Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Rogue' UK Girl Guide troop won't use new non-religious promise, excludes new leader

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    I do know there were these pockets of extremists, you can't control everybody's actions, I have mentioned the black panthers, earlier in the thread.. And the opposing side loved to highlight them to show that the other side was wrong.. Thing was, the larger group that was peaceful was accepted by most of the group to be their official leader and spokesperson, and they would denounce this actions as being the right way to go, and be louder in there insistence that the group push for change in peaceful manner.. It was the louder voice.. In the end their cause was won by the nation respecting the actions of those who stood up for their rights in a respectful manner, and those who fought in a hostile manner had no impact on changing the attitude of the nation.. The cause was not won because of their actions, it was won in spite of their actions.

    Your group just has the rabble rousers.. So basically the group that was totally ineffective..
    Last edited by moosetracker; 08-30-2013, 04:42 AM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Now all you need to do, moosetracker, is show that the peaceful black liberation activists (who filed lawsuits), and the peaceful gay rights activists (who filed lawsuits), are different from the peaceful atheist activists who file lawsuits. Where's the atheist equivalent of the black panthers?

      So basically the group that was totally ineffective..

      Moosetracker, I got about 10,000 public schools to drop BSA charters and end illegal discrimination against atheist students. I don't call that ineffective.
      Last edited by Merlyn_LeRoy; 08-30-2013, 08:15 AM.

      Comment


      • fred johnson
        fred johnson commented
        Editing a comment
        I am sad for you.

    • #78
      Well fred, your entire contribution to this thread has been to insult me and whine about atheists, so I'd say you're pretty sad yourself.

      Comment


      • #79
        Okay M&M, it's time for one of you to take the high road and step back from the keyboard. This conversation is not changing anyone's mind and brings nothing new to the table. Both of you have a strong desire to convince the other of something very important to you and, to be honest, neither of you will. What's left is the appearance that neither of you is willing to not have the last word. How do you teach your scouts to deal with another kid that won't stop arguing? Some times it's better to just walk away and know in your heart that you are right.

        Anyway, please stop, before I start praying for Packsaddle to start singing

        Comment


        • NJCubScouter
          NJCubScouter commented
          Editing a comment
          MattR makes a good point, and if you all are REALLY unlucky, it may be me who starts singing instead of Packsaddle. But seriously, while I believe people should discuss anything they want to discuss (within the boundaries that are more-or-less well-established in this forum), there does come a time when a conversation is producing little but ad hominem attacks, with little or no new light being shed on the subject. Except for Pint's helpful and informative post, I think this thread has reached and exceeded that point. Quite frankly, I'm not even sure what Moosetracker and Merlyn are arguing about at this point. (But you don't have to tell me. Really.) I should also note that as I write this, I am wearing my just-another-editor hat, but I've got my other hat in my hand.

      • #80
        Originally posted by moosetracker View Post
        . From what I can see, if all atheists in this movement are exactly like you, then I believe you guys really don't care.. Your just having fun with you low level harassment at the enemy..


        That mirrors my impression.

        Comment


        • #81
          Yeah, I've been watching and musing about that scene in 'Cool Hand Luke' where Paul Newman is getting the stuffing beat out of him by George Kennedy but he just keeps coming back anyway. Here it's two Lukes who just keep slugging away. It's one of those spectacles that we'd like to end but are mysteriously drawn to anyway. But since I've been invoked, here is the eleventh commandment:

          THOU SHALT NOT TAKE Packsaddle's singing IN VAIN!

          All together now:

          "Oh...I wish I was an Ocar Mayer weiner...."

          "Little girls have pretty curls, but I like Oreos....."

          "Second verse, same as the first...I'm 'enery the 8th I am, 'enery the 8th I am, I am....I got married to the widow next door, she's been married seven...times before, and every one was an 'enery 'ENERY! Wouldn't have a Willie or a Sam, NO SAM!, I'm her 8th old man I'm 'enery, 'enery the 8th I am...second verse, same as the first..."

          Comment


          • #82
            Sorry guys.. I know I will not convince Merlyn, nor he I.. But, I have been enjoying the conversation with Merlyn, first to see if I could get him out of simply throwing insults with no substance, and open up to a real discussion, and then since Tuesday, I have been enjoying a true discussion of viewpoints with him.. Oh, it's one that revolves around and around and gets no one convinced of any body else's opinion, like homosexuals and politics.. But, hey we have had a lot of those.. And the board is still slow about any other topics, as it tries to recover from being difficult to use for about 3 or 4 months.

