AZMike

"We use these: http://www.stanleytools.com/default.asp?CATEGORY=ZAG+ROLLING+WORK&TYPE=PRODUCT&PARTNUMBER=020800R&SDesc=FatMax%26%23174%3B+4%2Din%2D1+Mobile+Work+Station Utensils & Silverware fit in the partitioned sections on the top. Pots & larger items go in the bin on the bottom. The wheels are heavy duty & roll over rough ground. Handles collapse for storage in the trailer." infoscouter, I bought one of these as a personal family chuckbox on your recommendation and like it a lot. Thanks!

""So are we dealing with the very vocal minority??? " I'd have to say so, yes. Polls pretty consistently show the country is pretty well split nearly 50/50 on the issue of gay marriage, with more recent polls showing a gradual trend toward acceptance. Yet, every time it's makes it to the ballot, voters have so far rejected the legality of the concept. This is mainly because at best, maybe 60% of eligible voters actually excercise their right to do so. In this case, 50.1% of that 60%, or 30.5% of all voters can decide an issue,(or decide who gets elected.) So, even though a plurlity

Hopefully, the theme wasn't "Renounce the Great Satan, America as a Hostage in the Basement of the U.S. Embassy." Wow. I had no idea that Iran was the planned site.

kros17, as an exiled Nigerian prince who also has access to secret bank accounts that only to be needing a small amount of funds to secure vast dollars resources, may I be so forward as to suggest that my country's bank accounts are the perfect investment resource for the vast sums of wealthiness that your firm, (insert firm name here), can be the only one to make a perfect financial match?

"Well according to google there are 4 states with issues on the ballot for November. They are Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington. I guess its just a matter of waiting to see what the voters have to say this time around." The Minnesota case is unusual in that it will allow the voters to decide whether the current statutory declaration of marriage as between a man and a woman should be included as an amendment to the state constitution - this is expressly to prevent the rule by judicial activism that has sought to eliminate the will of the electorate. The legislature prov

Are you talking about state recognition of your marriage as an inalienable right (with the attendant economic benefits) by issuing a marriage license, the right to compel a JoP or a religious denomination to conduct a marriage ceremony, or what? Does being an "inalienable right" mean the state cannot place any restrictions on it (underage marriages, # of people involved, a woman and her cat, two cousins, a guy and an inanimate object, two dudes, etc.)?

"I am glad I do not live in AZ. during the summer." You don't have to shovel heat! Besides, if it wasn't for the heat, we'd be more overcrowded than Los Angeles... There's still lots to do in the summer in the Valley and around the state (it's cooler up in Northern AZ, too - as you go north in latitude, you go up in average elevation in Arizona). Lots of lake and river trips, Flagstaff, the Canyon, etc.

WasE61: "The Catholic Church did not formally embrace Aquina's writings as theological doctrine for some 600 years AFTER his death. I submit, that this adoption is more of a populist acceptance by the Church due to social-political pressures, rather than some divine revelation. " Say what now? St. Thomas Aquinas's writings (which are many, and varied, and embrace far more than theories of Natural Law) were formally adopted well before the 600 year mark. The Church tends to move very slowly on issues that impact doctrine, and there was a great deal of discussion and disagreeme

(edited to move to spin-off thread on Natural Law)(This message has been edited by AZMike)

The opinions of the polled American public en masse matter less, perhaps, than the opinions of those who actually exercise their franchise. Those who are willing to legally vote seem to have a decisive opinion on the matter.

"AZMike, assuming their church is also a CO, if that CO has a positive view toward them, I'm guessing they'll be BSA adult members. Like NJ says, I am not aware of anything in the policy that indicates otherwise. So, are you ever going to answer any of my questions?" Re the incest queston, I wasn't asking about the BSA policy, I was asking if you would be comfortable with them in Scouting. Will you answer that question, or duck? I did answer your question, as I said on another thread. My answer was, "I don't know." When is that not an acceptable response? I don't have the

NJ: "AZMike, I have a question for you about your hypothetical adult brother and sister (or brother and brother) openly living together in a sexual relationship: Are you aware of any national BSA policy that prevents them from being adult leaders? I'm not. I don't think there is one. I don't think there needs to be one, because the local unit's authority to select it's leaders takes care of it. My guess is that 100 percent of local units would, and will continue to, choose not to have a leader in that situation. My guess also is that if given the option, somewhere less than 100 percent (

Would incestuous relationships also be okay, as long as the participants are both consenting adults? There are some concerns about genetic disorders from the offspring of consanguine intercourse, so let's presume that either 24 year old brother and 26 year old sister are married but the brother had a vasectomy, or the husband is a 25 year old male and his mother is post-menopausal and they're in a committed relationship, or to make it easier, a 25 year old man and his 32 year old brother. They don't talk about their sex lives, but they're "out" and don't want to hide the fact that

