this for a bowl of borscht.
User avatar
slowshooter
hunter
 
Posts: 9011
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby High Sierras » Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:53 am

slowshooter wrote:
High Sierras wrote:Why do you feel that a private organization, with a track record over a hundred years running on taking in boys and turning out productive young men, should have it’s tax exempt status revoked because they have standards of behavior?


This is the issue. It's a long lived organization. IIRC, it's been sued repeatedly for the preferential treatment that it has gotten from the Feds and states over the years. The behaviour around benefits that it exhibits today is not the same behaviour that it exhibited around preferential treatment even 10 years ago.
Slow,

I'm not sure what you're getting at, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. The issue as you see it is that because the BSA is a long lived (private) organization, and they might have been unsuccessfully sued in the past because of some 'preferential treatment', it's time to sue them again and see if anything has changed in the legal landscape to force them to conform to whatever the new standard of decent behavior is now?

Both the US Supreme Court, and the California State Supreme Court have heard discrimination lawsuits leveled at the BSA, and both have ruled in separate cases that as a private organization, the Boy Scouts can put whatever restrictions they want on the membership. Not sure if those are the 'repeated suings' you've mentioned. Since the gays can't win by suing for discrimination, most of the lawsuits that changed the funding for the Scouts was not leveled directly at the Scouts, but at the public agencies that supported the Scouts... hence few police departments and fire departments are now charter organizations to local Boy Scout troops anymore.The laws regarding public support of the BSA has changed over the years, and the Scouts have had to adjust to the new funding restrictions placed on local government agencies.

I'm not sure what preferential treatment you seem to think the Scouts recieve/received over the years, can you provide some links to what you think the BSA gets or got from the feds? I know congress passed a law in the 50's that allows the BSA to retire flags alongside millitary units (no monetary advantage there)...I know that the DoD allows the scouts to use a millitary base for a few weeks once every four years to hold the national scout jamboree (which the Scouts repay in improvements to the property for all to use) ... I know they are listed in the IRS as a tax exempt charity (as are a lot of charitable organizations)... but what I haven't seen is any evidence that the BSA is getting millions (or heck, thousands, or even hundreds) of taxpayer dollars to "discriminate" against people who do not conform to their standards of behavior.

Not sure if you keep abreast of the news down there in the central valley, but there's a dirtbag lawyer type who makes a living of sorts by going to little mom and pop type restaurants up and down the valley with a tape measure and a smart level. Goes over every ADA compliance dimension in the building, then files a lawsuit over 'handicap violations'. Several little restaurants have had to shut down over the years - because they just can not afford to pay for all the renovations to be in ADA compliance on thier shoestring budget.

Oh, and by the way, the dirtbag lawyer isn't handicapped, he's not 'fighting the good fight' on behalf of some wheelchair-bound client who was discriminated against by not being able to reach the paper towels in the bathroom or can't get around because the space between the tables is 3" too narrow, he's just a shmuck with a law degree who can use the law to poke at a business to make a fast buck. To me, that's kinda like the folks trying to use the law to poke at the BSA to force compliance where there was no percieved problem before.

Again, if the homosexuals think the BSA is such a great organization, why don't they set up one of their own that allows gays and athiests in? Why do they instead choose to demand that an organization that doesn't want them there be forced to let them in? The only two answers I have been able to come up with are either they're too few, too cheap, or too lazy to put in the work needed to run a sucessful program, which I'm not buying. What I believe is that it's not about them wanting the opportunity for their kids, it's about trying yet again to destroy an organization that teaches morality to the next generation -- which shines a light on what they (as homosexuals) do as wrong. The gays hate the BSA the same as they hate most Christian churches, and pretty much for the same reason. For a group that constantly whines about just wanting tollerence and understanding, they're not exactly tollerent of others opinions, are they?
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby Glimmerjim » Mon Jul 15, 2013 11:53 am

High Sierras wrote: Where is the individualism that we once celebrated in this country?

It's still here. It is just that now it is often recognized as hate and discrimination, rather than a lofty "individualism."
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10885
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby High Sierras » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:02 pm

Glimmerjim wrote:
High Sierras wrote: Where is the individualism that we once celebrated in this country?

It's still here. It is just that now it is often recognized as hate and discrimination, rather than a lofty "individualism."

