Scouts face pressure before vote on no-gays policy

It promises to be a campaign as passionate and dramatic as any big election. For the next 14 weeks, the Boy Scouts of America will be the focus of prayers, petitions and pressure tactics aimed at swaying a vote on whether to ease its ban on gays as Scouts or adult leaders.

[TomInElPaso]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Far better to come down on the side of inclusion than being on the wrong side of history. The Scouts don't have a strong history of inclusion. All you have to do is look at how long it took them to get to the integration table.

[Thundersnow]

Just say no to buggery.
The Boy Scouts should close down entirely and start up under new ownership and ask the American public for 'private' donations and remain separate from this perverted evil empire that is out to subvert and destroy the world.

[TomInElPaso]

Wouldn't you be more comfortable in another country? Say Iran under its current administration? You do know they have no homosexuals there don't you?

Thundersnow wrote:

Just say no to buggery.
The Boy Scouts should close down entirely and start up under new ownership and ask the American public for 'private' donations and remain separate from this perverted evil empire that is out to subvert and destroy the world.

[lides]

Thundersnow wrote:

Just say no to buggery.
The Boy Scouts should close down entirely and start up under new ownership and ask the American public for 'private' donations and remain separate from this perverted evil empire that is out to subvert and destroy the world.

At which point, they would still be bigots.

Why is it that opponents of inclusion can't seem to see the difference between a homosexual and pedophile?

[mark in Toronto]

Thundersnow wrote:

Just say no to buggery.
The Boy Scouts should close down entirely and start up under new ownership and ask the American public for 'private' donations and remain separate from this perverted evil empire that is out to subvert and destroy the world.

How do you handle something REALLY important in your life?
Not like this, I hope.
We are living. We are enjoying life. Why not do the same?

[Troth for Leogere]

Thundersnow wrote:

<quoted text>
The only difference between a homosexual and a msm pedophile is just that. The age. Desperate tonight are we?
Words synonymous with bigot are zealot and fanatic. Perfect descriptions of the homosexual.

Choke to death on it clown!

[lides]

Thundersnow wrote:

The only difference between a homosexual and a msm pedophile is just that. The age.

Not to bright, are you? Not all pedophiles select victims of the same sex. However all of them are perpetrating a criminal act. The same is true of no homosexual. One has to be pretty slow not to see the difference.

Thundersnow wrote:

Desperate tonight are we?

You certainly are.

Thundersnow wrote:

Words synonymous with bigot are zealot and fanatic. Perfect descriptions of the homosexual.

Why would they not want equality? They are guaranteed as much by the constitution.

So I guess we can add to your list of attributes unpatriotic?

[lides]

I always find it interesting that the vast majority of trolls are unregistered users.

[Thundersnow]

Wow lides. You impress. Well, how bout it? Why don't you pick a time and a place and you and I can get this shit outta the way since you're sooooo interested in who I am?
Deal?

[Thundersnow]

Just a reminder Lides.

Child traficking should stop trying to 'coexist' with young children and suggest that they qualify as parents because gay or straight, two men or two women should NEVER qualify as an 'alterative' parental environment. Either way it ensures said child will be deficient of either 'male' father or 'female' mother. Most detrimental being a dual male environment, for every child should be provided with the basic human right to be afforded the nurturing, compassion, and care that only a 'female' mother can provide in the child's most indelible years of their lives.

STUPID!

[Thundersnow]

No way around it.

The Rev Bill Owens says hi too Lides. Obummy hasn't returned his call. Tell praxis I said hi.
Nighty night ya old rag.

[Thundersnow]

The police of the left leaning moral web destroyers must've given lides special instructions to go after me tonite. This has gotta be a first.

[lides]

Thundersnow wrote:

Wow lides. You impress. Well, how bout it? Why don't you pick a time and a place and you and I can get this shit outta the way since you're sooooo interested in who I am?
Deal?

I don't care who you are. And, like most irrational bigots you lack the reading capacity to understand what I have implied. Namely that due to the crass nature of your comments, I doubt you could keep a registered username without being banned.

Or perhaps you like the ability to post under multiple names, but are too lazy to manage multiple log ins?

Regardless of your motives, you come across as bigoted and none too bright.

[Thundersnow]

lides wrote:

I always find it interesting that the vast majority of trolls are unregistered users.

I find it interesting that when a left wing loon disagrees with someone they call their opponent a troll. Unregistered must really really bother you eh Lides?
Poor overpaid and educated subversive decadent retard.

