moosetracker

merlyn writes : You can also turn the question around and ask how many people believe in a god that doesn't meet all these qualifications; I'm sure some deists, for example, would say their god doesn't "rule" or "favor or bless" people, since deism usually implies a god that doesn't interfere. I agree with you there, and even stated so, after reading that statement, again for the first time in about 15, and years and years of discussing it, with no one ever bringing up that piece of the statement since. It is solely there to ban the atheists, because National seems content to ignore it themselves to allow in all religions that obviously do not conform to that statement. It is solely there to only drag out and use as a reason to deny an atheist comes along believing loosely in the same belief that a Hindu person believes in, but wishes to define himself an atheists, because there are other things of the Hindu faith foreign to him. I still say atheists would be out the door as quickly as the enter it, if they cannot uphold other parts of the Scout law, Kind, friendly, reverent (per the dictionary) which they would not be upholding if they entered to deny & protest other peoples beliefs and faiths.. Could not stand in silence or go for a walk if the Troop chooses to do an interfaith prayer before dinner, trys to remove the word God because they can't understand difference between "God" vs god.. But, if they removed that phrase from the DRP, and kept the rest with the understanding that God is "something Greater then Self" then they would put their rules in line with all of the religions that they have accepted into the BSA, and it would then also not bar the atheist who could understand the difference between God vs god... As for personifying "love" maybe, maybe not.. I have heard that "Love makes the world go round".. I have also heard "Money makes the world go round".. but I don't think Love or money is personifyied, in the statement.. You just need to get "Love" to make the universe go round..

Very true packsaddle Live & let Live.. drmbear - True.. Let's ask the atheist.. So Merlyn.. Can some atheists take the meaning of "Love" and say that it is a ruling and leading power in the universe and are grateful if Love favors and bless them during their life? Beav.. All the polls & comments I have seen to date state the consensus is to let things stand as they are, with same-sex marriage being legal.. Not all were at 90% favor one was on 68% in favor of. Or is consensus to you 100%.. If we needed 100% consensus for every rule or law passed, there would be no rules or laws ever passed. Or, is it that if the ruling is against your religious belief then it must be 100% against your religious belief to be considered a consensus. You might argue with me, but.. Passing the bill was a step in removing church from state law.. To put it back into place because there are religions that are protesting it, while the majority of the people of the State of NH are now in favor of letting it stay in place, would be making a ruling for a religious group against the will of the people, and therefore a reason to protest the the State has failed to remove church from state in it's passing of this bill. Maybe Merlyn can get his atheist pals to come and rally the cause!

Sorry packsaddle, I meant soft-science as psychology or sociology. Could create various test the effects of the benefits that Religious Faith have on individual or community. Soft-science I know is not quite as respected as hard science in the scientific world.. But, soft-science cannot prove or disprove the content of anyones faith. Now onto the 14th amendment (which packsaddle wants to discuss.. And we have beat to death this religious discussion with no one swaying anyone to their side.. And it isnt a tread on Religion, but on same-sex marriages).. So the 14th amendment may prove interesting in New Hampshire. They have approved marriage of Gays, now they want to repeal it in a vote Jan 2010, the bill states it will preserve the rights of those who have already been married. http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111026/NEWS06/710269989 Just took a survey on if I think they should or should not repel the decision.. Guess which way I voted .. Then they gave me the results of the poll. 9% think they should (2394), 90% think they should not (23053).. But I guess the conservatives are now in the majority of those voted in, and are stating that we voted them in for the sole purpose of changing this law.. (Yeah Right.. Try the economic crisis, that has angered everyone and caused whoever the party that was in office to be voted out across the whole country, in a flip-flop election) So how does that play into the fact that the homosexuals will have a great lawsuit using the 14th amendment should the bill be repealed? Given that some homosexuals will be given the privilege to have their marriages be considered valid by the state, and others will not be.. NH is considered a Conservative State.. But from the poll I took, and the comments on the link to the news article.. The PEOPLE want the bill to stand as it is.. Like in this difficult economic times, NH needs to pay out millions in lawsuits if the bill were to be changed. (This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Beavah writes: What's fascinatin' is that people believe that "science" with its short history and relatively paltry evidence base should be privileged. Beavah Never said the Faith does not have a privilege all it's own.. "Faith can move mountains".. And that might be something you can put to a Scientific test.. You trying to tell us God can be proved Scientifically, seem to be pooh-poohing the fascinating and wonderous thing that Faith is all on it's own, as if Faith is not as privileged as Science and Fact.. So you have to move God into the world of Science to acheive that privilege.. All I suggested was that it wasn't unreasonable to claim that da tenets of at least Western Judeo-Christian faith have been tested over a period of 3000+ years, eh? That contributing alms is a good thing. That it's best when alms are given out of true generosity, without expecting anything in return. It is a notion that has stood the test of time and multiple cultures better than any "scientific" notion from 3000 years ago, and the link I provided offered evidence that it is practiced more fully by those who are religious than those who aren't. I have no problem with that statement either.. I will except that a scientific test can be done to proove that Faith of God, has a very positive influence on humanity. But, I doubt any test on the results of those who have faith in God can be used as Scientific proof of God.. Or whose belief of what God really is the right one, or what this God(s) really want from mankind. In the same light.. No one can scientifically dis-prove God(s).. It is up to individual belief.. It is their personal faith, or lack-of-faith..

