Merlyn_LeRoy

SSScout writes: This is , more than anything else, a self selecting organization. Not always. Atheists who wanted to stay as members have been thrown out, even when their own unit wanted them to stay members. And I don't go along with the idea that atheists are excluding themselves; the BSA is excluding them. I've read rationalizations where people insist the BSA doesn't exclude atheists, atheists exclude themselves; that's just blaming the victim.

I do have insight; just none for you, Ed.

What, you mean I'm supposed to go out and survey atheists FOR you? Why would I ever do anything to make your life easier, Ed?

Yes Ed, I'm NOT the only atheist in the USA; if you want to know why an atheist would want to join the BSA, why not ask an atheist who wants to join the BSA? Did you want me to just make up an answer? PS: If you want a made-up answer, my stock made-up answer is "blue" (fixed typo)(This message has been edited by Merlyn_LeRoy)

Why ask me, Ed? I thought I established earlier that I don't want to join the BSA. Did you miss that part?

But atheists can't join Ed, I just said that.

How, Ed?

It simply isn't true that "anyone can join." Atheists can't join. I also disagree with your implication that atheists haven't thought about it (which appears to be the usual theist assumption that anyone who does think about it, would suddenly decide that invisible superbeings really exist, for some reason).

moosetracker, the BSA says that atheists (both youth and adult) can't join. That's why they lost public schools as chartering organizations.

No, you misunderstand. YOU are obviously not interested in a reasonable conversation. Like I said, case in point.

Case in point.

It isn't a copout Sherminator; there's really no point "discussing" things with you.

Sherminator writes: Oh, yeah. You're not about explanations or arguing a point. I am, where appropriate. There's no point with you, of course.

Sherminator writes: Well, for starters, you still haven't explained just why you're here. I have in other threads. I've been posting here since 2001. It's only about 3300 posts if you want to go through them. You're clearly not interested in Scouting, so why spend so much time in this forum? You're clearly not interested in a sincere discussion, so why should I bother explaining anything to you?

What silence?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bad-mouthing

Woapalanne writes: That's right, they enforce ONE religious behavior, at the expense of others. Oh, I see what you mean. Yes, I agree. Forcing Jewish owned stores, for example, to close on other than the Sabbath, thereby limiting their operating hours to 5 days when others can be open for six. They also discriminate against non-religious, by limiting their actions to conform with one particular religion. They definitely discourage worship in other than the officially approved form. I am amazed that they still stand. Well, the ACLU and others tried to get rid of a lot of them back around the 1960s, but courts would accept pretty thin justifications that the laws were "neutral," even though they obviously weren't. I'm available to break Sunday liquor laws if you need someone. "The ACLU doesn't attack individual prayer...... " Sure they do. They recently forced councilmen in a nearby county to NOT go into a private, closed room to pray, under threat of a Federal lawsuit. Where's this? Yes, the judges make the rulings, I didn't say they don't. But the ACLU has been strongly against any religious practice, ignoring (or opposing) the second half of the clause I mentioned above. See aclufightsforchristians.com contradicting your "against any religious practice" claim.

Sherminator writes: I made some observations and you call it badmouthing? If my observations are somehow off, please, tell me how. Easily. I'm not a single-issue entity (oddly enough, you prefaced that with "let's concentrate on what we've learned about Merlyn just from this thread," which, if you think about it for a moment, pretty much guarantees that anyone you "learn" about from a single thread will appear to be a "single-issue entity." As Gomer Pyle would say, "Surprise, surprise, surprise!" And, of course, if I hadn't kept to one topic in a single thread, I could be accused of posting off-topic. So it's a no-win situation). If you check other threads, you'll find me posting about more issues, but since this is a forum on scouting issues & politics, I generally stick topics related to that, but you could still accuse me of being a "single-issue entity" if you have a sufficiently broad definition of "single-issue." Plus it's pretty evident to me that you posted your "observations" to badmouth me, as you "protested" using mock sincerity.

So namecalling is bad, but badmouthing people is OK? Had to keep track of the unwritten rules, much like the BSA and their unwritten membership policies.

I'll just note the distinct lack of protests against people namecalling me. But I would expect such hypocrisy.

Woapalanne writes: What I was referring to (about the second half of the religion clause) was the common prohibitions on worship today, ranging from Blue Laws to the ACLU's attacks on individual prayer (if one happens to hold public office, or be in a stadium). "Blue laws" don't prohibit worship, those are laws that are designed to enforce religious behavior, such as laws making it illegal to sell liquor on Sundays. The ACLU doesn't attack individual prayer (and in any case, the ACLU doesn't decide the law, judges do that); the ACLU is against official prayers. Do you have any examples that are actionable? If someone's first amendment rights are really being denied or ignored, then there will be some basis to file a lawsuit against the guilty party. But it doesn't look like you have any genuine examples, just the usual vague anti-ACLU boilerplate.

No Ed, you're really wrong. If you were right, refusing to serve blacks at a lunch counter wouldn't be discrimination, because they aren't being required to eat there.

That's two wrong, Ed, and you're still not right. But keep pretending.

Atheists are just people who aren't theists. Atheism isn't a religion, just as theism isn't a religion. But if a theist was discriminated against due to his or her theism, I might describe that as being discriminated against because of his or her "religion."

Did you have a point, Sherminator?