| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"L. Raymond" |
| Date: |
18 Oct 2007 01:45:39 PM |
| Object: |
Boy Scouts held to account |
It's good to see them being held liable for their anti-homosexual
policies, but I do wonder if this would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/5225139.html
PHILADELPHIA ¡X The city has decided that the Boy Scouts chapter here
must pay fair-market rent of $200,000 a year for its city-owned
headquarters because it refuses to permit gay Scouts.
The organization's Cradle of Liberty Council, which currently pays $1 a
year in rent, must pay the increased amount to remain in its downtown
building past May 31, Fairmount Park Commission president Robert N.C.
Nix said Wednesday.
City officials say they cannot legally rent taxpayer-owned property for
a nominal sum to a private organization that discriminates. The city
owns the land on which the council's 1928 Beaux Arts building sits.
Scouting officials will ask the city solicitor for details on the
appraisals that yielded the $200,000 figure, said Jeff Jubelirer,
spokesman for the Cradle of Liberty Council.
The higher rent money "would have to come from programs. That's 30 new
Cub Scout packs, or 800 needy kids going to our summer camp," Jubelirer
said. "It's disappointing, and it's certainly a threat."
The Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that Scouts, as a private group, have a
First Amendment right to bar gays from membership.
The council adopted a nondiscrimination policy in 2003 but was ordered
to revoke it by the National Council, which said local chapters cannot
deviate from national rules barring participation by anyone who is
openly gay.
The Cradle of Liberty Council serves about 64,000 scouts in Philadelphia
and its suburbs.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
22 Oct 2007 11:26:21 AM |
|
|
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
See, once they went into court and DEFINED
THEMSELVES as a PRIVATE RELIGIOUS
club it became unavoidable.
You should be greatful for the gay rights activists
who challenged them, leading to the court battles,
instead of resenting them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
22 Oct 2007 09:17:47 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mizlee" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 12:57:50 PM |
|
|
On Oct 22, 10:17?pm, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
snip
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Only a mouth breathing moron would make a patently ridiculous
statement llike this. Now that I got THAT off my chest, I merely wish
to say that it's about time a bigoted organization like the Boy Scouts
has had their special privileges revoked. The christian right has
their knickers in a bunch because *horrors!* - the rest of the world
is waking up to the fact that it deserves an equal place at the
table. But they will never understand this as they think "equality"
only means equality for THEM. We atheists will no longer just roll
over for the delusional sky-daddy worshippers, and boy are they pissed!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 08:37:49 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:57:50 -0700, mizlee <mizlee@aol.com> wrote:
On Oct 22, 10:17?pm, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
snip
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Only a mouth breathing moron would make a patently ridiculous
statement llike this. Now that I got THAT off my chest, I merely wish
to say that it's about time a bigoted organization like the Boy Scouts
has had their special privileges revoked. The christian right has
their knickers in a bunch because *horrors!* - the rest of the world
is waking up to the fact that it deserves an equal place at the
table. But they will never understand this as they think "equality"
only means equality for THEM. We atheists will no longer just roll
over for the delusional sky-daddy worshippers, and boy are they pissed!
You will continue to "roll over". You have no other choice. No
politician in his right mind would support legislation favorable to
atheist only. Especially when studies have shown that you are despised
by a vast majority of the American population.
University of Minnesota Study on American Attitudes Towards Atheists &
Atheism
Research Finds that Atheists are Most Despised, Most Distrusted
Minority
The most recent data shows that atheists are more distrusted and
despised than any other minority and that an atheist is the least
likely person that Americans would vote for in a presidential
election. It's not just that atheists are hated, though, but also that
atheists seem to represent everything about modernity which Americans
dislike.
The most recent study was conducted by the University of Minnesota,
which found that atheists ranked lower than "Muslims, recent
immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in 'sharing
their vision of American society.' Atheists are also the minority
group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to
marry." The results from two of the most important questions were:
This group does not at all agree with my vision of American society...
Atheist: 39.6%
Muslims: 26.3%
Homosexuals: 22.6%
Hispanics: 20%
Conservative Christians: 13.5%
Recent Immigrants: 12.5%
Jews: 7.6%
I would disapprove if my child wanted to marry a member of this
group....
