Bobanon

Merlyn, The Founding Fathers knew first hand just how bad religious institutions could muddle things up. Thats why the new government was set up as a secular government protected from religious influence. Sadly by 1801 religion reared its ugly head with the 2nd great awakening to lead us to where we are today. EagleDad righto about Constantine. He needed one religion to bring the Empire under. Constantine himself was a follower of Mithra, (he did convert to Christianity on his deathbed). I had wondered why he chose Christianity over Mithra, and through research I found but his

Old Grey Eagle, After I read your response I did a little digging and found that it was Napoleon Bonaparte who said We have religion to keep the poor from murdering the rich. Karl Marx said basically the same thing with his maxim about religion being the opiate of the masses. One of the biggest problems the communism faced was that it sub-planted catholicism with essentially the same autocratic rule in that one cannot believe anything but the RCC or the communists (respectively). EagleDad on the idea that religion is necessary for society I found this item: "Secular

I like the Scout Oath and Law and try to live my life by them. They are both good guides to life. The 10 Commandments are good rules and guides for life. And I certainly have no problem repeating the Scout Oath and Law at every Scout meeting. Matter of fact its a great idea. I do not believe your biggest stick theory. Man is capable of building a soceity without religious influence. I think that mankind naturally knows right from wrong. If not why are human laws the way they are in the non Abrahamic world. Especially in Asia where Buddhism is more of a philosohy than religio

EagleDad you wrote: "moral code will always fluctuate from the guy with the biggest stick. And the little guy will be left out." This happens with religion, and comes about very easily. Have you never heard of the Inquisition? How about the Protestant Inquisition? It wasn't just the Catholic Church that put heretics to death. John Calvin did too. And did you know the last person put to death by the Inquisition was in Mexico City in 1860? 1860! Epicurian poet Lucretius wrote on the issue of how easily religion led to evil in the name of god. Lucretius was branded an ene

ohadam, This is something I have been wrestling with of late myself. I have come to the conclusion that as long as you are not an atheist you can belong. Agnosticism is legit. An agnostic while does not believe there is any way one can have a personal relationship with god, and some believe there is no way to know if god exist or doesn't exist. Have you ever heard of Deism? Deism was the monotheistic religion of the Great Enlightenment and of the American Revolution. Deism was the religion of Ben Franklin, Thomsas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, George Washington, and John Adams

SaintCad you posted; "Can a person truly develop a moral code without a spiritual guide? I don't think so." Does this mean Andy Rooney, Warren Buffet, Lance Armstrong, Richard Dawkins, Noam Chomsky, Richard Leakey, and Ted Williams, to name a few atheist have no moral codes? I work for Mr. Warren Buffet and I can tell you that Mr. Buffet's morals are above reproach. And he expects the same from everyone of his employees. A spiritual guide / religion is not necesarry to the development of a moral code in the least.

EagleDad you make quite a few assumptions and you know what they say about assuming don't you? Just because I don't have a very high opinion of conservative Christians as a whole, doesn't I can't work with them. I do and have for years. And I have many many friends that are Christians. How could you not in the US? I don't really care what people believe or don't believe as long as they don't force it upon me, or others unwarranted. Don't patronize. How old are you? And how long have you been involved in Scouting? Myself, I have been around Scouting for a long time. It s

EagleDad I neither agree nor disagree with Wayne Bensen's article. I thought it might give a different persepctive to the discussion. I do know that Mrs. Yates, the lady in Houston convicted of drowning her 5 children was severly mentally ill. How could she not have been. I didn't follow her trial very closely on a day to day basis, however I did follow it close enough to see that her husband, and pastor should both have been implicated for pushing her over the edge. As far as gay parents I know so few as to be able to form a real opinion. But the ones I do know that have child

I ran across this on another forum and c&ped it here. Here too is the link: http://www.waynebesen.com/2006/06/double-standard-in-parenting.html Double Standard In Parenting Next time self-righteous religious groups attack gay parents or adoption by same-sex families consider this: ** In San Francisco, Lashaun Harris is on trial in the murder of her three kids, whom she allegedly threw into the frigid waters of San Francisco Bay in October. Harris believed that God wanted her children as a sacrifice, police said. ** In Houston, a new trial has been ordered for Andre

Anyone that burns the flag is automatically marginalizes themselves. Whatever complaint or gripe they have is lost and all anyone remembers is the nut burning a flag. While I detest seeing the American flag dishonored in such away I wouldn't want to deny someone the chance to make a supreme jackass of themselves. ohadam you're exactly right about the knee jerk reationary effect of such hot topic issues. Who'd have though the issue of gay marriage would have been one of the key issues of the 04 campaign. Henry Lewis Mencken once wrote, "the whole aim of practical politics is to

Okay, I apologize for the "religious reich". My bad. Hunt I am confused by your: "Merlyn, do you think the Roman Catholic Church denigrates atheists by refusing to allow them to receive Mass?" Why would an atheist be upset for not being allowed to receive Mass? On the issue of belief in God. Perhaps it would be more of a universal and acceptable for those other than Christians for the BSA to "have a belief in Deity" for admittance. I don't think this would be offensive to Christians either. Besides, this is one of the requirement to become a Mason, and it has worked well for th

