Rooster7

Just to be clear For those taking offense, true believers (a.k.a. Christians) do not condemn anyone. In fact, our faith is rather simple. We claim to believe in the God of the Bible and embrace His Son, Jesus not only as Lord (great teacher and philosopher), but as Savior. If you have no reason to believe that you will be judged, then I suppose thats a good thing. However, my faith tells me that we (all of us) are in desperate need of a Savior that we must humbly bow down and accept the gift laid before us if we want to see God that gift being Jesus Christ and His work on the cro

SemperParatus, I believe Jesus died for all men. But not all men will receive Jesus. With that said, Im not sure what your point is concerning the Pharisees and Sadducees. He certainly did not respect them. 32"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. 34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn " 'a man against his father, a daughter agains

I agree with Ed. Its important to understand and note the definition of words. While Jesus implores us to love one another, we are not exhorted to accept all people and ideas in high regard. SemperParatus, How do you reconcile - Jesus calls you to respect (and love) everyone, even when they offend you, disrespect you, or cause you far worse harm. As compared to Jesus words in these verses: But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce

SemperParatus is exactly right. In order for anyone to uplift Jesus as a great teacher or philosopher, and not recognize him as God, one must completely ignore the claims He made about himself. And just to clarify, I doubt that SemperParatus is offended. I know Im not. Im just dumb-founded that folks cannot see the simple truth. DanKroh, So, when some well-meaning Jew wishes me a Happy Hanukkah, I have a right to be offended? I should berate and beseech him to start using the more generic and politically friendly Happy Holidays? Why would someone be offended

DanKroh, You can believe in whatever you want. Im merely saying that your acknowledgement of Jesus as a great teacher and philosopher, but not as Gods son is incredibly silly. Its akin to saying that I believe in the planets and stars, but not the Earth and Sun. It simply does not make sense to acknowledge one without the other. Why do you suggest that non-Christians will be, or ought to be, offended when others wish them a "Merry Christmas"? Why do you consider this greeting an insult to non-Christians, when almost universally throughout this country, people warmly accept the

DanKroh And why can't I celebrate the beauty of his life just because I do not accept that he was divine? That's like saying that because I'm not black, I can't celebrate MLK Jr. Day. To me, Jesus was a great man who was certainly touched by God. To you, he was/is the Son of God. You are entitled to your belief, just as I am entitled to mine. Yes, we are. But use some common sense here. Your comparison to MLK Jr. is amazingly lacking. Jesus proclaimed that no one could come to the Father except through Him. He made it clear in many different ways, if you want salvation, you must

DanKroh, Personally, I have no problem with Christmas. I celebrate it like I do any other day of recognition for the life of a great teacher and philosopher. It's right up there with MLK Jr. Day in my book, and President's Day. Your statement is truly a foolish one. Jesus Christ was either who he said he was, or he was a mad man. If he is not who he said he was; theres no reason to recognize Christmas. Christians and others, who present Jesus as merely a great teacher and/or philosopher, have not examined His life or His message. They are attempting to intellectualize Christ as

Ronvo, Okay...so you're "a separation of church and state guy". I'm not entirely sure what that means outside of the context of purported Constitutional arguments. Regardless, it seems to me, it has no meaning whatsoever in regard to Scouting. What does the "separation of church and state" have to do with a private organization's goals of mentoring young boys? And Merlyn, I already know your response (i.e., the BSA dishonestly solicits the support of public entities blah, blah, blah, or something along those lines), so please spare us.

A group of foxes is a skulk. I'm not sure what you thought it was, but you sure make it sound a lot more sinister. And my reference was to boys in general, not just your son. Perhaps you're right. Our experiences may be quite different. I remember my teenaged years. Most of the time, when I thought about girls it didn't involve outdoor adventure and service projects. However, no matter how undisciplined my thoughts were, somehow I doubt I was in the minority...at least among the male population. Okay, so we've established that "scream" and "demand", rubs you the wrong way. How

Hunt, Have you stooped to baiting? I thought we were engaged in a thoughtful debate. Let me clarify As to the high moral standards of the boys you know verses the ones I know please. Im sure the boys we know are very similar. Now, you may choose to see things one way, and I another but lets not compare children. Thats just a little tacky. When I wrote scream, I did not intend folks to take it literally. It was meant to convey that folks believe passionately that they have a right to demand the local option, because peoples convictions on these issues vary from troop

In reference to the Anne Frank analogy, a third option exists. Dont reveal her location and be truthful about it. Of course, there are few men that I know that could or would do this, because the end result would likely be their own execution. Morally right by human standards, and morally right by Gods standards, are two separate things. Certainly we can sympathize with the telling of a lie in order to save innocent people and/or ourselves from suffering evil at the hands of others but that doesnt make it morally right. It just makes it understandable.

Hunt, How old is your son? 15? 16? My point Asking the boys (most notably those 15 and older) if theyd like to see girls introduced into the BSA (i.e. would you like a teenaged girl or two sleeping in the tent next to yours), is akin to asking a fox if hed consider inviting a few hens into his skulk. The resulting answer is predictable, but it doesnt guarantee a nice outcome especially for the hens. As to god and gays while many here have boldly stated that these issues are relatively minor in their impact, I doubt if anyone can truly gage and verify such a remark beyo

Regards "don't ask, don't tell", my district professional told me that it is the official BSA policy. For what it's worth. No offense, but its not worth much. If the only way a policy can be verified as official is through word of mouth (i.e. my district professional told me, or at a council meeting, blah, blah, blah, or something else along those lines), then I have no confidence in it. If its official policy, then it can be found in writing somewhere. Otherwise, its a bunch of conjectureusually to support somebody elses idea of what official policy should be, vice the reality.