Atheist: 47.6%
Muslim: 33.5%
African-American 27.2%
Asian-Americans: 18.5%
Hispanics: 18.5%
Jews: 11.8%
Conservative Christians: 6.9%
Whites: 2.3%
*****
How about them apples, boy?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
22 Oct 2007 11:44:08 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 08:09:29 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
24 Oct 2007 08:33:25 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:09:29 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, for getting bad information, but if
you rather just take credit for being a liar that's OK by me.
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
24 Oct 2007 09:15:28 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:33:25 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:09:29 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, for getting bad information, but if
you rather just take credit for being a liar that's OK by me.
If you want to hunt turkeys you go where the turkeys are. I would
hardly be effective or would it be efficient to work against
homosexual child abuse in alt.christianity. See how that works?
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
26 Oct 2007 08:09:15 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:15:28 GMT, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:33:25 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:09:29 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, for getting bad information, but if
you rather just take credit for being a liar that's OK by me.
If you want to hunt turkeys you go where the turkeys are. I would
hardly be effective or would it be efficient to work against
homosexual child abuse in alt.christianity. See how that works?
Ben
LOL, you're doing a fine job here. Exactly how many child abuses have you
prevented today? Hmm? Hmmm? Thought so.
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
27 Oct 2007 10:10:24 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:09:15 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:15:28 GMT, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:33:25 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:09:29 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, for getting bad information, but if
you rather just take credit for being a liar that's OK by me.
If you want to hunt turkeys you go where the turkeys are. I would
hardly be effective or would it be efficient to work against
homosexual child abuse in alt.christianity. See how that works?
Ben
LOL, you're doing a fine job here. Exactly how many child abuses have you
prevented today? Hmm? Hmmm? Thought so.
His English is atrocious, and his fixation with pedophilia and
homosexuality are so great, that he imagines everybody is the same.
His ploy therefore is to post a continuous stream of tripe, imagining
that we will be so fascinated by him that we will waste all our time
trying to decipher what he is on about, that any xtians H^H^
pedophiles, that may pass through this NG, will have no time for
abusing kids.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
28 Oct 2007 06:45:41 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:10:24 GMT, Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote:
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:09:15 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:15:28 GMT, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:33:25 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:09:29 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, for getting bad information, but if
you rather just take credit for being a liar that's OK by me.
If you want to hunt turkeys you go where the turkeys are. I would
hardly be effective or would it be efficient to work against
homosexual child abuse in alt.christianity. See how that works?
Ben
LOL, you're doing a fine job here. Exactly how many child abuses have you
prevented today? Hmm? Hmmm? Thought so.
His English is atrocious, and his fixation with pedophilia and
homosexuality are so great, that he imagines everybody is the same.
His ploy therefore is to post a continuous stream of tripe, imagining
that we will be so fascinated by him that we will waste all our time
trying to decipher what he is on about, that any xtians H^H^
pedophiles, that may pass through this NG, will have no time for
abusing kids.
Or maybe he is attempting to use his posts here as an alibi? ;-)
Ben
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
28 Oct 2007 07:06:53 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 07:45:41 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
LOL, you're doing a fine job here. Exactly how many child abuses have you
prevented today? Hmm? Hmmm? Thought so.
His English is atrocious, and his fixation with pedophilia and
homosexuality are so great, that he imagines everybody is the same.
His ploy therefore is to post a continuous stream of tripe, imagining
that we will be so fascinated by him that we will waste all our time
trying to decipher what he is on about, that any xtians H^H^
pedophiles, that may pass through this NG, will have no time for
abusing kids.
Or maybe he is attempting to use his posts here as an alibi? ;-)
Yep, that to.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
27 Oct 2007 03:28:32 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:09:15 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
[piggybacking]
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:15:28 GMT, wrote:
If you want to hunt turkeys you go where the turkeys are. I would
hardly be effective or would it be efficient to work against
homosexual child abuse in alt.christianity.
It's where you'll find the most homosexual child abuse, so why not?
It's not like MORAL people would abuse children.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be
white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."
- Saint Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556) Founder of the Jesuit Order.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
24 Oct 2007 06:08:08 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:33:25 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:09:29 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, for getting bad information, but if
you rather just take credit for being a liar that's OK by me.