            I felt like my answer to him would have again be revolving around what has been said, but summed up and with an attempt to say it a little differently hoping to see if I could get something that has yet to take hold, take hold if said differently..

            But, If you guys want us to stop.. I will not comment, at this time and wait until at least tomorrow at this time.. If I get three votes that tell me to end it now, before that time period, then I will.. If not I will continue.. Then just twiddle my thumbs in hopes something of interest will materialize in the near future..

            Sorry Merlyn.. Perhaps we will pick this up tomorrow.. Perhaps not.

            Comment


            • qwazse
              qwazse commented
              Editing a comment
              Sorry, I've found some of the program issues, like hashing out the difference between teach a topic and counseling an MB to be more engaging and relevant to the time of year. If I think of something that someone may take with them to the next campfire, I'll chime in. But until then, like Pack said .... Ding dong diddly um day.

          • #83
            By all means, as long as it is merely pointless, I suppose there's no real harm. So if this is your idea of fun, I'm good with it.

            Oo eeeeee oo ah ahhhhh, ting tang walla walla bing bang....

            Comment


            • #84
              I guess I can restart, seeing I didn’t get 3 people telling me to hang it up..

              Merlin:
              “Now all you need to do, moosetracker, is show that the peaceful black liberation activists (who filed lawsuits), and the peaceful gay rights activists (who filed lawsuits), are different from the peaceful atheist activists who file lawsuits. Where's the atheist equivalent of the black panthers?

              So basically the group that was totally ineffective..

              Moosetracker, I got about 10,000 public schools to drop BSA charters and end illegal discrimination against atheist students. I don't call that ineffective.”
              Ok let’s start with the 10,000 public schools you got to drop BSA.. I would say that someone who burns down a building might also argue they were effective at what they did.. The real determination is to figure out if this brought you closer to what your end game, or not.. Maybe it did, Maybe it didn’t because I get conflicting signals as to what your end game really is.. And so do others..

              If the homosexuals fighting for same sex marriage had done similar.. They would first had to fight to try to ban all the Federal and State benefits that come with marriage, joint tax returns, not paying death taxes when your spouse dies, continuing benefits from the military after you military spouse dies etc. etc. etc.. Wipe all these benefits out of being benefits of a married couple.. I mean to gain equality for their group then if they can’t have them no one can.. Seems legitimate, after all they are being denied the right to marry because of the thought that they were sinners and marriage was a holy institution.. Then after they had wiped all states & Federal benefits from marriage, thus by pretty much making it more of a religious ceremony, because accept for the religious blessing you didn’t get anything else out of it.. They demanded to be allowed the right to enter into a same-sex marriage union..

              Or for the blacks to do something similar.. (This is a little further stretch, as they weren’t fighting directly against church beliefs.. But, they would have to do something to force most of the whites to lose their jobs or get paid pittance for their work, so that things were on a more equal playing field for whites and blacks.. Then demand higher pay.. Or perhaps burn down the theater that didn’t allow them entrance, if they could not enter the theater, then no one could.. Equality for all.. Then ask for the theater to now allow blacks into the theater in desegregated seating..

              So if the homosexuals removed the government benefits from a marriage, do you really think they would have won the majority of the population over to their ultimate goal which was to legalize SS-marriage? I doubt it.. They would only have won the battle not the war..
              If blacks were successful in making it hard for anyone to earn a decent wage, or in burning down the theater.. Do you really think they would have been successful in the end game of desegregation and better job opportunities where they could earn a decent wage? Again I don’t think so..
              You simply don’t win over the nation to agree with your cause by acts that are not only hostile in nature, but also makes it harder for you to achieve your goal..

              So, if your ultimate goal was to have BSA open membership to atheists, why do you think getting rid of the schools (which would have been very accepting to atheists had the rules been changed) and moving them into being more dependent on Religious charters was a great way to move you closer to the ultimate goal.. I know it was the easier victory for you to achieve, but it made your ability to win the war that much more out of reach..

