Dedicated Dad

Do you have this much of a problem admitting when youre wrong in other aspects of your life? You said: Show where I have lied. Even once. If you can, Ill be happy to apologize. And you didnt. And yet another credibility issue surfaces, when will it ever stop?

Whoops, I see a typo too, it should readit went unaddressed by you

this thread

DedDad's "logic" is based completely on one premise, Wrong again, its based on two. Remember the proof by congruence thingy. that gay = perversion and perversion = immoral. Though when pressed, there is no "logical" defense offered by him of these leaps. No-no tj, thats yet another mistruth, wow two in one paragraph, I replied to that on the other thread and when I pressed you to be specific on what was a leap, you replied with leap, leap and leap. So if youre serious about revisiting this issue try using some examples OK? tjhmmr=illogic=non-specificity

See my reply to tjhmmrs credibility challenge before you believe word one here.

Dont worry about what is said on this post, see reply to tjhmmrs credibility challenge before you believe word one here.

(haven't we been through this before on this board, with you making the exact same attack and then failing to back it up?). Show where I have lied. Even once. If you can, Ill be happy to apologize. Until then, put up or shut up. HeheheI should have read this thread sooner than today. Last time you asked me to demonstrate where you lied it went addressed by you on the last post on this thread. Since youre caught red handed yet again in this challenge, I expect your admission of lying included in your apology before we can go on to your other challenges, otherwise you remain the same truth-c

Let me be very clear, my first post was not intended as a personal attack on DedDad or anyone else. Well I hope everyone doesnt base their opinion of you on the validity of these words, telling the truth is not a priority of yours is it? I will actually use a little of that "moral equivalency" that DedDad relies on Im happy to take on the moral equivalency of the afford mentioned, I believe there a lot of BSA families who happily wear the label. Though I dont necessarily agree with Jerry Tele tubby Falwell, Pat Im Channeling your pain Robertson and your friend Rev. I know what God thinks Ph

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Ouch! BANG! BANG!

Sound of head banging on wallBANG! BANG! ouch! BANG! BANG! BANG!

As well you should be Mike, its not just some alternative lifestyle, its a serious attempt to promote and justify evil and wickedness in the world. Dont give in to their agenda.

Ed, I dont disagree with that, in fact, I think a boy who wears make-up, lipstick and high heels can live by the Oath and Laws, dont you? The fact remains, would you deny a CO to make membership rules for appearance?

You know what NJ, Im going to guess that when your were a little kid youd make rules for games and then change them when you were losing, am I close? While Im happy to jump through more of your arbitrary hoops Im going to ask you keep your integrity and answer my little question. How are these things Tradition Values? Standning ready with high boots and towel firmly in hand.

But DD, you haven't been talking about mistakes. You've been talking about knowingly breaking the rules because you felt your excuse was more important than the rule, or the rule didn't matter. No neither, I know there exists scenarios where the rules are not applicable and so do you. And dont use my situation, try-answering Roosters without the ludicrous analogy and invisible ambulances, the problem is that its a real possibility and youre not humble enough to admit it. And regardless, stop the intimations and embellishments please, cant you just copy and paste our quotes so you dont keep mi

After reading that gay Scout leaders were no different than a father/daughter/moose threeway relationship Actually its just homosexuals in general because theres no such thing as gay scout leaders, only those who pretend to be. That must be your gaydar thing workin again, which reminds me, were still waiting for that clarification on your orientation there OLE buddy, are you gay? As far as your premise goes I hadnt really given that combo any consideration before now but if youre interested in revisiting the issue how are they morally inferior to your pet perversion? , I was surprised any pers

You didnt say a Scoutmaster and his son( I agree. ) You were insinuating a scout not a son, and everyone who read that post knows it. Me included! Bob, are you sure you want to insist this is my position? the last of which OGE and I called you on, and your attempt to slide out was weak at best. Please call me again on it, Im trying my best to follow. What exactly have I not responded too, I certainly dont want to slide out. Should you want me to restate my questions you havent answered Ill be happy to abridge. I have no problems with scouters who say you know, I made a mistake or

