Some people are just F**CKED UP!!!! Where does this ignorance come from?

Voil said "I say first and foremost, no discrimination against other human beings period, in the private just as much as the public domain. Then and only then, it would make sense to allow freedom to believe and practice, or not believe and not practice a particular religion, in a private context only."

Well,

Suppose a gay rights group wants to put on a cartoon just for kids, with explicit sex scenes in graphic detail, and demands the right to the Saturday morning time slot in broadcast television, would this be a first amendment issue? I hardly think so.

Rules of public decency are independent of religion. Even though some like to say it is only a religious matter, certain things are just so deviant as to be wholesale rejected by society as undesirable. As to whether gay behavior falls in that category, depends on your perspective.

Freedom of speech has long been subject to decency rules.

philosopher,

Have you no respect for yourself?!?!?

I feel for you. How can you allow such sloppy, irresponsiple and demagogic mushy brainwork?!?!?

Where do you come up with these jello fabulations:

You really wrote this 'intellectual flatulence':

''... Suppose a gay rights group wants to put on a cartoon just for kids, with explicit sex scenes in graphic detail, and demands the right to the Saturday morning time slot in broadcast television...''

Can't speak for him, but I don't think 'spider' would even support you with that kind of unintelligent mushy rhetoric!!!

It's not provocative, it's not intelligent, it's not on topic, ... IT'S PURE UNADULTERATERED FREE SPEECH ABUSE!!!

Of course you have the right to abuse free speech 'phil', but be clear I'll keep claiming my right of free speech to denounce what I perceive as abuse.

What do gays have to do with the absolute and categorical rejection of '... explicit sex scenes in graphic detail...' for Saturday morning cartoons. What the heck does the first amendment have todo with this.

Whether gay, hetero, pedo, maniaco, or yours 'philo',
'... explicit sex scenes in graphic detail...' will not be appropriate content for Saturday morning cartoons in our lifetime. Human beings, gays and heteros alike know that. What kind of troubled childhood have you been subjected to, that would have you come up with these distorted and twisted sophisms. You should be ashamed.

Really mushy brainwork. You need to regroup 'phil'!!!

You're whipping a froth out of egg whites there Voil. Who cares.

You refer to the issue of gays in scouts as a first amendment issue, and I'm pointing out that it is not. My example was good for illustrating the point.

So basically your attack against my comments makes it apparent that you were unable to dispute the content of the matter. I'm surprised you couldn't do a little better on this one. But then I was right after all. It is not a first amendment issue, so what could you possibly say?

Furthermore, you ignored the logical explanation of my position on the previous post, so it seems to me that yours is not a serious commentary anyway.

So what about it Spider? Is Voil right? Is it a first amendment issue?

KID.....

Thats just ****ed up, or as we said in the military SNAFU!!!!

'phil' (I refuse to spell out your pseudo :))


A pararagraph of the article 'fitness' provided, reads as follows:

'... The Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that Scouts, as a private group, have a First Amendment right to bar gays from membership...'

City officials say they cannot legally rent taxpayer-owned property for a nominal sum to a private organization that discriminates. That 'legally cannot rent at nominal...' is entirely based on the 'establishement rule' of same fist amendment.

Read slowly 'phil',

THIS TOPIC HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT !!!

Make an effort 'phil'. It's embarassasing.

Read the opening post slowly, and then go educate yourself on the 'First Amendment'. The web, an encyclopedia, your local library, a friend are the many sources of information!!!

If you still don't understand, please don't post.

Philosopher,

I'm disgusted with your post. Never have I met anybody with as sick an imagination as yours.

Phil, are you suggesting that because of some boy being gay that he might not be able to control himself in an environment surrounded by other boys? What about heterosexual boys at the same age? Can they not contain themselves?
It makes absolutely no difference in your sexual orientation as to whether or not you're able to deal with your urges around those you might be attracted to. If you can't, then you likely have other problems that need addressing that have no bearing on your preferences.

It's becoming painfully apparent that some posters aren't comfortable with either their own sexuality or are afraid of anything that is perceived to be "different".
Leave the dark ages in the past where they belong and educate yourselves.

Right on 'kidatheart70', and invisible.

Felt a bit alone here! Was starting to wonder!

Need to be compassionate with 'phil' though, I'm sure deep inside, he means well.

A ruthless 'tough-love' kind of compassion though!!!

:)



'EDUCATE'

Before faith, believing, or all the religious 'dogma' in the world, is the key to human beings 'making it' !

The ethymology of the word is 'to extract the barbaric nature of human beings'!!!

Educate, brings an alternative, a sort of intelectual dialectic neo-cortex construct, which builds a civilized understanding of one's surrounding, and fundamentally replaces the barbaric reptilian brain, 'automatic' and instinctive flight/fight response to anything and everything.

The reptilian brain, it could be said controls humans beings. A bit of in spite of us syndrome. It brings the kind of mystical and irrational response: '... I don't why, I just can't stand homosexuals!!!', or worse, '... I know exactly why I hate all homosexulas!!!, or their homosexuality, or their lifetstyles, or their looks, or whatever!!!