EagleScout901 welcome. My post about stoning was meant to be taken as humor. While I am not a Christian I do fully believe that the 10 Commandments are a good set of rules and guides for life. In fact they're somewhat universal, much in the way the so many different cultures have what Western Civilization sees as the Golden Rule. The issue on homosexuality is quite a difficult problem. On one hand its discrimination, yet if gay people are openly allowed a certain signifigant percentage of those supporting Scouting will leave. How much has this already cost the BSA in lawsuits and

Brent what we have here is an impass. You won't believe the Bush Admin has done anything wrong even if a photo of them holding a smoking gun was produced. No matter what is produced you are part of the Bush rah-rah crowd. Not that it matters what you hold to be true. History eventually will show just how bad the Presidency of George W. Bush has been. And I voted for the guy the first in 2000. I have heard interviews of O'Neill where he said during meetings that Bush, etal were fanatical about implicating Hussein and Iraq. I could produce this if I wanted to go to the trouble. Howe

BrentAllen who said anything about invading Iraq prior to 9-11? O'neill claims that Bush and Co. wanted to implicate Iraq as the force behind 9-11 which is false. Faux News even reported it, and as H.L. Mencken would have put it, "Boobus Americanus" bought off on it hook line and sinker. This is apparently true as indicated by your position on the issue. If there hadn't been such a high cost in lives and money it would be funny. I myself do find the antics of the Bush cheerleading crowd to be something of a very sick joke. The Bush Administration is the most ethically bankrupt

SaintCad I enjoyed the sarcasm! Here's some more. (EDITED BY EAMONN -DUE TO A REFERENCE TO KILLING BOY SCOUTS. - Totally unneeded.) What I see as the sad fact of the matter is the literal interpretation of the bible. At best the Christian bible is allegory and in no way should it be taken as literal truth. (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

I was a little hesitant to continue on since the ire of the Forum Admin has been raised. But what the heck............ BrentAllen I am still waiting for your response to what Paul O'Neill former Sec. of Commerce had to say about the skewing of intelligence to implicate Iraq for 9-11.

Fuzzy Bear thanks for pointing out the obvious and providing sage advice: "Religion belongs in the Churches and the daily life of the individual and should not be watered down or disturbed by school activities. Prayer belongs in the individual's private daily meditations and should not be disturbed by school activities or any other activity." Too many Christians seem to have forgotten Jesus teaching about public prayer. evmori would be well served to go and read Matthew 6:5 for you apparently have not read that one. Fuzzy Bear you also pointed out this: "Scouting is not a re

OldGreyEagle zey haf vays of makink you talk. Actually the company I work for believes that anyone with internet access is just waiting for the moment they can look at dirty pictures on the net. Forum Monitor......cooling it here Boss. ;o)

acco40 you can think of non religious humanist as agnosticism. It is the same as secular humanism. While not atheistic secular humanist do not believe in a deity who takes an active role in the affairs of humans or the earth. They believe that it is our responsibility to create a better world and that no god or gods will step in to assist in any way. Think of it as a religious philosophy that advocates human values instead of religious values, or rather the values dictated by religous dogma. evmori I find it somewhat humorous that the ACLU is fine and dandy when it comes to the aid

BrentAllen, I forgot to mention about Mr. Bush's first Commerce Sec. and the revelations Mr. Paul O'Neill came out with after leaving the cabinet. O'Neill claims that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld wanted to implicate Saddam Hussein long before talk of invading Iraq ever came out. He claims that they (Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld), were obcessive about it. How ethical is that? Ooops, my mistake, never mind, don't try to answer something you couldn't.

LOLOL sorry about the 00000! I wrote that at work in Word so I wouldn't misspell anything, (didn't want to give the forum spelling monitor ammo), and didn't want the IT Nazis at work getting a wiff of what I was writing. Certain words send up flags for them. And I figured homosexual would be a flag word.

BrentAllen are you the forum spelling monitor? The argument that is the point, not whether or not something was spelled correctly. Complaining about a misspelled word or two is grasping on your part. Yes there was intelligence. Was it skewed to make the need for war more palatable? Yes, and there is no need to bring up every instance, but I will point to Niger and the yellow cake as one. How do you explain the out right lie that was made that Saddam was responsible for the attacks on Sept. 11? That was one REAL big whopper of a lie. I can't wait to hear your explanation!

Brent surely you can do better than that. Come on, a mindless personal attack? Show me where I'm wrong. Tell me where the weapons of mass destruction are that lead us into war in Iraq. I'm sure Mr. Bush would pay you a big reward for that information. Remember Rumsfeld said he knew where they were. I shall be sitting on the edge of my seat in anticipation of your answer. On a sericous note Brent a word of advice..... for what it's worth there is other news sources besides Faux News Network and Rush Limbaugh.

Hmmm seems I've hit a nerve. Impeachment may be on the horizon, that is if the House goes back to Democratic control. The Bush administration has regularly disreguarded federal laws. From the outing of Valarie Plame to illegal wiretapping. BrentAllen how can you nont be insensed at the out right spitting on the Constitution of the U.S. by the likes of Bush and Rumsfeld? I am amazed that anyone supports them privately much less in open conversation. I suppose too you like our new CIA director. Harry Truman once said this about Richard Nixon; "You don't put the fox in char

I stopped saying "one nation under god" years ago. I don't necessarily find it offensive per se. BI quit because I don't believe God chooses sides based upon nationality or national origin, I don't believe God thinks one way or another about us actually. If he did, he would love all equally, and maybe a little more for the poor, suffering and destitute.