National never said that they wanted all the gays and atheists weeded out. Well, yeah, they did. Are you insinuating that they do not care if folks lied or slipped through the application process? Your slant seems to be, they dont really careas if these BSA policies are merely placeboes, to keep their conservative base happy. Heres my take. They dont openly encourage members to weed out gays and atheistsnot because they dont care, but because theyre more fearful of the witch-hunts that such encouragement might generate. In short, your conclusion is akin to saying; the police d

It will change; just take some more time. Girls will be in the BSA at all levels (name will probably be changed to Scouting USA or some such) Homophobia will become a non-issue. Not sure what to predict about Reverence. Redefined? Dropped? Replaced? And the rainbow coalition marches on... If girls are allowed to join the BSA, and thus the organization is renamed appropriately, it will be a sad day. Not because girls don't deserve to have access to such a fine organization - But because an organization uniquely designed to capture the hearts of boys will no longer exist.

I think it was a Good News Bible Club that caused the end of so-called "backpack mail" in my locality. The School Board wanted to exclude the Bible Club's mailings--because they were too evangelistic, I guess, and they learned that the only way to do that was to ban "backpack mail" from essentially all outside organizations, including Scouting. What is too evangelistic? And, who gets to decide that? Evidently, this local school board is so against the free exercise of religious speech; they are willing to censor all non-school related materials. Inappropriate materials aside (i.e

Heres another thing of which I remain unconvinced... that federal judges make the best safeguards against travesties of injustice, especially those perpetrated against the law abiding people of the United States. You say - we should remain a nation of laws. Thats great. I agree - whenever individuals have direct control of the rights of another, there is plenty of room for error and abuse. However, before we go after those in military for taking the law in their own hands, lets tidy up the Supreme Court. Theyve been taking the law in their own hands for the last 40 plus years. I realize

LongHaul, Did I overreact? Its not my goal to make you my enemy to make unnecessary and harsh distinctions. You are probably a great guy, who loves his family and neighbors. Just the same, I am tired of defending our country. Despite having a long history of reaching out to other nations and being the victim of heinous terrorists acts, America is portrayed as the victimizer vice the victim. This I can barely tolerant from the French. Yet, when my own countrymen fuel the fires, I tend to implode. So, while I am sorry that I may have come off as someone whose one step away from the

I dont think I quite said what you implied. Nonetheless, I do understand the call for torture, given the nature of our enemy, the situation in Iraq, and the terror that they seek to inflict upon our nation. Im not advocating it. In terms of its morality, Im really not sure what I believe. But I understand why our nation might employ it. Furthermore, I think what some folks call torture is a real stretch. A case in point is the story shared by BrentAllen about the Captain firing his sidearm.

As I previously indicated, I do believe in absolute moral standards those established by the God of the Bible. However, here are some disclaimers: 1) I am not always able to discern what Gods will is for a given situation. While I believe in Gods perfect law, I do not always understand how and when it should be applied. 2) While I do not believe in moral relativism, circumstances and purpose do define the nature of an act. That is to say, while I do not believe its wrong to shoot and kill a deer for food. I do believe its wrong to shoot a deer in its legs for sport. 3) Gi

We waited patiently for nearly 30 years after Munich, for the Muslim world to denounce terrorism and to purge their ranks of the despicable fiends that perpetrate and spread such violence. While we waited, these radicals have grown significantly in number, dramatically increased their influence throughout the Middle East and other areas of the world, and steadily increased the scope and frequency of their attacks. Most of the free world wants to act like an ostrich. We may not have as many allies as Id like but Im convinced that we need to act today. By the time the French realize theres

I have had my second cup of coffee and my opinion remains the same. This debate is no longer talking about the rightness or wrongness of torture. Its talking about the rightness or wrongness of America and how it reacted to 9-11. LongHauls words ring hollow to me. Hes implying that we conducted ourselves as nation in such a way that the 9-11 attack warrants some kind of self-examination to determine whether or not their anger was justifiable. His words are ridiculous and insulting to the millions of Americans who have built this nation. Furthermore, intentional or not, they serve to en

LongHaul, Let me restate my last post in more direct language. This is one time I think may have been too polite. So to be more to the point Your views disgust me. You cannot justify 9-11. Your words, and others who preach the same garbage, are only encouraging our enemies and fueling their twisted minds to do more.

LongHaul, I dont believe the non-sense that you are spewing about our country. But since you do, I think you have to seriously ask yourself, How can I remain a citizen of such a morally deficient nation? May I suggest that you take a long haul down the road perhaps to one of those Middle Eastern countries that you seem to admire so much? Im sure you would be welcomed warmly. Certainly, there must be at least one nation in that area of the world that you find more acceptable than "The Great Satan" - at least, so your words seem to indicate.

Ironically, I do believe in absolute moral standards. Im just not sure how capable I am at meeting those standards 24/7 no matter what the circumstance might be.