From a follow-up story: He also said he and his partner attend Our Lady of Lourdes and it is widely known that they are gay. He contacted Scouting officials in part, he said, because he was no longer comfortable hiding his sexual preference in his role with the Boy Scouts when he was open about it everywhere else, including at Humana, where he has been involved in an organization of gay and lesbian employees. I am finding it increasingly difficult to keep a low profile and stay in the closet with the Boy Scouts, he said in a June 22 letter. . . Catholic officials initially

"Your bizarre accusations that most atheists are genocidal is a good example why." I don't think most atheists are genocidal. I think the majority of atheist leaders of countries have been democidal, as the stats show. The odd atheist president of a western country is unlikely to be able to slaughter significant portions of his population (with the exception of abortion), even if he wanted to, thanks to the stability of western political systems. Mostly. The comment was in reference to why most people don't trust atheists as political leaders.

Merlyn: "There's one OUT atheist in congress (Rep. Pete Stark of CA), but according to the Secular Coalition's poll of congress, there are 28 members of congress "who do not personally believe in a higher power" (a little over 5%)." So you have 28 members of Congress who don't have the courage to announce their convictions? This is according to the Secular Coalition, who claims they did a secret poll and won't announce their names as they don't want to "out" any secret atheists. As only 6 members of Congress refused to respond to respond to a request to identify their religious beli

My best recollection, from a biography of Ayn Rand I read a long time ago, was that she had an "open marriage," or partially-open marriage, and insisted on the right to have sex with her acolytes. I can't remember if she offered the same privilege to her spouse. Not my choice of a philosopher, and I understand Ryan picked some parts of her philosophy while discarding the others. Rand was about as objectionable as Alinsky, I guess.

packsaddle: "It's kind of like that question I asked AZMike in the other thread which he seems not to want to answer, the one related to health care and eugenics. I get that people don't like certain ideas. I'd just like to understand the reasoning for their dislike. " packsaddle, I gave up on answering your question, convoluted as it was, as you refused to answer mine, since you got upset when I asked you how you squared your views with the Scout Oath and Law, declaring that you didn't have to explain your religious views to me (a post you have since edited, I note, to remove that commen

"It also interests me that his income rose so dramatically. I find it fascinatin' that fellows who take a public service job for relatively modest wages seem to do so well for themselves." I think that's because of the income from his wife. Ryan's bishop has some interesting comments on whether Ryan's economic beliefs are "Catholic" or not: http://www.madisoncatholicherald.org/bishopscolumns/3366-bishop-column.html

Paul Ryan released his tax returns today - nice to read that: "The Ryans donated $12,991 to charity in 2011, and $2,600 to charity in 2010. Those contributions went to such groups as the Boy Scouts of America, Junior Achievement, and Women and Childrens Horizons, according to the campaign."

"Check out County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1989). And, since no other religion was allowed to offer prayers, yes, it IS a special privilege. " If no other religion was allowed to offer prayers, in that specific case, sure. The use of public prayer in other circumstances I described, no problem. Merlyn": "Atheism is no different. That would also be state control of religion." So, in your opinion, atheism is a religion? Merlyn: "It isn't a religion, but it's still covered by the first amendment. Trinitarianism isn't a religion, but that's covere

"What's that got to do with Christian special privilege? Having the city council open each meeting with a prayer from your religion is a special privilege (and illegal), not a right. " No, it's not illegal, nor is it a special privilege. Every session of Congress opens like that. America is still largely a country marked by religious observance, If your argument is correct, then all the sessions and all the legislation passed is illegal and presumably invalid. As American culture is largely religious and believes in God (lack of belief in God is about 7%, per Gallup) it seems appropr

"Well, I wasn't TALKING about constitutional rights; I was talking about special privileges. Some Christians whine when e.g. a city council has to stop opening meetings with the lord's prayer." Some atheists whine about city councils opening a meeting with any prayer. I have no problem with either an interfaith prayer, or preferably, rotating chaplaincy so different faiths can begin the invocation. "What do you think about US states that say atheists can't hold public office, or Indonesia imprisoning people for stating they're atheists?" Which U.S. states have laws against at

"Yes, I am a member. Here is one of those old threads: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=20866#id_213050" That thread link appears to be dead. So in the absence of a preserved thread, would you be kind enough to discuss how you reconcile the ideals of scouting with your own atheism? "In NC a few years back a voter registrar informed me that in NC, you can't vote if you don't believe in God. I think that has changed since then though. But it was recent enough to be within my lifetime." How would he know that? Did you have to recite the Lord's Pra

Blasphemy laws are inherently a religious act, since you need to set a religious standard for prosecution. No more so than "Hate speech laws," yes? You can recognize that some speech is offensive to others without holding to the tenets of that or any religion. I personally don't agree with blasphemy laws as an American. "What's that got to do with my statement about losing special privileges?" I don't think constitutional rights (in the U.S., at least) constitute "special privileges." "What do you think about US states that say atheists can't hold public office, or Indon