Let's help 'ruthless-compassionaltely' our barbaric friends on these forums, and litterally educate the 'crap' out of them!!!

Siddharta, Jesus, Allah, Socrates, Plato, Einstein, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Mandela, to name a very few have contributed so much to extact our own barbaric nature, isn't the least we could do for 'phil, 'spider' and the little 'caolina' ?!?!?

What a new meaning I have gleaned for the word "Philosopher"!..

I just never equated it to comedy...Until I read your quaint posts..

I am rolling on the floor..

Thank you, indeed, for the laughs!!

'bibby7' SIR,

You are my Viking of Choice!!!

Ha Ha Ha. You guys are making me laugh.

Voil, city officials can rent property to anyone for any price they want. Just some city council member or some such has a bone to pick there is suddenly am issue. Maybe the person who stirred up the mess with the city in the first place was the problem.

All you guys/girls who want your 11 to 17 year old boys to be handed over to gays to satisfy the agenda of a sideline activist group might consider starting your own scout group, if you are so offended. You could call it Gay scouts, for example. They could all sit around talking about how they feel about each other's private parts or something. They can give out merit badges for creative sex with young children or whatever.

As for me, scouts is not about sex. Its about children learning to do things they never had a chance to learn before, developing self confidence and independence. If that is too tough for a city to understand, if it is not worth the support of the city by reduced rent on a meeting hall, the city should take a hard look at itself, and get its eyes off each other's pants.

If you have a problem with my comments, tough luck. I'm happy, well adjusted, and I support the boy scouts in whatever they have to do to keep their group about development and not about sex. Gay kids can do whatever they want, I don't care, but nobody should tell me they have a right to sleep in a tent, unsupervised, with my children or the children of others for that matter.

Why don't parents support something called coed scouts, where 11 to 17 years old children, girls and boys mixed are sent to camp in tents with each other and no adult supervision? Why? Would you send your 12 year old daughter to sleep in tents on camping trips with boys who might be up to 17 years old?

Nobody else sees the ridiculousness in this? Nobody else sees the similarity to mixing gays into a group of young boys? You don't have to hate gays to not want your 11 year old having sex.

I'm shaking my head and rolling my eyes here.

I don't hate gays. That's not the point at all. Just love my children. If you don't love yours, or if your particular kind of tough love for your children is sink or swim, go for it, toss them in the water with a bunch of adolescent gays and wait and see how they behave when they come home. See if you can determine if they have or have not been abused sexually. If they have you can help them adjust by supporting them in their choice, whether it was accidental, coerced or forced upon them.

Are you people in this topic aware of the age range in the organization, from 11 to 17 years? To an 11 year old, a 17 year old is twice his size and much more well educated and sexually developed. Its lambs and lions.

Here's to your tough love.

Kid, I'm not suggesting they can't control themselves, I'm suggesting their particular motivation might well not be to control themselves, but to have a little fun with the children. Would you approve of that?

Invisible, what part of my post are you disgusted with? Maybe I can make the point a little more clear for you. Its not my imagination that is so bad. What is so bad is that people have on rose colored glasses so that they don't see the need to watch out for their children.

Let me tell you this. You don't send your children to play on the freeway. There are cars moving fast there and it is dangerous. It does not take a sick imagination to think of what might happen top them if you send them out to play on the freeway. For those who lack the imagination, others should remind them. Or they could just let people send their kids to play on the freeway, after all a person does not have to be concerned about the children of others.

So now that I have thwarted all of your personal versions of logic I hope you will all take a lesson from this and quit trying to debate this ridiculous point.

Karmafury - question
Do all of the branches of the Boy Scouts throughout the world, discriminate? Or is it only in America?
Looks like you’ve done some research so I thought I’d ask!


Philosopher writes:
“What is homophobic about being a responsible parent? What is homophobic about an organization trying to be responsible to those parents?”

You never really say what you fear from having a homosexual involved with the activities you present.
What, exactly, is it that you think would happen?

Furthermore, what responsible parent, would teach their children to be bigoted? Now I can understand teaching your children to beware of strangers, I can certainly understand a parent running through the whole ‘good touch – bad touch’ gambit as well. But exactly where and how do you teach a child to fear people based on their religion, or the color of their skin or the normalcy of their body, or who they are attracted to. If that’s part of the responsibility of being a parent, we need better parenting classes.

I would venture to say that perhaps your fear might be that your son might find an awakening, and may easily be drawn into temptation. But, if you believed that every kid about that age in a similar group setting, with similar goals, like the Boy Scouts, then you HAVE TO KNOW that being gay does no make one a pervert, and that gay kid is just as likely to run from an offer as to accept it, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER KID.

We don’t often have major difference Philosopher, but this time I have to say - How dare you or anyone else stand on the premise that being gay automatically makes one any more perverted than any heterosexual. Tsk tsk tsk. Shaking finger emoticon

AND YET MORE :
“”Suppose a gay rights group wants to put on a cartoon just for kids, with explicit sex scenes in graphic detail, and demands the right to the Saturday morning time slot in broadcast television, would this be a first amendment issue? I hardly think so. “”

Where have you gotten this idea that gays are degenerates – that even gay teenagers are somehow pedophiles, and perverted?

