Boy Scouts set to end ban on gay members

[Solar]

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/30/5457390/california-senate-votes-to-revoke.html

This is what you call "foot in the door" legislation.  It won't be long before they use this as precident to take tax exempt status from other religious orgs like Sameritans Purse and Salvation Army, then churches.

I saw this and was scratching my head, because I thought tax exempt was a Federal issue.
But regardless, this Bill is illegal because the Dims are using taxes as punitive, which is a Constitutional issue.
But you're right, they, just like Hussein are targeting Conservative groups.

[Darth Fife]

I think they found a fair compromise.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324659404578501650925094878.html

I've always viewed compromise, especially on core issues to be kind of like seeing how much poison one can take, and still survive.

-Darth

[Solar]

I've always viewed compromise, especially on core issues to be kind of like seeing how much poison one can take, and still survive.

-Darth

In truth, there was no compromise, gay children have never been an issue for the boy-scouts, it's the leadership they have a problem with.
The boy scouts claim compromise, but in truth, nothing changed.

[Mountainshield]

Isn't this really just sexualization of children?

I don't think it is a coincidence that children of hetereosexual couples usually don't become sexually active or identify sexually before around the age of 16 whereas children of homosexual couples from all the interviews I have seen seem to be obsessed with their sexual orientation from age 3-5 and up.

[MFA]

Isn't this really just sexualization of children?

I don't think it is a coincidence that children of hetereosexual couples usually don't become sexually active or identify sexually before around the age of 16 whereas children of homosexual couples from all the interviews I have seen seem to be obsessed with their sexual orientation from age 3-5 and up.

Not in my experience.  I always liked girls and saw myself as male.  At least, from as far back as I can remember.

[Mountainshield]

Not in my experience.  I always liked girls and saw myself as male.  At least, from as far back as I can remember.

Well no shit MFA. I don't think you understood my post, I worked in primary and junior high school, and it is not until late junior high that boys become seriously interested in pursuing relationship with girls other than just friendships (keep in mind i'm generalizing here).

My point is you don't see children of heterosexual couples strutting around stating that they are proud of their sexual orientation like children of homosexual couples do. Children of heterosexual couples act naturally and develope at their own pace.

This would not be an issue if it wasn't for homosexuals sexualizing children in the age they don't have any natural interest in "sex".

[kramarat]

Well no shit MFA. I don't think you understood my post, I worked in primary and junior high school, and it is not until late junior high that boys become seriously interested in pursuing relationship with girls other than just friendships (keep in mind i'm generalizing here).

My point is you don't see children of heterosexual couples strutting around stating that they are proud of their sexual orientation like children of homosexual couples do. Children of heterosexual couples act naturally and develop at their own pace.

This would not be an issue if it wasn't for homosexuals sexualizing children in the age they don't have any natural interest in "sex".

I would expand that last sentence to include liberals in general.

For whatever reason, they want children engaging in sex at younger and younger ages, along with no repercussions for that behavior; as recently witnessed with the "morning after" pill being made available to children. What they fail to acknowledge, is the devastating emotional and psychological effects that this early sex is causing...not to mention the rampant spread of disease among kids. It's both sick, and tragic.

[Mountainshield]

I would expand that last sentence to include liberals in general.

For whatever reason, they want children engaging in sex at younger and younger ages, along with no repercussions for that behavior; as recently witnessed with the "morning after" pill being made available to children. What they fail to acknowledge, is the devastating emotional and psychological effects that this early sex is causing...not to mention the rampant spread of disease among kids. It's both sick, and tragic.

Thats true, MTV even has a show to remove the stigma of teen pregnancy, its called teen mom or something.

It seems to me that most people are fed up with it though, even parents who were brought up in liberal homes have very conservative values when it comes to their homes, yet vote liberal in elections.

[kramarat]

That's true, MTV even has a show to remove the stigma of teen pregnancy, its called teen mom or something.

It seems to me that most people are fed up with it though, even parents who were brought up in liberal homes have very conservative values when it comes to their homes, yet vote liberal in elections.

I'm not sure why it still goes on.

I saw a show, or read an article a couple of years ago, where they had interviewed females that took part in the "free love" movement in the late 60's. As they had aged and gained some wisdom, they had come to realize that they had essentially been encouraged, (by men), to become sluts to serve the needs of the guys. They unanimously regretted what they had done. Of course, they weren't willing to say that they had come to embrace conservative values.

[Mountainshield]

I'm not sure why it still goes on.

I saw a show, or read an article a couple of years ago, where they had interviewed females that took part in the "free love" movement in the late 60's. As they had aged and gained some wisdom, they had come to realize that they had essentially been encouraged, (by men), to become sluts to serve the needs of the guys. They unanimously regretted what they had done. Of course, they weren't willing to say that they had come to embrace conservative values.

I listen a lot to Dennis Prager, and his argument is that it is the emotional indoctrination of the leftist education and MSM that instills a emotional rather than rational approach to politics. I.e conservatives are greedy, wellfare is good because it means you support "charity", postmodernist relativism that all cultures are equal etc. At both university and private sphere when you confront a liberal they usually begin screaming and trying to overpower you with strawmen argument never letting you speak because they are emotionally unable to comprehend economical/sociological facts and fallacies, which also explains why many intelligent people sounds like middleschool students when they talk about politics which is outside they're field of education.

It doesn't matter how much we conservatives have reality and empirical facts on our side, what matters is what feels emotionally good. No wonder conservatives give more to charity for whatever reasons, for liberals its enough to just vote democratic/left and you are a good person, no concept of individual responsability whatsoever, except maybe carbon footprint.

[redlom xof]

If homosexuality is a choice, why don't you choose to be a homosexual ? Just for a while, see if you like it.

I listen a lot to Dennis Prager, and his argument is that it is the emotional indoctrination of the leftist education and MSM that instills a emotional rather than rational approach to politics. I.e conservatives are greedy, wellfare is good because it means you support "charity", postmodernist relativism that all cultures are equal etc. At both university and private sphere when you confront a liberal they usually begin screaming and trying to overpower you with strawmen argument never letting you speak because they are emotionally unable to comprehend economical/sociological facts and fallacies, which also explains why many intelligent people sounds like middleschool students when they talk about politics which is outside they're field of education.

It doesn't matter how much we conservatives have reality and empirical facts on our side, what matters is what feels emotionally good. No wonder conservatives give more to charity for whatever reasons, for liberals its enough to just vote democratic/left and you are a good person, no concept of individual responsability whatsoever, except maybe carbon footprint.

Mountainsheild, judging by your posts, you seem to be a religious person. That is hardly thinking logically and basing thought on empirical facts but more on faith and emotion.

[MFA]

Mountainsheild, judging by your posts, you seem to be a religious person. That is hardly thinking logically and basing thought on empirical facts but more on faith and emotion.

Really?  On what do you base that assessment?

[redlom xof]

Religion requires faith, not reason.

You're believing something not because of scientific proof, but on allegiance.

[Solar]

Religion requires faith, not reason.

You're believing something not because of scientific proof, but on allegiance.

The Boy Scouts IS a Faith Based organization.

[MFA]

Religion requires faith, not reason.

You're believing something not because of scientific proof, but on allegiance.

That's not what faith is.  Faith incorporates reason.  It is not independent of reason.