aquaticeagle

"Yes Communism wasn't the only reason for mass murder throughout history. What does that prove?" - TheScout It proves that you don't know how to make an example that's relative.

You are assuming that my father is doing nothing. I never said that. My father was simply asking for my opinion on the issue and I in turn was asking for other people's opinions. Anything wrong with that? My father has already voiced his opinion to the CM and the last I heard he was on his way to talk to the charter representative.

"What if your heart tells you to be a pedophile?" If you'll read what I've been posting here, you'll see that I've written several times that when a belief involves harming anyone it is not okay. "Should we let them live the lie that being gay is OK?" Explain to me why being gay is unacceptable and wrong. "You make some broad statements that can't be backed up, aquaticeagle, and it sounds like you have an agenda. You also seem to be hung up on the "physically strong" part of the Oath." What statements have I made that can't be backed up? Can you post some examples so t

Those scouts are being harmed because they worked their butts off to make the popcorn season incredibly successful and now they have to pay for things that should already be covered. They are working very hard to pay their own way through popcorn sales and are not seeing any of the benefits from it. When a child works hard to earn some money and puts it away in his piggy-bank, it is certainly any adult's business if they see the parent break that piggy-bank open and steal their child's money.

You're right Gern and I feel the same way about that as I do about the "Don't ask don't tell" policy of the US military. That's ridiculous. As I said before, that is only teaching children that it's okay to lie to themselves and others and deny their true personality.

What is not clean about being a homosexual? How is it any less clean than being straight? The BSA conducts criminal and background checks for a reason. Of course people who harm others in any way should not be allowed to participate in youth organizations but that is simply because they bring harm to others. A person does not harm others by being homosexual. By excluding gays the BSA is telling the youth of America that it is not okay to be yourself and be true to your heart.

"Is this the behavior of all gay men? No, it isn't. But, do you want to play the odds with your child? Do you also want to play the odds with your gay friends and the accusations that could be made against them?" Anyone who puts their child into ANY youth organization with ANY adult leadership is playing the odds. Where is the research done that says that the odds of your child encountering a pedophile are any higher with a gay adult than with a straight one? If that research doesn't exist or says otherwise then that argument has no substance. The odds of molestation or abuse are not any

I will never be happy about ANYBODY being excluded from the BSA. I think everyone should have the opportunities that Boy Scouts have because I know that those opportunities made me what I am today. Taking the alcohol and tobacco part out of the "physically fit" part would definitely make the BSA seem less hypocritical. When you get down to it though, I think that the physically fit and morally straight parts of the Oath are defined just fine. I think scouts should avoid smoking or drinking as best they can. I also think that as "morally straight" is defined by the Boy Scouts is perfe

Why am I concerned? Why do I have to be personally involved in the pack to be concerned about the welfare of their boys? If someone is using funds for things other than the scouts or the program then anyone who knows about it should be concerned. That is what the worry is here. I have seen a lot of replies that makes sense to me here. Not all packs have enough money from fund-raising to cover all of the costs and sometimes scout families have to help out. That doesn't seem to be the case with the pack in question though. The account should have plenty in it to cover these costs but still scout

I agree GernBlansten. The hypocrisy problem is the unequal treatment enforcement of the Oath. "And if the BSA moved to strict enforcement, many of us would be gone. The reality is, BSA has no choice...their strings are being pulled by very large and very rich outside organizations." They do have a choice. They could set the example as a leading youth organization. I don't want the BSA to kick out smokers or those who drink alcohol because I don't think that those things make someone a bad person. But if they are going to kick out gays because of a very ambiguous definition and allow

"I teach my children (7 and 10) about Jesus because as a parent that is my job. Whether or not they choose to believe or make a profession of faith in Christ is theirs. That is not removing or hindering any of their rights, it is the basis of faith and freedom, that they will see what is right and choose to follow it." I don't see anything wrong with that. As I said above I think it's important that we teach our children about religion but not okay to teach them which one to believe. Let them learn about all of them and when they are mature enough to make the decision for themselves then