Yes, individualism is still here. It must gall the crap out of the progressives to have an outfit that still expects a standard of decency, and as such it needs to be squelched whenever it does not conform to the sheepthink of the lefties in the democratic party, hence the immediate condemnation by calling it "hate and discrimination".

You guys can hate on the Boy Scouts all you want for having standards and morals they expect of their members...but no one has been able to give me even one good reason why the homosexuals can't start an outdoor program for the gays and atheist boys out there. Unless, of course, the reason they decided to bully their way in to a private organization was more about destroying one more organization that stood between them and their hoped-for claims of 'normalcy' than it was about wanting their gender confused kids to get to go camping and hiking with a buch of heteros.
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby ohioboy » Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:53 pm

High Sierras wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
High Sierras wrote: Where is the individualism that we once celebrated in this country?

It's still here. It is just that now it is often recognized as hate and discrimination, rather than a lofty "individualism."

Yes, individualism is still here. It must gall the crap out of the progressives to have an outfit that still expects a standard of decency, and as such it needs to be squelched whenever it does not conform to the sheepthink of the lefties in the democratic party, hence the immediate condemnation by calling it "hate and discrimination".

You guys can hate on the Boy Scouts all you want for having standards and morals they expect of their members...but no one has been able to give me even one good reason why the homosexuals can't start an outdoor program for the gays and atheist boys out there. Unless, of course, the reason they decided to bully their way in to a private organization was more about destroying one more organization that stood between them and their hoped-for claims of 'normalcy' than it was about wanting their gender confused kids to get to go camping and hiking with a buch of heteros.


Their uniforms would be too expensive. :lol3:

Silk IS expensive.
User avatar
ohioboy
hunter
 
Posts: 2354
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: MoCo, MD

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby Glimmerjim » Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:42 pm

ohioboy wrote:
High Sierras wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
High Sierras wrote: Where is the individualism that we once celebrated in this country?

It's still here. It is just that now it is often recognized as hate and discrimination, rather than a lofty "individualism."

Yes, individualism is still here. It must gall the crap out of the progressives to have an outfit that still expects a standard of decency, and as such it needs to be squelched whenever it does not conform to the sheepthink of the lefties in the democratic party, hence the immediate condemnation by calling it "hate and discrimination".

You guys can hate on the Boy Scouts all you want for having standards and morals they expect of their members...but no one has been able to give me even one good reason why the homosexuals can't start an outdoor program for the gays and atheist boys out there. Unless, of course, the reason they decided to bully their way in to a private organization was more about destroying one more organization that stood between them and their hoped-for claims of 'normalcy' than it was about wanting their gender confused kids to get to go camping and hiking with a buch of heteros.


Their uniforms would be too expensive. :lol3:

Silk IS expensive.

It's simply because that is an exclusive rather than an inclusive policy, ohio. Why should we have to have separate groups for members of every affilliation? Let's try to find similarities rather than concentrate on differences. I do, absolutely, disagree with the "black group of...." I sold Real Estate for a while. There was a "Black Realtors Association". Total crap in my opinion. Attempt to assimilate, not differentiate. Rascism could be a vaguely remembered shadow in a generation if everyone would man up, take responsibility for themselves, prove those that are critical of them wrong, feel either empathetic or sympathetic for those of racial bias, and attempt to elevate themselves to a position of pride and excellence. God I wish a man would come along that could unite the "oppressed" and spur them to drag their asses out of a perception of lesser ability and opportunity and use every resource at their disposal to prove to everyone that they are as good as every one else. And even, as all groups do, have abilities that make them excel over others. We could then accept everyone for their strengths. We are all going to be one race someday.......who will we denigrate then? By the way, in my opinion after having viewed a limited number of interviews ....Muhammad Ali was a naturally intelligent man that had the right idea in mind. He TOLD the black man that THEY have to fight and prove themselves, and that they were a disgrace that should not expect respect for the lifestyle they lived. You may not agree with some of his political stances, but he blamed the black man for the black man's problems, and attempted to urge the black man to earn his respect, not consider it as an affront if not earned.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10885
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Jul 16, 2013 5:33 am

Glimmerjim wrote:There was a "Black Realtors Association". Total crap in my opinion. Attempt to assimilate, not differentiate.
When the differences are meaningless, I agree. When they are not, I do not.

