Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Afraid to admit you are a bigot? I understand.
As I am not a bigot, there is nothing to admit.
Afraid to admit that you don't respect the individual liberty of others?
Of course I respect the individual liberty of others. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to my death your right to say it." I firmly believe in that - always have.
I do respect the "individual liberty" of the Boy Scouts to kick gays out of their orgranization if they are discovered. That doesn't mean that I don't think that such action is extremely BIGOTED and I do not respect the motivation behind the action.
I am glad you are not a bigot. For a moment there, I was afraid you endorsed the motivation behind the Scout's policy.
Link please? No one asks ten year olds about butt sex.
Its about the leaders. Period.
chanel, in the article you linked, it is reported that the Boy Scouts have a policy against "admitting gay youth". Care to explain?
In the 2000 SCOTUS case cited they were affirmed to have the right to have a sort of DADT policy. They don't ask, but if it becomes known.............
chanel, in the article you linked, it is reported that the Boy Scouts have a policy against "admitting gay youth". Care to explain?
In the 2000 SCOTUS case cited they were affirmed to have the right to have a sort of DADT policy. They don't ask, but if it becomes known.............
"Known"? How the fuck is to become "known" as to a 7 year old who prolly has not yet mastered the basic concepts of human sexuality? And yet, trust me when I say anyone spending time with my cousin -- even in the hyper-repressed fifties -- knew good and well he was gay.
Some male kids have an affect that is clearly feminine. Are you saying these kids don't get grief from the Boy Scouts?
It doesn't matter if it is okay with me.
Afraid to admit you are a bigot? I understand.
As I am not a bigot, there is nothing to admit.
Afraid to admit that you don't respect the individual liberty of others?
In the 2000 SCOTUS case cited they were affirmed to have the right to have a sort of DADT policy. They don't ask, but if it becomes known.............
"Known"? How the fuck is to become "known" as to a 7 year old who prolly has not yet mastered the basic concepts of human sexuality? And yet, trust me when I say anyone spending time with my cousin -- even in the hyper-repressed fifties -- knew good and well he was gay.
Some male kids have an affect that is clearly feminine. Are you saying these kids don't get grief from the Boy Scouts?
Boy Scouts of America encompasses the Eagle Scouts who are teenagers, and yes teenagers can be obviously gay, as can leaders.
As to do they get grief, I don't know, I have zero personal experience in seeing gays being given grief by the boy scouts, and I suspect you don't either.
Afraid to admit you are a bigot? I understand.
As I am not a bigot, there is nothing to admit.
Afraid to admit that you don't respect the individual liberty of others?
You all are missing the point. I don't give a shit who the BSA wants to discriminate against
As
Long
As
They
Pay
Their
Way!
Wanting free use of government land AND wanting to discriminate is LIBERAL BULLSHIT!
As I am not a bigot, there is nothing to admit.
Afraid to admit that you don't respect the individual liberty of others?
Of course I respect the individual liberty of others. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to my death your right to say it." I firmly believe in that - always have.
I do respect the "individual liberty" of the Boy Scouts to kick gays out of their orgranization if they are discovered. That doesn't mean that I don't think that such action is extremely BIGOTED and I do not respect the motivation behind the action.
I am glad you are not a bigot. For a moment there, I was afraid you endorsed the motivation behind the Scout's policy.
Why would that make a difference George? Someone who agrees with their policy towards homosexuals is less of a human? I don't get this kind of thinking. Some people just see homosexuality as wrong for religious reasons and bashing them for "bashing" gays seems just slightly hypocritical.
"PC attacks"? Give me a BREAK. OK - let's get to it.
Do you deny that the Boy Scouts exclude gays from their membership? Do you think it is "politically correct" for people to have the outrageous notion that this is, oh, I don't know, kind of BIGOTTED?
I suppose the Scouts can exclude gays. They are a private organization and I guess they aren't engaged in interstate commerce - although I could make an argument that they are. But just because they can do it, does not mean they can avoid the consequences of doing it.
And the major consequence of excluding gays is that right-thinking people will think (for very good reason) that the Boy Scouts of America appear to be run by a bunch of BIGOTS.