[lides]

Thundersnow wrote:

Just a reminder Lides.
Child traficking should stop trying to 'coexist' with young children and suggest that they qualify as parents because gay or straight, two men or two women should NEVER qualify as an 'alterative' parental environment. Either way it ensures said child will be deficient of either 'male' father or 'female' mother. Most detrimental being a dual male environment, for every child should be provided with the basic human right to be afforded the nurturing, compassion, and care that only a 'female' mother can provide in the child's most indelible years of their lives.
STUPID!

Uhm, allowing homosexual participants in the scouts is not child trafficking. Once again, you have mistaken a sexual orientation for a criminal activity.

No worry, it's a problem that many unintelligent people have. Feel free to come back to reality and offer a big boy argument, if you are able.

Thundersnow wrote:

No way around it.
The Rev Bill Owens says hi too Lides. Obummy hasn't returned his call. Tell praxis I said hi.
Nighty night ya old rag.

Clearly, I've gotten under your skin. Perhaps sometime you can grow up enough to offer an intelligent argument?

Thundersnow wrote:

The police of the left leaning moral web destroyers must've given lides special instructions to go after me tonite. This has gotta be a first.

No, I just regularly resist bigoted and ignorant people and debunk the garbage that they spew in lieu of earnest debate.

I have no problem with holding a principled disagreement with someone. I do have a problem with them advancing libelous, ignorant, and bigoted lies to generate fear, which is what you do when you make an utterly absurd argument, like equating homosexuality with pedophile and/or child trafficking.

One wonders if you are really so dim as to believe the arguments, or if you merely employ them in your role as bigot to inflame debate.

[lides]

Thundersnow wrote:

I find it interesting that when a left wing loon disagrees with someone they call their opponent a troll. Unregistered must really really bother you eh Lides?
Poor overpaid and educated subversive decadent retard.

The truth is an absolute defense against slander and libel.

You are a troll. You have on several occasions equated homosexuality, which is legal, with pedophile and child trafficking, which are not. you are either intensely ignorant, or just a bigoted blowhard, and quite frankly, I don't care which. Those, like yourself, are their own worst enemy in public discussions on such topics, as they employ inflammatory rhetoric, which is factually untrue.

Here's a clue, the scouts can still forbid sexual activity of any kind, and can and should insist upon separation of scouts and leaders in overnight functions. There is no guarantee that any adult is not a pedophile, one need only look at the scandal in the Catholic church to see that. The sad part is that the reaction to that scandal was to label it a Catholic problem, instead of addressing the real underlying problem of pedophiles.

The reality is you are not concerned about pedophiles, you are a bigot making inane excuses to justify your bigotry. Congratulations, the truth is you're still a bigot.

[EdmondWA]

Thundersnow wrote:

The only difference between a homosexual and a msm pedophile is just that. The age.

Then this also sums up the difference between heterosexuals and pedophiles that prey on the opposite sex.

But if you just lump them ALL together, without bothering to learn the difference between consenting adults and adults who abuse children, then you'll just wind up in the same situation that the Scouts (and the Catholic church) put themselves in. If you scapegoat innocent people who are no threat, then the REAL perpetrators will just make sure that they live up to your expectations of "normal", and gain access to the children that you hope to protect.

[Thundersnow]

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Uhm, allowing homosexual participants in the scouts is not child trafficking. Once again, you have mistaken a sexual orientation for a criminal activity.
No worry, it's a problem that many unintelligent people have. Feel free to come back to reality and offer a big boy argument, if you are able.
<quoted text>
Clearly, I've gotten under your skin. Perhaps sometime you can grow up enough to offer an intelligent argument?
<quoted text>
No, I just regularly resist bigoted and ignorant people and debunk the garbage that they spew in lieu of earnest debate.
I have no problem with holding a principled disagreement with someone. I do have a problem with them advancing libelous, ignorant, and bigoted lies to generate fear, which is what you do when you make an utterly absurd argument, like equating homosexuality with pedophile and/or child trafficking.
One wonders if you are really so dim as to believe the arguments, or if you merely employ them in your role as bigot to inflame debate.

I was referring to the preposterous idea of ss parenting. NOT just gay parenting but ss parenting. Good luck. Jerk.

[Quest]

Thundersnow wrote:

<quoted text>
I was referring to the preposterous idea of ss parenting. NOT just gay parenting but ss parenting..

Do you have some proof that a gay person can't be an effective parent simply because they are gay?

I mean, if there are a few well adjusted happy and healthy kids out there with gay parents, wouldn't that crush your odd theory?

[Thundersnow]

“Sexual morality is contemptible. I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life…. If only Americans knew, we are bringing them the plague!”— Sigmund Freud