“…, certain things are just so deviant as to be wholesale rejected by society as undesirable. As to whether gay behavior falls in that category, depends on your perspective”

YOU TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK IS NORMAL – and then we’ll have a place to start with what is deviant! And let's not forget to define the word deviant. It has nothing to do with degenerate activities.

Sorry, answering out of oder, I got behind.

Voil
“I say first and foremost, no discrimination against other human beings period, in the private just as much as the public domain. “

That’s very true but I’m not sure even you understand the scope of the problem. Discrimination is so liberally strewn within our laws, that when some small thing, like this Boy issue, finally is recognized for what it is, there is cause for celebration. That celebration takes the form of grabbing the issue and running with it. There are those who think we take it too far. Yes the Boy Scouts has a lot to offer, and I have celebrated with those boys who have won the highest honors, my sons best friends. But I can’t let any foundation stand behind a façade while it discriminates.

There are a massive number of qualifiers on the numerous laws that are invoked at the local, city, and state level of every state, and it’s in place because of a fault in the Federal Code. There are only so many battles a minority can fight. So we choose to support the main ones – The Mathew Shepard Act, ENDA (Employment Non-discrimination Act), the marriage amendment. Enactments at the Federal level take a long time. So in the mean time, it’s the little victories that are touted around on a banner. Because it’s the only way to show America that the discrimination that is being claimed, exists at all levels, including those respected long standing organizations like the Boy Scouts.

I would be remiss in my duty to the foundations and principals that this country is so happy to boast about, if I did not make known the flaws that could be affecting the freedoms and rights of everyone.
So I will just continue to point out those place where I see the affects of those flaws.




Voil:
“The intent of the first amendment is division of state and church.
This division allows for the public space to be free of religious discrimination and oppression, while not forbidding those whom chose ‘oppression’, to practice it in a private context.”

This is the pulpit from whence the greatest of injustices is extends from. The saddest part is that there are so very many, who don’t want to be associated with that pulpit, but still they do nothing .

KID - awe have another!

Have you lost it!!?

I mean crap man! I don't know much about this link and who wrote it...but it is well known that it is heterosexual men that do the most molesting of boys AND girls.
There is very little to support that theory of homosexuals molesting anyone.
This falsehood of misconceptions sickens me. False, false false....

The boy scouts of America is NOT a Christian organization nor is it fair! It for years was a boys only. All good...it is called "boy scouts", but they since let girls in. Not onmly have they let gorls in...but also have let in those that have no religious values. Values...hmmmmmm....not what I meant to say. What am I trying to say? Uhhhhhh, uhhh...help me out here Di, or Jess. Why not gays?? Segregation is illegal now. Ahemmm...remember??
Kat

Ooops...I didn't mean to say "anyone", I meant to say molesting in a capacity to warrant fear of gay people. I am sure there are some that are responsible for bad behaviors as well as straight men, but we hear of it very little.
Kat

Oh...and excuse my spelling errors.

Philosopher - it is so obvious that you are not aware of the nature of those around you.

To call you Philosopher leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

It's unfortunate that you are not alone. And it's also unfortunate that GLBT are still forced to hide.

It's a catch 22, you see. They hide because of people like you. But if they didn't have to hide, you might be shown who they really are, and how close they live to you, every day. But you can't even tell who they are and you will never see them, because they're not what you're expecting to see.

Philosopher writes:

"Suppose a gay rights group wants to put on a cartoon just for kids, with explicit sex scenes in graphic detail, and demands the right to the Saturday morning time slot in broadcast television, would this be a first amendment issue? I hardly think so."

I had no idea they were considering putting South Park on on Saturday morning. :) But quite right you are, mostly because the same people who freeze-framed Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction 500 times so they could be sure they were properly offended wouldn't allow it to happen.

"Rules of public decency are independent of religion. Even though some like to say it is only a religious matter, certain things are just so deviant as to be wholesale rejected by society as undesirable."

Which brings us to the ads on tee vee for :::ahem:::: personal/intimate lubricants. I almost never watch network tee vee and I refuse to be taken by the highwaymen of the CATV industry, but it wasn't too long ago I saw an ad for these. I can well imagine the look on my face was a WTF Kodak moment.

" As to whether gay behavior falls in that category, depends on your perspective."

So, lemme guess your perspective on the above.
"Astroglide" ad: Thumbs up. "Boy Butter" ad: Thumbs down?

-Kerry O.

Red, Kat
Voil, Bobby
If this was a school teacher (public or private) would it still be the same arguement Phil? Don't schools have outdoor ed. classes and field trips?
Where do you get the idea that children are at any greater risk of ANYTHING by being around gay people? Do you think that homosexuality might rub off on them? I'm trying to understand you line of thinking here but I'm having a REALLY tough time doing so. Molestation, pedophilia, rape and things of this nature have nothing to do with being gay!
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS PHIL? A simple yes or no answer will do, thank you.