Babwa Wawa: A "tolerance wall" is some kind of f*&cking copout for an Eagle project. An eagle service project should involve at least 40 person-hours of work.

That said, screw the BSA and their intolerance.

My Eagle Scout project took 6 weekends of work w/ help of others.

And echoing their other point, screw the BSA.

Joe Blowme: Im sure they too can apply for support, gov cant descriminate. So what is your deal again? Too lazy to do all the set up work yourself to create your own club?

It was your idea, Joe. You want to form a Gay Scouts and be Gaymaster, you go do it.

p51d007: Sorry, it is a PRIVATE organization with KNOWN rules.

Read the thread, then get back to us.

BendreGiant: I am an eagle scout, and this shiat makes me sick to my stomach. If he earned the badges and did the project, give him the damned rank. I had to fake God for 3 years for mine, and it was BS then. Give the kid a break.

So...you're admitting that you lied to get your Eagle Badge.

And this makes you an authority to pass moral judgment on the BSA how?

coolschool_dropout: liam76: Scouts are huge in my family, so honestly, no I didn't think it was that rare.

That being said I still think a guy who has worked to get it, but won't hide what he truly believes to check a box is a lot more rare.

OK. I imagine your family is pretty large but, really? Six tenths of a percent isn't rare? Just because your family is into it and everybody is an Eagle, doesn't mean it's not rare. It just means that it's not rare in your family. Eagle is slightly easier now, but still less than 2% of all kids in Scouting attain Eagle.

My family was WAY involved also. Years and years of Scouting. Thousands of dollars and hours poured into the organization. We're all pretty much retired now.

liam76: That being said I still think a guy who has worked to get it, but won't hide what he truly believes to check a box is a lot more rare.

True. But what seems too common, is to complain about something when you KNOW the outcome of decisions well before. If you want something, but are denied because you broke the rules, you can't complain when you don't get it. I feel for the kid, I really do. But that doesn't change the fact that he knew the rules and broke them at the eleventh hour. It's not right, but that's the fact.

I wish he could get it. Sounds like he deserves it. It's a shame and a stupid, short-sighted and bigoted policy.

I wasn't clear. There a lot of eagle scouts in my family, so o didn't think it was that rare. Never looked into the stats. It is much more rare than I thought.

He didn't 'break the rules' he was honest. I was a life scout and did a lot of leg work for my project but didn't go through with it because I was very athiest (bounced back and forth for a few years after that so it was teen athiest ). I respect him more than a Guy who gets it and says that bit was BS.

Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what you proclaim is his holy book and use it as a weapon and a reason to oppress, harass, and murder. Then you have the audacity to cry "OPPRESSION!!" when people stand up to your bullshiat. You don't follow anything about your precious god. You took his good and made it your evil. So take your holy horseshiat and shove it back up your festering asses.

Duke_leto_Atredes: Theaetetus: reaperducer: Don't believe in what the Scouts believe? Then don't join.

I thought the Scouts believed in covering up tens of thousands of instances of child rape. Simply "not joining" doesn't seem to be enough of a response.

That was gay people attempting to corrupt our kids, we need to protect our kids and ban gays from public life until we can find a cure for this sickness

"Herp de derp, it's the gay agenda spreading a physical illness like it's a bacteria, all dah gays are pedos too, doo dee doo I'mma da next Galistein, wheeee!" Your kind can eat a shotgun.

Seems like every couple months there's someone else crying about the Boy Scouts being anti-gay. That's like complaining that the KKK is anti-black. It's a stupid argument. The boy scouts organization was founded specifically to keep kids busy so they wouldn't become "sexual deviants", which meant then what "gay" means now. If you don't like anti-gay groups, don't join one.

And don't eat corn flakes, they were invented to give kids boring, bland food so they wouldn't get all excited and turn gay.

/true story
//not anti-gay, 100% don't-care, just don't like people whining at something for being what it was designed to be

Debeo Summa Credo: I honestly don't buy the $8m number that the anti-boy scout website threw out there.... Not going to get bent out of shape about costs of military personnel attending jamborees or implied free rent on governmental land. If the govt writes a check to BSA for $8m a year, you are right that I think it should stop.