Isn't leroy just another jabriol sock-puppet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
26 Oct 2007 08:05:18 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:38:08 +0930, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:33:25 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:09:29 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:44:08 -0400, Ben Kaufman
<spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@pobox.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:17:47 GMT, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their
anti-homosexual policies, but I do wonder if this
would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
Though I'm certain many will pretend that it wouldn't
have happened, the truth is that there was no way
to avoid it.
Correct, since most atheist are homosexuals.
Ah, so that's why you cruise this group! Don't let that fallacy feed your
fantasy.
You need to look up the definition of fallacy, bonehead.
Ben
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, for getting bad information, but if
you rather just take credit for being a liar that's OK by me.
Isn't leroy just another jabriol sock-puppet?
I think a lot of them must be sock puppets.
Ben
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
31 Oct 2007 08:12:08 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:45:39 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
It's good to see them being held liable for their anti-homosexual
policies, but I do wonder if this would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
No, it would not have happened.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/5225139.html
PHILADELPHIA ¡X The city has decided that the Boy Scouts chapter here
must pay fair-market rent of $200,000 a year for its city-owned
headquarters because it refuses to permit gay Scouts.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
18 Oct 2007 05:21:10 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:45:39 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
The higher rent money "would have to come from programs. That's 30 new
Cub Scout packs, or 800 needy kids going to our summer camp," Jubelirer
said.
But not 800, or 80 or even 8, homosexual kids.
but I do wonder if this would have happened if they accepted
homosexuals and just barred atheists.
They'd probably be allowed to rent the property for $1/year. After
all, the government can't interfere with their "free exercise of
religion", can it?
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"A truly unselfish act would be a Christian volunteering to have his soul take your
soul's place in hell, so yours could go to Heaven. Don't hold your breath."
- John Popelish
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
22 Oct 2007 11:28:36 AM |
|
|
Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote:
<badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
The higher rent money "would have to come from
programs. That's 30 new Cub Scout packs, or
800 needy kids going to our summer camp,"
Jubelirer said.
But not 800, or 80 or even 8, homosexual kids.
Boyscout values: "We would rather our vast
resources go to hurting a few gay kids than to
helping all the kids."
That's malice for you. It's more important to hurt
the people you don't like than to help the people
you supposedly like.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
22 Oct 2007 09:56:27 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:28:36 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote:
<badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
The higher rent money "would have to come from
programs. That's 30 new Cub Scout packs, or
800 needy kids going to our summer camp,"
Jubelirer said.
But not 800, or 80 or even 8, homosexual kids.
Boyscout values: "We would rather our vast
resources go to hurting a few gay kids than to
helping all the kids."
That's malice for you. It's more important to hurt
the people you don't like than to help the people
you supposedly like.
Showing the kids how to hurt people is good for them.
</twisted Christian "morality">
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"Creationists make it sound like a "theory" is something
you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
- Isaac Asimov
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
22 Oct 2007 09:25:20 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:28:36 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote:
<badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
The higher rent money "would have to come from
programs. That's 30 new Cub Scout packs, or
800 needy kids going to our summer camp,"
Jubelirer said.
But not 800, or 80 or even 8, homosexual kids.
Boyscout values: "We would rather our vast
resources go to hurting a few gay kids than to
helping all the kids."
That's malice for you. It's more important to hurt
the people you don't like than to help the people
you supposedly like.
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 12:12:17 AM |
|
|
wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys
An eight y.o. doesn't meet the age requirements of the
Boy Scouts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 08:47:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:12:17 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
leroyb...@pillinor.net wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys
An eight y.o. doesn't meet the age requirements of the
Boy Scouts.
Stop confusing the homophobes with facts. They can't even tell that
they're homosexual.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"The United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion"
- Treaty with Tripoli, 1797, ratified by Congress, signed by John Adams
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 08:13:29 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:12:17 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
leroyb...@pillinor.net wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys
An eight y.o. doesn't meet the age requirements of the
Boy Scouts.
What Is Cub Scouting?
Since 1930, the Boy Scouts of America has helped younger boys through
Cub Scouting. It is a year-round family program designed for boys who
are in the first grade through fifth grade (or 7, 8, 9, and 10 years
of age). Parents, leaders, and organizations work together to achieve
the purposes of Cub Scouting. Currently, Cub Scouting is the largest
of the BSA's three traditional membership divisions. (The others are
Boy Scouting and Venturing.)
http://www.scouting.org/factsheets/02-502.html
You must find delight in your ignorance.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
22 Oct 2007 11:18:39 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:28:36 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote:
<badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
The higher rent money "would have to come from
programs. That's 30 new Cub Scout packs, or
800 needy kids going to our summer camp,"
Jubelirer said.