"Politically correct" my ass.
i disagree with bsa's decision to exclude gays, but i support bsa's mission. in reality, the only time that a person's sexual orientation becomes a part of the conversation is when that specific person chooses to make it an issue.
that's certainly their right, but to imply that bsa actively seeks out and excludes gays is simply not true in my experience.
How would an organization such as the BSA "actively seek out" and then "exclude" gays?
Are you talking about a sexual orientation question in the membership app? Are you saying they have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy?
Of course I respect the individual liberty of others. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to my death your right to say it." I firmly believe in that - always have.
I do respect the "individual liberty" of the Boy Scouts to kick gays out of their orgranization if they are discovered. That doesn't mean that I don't think that such action is extremely BIGOTED and I do not respect the motivation behind the action.
I am glad you are not a bigot. For a moment there, I was afraid you endorsed the motivation behind the Scout's policy.
Why would that make a difference George? Someone who agrees with their policy towards homosexuals is less of a human? I don't get this kind of thinking. Some people just see homosexuality as wrong for religious reasons and bashing them for "bashing" gays seems just slightly hypocritical.
It's not "bashing" to call out bigotry where bigotry exists. The BSA has enable pedophiles and like the Catholic Church, is guilty of keeping private files on pedophiles within the BSA. The majority of pedophiles who hurt young boys are heterosexual men. So if the BSA was so "concerned" about pedophilia why hasn't it been honest in profiling them? Why have they kept secret files on them instead of immediately alerting local authorities?
Wherever you find bigotry, dishonesty is in the shadow.
As I am not a bigot, there is nothing to admit.
Afraid to admit that you don't respect the individual liberty of others?
You all are missing the point. I don't give a shit who the BSA wants to discriminate against
As
Long
As
They
Pay
Their
Way!
Wanting free use of government land AND wanting to discriminate is LIBERAL BULLSHIT!
They
have
a
written
lease
agreement
and oh yeah, they built the building and have been maintaining it for 80 years.
Curiously, although the city does indeed own the building occupied by the Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, the money to construct the downtown edifice, known as the Beaux Arts building, was raised by the Boy Scouts themselves over 80 years ago pursuant to an agreement signed between the mayor and the local council. Since that time, the Council has paid all costs associated with the maintenance, repair, and capital improvements of the building, with "no financial contribution from the City," according to the complaint.
Philadelphia Pressuress Local BSA to Admit Gays or Lose Lease
Yes...what is up with that? Why the hell are they even asking?
they aren't. they never have. sorry to disappoint.
Powered by Google Docs
I couldn't really read the linked material, del. The news coverage chanel linked stated that the Boy Scouts have a policy of not admitting "gay youth". In my family, we have a gay man. Trust me when I say, I knew when we made our first holy communion together that he was gay, not that I could have told you what it meant. But yes; some kids' sexual orientation is pretty obvious fairly young.
I'm picturing little Dick being told, at 7 or 8 or 10, that he can't be a Boy Scout because he's "different". I gotta tell ya, for many kids that would be a prelude to a depression that might lead to suicide, and I cannot see any justification for it. It was this cruelty I objected to.
You seem to be claiming no such thing ever happens, and I do hope you are right. But if it does not, then what is this reported fact that "the Boy Scouts have a policy against admitting gay youth"?
Why would that make a difference George? Someone who agrees with their policy towards homosexuals is less of a human? I don't get this kind of thinking. Some people just see homosexuality as wrong for religious reasons and bashing them for "bashing" gays seems just slightly hypocritical.
It's not "bashing" to call out bigotry where bigotry exists. The BSA has enable pedophiles and like the Catholic Church, is guilty of keeping private files on pedophiles within the BSA. The majority of pedophiles who hurt young boys are heterosexual men. So if the BSA was so "concerned" about pedophilia why hasn't it been honest in profiling them? Why have they kept secret files on them instead of immediately alerting local authorities?
Wherever you find bigotry, dishonesty is in the shadow.
What does that have to do with anything? Are you seriously saying the BSA endorses pedophilia? Come on now.
What a joke. I thought you wanted a real debate , not some bullshit about they should allow homosexuals because they allow pedophiles.
I won't bother responding to you again.