              Now for things like placing insulting signs to church goers on lawns across the street, or on billboards right next to the church.. Or in the middle of a Christmas display on the lawn.. Sure you can do it, Sure free speech and all that.. But, what does it do to get you closer to your ultimate goal? If you had used your piece of lawn in the middle of the Christmas scenes to do some positive promotion for your group and let the community know you might not believe in religion, but here is what you do believe in and list your positives, and that though you did not believe in religion you could be a good neighbor.. Then I would have said it was a good PR campaign.. Bravo for you.. But basically, it is just time spent to make sure that people get negative impressions of your group, and when the religious play victim over your actions, people have some nice memories of signage you have done and do not feel the religious are making things up..
              So do you really think that if the blacks put up a billboard next to a whites only school reading “Death to whitey” this would have gotten the schools desegregated faster??

              Suing a restaurant over a discount for bringing in a church bulletin on Sunday.. First off it wasn't discrimination of atheists only, people who don't know what they believe but don't classify themselves as atheists, stay at home Catholics, people who didn't get out of bed early enough, people who went to church but left there bulletin in the pew.. They all don't get the discount.. And as stated discounts have been for age, gender also at bars where they have women's night.. But anyway, aside from all that.. If you win, what do you win?.. Does your meal that cost you $15 become cheaper.. NO.. Actually you helped the restaurant, free publicity for them and they got lots of church goers now stopping in for brunch or lunch after church.. So you didn't hurt them any.. Church goers maybe, but that again would be a battle won, but gotten you further from winning the war.. And really they probably wont care much you put the church goers in contact with a restaurant that welcomes their business.

              So what is your ultimate goal.. I have definitely heard to get into the BSA, and I also heard to have people except you as moral upright citizens and neighbors, and to separate church & state.. Ok, you might have the separate church & state down to a working routine.. You won’t win over national support for it, but you can make that happen without it, and really for me personally, never took notice of the statues, and if you ever go the money changed, it probably wouldn’t effect me, I don’t study it under a microscope anyway.. But, it just doesn’t make you well liked.. So, for the other goals.. Well… flunk, flunk, big fat “F”.. In order to win national support, you got to get people to like you and see you as not doing anything to deserve the animosity you receive..

              Comment


              • Eagledad
                Eagledad commented
                Editing a comment
                Moose, it's not fair when you make up your own rules. There aren't three people watching. Barry

            • #85
              Well 2 answered packsaddle said continue on if you see this as fun.. qwazse might have been a vote to stop, but if it was it was kindof cryptic because all it said was I find other threads going on more interesting.. Here is you, but you didn't answer yes or no.. JoeBob, NJCubScouter, MattR, FredR, Pint.. And of course merlyn all have commented, any of them could have voted.. And I don't know if there are any other spectators.. I think a 24 hour timeframe to answer was decent.. And if Merlyn seems to be taking an uncustomary long time to answer.. So it may already be over, with me having the last word.

              Oh yeah and someone further up said they didn't see what Merlyn & I was argueing over.. Merlyn may have some other idea.. This is my take on it, form a timeline perspective..

              1) Started off just me stating my position relative to acceptance of atheists in BSA..
              2) Then turned into trying to reason with Merlyn..
              3) Then turned into trying to see if I could get Merlyn to have an open discussion to let me know why he thinks there is no reason for BSA to fear the actions of atheists bent on a negative campaign for religion.. (I was truly hoping to find, an organization that worked for positive action that most atheists sided with, but the radical fringe was currently out voicing their message..
              4) That being proven not to be the case, it has been to point out to Merlyn my viewpoint of positive activism to improve conditions of your group vs negative activism, and try to see if I could figure out from him why he thinks his group thinks they have positive activism similar to the civil rights movements of both the blacks & the homosexuals & I guess we could also add the undocumented immigrants as they seem to be slowly winning national support. Might not be able to agree, but it would be nice to understand where their head is at.
              Last edited by moosetracker; 09-01-2013, 12:49 PM.

              Comment


              • #86
                Ok let’s start with the 10,000 public schools you got to drop BSA.. I would say that someone who burns down a building might also argue they were effective at what they did.. The real determination is to figure out if this brought you closer to what your end game, or not..

                You don't define my "end game". Any public school illegally discriminating against atheists is a far more important and immediate problem than the BSA's petty bigotry. Stopping this discrimination took priority.

                But you'd have to respect the civil rights of atheists to understand that distinction.

                The rest of your post is pointless, because you totally discounted stopping illegal discrimination against atheists as an end in itself.

                So do you really think that if the blacks put up a billboard next to a whites only school reading “Death to whitey” this would have gotten the schools desegregated faster??

