ScoutParent

A law or rule sanctioning such a thing is a "law respecting establishment of religion." The Supreme Court isn't always right, but they are right on this. What did you base your decision that they are right about this on? How do you reconcile this decision with the right to exercise clause?

"Zorn, lets say I agree with you, what is the remedy?" Respect for the "right to exercise" clause as well as the "establishment clause", "freedom of speech" being observed by all groups. People of all religious faiths standing up for God. Teaching our children that peer pressure exists and how to stand for their beliefs with pride.

Merlyn, What's your objection to government refunding school tax dollars to parents who chose not to use the government "atheist" schools in favor of private schools that fit more closely with their personal ideals? Further, your interpretation of the basis for the findings on the cases determining the constitutionality of teaching evolution and Creation as theories of evolution was inaccurate and misleading. What's your objection to groups having fellowship with people of similiar beliefs? Why don't you start some atheist organizations with the purported millions rather than disr

"When the court has addressed this issue, they found that teaching creationism is not teaching science, but just teaching religion masquerading as science. They also found that the government's interest in teaching *real* science to students is a compelling state interest that is not being done to purposely ridicule or subvert students' religious views, which makes it quite legal for public schools to teach subjects that may, incidentally, contradict various religious teachings." Amazing how you can write that and find nothing wrong with it but continue to find objection to the word God i

As I wrote earlier: "Merlyn, as it stands now the public school system is reduced to teaching in totally secular terms, completely unfair to the nation's majority that have religious beliefs. We'll use your example of evolution, by ignoring creation, you are giving credence to the theory of evolution. Evolution is a direct contradition to many religious beliefs. Schools have no problem teaching ideas from naturalists and humanists so yes, they definitely should add ideas from other perspectives. A better solution yet would be for atheist organizations to stop fighting school vouchers so p

"Do my eyes deceive me? Can it be that this thread has finally wound its way back to an issue that actually has something to do with the Boy Scouts of America?" The entire thread has something to do with BSA and how you incorporate the Scouting Ideals into your daily life. "Duty to God", "Morally Straight", "A Scout is Brave", "A Scout is Clean" and "A Scout is Reverent". If you don't subscribe to these ideals then you should consider starting a group that will reflect your ideals. If the problems are still there then you can work on improving it in your group without denigratin

Why not start another youth organization that more closely fits your ideals? I think that would be more constructive than demeaning this one.

"I guess you don't understand real religious freedom; I'm certainly free to NOT follow any religion, right? It would be unconstitutional to pass a law requiring that all citizens belong to some religion, right? It would be unconstitutional to pass a law requiring all citizens to believe in one (or more) gods, right?" Yes, you certainly are free to NONBELIEVE in anything you choose. What you can't do is try to impose that idea on the majority of people who disagree with you. "I seem to have missed where you cited cases where atheists are trying to prevent religious believers fr

FirstPusk writes the following: "Among them the very beginning of life hundreds of millions of years ago. But in the real world that is how things work. Our minds solve one problem but see in the solution a dozen more difficult questions to ponder. Such is science. You read too much fictional science and not enough of the real thing. If you understood evolution, you would know that at this time there is no viable scientific alternative. But then again, according to you I am not a reasoning or logical person." FirstPusk, please reread what you wrote. I am not as sensitive as you a

"American Atheist labors on behalf of the civil rights of these non-believers who defend the right to freedom from religion." Merlyn's Response "And?" I guess you don't understand that no where in the consitution is it expressed that you or any member of any religious group has a right to freedom from religon--just freedom of religion--the denial of all religious beliefs can not qualify as a religion. Oh, my religion is no religion--makes little sense Merlyn, surely you see that. Merlyn further writes: "How, exactly, does an atheist group defending the rights of athei

2 liter soda bottles for terrariums or rockets. Metal candy tins for pocket first aid kits. Film cannisters hold dryer lint, wood shavings, etc for fire starting. Any interesting items for "Genius Kits" Have kits with all sorts of interesting items--have groups of boys make a useful item out of it Cardboard boxes to make games. Toilet paper rolls cut in increments and covered make napkin rings for blue and gold. Scraps of material, feathers, pinecones, coat hangers, wood scraps all come in handy for craft projects.

Audit reports for the BSA can be found easily on the internet.

So this exact science of evolution starts in the middle and that's ok with you? Whereas creation as related to us in Genesis starts with God creating the heavens and earth. "Abiogenisis is a theory that certain low forms of living matter can come from non-living material." Sounds strikingly similiar to how God created Adam from the dust of the earth to me. "The validity of evolution does not rely on a definitive answer of your question." Just say I throw you the bone and give you that point, what about the missing link (another insignificant item in the equation

Scouts out there---what do you like best about your Scoutmaster, Assistant Scoutmaster, SPL, PL?