"Known"? How the fuck is to become "known" as to a 7 year old who prolly has not yet mastered the basic concepts of human sexuality? And yet, trust me when I say anyone spending time with my cousin -- even in the hyper-repressed fifties -- knew good and well he was gay.
Some male kids have an affect that is clearly feminine. Are you saying these kids don't get grief from the Boy Scouts?
Boy Scouts of America encompasses the Eagle Scouts who are teenagers, and yes teenagers can be obviously gay, as can leaders.
As to do they get grief, I don't know, I have zero personal experience in seeing gays being given grief by the boy scouts, and I suspect you don't either.
I've never personally seen a ten year old's hand getting chopped off. That must mean it has not nor does not happen.
You all are missing the point. I don't give a shit who the BSA wants to discriminate against
As
Long
As
They
Pay
Their
Way!
Wanting free use of government land AND wanting to discriminate is LIBERAL BULLSHIT!
They
have
a
written
lease
agreement
and oh yeah, they built the building and have been maintaining it for 80 years.
Curiously, although the city does indeed own the building occupied by the Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, the money to construct the downtown edifice, known as the Beaux Arts building, was raised by the Boy Scouts themselves over 80 years ago pursuant to an agreement signed between the mayor and the local council. Since that time, the Council has paid all costs associated with the maintenance, repair, and capital improvements of the building, with "no financial contribution from the City," according to the complaint.
Philadelphia Pressuress Local BSA to Admit Gays or Lose Lease
Thank you for proving my point with a link. Does this mean you agree the BSA should pay their way if they want the benefits of a private organization or are you still in Liberal Land where you want them to use the city owned property for free while practicing discrimination?
It's not an issue of taxpayers subsidizing the Boy Scouts, but one of upholding a valid contract. The Boys Scouts have a lease "in perpetuity" dating back to the late 1920s. We are either a nation which respects the Rule of Law and the validity of binding contracts - or we are a nation of thugs. It's clear that the current Federal Government is favors the latter position, as we have seen repeatedly with their interference in private business arrangements. The BSA situation in Philadelphia is philosophically congruent with that thuggery.
It's not an issue of taxpayers subsidizing the Boy Scouts, but one of upholding a valid contract. The Boys Scouts have a lease "in perpetuity" dating back to the late 1920s. We are either a nation which respects the Rule of Law and the validity of binding contracts - or we are a nation of thugs. It's clear that the current Federal Government is favors the latter position, as we have seen repeatedly with their interference in private business arrangements. The BSA situation in Philadelphia is philosophically congruent with that thuggery.
The contract violates the City's law about non-profit groups using City owned property for free on the condition they don't discriminate. Rule of Law my ass. You're digging a hole for hypocrisy. Don't worry.....there are plenty of other shovelers in this thread working right beside you.
The Federal Jury are fucking idiots for voting to allow free use of government property by a group that actively discriminates. SCOTUS was correct in ruling the BSA have a right to discriminate based on the standing of being a "Private" organization but RULE OF LAW states Private organizations cannot violate public discrimination laws if they are publicly subsidized and the BSA clearly fit that category.
They
have
a
written
lease
agreement
and oh yeah, they built the building and have been maintaining it for 80 years.
Curiously, although the city does indeed own the building occupied by the Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, the money to construct the downtown edifice, known as the Beaux Arts building, was raised by the Boy Scouts themselves over 80 years ago pursuant to an agreement signed between the mayor and the local council. Since that time, the Council has paid all costs associated with the maintenance, repair, and capital improvements of the building, with "no financial contribution from the City," according to the complaint.
Philadelphia Pressuress Local BSA to Admit Gays or Lose Lease
Thank you for proving my point with a link. Does this mean you agree the BSA should pay their way if they want the benefits of a private organization or are you still in Liberal Land where you want them to use the city owned property for free while practicing discrimination?
Liberal land? HAHAHAHHAHAHA - No I want the city to uphold their end of the lease agreement, $1 per year as long as the BSA upholds their end and keeps the building maintained. Notice that nowhere in there is the city given the right to determine the BSA's membership rules. I would equally defend a group of homosexuals who had a signed lease if the city was trying to define their membership or kick them out.