Oh please. If we showed you a copy of the front and back of a cashed $8 million check from the U.S. government to the Boy Scouts with "Screw the Queers" written in the memo section, you'd be all "Not going to get bent out of shape about this until I see the original check and an itemized receipt for exactly what it paid for." And after we gave you that you'd quibble about individual line items.

thoreau: Seems like every couple months there's someone else crying about the Boy Scouts being anti-gay. That's like complaining that the KKK is anti-black. It's a stupid argument. The boy scouts organization was founded specifically to keep kids busy so they wouldn't become "sexual deviants", which meant then what "gay" means now. If you don't like anti-gay groups, don't join one.

And don't eat corn flakes, they were invented to give kids boring, bland food so they wouldn't get all excited and turn gay.

/true story
//not anti-gay, 100% don't-care, just don't like people whining at something for being what it was designed to be

The corn flakes was to prevent masturbation, which was considered "Sexual deviancy" back then, along with women having sexual urges at all as well as simply having an erection at any time. Why aren't the BSA also against those?

/God says there are many things that are evil and worthy of being executed, why do Christians only focus on the most vague one of them?

Keizer_Ghidorah: thoreau: Seems like every couple months there's someone else crying about the Boy Scouts being anti-gay. That's like complaining that the KKK is anti-black. It's a stupid argument. The boy scouts organization was founded specifically to keep kids busy so they wouldn't become "sexual deviants", which meant then what "gay" means now. If you don't like anti-gay groups, don't join one.

And don't eat corn flakes, they were invented to give kids boring, bland food so they wouldn't get all excited and turn gay.

/true story
//not anti-gay, 100% don't-care, just don't like people whining at something for being what it was designed to be

The corn flakes was to prevent masturbation, which was considered "Sexual deviancy" back then, along with women having sexual urges at all as well as simply having an erection at any time. Why aren't the BSA also against those?

/God says there are many things that are evil and worthy of being executed, why do Christians only focus on the most vague one of them?

Because the overwhelming majority of the population isn't gay, so it's very easy to say being gay is a "sin" without worrying about offending the people who fill your coffers. Churches can no longer take a hard line against things like divorce, masturbation, women having sexual autonomy, because that makes up most of their membership roles. Gay people, however, are still an acceptable target. Although, even that is fading, as more and more gay people come out and more and more straight people realize that at least one person they love is gay, and that person isn't the evil sexual deviant the church always said they were.

timujin: I want everyone to know that [the Eagle award] should be based on accomplishment, not your sexual orientation.

Should be? What the fark does that have to do with it? The Scouts, while considered an "American institution" are a private group of homophobes who have spent the last forty years (at least) covering for child molesters. If that's the kind of organization you wish to have the highest honors in, go ahead, but it makes you look like an idiot for doing so once you're aware of who they really are..

So, it's a church?

Debeo Summa Credo: Okay, so basically no significant support.

Wrong.

First of all, one cent is one cent too much.

But it's much more. The Department of Defense spends hundreds of thousands of tax dollars helping the Scouts run their Jamboree. A few years ago Congress ordered the minting of a coin marking the centennial of Scouting. Congress ordered that the coin be sold with a surcharge, and the surcharge be donated to the Scouts. The surcharge was $10 per coin and the Scouts made $3.5 million off the sale. Now, I realize that both of the cases I mention do not involve handing over a check to the Scouts, but Congress and the Department of Defense used their authority and Federal infrastructure to provide in kind and financial support - to the tune of $3.5 million - for the Scouts. And you dismiss that as "no significant support". I'd call $3.5 million significant. But I'm just a Godless homo.

And that's not even getting into the local schools, police and fire departments etc. that make their facilities available to Scouts free of charge.

coolschool_dropout: He had completed the requirements and only had to keep quiet until he had it in his hands and it was "official".

I guess he decided having a badge that is supposed to represent (among other things) honesty was less important than actually living honestly.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what you proclaim is his holy book and use it as a weapon and a reason to oppress, harass, and murder. Then you have the audacity to cry "OPPRESSION!!" when people stand up to your bullshiat. You don't follow anything about your precious god. You took his good and made it your evil. So take your holy horseshiat and shove it back up your festering asses.

They are free to go ahead and ban blacks, and brunettes, and non-midgets and anyone else they want to. Again, they are a private organization and are free to do so. The Supreme Court ruled that. Is it retarded? Of course it is. That is why so many members quit after that lawsuit (myself included). That is why so many civic organizations stopped supporting them.

As for claiming to follow a being of love and tolerance, I never made any such claim, either in this discussion or while a member of the BSA.