Merlyn writes: "And exactly who is trying to take this away? Be specific; removing 'under god' from the pledge or official congressional chaplains does nothing to remove your religious rights." Why, your fellow non believers of course! From www.atheists.org: "We are aware that in legal issues concerning "religious liberty", there are those affected to have no religious beliefs whatsoever. American Atheist labors on behalf of the civil rights of these non-believers who defend the right to freedom from religion." I've read a number of websites concerning atheist issues rece

And the first organisms that started this evolutionary chain came from...?

Venturer2002, you're right; you can't exclude religion from a person's life just because he/she is in school. That's exactly what atheists would like to have happen; remove all traces of God. Not exactly demonstrating tolerance to other people's views, is it? Slontwoovy; another great way of saying the same thing. It's our responsibility to speak up when other's would try to take away a constitutional right, freedom of religon. Now I know we'll hear more about the lemon law used to test it but even the justices refuse to embrace such nonsense anymore. The intent was clear in

Venturer2002, you're right; you can't exclude religion from a person's life just because he/she is in school. That's exactly what atheists would like to have happen; remove all traces of God. Not exactly demonstrating tolerance to other people's views, is it? Slontwoovy; another great way of saying the same thing. It's our responsibility to speak up when other's would try to take away a constitutional right, freedom of religon. Now I know we'll hear more about the lemon law used to test it but even the justices refuse to embrace such nonsense anymore. The intent was clear in

"However, atheism is another belief system in which the practitioner KNOWS that there is no deity" Let's be accurate, shall we, try ASSUMES, BELIEVES, SUPPOSES. An atheist that "KNOWS" is surely not going on logic, so what could they be basing it on, FAITH? I was curious why you didn't give Umberto Eco credit for more than the post script the other day--such a large part of your post was his verbatim. PS I understood your insinuation in the post scrip, just wanted to see if you would stand behind your words.

As I was reading these posts today, it became apparent that we, the people who believe in "Duty to God" and "A Scout is Reverent" need to begin advocating those ideals. By advocacy, I mean take the time to get your beliefs and principles known. Write a letter to every politician in your area, to your congressmen, President of the U.S., etc. Send letters to corporations in your area that let them know how valuable their contribution to the BSA would be to you and your family. Let those entities that no longer support the BSA in your area know how your support will no longer be available to

"Doesn't Merlyn's presence here represent the very essence of the strength of our system?" No, not really. If this was a forum for those interested in discussing the government of our country, or for debating religious principles only, then yes it would; but the fact is this is a forum for Scouters and Merlyn has clearly shown that he is not interested in the scouting programs. Why is it that if pagans, atheists, satanists want the right to express themselves, we are supposed to sit back quietly but when people who feel a Duty to God want the same right, we are considered bigotted

Packsaddle, Please click on Merlyn's posts and read them. You will find there, in his own words that he has no interest in the scouting program; that he is an atheist and that his interest is in promoting the rights of atheists. It is perfectly within Merlyn's right to be an atheist; I'm not debating that. What I am questioning is the appropriateness of his continued participation in a forum that is for people of an organization that holds religious principles that include a duty to God and for people that share an interest in the BSA program.

Sort of seems like you forget that part about free exercise of religious beliefs, Merlyn. What I don't really understand is why you feel it is appropriate for you to enter into debate on a board that is connected to an organization that clearly hold different religious beliefs from your own? When you have no interest in the organization otherwise, it seems one can conclude you are interested in disrupting only. Otherwise, if you hold true to the belief that their is NO God and you believe in respecting people's religious beliefs, what compels you to return here?

As the senior level of cub scouting, Webelos are to be involved in more advanced activities than the younger scouts. While it is a fun program they are beginning to learn skills that they will build on in BSA. It is considered a transitory time when they are preparing for the boy scouting experience and need to start learning how to do that. The parents no longer can sign off on badges. The badges are expected to be earned in meetings and on their own; getting them ready to accept the responsiblity of BSA. They begin to take part in troop activities and meetings. It's an exciting time fo

Boy, was the impact ever great on us back here! I had two brothers in Viet Nam; remember clearly praying for their safe return every night and then there was the year we had the Christmas Tree in the living room until July when my brother could be with us. My mom just would not consider taking it down til he was home. Making comic books and sending them. Writing letters to them before I was able to write. I still thank God every day that both of them came home safely.