Should the atheists assimilate with the majority Christians? The existence of the BRA does not indicate a failure to assimilate. The BRA is saying that there are meaningful differences between blacks and whites. And who are you to disrespect them and reject this you racist :tongue:

I like you agree that there is nothing that indicates a need for a black realtors association any more than a male or female or gay or straight or old or young realtors association. Now if you are of a religion with very particular and complex requirements where this special knowledge would be of great value to you as a customer, then I can see it.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16427
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby ohioboy » Tue Jul 16, 2013 6:42 am

Glimmerjim wrote:
ohioboy wrote:
High Sierras wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
High Sierras wrote: Where is the individualism that we once celebrated in this country?

It's still here. It is just that now it is often recognized as hate and discrimination, rather than a lofty "individualism."

Yes, individualism is still here. It must gall the crap out of the progressives to have an outfit that still expects a standard of decency, and as such it needs to be squelched whenever it does not conform to the sheepthink of the lefties in the democratic party, hence the immediate condemnation by calling it "hate and discrimination".

You guys can hate on the Boy Scouts all you want for having standards and morals they expect of their members...but no one has been able to give me even one good reason why the homosexuals can't start an outdoor program for the gays and atheist boys out there. Unless, of course, the reason they decided to bully their way in to a private organization was more about destroying one more organization that stood between them and their hoped-for claims of 'normalcy' than it was about wanting their gender confused kids to get to go camping and hiking with a buch of heteros.


Their uniforms would be too expensive. :lol3:

Silk IS expensive.

It's simply because that is an exclusive rather than an inclusive policy, ohio. Why should we have to have separate groups for members of every affilliation? Let's try to find similarities rather than concentrate on differences. I do, absolutely, disagree with the "black group of...." I sold Real Estate for a while. There was a "Black Realtors Association". Total crap in my opinion. Attempt to assimilate, not differentiate. Rascism could be a vaguely remembered shadow in a generation if everyone would man up, take responsibility for themselves, prove those that are critical of them wrong, feel either empathetic or sympathetic for those of racial bias, and attempt to elevate themselves to a position of pride and excellence. God I wish a man would come along that could unite the "oppressed" and spur them to drag their asses out of a perception of lesser ability and opportunity and use every resource at their disposal to prove to everyone that they are as good as every one else. And even, as all groups do, have abilities that make them excel over others. We could then accept everyone for their strengths. We are all going to be one race someday.......who will we denigrate then? By the way, in my opinion after having viewed a limited number of interviews ....Muhammad Ali was a naturally intelligent man that had the right idea in mind. He TOLD the black man that THEY have to fight and prove themselves, and that they were a disgrace that should not expect respect for the lifestyle they lived. You may not agree with some of his political stances, but he blamed the black man for the black man's problems, and attempted to urge the black man to earn his respect, not consider it as an affront if not earned.


So racism in America is a mere shadow of what it is like in other countries. Same as slavery. It is here, has been, will be. I hope people get this. It's not just an "us" problem.
User avatar
ohioboy
hunter
 
Posts: 2354
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: MoCo, MD

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby High Sierras » Tue Jul 16, 2013 5:32 pm

Glimmerjim wrote:It's simply because that is an exclusive rather than an inclusive policy, ohio. Why should we have to have separate groups for members of every affilliation? Let's try to find similarities rather than concentrate on differences. I do, absolutely, disagree with the "black group of...." I sold Real Estate for a while. There was a "Black Realtors Association". Total crap in my opinion. Attempt to assimilate, not differentiate. Rascism could be a vaguely remembered shadow in a generation if everyone would man up, take responsibility for themselves, prove those that are critical of them wrong, feel either empathetic or sympathetic for those of racial bias, and attempt to elevate themselves to a position of pride and excellence. God I wish a man would come along that could unite the "oppressed" and spur them to drag their asses out of a perception of lesser ability and opportunity and use every resource at their disposal to prove to everyone that they are as good as every one else. And even, as all groups do, have abilities that make them excel over others. We could then accept everyone for their strengths. We are all going to be one race someday.......who will we denigrate then? By the way, in my opinion after having viewed a limited number of interviews ....Muhammad Ali was a naturally intelligent man that had the right idea in mind. He TOLD the black man that THEY have to fight and prove themselves, and that they were a disgrace that should not expect respect for the lifestyle they lived. You may not agree with some of his political stances, but he blamed the black man for the black man's problems, and attempted to urge the black man to earn his respect, not consider it as an affront if not earned.
Jim,

