![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Really, I had no intention of starting a heated discussion on homosexual
rights with my original post. This thread confirms some things for me, though: There is no one who is so intolerant as someone who professes to hate intolerance. The Boy Scouts is a private organization devoted to the interests of straight young males. So what? Those who cannot stand the existence of such an organization genuinely deserve the appellation of "heterophobes." It is hypocritical to assert that the Scouts are attempting to impose their morality on others. They are doing no such thing. In fact, the critics are attempting to impose their morality on the Scouts, which I think is just wrong. My personal feelings about the matter is that any private organization should be able to discriminate against any group that it wishes for any reason. This is the only way to achieve and maintain any kind of healthy cultural and political diversity. Here is where modern liberalism has failed. Instead of celebrating diversity, as it claims, modern liberalism seems solely interested in an Orwellian, politically correct monoculture where the only value is "tolerance" -- which has been given a new and twisted definition meaning only "tolerant of the party line." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "C J Campbell" wrote in message ... Here is where modern liberalism has failed. Modern liberalism has failed EVERYWHERE. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
... My personal feelings about the matter is that any private organization should be able to discriminate against any group that it wishes for any reason. I agree with you there. However: * The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any sort of government support. As a private organization, they should be self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate. * As a former scout myself, I look forward to a day when in good conscience allow my own son to participate in the BSA. The BSA has a lot of great things to offer. I will continue to be vocal in my desire for the BSA to change their policy, for this reason. Will I ask the government to force a change? No, absolutely not. But if the change happens from within, as a result of pressure from without, I see nothing wrong with that. In other words, the BSA should be permitted to do what they feel is best. However, they should not be surprised when they receive social criticism. Pete |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... | "C J Campbell" wrote in message | ... | My personal feelings about the matter is that any private organization | should be able to discriminate against any group that it wishes for any | reason. | | I agree with you there. However: | | * The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any sort | of government support. As a private organization, they should be | self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate. | I really get tired of that canard. The Boy Scouts do not get any more government support than any other private organization. Yes, they are allowed to meet in public schools, just like the gay rights groups -- many of whom do not allow straight members. Yes, they are allowed to use the public parks, drive on the public roads, and even breathe the public air, despite the fact that I have heard from numerous activists who do not think any of these things should be allowed. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
... "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... | "C J Campbell" wrote in message | ... | My personal feelings about the matter is that any private organization | should be able to discriminate against any group that it wishes for any | reason. | | I agree with you there. However: | | * The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any sort | of government support. As a private organization, they should be | self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate. | I really get tired of that canard. The Boy Scouts do not get any more government support than any other private organization. Yes, they are allowed to meet in public schools, just like the gay rights groups -- many of whom do not allow straight members. Again, CJ, you are just inventing claims about your opponents from thin air, so reflexively that you don't even notice that you're doing it. Please cite even *one* example *anywhere* of a gay rights group meeting in public schools and not allowing straight members. I doubt you can even find a completely *private* gay rights group anywhere that doesn't allow straight members. Yes, they are allowed to use the public parks, drive on the public roads, and even breathe the public air, despite the fact that I have heard from numerous activists who do not think any of these things should be allowed. This is beyond ludicrous. Apparently these activists confide in you their secret intentions that they do not reveal anywhere else, or else you would be able to find at least one documented instance of activists who oppose Scouts' use of public parks or roads. Back in the real world, CJ, groups like the ACLU that are at the forefront of the gay rights movement are also the most adamantly in *support* of the free-speech rights of those they disagree with, such as when the ACLU defends the rights of Nazis to march in the streets of Skokie. --Gary |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well, Gary, you can call me a liar if you wish, but in fact gay rights
activists have posted their opinion on rec.scouting.usa and rec.scouting.issues that BSA should not be allowed to use public facilities, including parks and roads, because to do so constitutes a government subsidy of a discriminatory group. You can fantasize all you want, but your refusal to accept the facts does not change them. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
* The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any
sort of government support. As a private organization, they should be self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate. 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. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:%U90b.183507$uu5.35115@sccrnsc04... This argument was used against the Scouts here in Iowa City, and has resulted in them being charged the "corporate rate" for using the schools when they want to hold a meeting or function. Of course, this price is impossibly high, and has resulted in the Scouts being driven out of the schools. Strangely enough, the Scouts presented a cost-benefit analysis to the School Board during the debate, proving that for every penny the City "spent" on the Scouts (by letting them use the schools for cheap) they received back five-fold in donated work, landscaping done for "Eagle Scout" projects, etc. The city actually *profited* from the Scouts, because they did work that the school district would otherwise have to buy. This argument did not sway the gay community, and the Scouts were effectively banned. Cogent argument will never sway the gay community. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message .net... "Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:%U90b.183507$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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jim Baker" wrote in message et... 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. I don't believe I've posted anything at all about the BSA or any similar group. 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 Example? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Stupid Question About Newsgroups | RST Engineering | General Aviation | 1 | January 17th 05 05:59 PM |
Re; What do you think? | Kelsibutt | Naval Aviation | 0 | September 29th 03 06:55 AM |
Newsgroups and Email | Jim Weir | Home Built | 8 | July 8th 03 11:30 PM |
Newsgroups and Email | Jim Weir | Owning | 8 | July 8th 03 11:30 PM |