Is that what you really think of the issue of whether otherwise qualified leaders are disqualified because they are honest about their orientation? It's all about what part goes where? Is there a coherent question there somewhere, Im not sure if Im suppose to answer whether I think about the practice of perversion as being filth and degradation or the choice of denying the one and only orientation we are all born with in order to choose a life of baseness and repugnance. Those were rhetorical questions. I'm pretty sure the answers are "yes" even if you don't like the way I asked the question

Gee Dad, I am honored to a much higher standard of decorum when debating than you hold yourselfI have come to understand your abusive style Now now OGE, you know very well my decorum for those promoting perversion is considerably different than on other topics. I did my best to be civil to Bob at all times and I apologize if I havent lived up to your standards. I equally understand if you hold no particular use for me because of my decorum on the sodomy threads, however I will remain civil to such end. Now, Bob said "So let me get this straight, you feel a scout with an extra hole in his ear

So Bob, what you are saying is that no positive scenario can possibly exist, of any kind, that a Scoutmaster can ever be lost in the woods with a scout? None? No possibility what so ever? And OGE, What on earth are you talking about? I need a few more sentences on the details for clarification of the Lucy thing please. Plus, you remind me the kids surrounding the schoolyard fight yelling Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! I expected better from you. PS What is corkscrew style debate mean anyway?

Evidendly following rules and protecting scouts from abuse are not part of the values you hold so dear. Wow Bob, thats a new low. Im sorry my example has you so flustered and apparently out of the realm of any imaginable scenario in your neat and tidy little world but youre out of control. Shame on you.

Ya know Rooster, on the very same page [134] that has the hard and fast rule for Separate Accommodations is a paragraph for the SM which validates his imperfections and mortal capabilities. It says: Give yourself permission to make mistakes. I like your speeding example but I would offer this as its more to the point; if a scoutmaster and scout are lost in the woods and they only have one tent, lets make the temperature below freezing, what accommodations should the SM and scout make?

Abortion - NOT a Traditional Value AIDS Research Currently - NOT a Traditional Value Christian Bigotry - NOT a Traditional Value Cloning - NOT a Traditional Value Condoms in School - NOT a Traditional Value Drug Legalization - NOT a Traditional Value Euthanasia - NOT a Traditional Value Promiscuity - NOT a Traditional Value Hate Crimes Legislation - NOT a Traditional Value Legal Prostitution - NOT a Traditional Value Prayer in School - Yes a Traditional Value Homosexual Agenda - NOT a Traditional Value Liberal Media Bias - NOT a Traditional Value Pornogra

You are a poor converstionalist who apparently likes to twist and convolute other people's statements in order to prolong a question that was long ago answered. Oh come on Bob, you shouldnt lower yourself to cheap shots just because you cant support your point, thats not the Bob White expert regulator we all know and love. The answers to your question, when you actually have a direct question, are in the manuals of the BSA, I invite you to read one, any one. Nope, you simply cant support your point well enough to answer my questions because they are based directly out of the Articles of Incor

but you keep referring to hair length and having a pierced ear as a behavior. Yes, both are the manners of conduct involving an action taken, or not taken as in the case of long hair. I think this is the point of contention that everyone is having - some people don't see hair length or having an earring as a behavior. Im not sure everyone is having a point of contention, it may seem Im alone here because most arent willing to debate the high percentage of shall we say progressive Scouters on this site. Assuming your hair is cut short, can i say you are behaving well? And if you hair is long

What value -- not just a tradition, but a value, is violated if a boy wears: An earring? "Long" hair? Purple hair? Facial makeup? Hmm Lets see. To start but not exclusive to, modesty, humility, propriety, politeness/decorum, good taste/etiquette and temperance/restraint kind of values. Further, Traditional Values is an analogy of conservative orthodoxy, and I know you and tjhmmr stand ready to chime in with your glib relativists slant on the issue, and youre certainly more than welcome to do so, but this is a conservative doctrine and will be after your liberal analogies. Now its your turn, I