But not 800, or 80 or even 8, homosexual kids.
Boyscout values: "We would rather our vast
resources go to hurting a few gay kids than to
helping all the kids."
That's malice for you. It's more important to hurt
the people you don't like than to help the people
you supposedly like.
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
The same number as know they're Christian, of course.
However, the boy scouts go to age 20 (I think that's the Eagle Scout
age; I don't care enough to look it up), and the rules apply to scout
masters, so it really doesn't matter how adults try to manipulate the
young ones. It's the older ones being stigmatized and treated like
subhuman garbage.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 08:02:38 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 23:18:39 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:28:36 -0700, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote:
<badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
The higher rent money "would have to come from
programs. That's 30 new Cub Scout packs, or
800 needy kids going to our summer camp,"
Jubelirer said.
But not 800, or 80 or even 8, homosexual kids.
Boyscout values: "We would rather our vast
resources go to hurting a few gay kids than to
helping all the kids."
That's malice for you. It's more important to hurt
the people you don't like than to help the people
you supposedly like.
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
The same number as know they're Christian, of course.
However, the boy scouts go to age 20 (I think that's the Eagle Scout
age; I don't care enough to look it up), and the rules apply to scout
masters, so it really doesn't matter how adults try to manipulate the
young ones.
It's the older ones being stigmatized and treated like
subhuman garbage.
Only by atheist and homosexuals and atheist homosexuals.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 09:14:45 PM |
|
|
wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
The same number as know they're Christian, of course.
However, the boy scouts go to age 20 (I think that's the Eagle Scout
age; I don't care enough to look it up), and the rules apply to scout
masters, so it really doesn't matter how adults try to manipulate the
young ones.
It's the older ones being stigmatized and treated like
subhuman garbage.
Only by atheist and homosexuals and atheist homosexuals.
So only homosexual atheists are behaving well? That clears everything
right up, doesn't it?
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 10:28:37 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:14:45 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
The same number as know they're Christian, of course.
However, the boy scouts go to age 20 (I think that's the Eagle Scout
age; I don't care enough to look it up), and the rules apply to scout
masters, so it really doesn't matter how adults try to manipulate the
young ones.
It's the older ones being stigmatized and treated like
subhuman garbage.
Only by atheist and homosexuals and atheist homosexuals.
So only homosexual atheists are behaving well? That clears everything
right up, doesn't it?
Does it?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
03 Nov 2007 06:35:40 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:14:45 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
The same number as know they're Christian, of course.
However, the boy scouts go to age 20 (I think that's the Eagle Scout
age; I don't care enough to look it up), and the rules apply to scout
masters, so it really doesn't matter how adults try to manipulate the
young ones.
It's the older ones being stigmatized and treated like
subhuman garbage.
Only by atheist and homosexuals and atheist homosexuals.
So only homosexual atheists are behaving well? That clears everything
right up, doesn't it?
MMMMMMMMMMMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTTHHHHHH
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: AQOTM Nomination Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
03 Nov 2007 06:36:05 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:14:45 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
The same number as know they're Christian, of course.
However, the boy scouts go to age 20 (I think that's the Eagle Scout
age; I don't care enough to look it up), and the rules apply to scout
masters, so it really doesn't matter how adults try to manipulate the
young ones.
It's the older ones being stigmatized and treated like
subhuman garbage.
Only by atheist and homosexuals and atheist homosexuals.
So only homosexual atheists are behaving well? That clears everything
right up, doesn't it?
Seconds?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Boy Scouts held to account |
23 Oct 2007 12:32:23 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 23:18:39 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
leroyblue@pillinor.net wrote:
What a frigging fallacy! How many eight year old boys know that they
are homosexuals?
The same number as know they're Christian, of course.
However, the boy scouts go to age 20 (I think that's the Eagle Scout
age; I don't care enough to look it up), and the rules apply to scout
masters, so it really doesn't matter how adults try to manipulate the
young ones. It's the older ones being stigmatized and treated like
subhuman garbage.
Since 1952 the maximum age for scouts was 18, but that doesn't change
anything else you said.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious
conviction."
- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