Also, which farking part of "I quit the Boy Scouts because of their discrimination policy" do you not understand? Let me try this again. I quit the Boy Scouts because of their discrimination policy. And while I support their right to teach the values they want to teach, I do not believe in that right. I is the same with the KKK or Neo Nazis or the Roman Catholic Church or any other similar group protected by the 1st Amendment. Just because I fully support their Constitutionally protected right to free speech does mean that I support or believe in the message they preach. So, yeah, I fully support the BSA on their right to throw this kid out, but only because of the 1st Amendment. I do not, however, support the rules that they used to determine he should be thrown out. Clear enough for you now?

Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what you proclaim is his holy book and use it as a weapon and a reason to oppress, harass, and murder. Then you have the audacity to cry "OPPRESSION!!" when people stand up to your bullshiat. You don't follow anything about your precious god. You took his good and made it your evil. So take your holy horseshiat and shove it back up your festering asses.

They are free to go ahead and ban blacks, and brunettes, and non-midgets and anyone else they want to. Again, they are a private organization and are free to do so. The Supreme Court ruled that. Is it retarded? Of course it is. That is why so many members quit after that lawsuit (myself included). That is why so many civic organizations stopped supporting them.

As for claiming to follow a being of love and tolerance, I never made any such claim, either in this discussion or while a member of the BSA.

Also, which farking part of "I quit the Boy Scouts because of their discrimination policy" do you not understand? Let me try this again. I quit the Boy Scouts because of their discrimination policy. And while I support their right to teach the values they want to teach, I do not support their belief that homosexuality is a sin. I is the same with the KKK or Neo Nazis or the Roman Catholic Church or any other similar group protected by the 1st Amendment. Just because I fully support their Constitutionally protected right to free speech does mean that I support or believe in the message they preach. So, yeah, I fully support the BSA on their right to throw this kid out, but only because of the 1st Amendment. I do not, however, support the rules that they used to determine he should be thrown out. Clear enough for you now?

Fixed That For Myself.

Mock26: They are free to go ahead and ban blacks, and brunettes, and non-midgets and anyone else they want to. Again, they are a private organization and are free to do so. The Supreme Court ruled that. Is it retarded? Of course it is. That is why so many members quit after that lawsuit (myself included). That is why so many civic organizations stopped supporting them.

Actually, the civil rights act of '64 said they cannot ban blacks or brunettes. Not sure about the non-midget part though.

PallMall: Mock26: They are free to go ahead and ban blacks, and brunettes, and non-midgets and anyone else they want to. Again, they are a private organization and are free to do so. The Supreme Court ruled that. Is it retarded? Of course it is. That is why so many members quit after that lawsuit (myself included). That is why so many civic organizations stopped supporting them.

Actually, the civil rights act of '64 said they cannot ban blacks or brunettes. Not sure about the non-midget part though.

Actually, according to Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, private clubs are exempt.

Mock26: Actually, according to Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, private clubs are exempt.

Tell the ACLU that.

If all businesses re-opened as private clubs, the "Private Club" exemption would get tossed in short order.

Mock26: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what you proclaim is his holy book and use it as a ...

Yet you still say that they're perfectly within their rights for discriminating because of biological reasons they dislike. A decent, intelligent, and compassionate person would put his or her foot down and say "No, we are not going to stand for this".

PallMall: Mock26: Actually, according to Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, private clubs are exempt.

Tell the ACLU that.

If all businesses re-opened as private clubs, the "Private Club" exemption would get tossed in short order.

The Supreme Court ruled that the BSA was a private organization.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what you proclaim is his holy book and use it as a ...

Yet you still say that they're perfectly within their rights for discriminating because of biological reasons they dislike. A decent, intelligent, and compassionate person would put his or her foot down and say "No, we are not going to stand for this".

No, a decent, intelligent and compassionate person would not presume to tell others what to think and believe.

Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what you proclaim is his holy bo ...

Hey, you wanna defend evil, knock yourself out. I won't. I'll tell them what I think of them and to get a clue and with the 21st century, along with anyone who thinks they're in the right.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what you proclaim is his holy book and use it as a ...

Yet you still say that they're perfectly within their rights for discriminating because of biological reasons they dislike. A decent, intelligent, and compassionate person would put his or her foot down and say "No, we are not going to stand for this".

No, a decent, intelligent and compassionate person would not presume to tell others what to think and believe.