                So do you really think that an atheist billboard that shows an atheist and says "I can be good without god" is equivalent to “Death to whitey”?

                See, you don't really respect atheists at all. That's why I consider your "support" for atheists in the BSA to be worthless.

                Comment


                • #87
                  That one would have been ok..
                  I was more thinking about billboards with the following statements "CHRISTIANITY: Sadistic God; Useless Savior 30,000+ Versions of "Truth" Promotes Hate, Calls it "Love" or "MORMONISM:
                  God is A Space Alien Baptizes Dead People Big Money, Big Bigotry"

                  I'm not defining your end game.. I'm just trying to understand it.. As stated I have heard 3 things.. heard to get into the BSA, and I also heard to have people except you as moral upright citizens and neighbors, and to separate church & state..

                  The separate church and state, I get..

                  Maybe to get that one, you have to accept that it contradicts the goals for the other two, and make them unobtainable.. If your good with that, just go for it, and stop complaining that the other two are getting no traction..

                  The other stuff wasn't discrimination at all, just plain harassment.. There was nothing that would be gained by your group by doing it.. The billboards were not going to further you separation of church and state, and it definitely wasn't going to win your group respect for your anti-beliefs etc.. And the discount at the restaurant didn't have anything to do with excluding atheists as I stated..

                  OK, so that's that.. your only going for the Church/State thing.. The rest is just noise.. That was what I was trying to understand..

                  Comment


                  • #88
                    That one would have been ok..

                    That's the one you were bitching about earlier; I guess you never even bothered to learn what the billboard you were bitching about actually said.

                    The other stuff wasn't discrimination at all, just plain harassment.. There was nothing that would be gained by your group by doing it..

                    Wrong again. David Silverman (current head of American Atheists) has stated many times that AA increases its membership from their billboard campaigns.
                    And no, it's not "harassment", it's just a message you don't like. That's your problem.

                    Comment


                    • #89
                      No, I am commenting on billboards you put up that are A) around churches, B) disrespectful.. The one on the property was simply because it was on the property, proclaiming something disagreement with their ideas however tastefully done.. The message on the billboard is not the point on that one, even if it was an OK message, it would have ben NOT OK to have to thumb it at the enemy.. It would have been OK disconnected from any church, sitting on a highway, You want to talk about a message individually, the message statement is OK.. You want to talk about the message, and the need to place it ONLY where it can harass those you dislike, now we have a different discussion.. And yes, due to the placement and the fact that you placed it their with the intention to annoy or harass those you dislike.. Then not the message, but the placement of the message, is harassment..
                      Wrong again. David Silverman (current head of American Atheists) has stated many times that AA increases its membership from their billboard campaigns.
                      And no, it's not "harassment", it's just a message you don't like. That's your problem
                      .
                      Coining a favorite phrase from Merlyn.. You don't get to dictate to people what is and is not harassing.. So you bring in more angry disagreeable souls with the signs. I can name some very bad organizations that are currently successfully advertising for new recruits, but will just let you think about that may be, as naming them may be going over the top.. Doesn't mean that your PR of "We hate religion, and feel we have a right to be as nasty and disagreeable as possible" campaign is winning the support of the American majority, those who are religious or simply those who don't but believe to live and let live.. Including many many who also consider themselves atheists, but will loudly proclaim they are not part of your movement, and feel the need to apologize for it.

                      Many of these billboards were forced to be taken down, (or moved in the case of the one on the church property..) Due to being DISRESPECTFUL..
                      Last edited by moosetracker; 09-02-2013, 07:29 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #90
                        No, I am commenting on billboards you put up that are A) around churches, B) disrespectful.. The one on the property was simply because it was on the property, proclaiming something disagreement with their ideas however tastefully done.. The message on the billboard is not the point on that one, even if it was an OK message, it would have ben NOT OK to have to thumb it at the enemy..

                        Which, as I already told you, was not the decision of the atheist group. The billboard company came up with that suggested spot along with 6 other spots. Yet you keep wanting to dishonestly blame the atheists as if they did it deliberately, and you keep lying about atheists.

                        Coining a favorite phrase from Merlyn.. You don't get to dictate to people what is and is not harassing..

                        For legal purposes, yes, a billboard can't be harassing. You can whine and say it is, but that won't support a lawsuit.

                        Many of these billboards were forced to be taken down, (or moved in the case of the one on the church property..) Due to being DISRESPECTFUL.

                        So what?

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X