Exclusive is not necessarily bad. I would not let my son go to a rap concert, no matter how bad he wanted to go. I won't allow him to be exposed to that crap while he's in my house. I don't let him hang out with boys that use conversational cussing. I have flat out told the parents of two of his 7th grade buddies that their sons are welcome to come to my house and play, pitch tents and camp out in the yard in the summertime, etc., but I will not allow my son to go to their house as long as they have pot plants growing in their garden. I don't care if they have a 215 card or not...that's also something I'm not going to allow my son to be exposed to in a casual, 'drugs are ok' atmosphere.

You and I might disagree on how you think I should be raising my son; but as his father, I get to make that call. Exclusive? You bet. Discriminatory? Maybe, but it's my call on how he's raised. Slow can raise his kids to think that any behavior Slow is ok with is ok, and we shouldn't judge people 'not like us'. He's his son's dad, he gets to make that call.

The BSA does not allow openly gay leaders. Up until 6 months or so ago, they did not allow gay youth. Some parents do not want their kids exposed to that kind of behavior, some parents don't care, and yet others glorify that kind of behavior. If your faith tells you that a certain act is immoral, then why in the hell would you promote it? Why would you want your kids exposed to it? Because the government says you have to be tolerant? Because a bunch of liberals think it's a good thing???

Is that discriminatory? No. Gays are free to start their own organization anytime they wish. Heck, they can mandate that all gay scouts have fabulous silk uniforms and rhinestone tiaras if they wish. They could just as well require all the gayscouts to wear all leather uniforms with a$$less chaps if they wish. After all, they're a PRIVATE organization. They can have merit badges on how to run gay massage parlors, build glory holes in the bathrooms, put on a condom in the dark while upside down with a blindfold on and a ball gag in... if that's what they deem important to teach their boys. They also have a right to be able to tell the westborough baptists to go pound sand when they demand the Gayscouts of America (TM) change their ways, since they're a PRIVATE organization.

Most importantly, if a private organization does not condone a certain lifestyle, and you happen to engage in that behavior, why would you want to be there in the first place, if not to destroy the organization from within? The homosexuals have been trying to tear down any and all organizations that teach that what they do is immoral and wrong for as long as they have been out of the closet.




As far as the rest of your comments about lamenting the lack of a charasmatic black leader to lead the blacks out of the "trapped in entitlement land"...the race baiters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson (et al) won't allow it, they make too much money off racial divisiveness. Anyone trying to actually teach self reliance and individual responsibility to the black community would be the target of character assasination on a scale like Sarah Palin endured in 2004 a the hands of the liberals. I'd be willing to bet that if Martin Luther King could come back to life today, as soon as he saw what Al and Jesse were up to, he would denounce both of them for being the race hustlers they are, and then MLK would immediately be attacked as an 'Uncle Tom' by the modern liberal version of the NAACP, who need the divisions to keep themselves relevant.
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: Gay Boy Scouts

Postby Glimmerjim » Tue Jul 16, 2013 5:55 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:There was a "Black Realtors Association". Total crap in my opinion. Attempt to assimilate, not differentiate.
When the differences are meaningless, I agree. When they are not, I do not.

Should the atheists assimilate with the majority Christians? The existence of the BRA does not indicate a failure to assimilate. The BRA is saying that there are meaningful differences between blacks and whites. And who are you to disrespect them and reject this you racist :tongue:

I like you agree that there is nothing that indicates a need for a black realtors association any more than a male or female or gay or straight or old or young realtors association. Now if you are of a religion with very particular and complex requirements where this special knowledge would be of great value to you as a customer, then I can see it.

Yep. Exactly spinner. That is what I saw in it, a totally useless tag that scribes a line in the sand when there is no reason to. If I needed the assistance of a Realtor, the one that presented himself as most professional, honest, and capable would be my choice. Black, white, Asian, Mexican, or attorney. No, that's going too far with the attorney bit. I do have my standards! :lol3: :lol3:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10885
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Previous

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SpinnerMan and 8 guests