"Hey, what if we limit participation in this thread to only those who assert they are willing to change their opinion on this topic based on the other sides argument?" I'm certainly willing to agree to that. I guess you're suggesting this because of some of the persistence on this thread. For my part of that, it's not about being stubborn and not changing my opinion. It's about being persistent in wanting someone to pay attention to what the thread is about and stop changing the subject. I'm willing to change my opinion if someone can explain to me why it's okay for the BSA to pick a

"I don't think it is hypocrisy as much as it is a different level of standards. We can not smoke or drink at Scout events - so they ARE keeping to some of their requirements. You could argue that the BSA has an uneven level of measurement, but not pure hypocrisy." Here is the problem. In the BSA definition of "physically strong" it is very specific in saying that alcohol, tobacco and illegal drugs should be avoided. Taking part in any of those is obviously NOT avoiding them and clearly would be a violation of the Scout Oath. "Morally straight" is NOT defined by the Scout Oath as having an

"So this Pack sell a ton of popcorn. Where do the profits go from the popcorn sale? Does this Pack have a massive bank account?" That's really the question of the day. There should have been plenty of money to cover these things but there isn't.

Cardinal: I would be happy if the BSA would open membership to people from all walks of life. A good citizen should not be defined by their sexuality or religion. I would be happy if the BSA would not pick and choose which parts of their policy they wish to observe. How can one justify the enforcing of one part of a policy but ignoring the others? I am against the BSA banning homosexuals but the issue here is the hypocrisy of the BSA in enforcing its policies. I'm going to bed now but I will continue this tomorrow.

Honestly we shouldn't be teaching children which side of politics is right or wrong any more than we should teach the same about religion. It is a subject that they need to decide on for themselves. We should teach them what democracy and communism are though.

"I did. It says harmful smoking and alcohol. I've had some of each. Haven't been harmed." You obviously either haven't read what I've written or you aren't understanding it. I am NOT debating whether or not smoking and drinking is right or wrong. I am at loss as to how to make this any clearer to you. Cardinal gets it. Why don't you?

Under the definition of right I would include "anything that does no harm to others". Not allowing someone to think for themselves is harmful by most definitions.

Thank you Cardinal for taking the time to read what was originally written and taking the time to understand it. It really helps the conversation. "To answer your original question: my opinion is that the BSA is never going to ban those who smoke or drink any alcohol.At least not those adults who do it outside of scouting." I don't think they will either. Don't you think that is hypocritical?

"I've had a many drinks in my time and a few smokes in my time. I feel fine." Do I seriously need to restate what I've already said a few times? I NEVER said there is anything wrong with drinking or smoking. Not once on this thread have I said that. At all. Not once. I hate repeating myself but it's obviously necessary. Please read what I wrote. I will even repost it right here just to make it easier for you. So the BSA Legal website defends the BSA position of banning homosexuals from membership by saying that it violates the "morally straight" portion of the

"Teaching a child something right does not violate free will." When the child is not allowed to think for themselves and is told that there is only one way to believe and that all others are nonsense...that IS violating free will and free thinking. I don't know of a better definition really.

Okay TheScout. Everybody on this thread needs to go back and read what the original post by me says. I DID not define "physically strong" as: "Take care of your body so that it will serve you well for an entire lifetime. That means eating nutritious foods, getting enough sleep, and exercising regularly to build strength and endurance. it also means avoiding harmful drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and anything else that can harm your health." That was the BSA definition. That is what I posted it and why I put quotation marks around it. My entire point is that if the BSA defines "physically s

Cardinal, please pay attention to the thread. What you just incorrectly said that I stated, I did not state at all. That was a quote from BSA literature. Hence the quotation marks around it. That was not my definition. Providing that definition from BSA was the entire point of this post. I'll say it again. The BSA, not me, defined "physically strong" as: "Take care of your body so that it will serve you well for an entire lifetime. That means eating nutritious foods, getting enough sleep, and exercising regularly to build strength and endurance. it also means avoiding harmful drugs, alcoh

"Some religions hold that theirs is the only true faith and that it is the parents duty to teach their child that." If they want to do that then they will but that doesn't make it right. When the free will and free thinking are violated, the situation is no longer right but is obviously wrong.

"Smoking and drinking doesn't make one not physically strong." No they aren't. If you'll notice in my original post in this thread, the BSA specifies under "Physically Strong" that scouts should avoid alcohol, drugs and tobacco. That is their specification, not mine.