About those anti-aviatoin newsgroups

If everyone involved is
consenting, what possible difference could it make? As a parent, I could
care less if my daughter turns out straight, gay, or bisexual. All that
matters is that she is happy.

This conversation is about children who, by definition, cannot be
"consenting".

Or do you dispute this assertion to?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I just looked at the rec.scouting.usa group on Google and saw one,
maybe two, of the most recent 50 threads related to issues of sexual
orientation. The rest, to my inexperienced eye, seemed related to
other topics relevant to scouting. The group doesn't appear useless,
for discussing scouting, to me.


"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
We should be cautious about posting anything on these news groups. There is
no way of convincing the mentally ill that airplanes are not a threat to
them, so arguing with them is futile. At worst, somebody in these groups
could find out about the rec.aviation news groups. This is a serious matter.
rec.scouting.usa, for example, has been completely hijacked by heterophobes
and is virtually useless for discussing Scouting. We would not want that to
happen here.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
.net...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:%U90b.183507$uu5.35115@sccrnsc04...

This argument was used against the Scouts here in Iowa City, and has
resulted in them being charged the "corporate rate" for using the
schools
when they want to hold a meeting or function. Of course, this price is
impossibly high, and has resulted in the Scouts being driven out of the
schools.

Strangely enough, the Scouts presented a cost-benefit analysis to the
School
Board during the debate, proving that for every penny the City "spent"
on
the Scouts (by letting them use the schools for cheap) they received
back
five-fold in donated work, landscaping done for "Eagle Scout" projects,
etc.
The city actually *profited* from the Scouts, because they did work that
the
school district would otherwise have to buy.

This argument did not sway the gay community, and the Scouts were
effectively banned.


Cogent argument will never sway the gay community.

What a hoot McNicoll. I doubt you even know the definition of cogent. It
is not a valid, forceful, reasoned, cogent argument to say that a
discriminatory group (and the BSA is by admission) should be accorded the
discount rate use of public buildings because they do good deeds for the
people holding the reservations book. It may be fact, but it isn't a sound
argument. If it were, the gays would be out there planting trees and
flowers like crazy and demanding the same benefits. In fact though, as far
as I know, they just demand the same treatment based on legalities.

JB

P.S. I just casually wandered into this thread and found it interesting, if
grossly OT. I have to say though, that for someone with some obvious, at
least to me, intelligence, you've done the best job here of all the posters
of posting inane, shallow, childish responses. For God's sake man, try to
do better. LOL

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
k.net...
Why don't you remove the "restriction" on division by zero

There are, in fact, methods for dealing with division by zero.

[...] or the "restriction" on perpetual motion machines.

I'm not aware of any arbitrary restriction on perpetual motion machines.
You are more than welcome to build one, should you happen across a method to
do so.

In any case, as far as genuine arbitrary restrictions go, be patient.
Eventually, we'll get to them all. But for the time-being, it's "one step
at a time".

Pete

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
news
You say that as if gays were prohibited from marrying a member of the
opposite sex. They're not.

If I didn't take the bait before, why do you think I'd take it now?

A good troll knows when to direct his efforts elsewhere...do you want to be
a good troll or not?

You can tell NOTHING AT ALL about a person's proclivity to
pedophilia by their outward, adult-oriented sexual preference. A
homosexual
adult male is no more likely to be attracted to your children than a
heterosexual male.

That's just (to put it politely) counterintuitive, Pete.

What you're saying (I think) is this: The odds of a heterosexual guy being
attracted to my 13 year old son are THE SAME AS those of a homosexual guy
being attracted to my son?

I think we're back to calling the sky green here. Do you really believe
this?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

I would say the odds of a woman "preying" upon a teenage boy are an order of
magnitude smaller than the reverse example

That's because it's not "preying". It's the fulfillment of the dream he
has had every night since he was 14.

"Margy Natalie" wrote in message
...


Dave Stadt wrote:

"Margy Natalie" wrote in message
...


Big John wrote:

I refuse to support United Way and any other organization who
discriminates against the BSA.

But organizations that discriminate against children are ok?

Margy

"As a licensed woman pilot (current or not), you are invited to become a
part of our legacy as the first and only international organization of
women
pilots."

How does one explain the above discrimination by the 99s.

Men are not excluded from the 99s. I'm sure if you want to pony up the
membership fee they would be glad to take it and welcome you to their
meetings.

From what I saw on their WEB site that is simply not true. To be a member
you must
be a licensed female pilot.

At school I had an aviation club and a "women in aviation" club. I did
this
because at the first meeting I knew my two quiet little girls would not
stay
with my loud boys. I didn't say the boys couldn't join the women in
aviation
club and if they wanted to come they could.

Margy

"Margy Natalie" wrote in message
...
|
|
| C J Campbell wrote:
|
|
| You might want to ask some of your gay friends just how far they are
willing
| to go to destroy the Boy Scouts. If they are not allowed to meet in
public
| schools (as in South Florida) or in fire stations (as in Chicago), how
long
| will it be before they are not allowed to meet in recreation centers in
| public parks? And from there, how long will it be that they will not be
| allowed in the public parks at all?
|
| As a straight woman and mother I don't have any problem with the BSA
destroying
| itself by having a policy that bans a group of children from becoming or
staying
| members. It's hard enough for a kid to come to grips with being gay, but
then
| to be thrown out of a social group where he has been a member for years
because
| of it is awful. I don't think any group should be allowed to harm
children in
| this way. When a kid is 7 they usually don't think much about sexual
| orientation, but that same cute little cub scout at 13 or 15 might know
full
| well he is gay. Now, should he lie, hide who he is, or get thrown out of
a
| group he's belonged to for 8 years. Tough choice for a kid! BTW my
daughter
| was a girl scout, but I didn't look into boy scouts for my son because I
was not
| comfortable having my son surrounded by a group of bigots.
|

The BSA does not throw out kids who are homosexuals. The policy applies to
adult leaders only.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:HRA0b.204564$uu5.36650@sccrnsc04...
That's just (to put it politely) counterintuitive, Pete.

To you, yes it is. That's because you continue to confuse a person who is
homosexual with a person who is a pedophile.

You need to get past your prejudices and come to terms with the fact that
the only thing that makes a homosexual different from you is that they
prefer someone of their own gender. Otherwise, they follow basically the
same societal norms that we do. In particular, for most homosexual adults,
just as is the case for most heterosexual adults, the thought of having sex
with a child is just plain abhorrent.

The way you talk, a person with a girl ought to be nervous about allowing
you to supervise that child alone. Are you really in such little control of
your sexual desires, and so terribly attracted to children, that you are
unsuitable as a guardian for someone else's girl?

What you're saying (I think) is this: The odds of a heterosexual guy being
attracted to my 13 year old son are THE SAME AS those of a homosexual guy
being attracted to my son?

That is basically true, and is in fact what I'm saying. The statistics bear
that out. Most pedophiles are not homosexuals, and yet most pedophiles prey
equally on girls and boys.

The gender of the victim isn't the attraction. The age is.

I think we're back to calling the sky green here. Do you really believe
this?

I not only believe it, I have seen the statistics that prove it.

Pete