Hey, you wanna defend evil, knock yourself out. I won't. I'll tell them what I think of them and to get a clue and with the 21st century, along with anyone who thinks they're in the right.

Hey, you wanna cloak yourself in self-righteousness and try to tell people what to believe and force your moral beliefs upon everyone around you, then you really are no better than those same narrow minded bigots within the Boy Scouts who have banned homosexuals from the organization. It is funny how you presume in your arrogance that because you are morally right and just that everyone has to think like you do. Well, funny in a sad and pathetic sort of a way. To paraphrase Jackson or Voltaire, I may not agree with what someone says, but I will defend with my life their right to say it. You, however, would presume to suppress anything and everything that you disagree with.

Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what yo ...

Blah blah blah stop being intolerant of my intolerance, evil must exist for there to be good, if you kill him you will be just like him.

Like I said, you can defend evil, hatred, and bigotry all you want. I won't. Some things just don't work in the "we must allow everything in order to be fair" mindset. I suppose you'd be fine with people who practiced hatred and bigotry towards redheads, dwarfism, hairy-armed men, or people over six feet tall, too?

Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.


You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what yo ...

Blah blah blah stop being intolerant of my intolerance, evil must exist for there to be good, if you kill him you will be just like him.

Like I said, you can defend evil, hatred, and bigotry all you want. I won't. Some things just don't work in the "we must allow everything in order to be fair" mindset. I suppose you'd be fine with people who practiced hatred and bigotry towards redheads, dwarfism, hairy-armed men, or people over six feet tall, too?

As part of a private organization, yeah, I would be fine with their Constitutionally protected rights of free speech and free association. For some reason, though, you seem to think that because I support their rights of free speech and free association that I agree with what they preach. Oh well, I have repeatedly said that I do not support or condone their message, only that in this county they are not only free to preach intolerance and hatred but that it is a Constitutionally protected right. If you cannot see the difference then that is your problem, not mine. But, continue to shiat all over the rights of others if you want to. It is no skin off my back.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: Keizer_Ghidorah: Mock26: The kid is gay and is a member of an organization that opposes homosexuality. What the Hades did he expect would happen if they found out? I do not condone the BSA's policy, but I do fully support their right to be a private organization. I only hope that they will some day change their stance on this because I would really like to put my uniform back on and become a Scout Master again.

/Not gay.

He joined before he was aware of what sexuality was, like a lot of Scouts. Why should he be punished for it? Why is being straight one of the requirements for a badge that tells everyone you're a cool person?

Once he figured out his sexuality then he should have quit. As for why he is being punished, well, quite frankly, he "broke the rules." Is that right? It really does not matter whether it is morally right or wrong. What matters is that it is "right" in regards to how the BSA is set up. Do not get me wrong, I am not condoning the BSA's anti-homosexual stance. As soon as they won their landmark Supreme Court lawsuit I quit, and I have not put on my uniform since then. But, as I said previously, they are a private organization and as such are allowed to set their own rules.

Then let's make being black against the rules. Let's make being a brunette against the rules. Over four feet tall? Against the rules. Ring finger as long as the middle finger? Against the rules. Sound retarded? Yep, just like making the particular demonized natural biological aspect being discussed "against the rules".

You farkers claim to follow a being of love and tolerance and piety, and in the same breath preach hatred and intolerance and arrogance. Your god tells you to love everyone as you love him and yourself, and you scream and screech about how evil and icky humanity is. God gives you the gift of life, and you squander it being complete farktards towards others. You take what yo ...

Blah blah blah stop being intolerant of my intolerance, evil must exist for there to be good, if you kill him you will be just like him.

Like I said, you can defend evil, hatred, and bigotry all you want. I won't. Some things just don't work in the "we must allow everything in order to be fair" mindset. I suppose you'd be fine with people who practiced hatred and bigotry towards redheads, dwarfism, hairy-armed men, or people over six feet tall, too?.

One more thing, just to be perfectly clear. I am not defending evil, hatred and bigotry. I am defending the Constitution of the United States of America. There is a huge difference there. You, though, would only see the rights guaranteed by the Constitution apply to people who receive your self-righteous, sanctimonious, holier-than-thou stamp of bigoted approval. Sorry, but the Constitution applies to everyone in this country. As someone once said, the most vile speech is that which most needs to be protected. It really is sad that you cannot see the importance of protecting the rights of those whom you disagree with or may even hate, loathe and despise. But, as I said, it is no skin off my back if you want to be a bigot.