Well you might prove charity helps people, and the church can encourage charity.. But, charity is not all from a church, without feeling it will please God, but because they care for the fellow man or other reason, such as a relative that died from a specific disease, or for a tax exemption, or to erect a large memorial to themselves or a loved one. Same with charity of a church member.. or.. because they have faith.. But contributing to charity because of their own faith does not prove God.. Prayer can do some good, I believe, but cannot prove.. If you pray and the situation improves, you say God listened.. If you pray and the situation does not improve or gets worse, well then God has a plan that we should not question. Or, God has decided that we need to help ourselves.. But, for the faithful prayer can help.. It can help them feel more self confident to solve their own problems. It can give a sick person a positive outlook to and a positive outlook with or without the aid of faith in God, can give a person more personal strength to fit the ailment.. It can also help the family to feel that they are not alone, and that people care.. But, I can do the same good by going to an friends house who is an atheist and offering them kind words and sincere well wishes without including God. Proof that people can be caring of others for various reasons, and that the act of people caring for others.. A religious belief can and the urging of a church can help someone choose to act this way.. But, that is proof that their faith and their choice to belong to a group have influenced them. It does not prove God, just that a faith in God can be beneficial. I believe in Ghost too, people try to prove the existence of ghosts.. Even have contraptions to record sound, and images and temperature etc.. Even though they have more sophisticated contraptions to prove ghosts, even though I believe in ghosts, I dont think they have yet to be successful in proving that either. I am satisfied with the fact that my belief in God and my belief in Ghosts have to rely on my faith. Your faith allows you to believe more then I, as you believe that you have facts of the existence of God, when your faith credits God with successful outcomes.. I am happy for you, but, I dont think your findings will be published in the next Scientific Journal.

Sorry Beav - While Science is based on Facts, Religion is based on Faith... Faith is defined as believing in what there is no proof of.. I agree Twocub.. Obviously this line is easily ignored by us all, and we follow the path of how BSA defines and explain, rather then then the DRP.. But, seriously it should not be in the DRP, if the BSA itself does not choose follow it.. It is probably just there to allow them the right to kick out an atheist, when they should kick out the Buddist or Hinduism or others.. grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary Even has a way of putting me off depending on how someone interprets this.. I can be grateful the earth was created in a way that supports life. I don't say anything, but get the willies around people who attribute everything from a new job to a nose bleed to God overseeing every tiny detail in their life.. Personnally I think God has more important matters to attend to.. And since I believe in free will. I would find it troubling to think that he is meddling that much. But my gratitude over the creation of the earth doesn't knock me out of the running... I would not advise a scout that is in search of his belief that this was a condition that he must come to terms with in order to advance in scouts.. And I think that is the approach most scouters take, and thus this line is widely ignored.. I have heard many in the past discuss helping boys figure out what they believe in by having them get in touch with nature. That they can harness the power of the wind, but not control it, nor control other natural forces. (This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Twocub - from my memory of the DRP, I thought so too.. But then this line threw me (and in my opinion trashes everything else they say to confirm being "absolutely nonsectarian", and is not what all the religions they do except will believe in. ....The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary...... Unless someone can tell me how someone who believes in trees and rocks, or Nature, or anything else earthly, can consider a these objects as the ruling and leading power in the universe?? Maybe they can come up with a reason of how a tree or rock can bless them and give them favor.. They would need to believe that the earth rules the universe because of this object, or force of nature that is upon the earth. There are people who have a faith that does not encompass the universe.. Or is itself the universe. Can the universe be its own ruling an leading power of itself?? Can an object from one of the plants within the universe actually rule the universe?

Merlyn writes : By the way moosetracker, I use the word "self" to refer to self, and "mankind" to refer to mankind.) That's because you have not ever sat in on any theological study sessions.. Words are interpreted for what is really meant.. That is why everyone can read the Bible and pull out totally different meanings and interpretations. And then discuss, ponder and debate a simple passage for a whole evening.

Not judge! That's like saying don't be human.. People hear, People interpret, People act on their interpretation of.. Then people judge if others are right or wrong based on their interpretations of.. I know of the DRP.. But from what I remember of it, I saw nothing so restrictive in it, so I had to look it up. Had an adult app. close by so went to check it, I think at one time it was on the app. now it is not. So I had to google it.. Your right in all that verbage there is one sentence that is out of sync with all that BSA verbally states.. Meryln states - You're actually pulling requirements out of the air; the BSA doesn't use the phrase "greater than self". It might not be in the DRP, but it is widely accepted as the definition of... That can be seen be the fact that my council uses it as stated the person who heads our Eagle Board defines the meaning of reverent using it, skeptic has used it in the thread, so has packsaddle. Oh well, Merlyn you would qualify by 9/10 of what they preach, but don't qualify due to one sentence in the DRP, which you have to search out to find, because if you ask what DRP is, I have never heard anyone quote that line.. Your right packsaddle it is not about winning, in fact I was hoping we could find away for Merlyn to be acceptable.. That would have been winning.. Although I really don't think Merlyn wants to win the battle because he would then have nothing to gripe about. But, I can't not interpret what I hear, or I would cease trying to make sense out what people are trying to tell me. Sometimes I may interpret it wrong.. And I still see "self" to mean mankind.. not personal self.. Sorry..

So Merlyn.. Have your victory.. "Humanity" wins.. ...IF... You truely belief that it is superior to self, to the point of defending it, when I say.. Fiddle-Faddle.. ...IF... In your heart of hearts this is truely something greater then self, and not something you pulled out of the air for the sake of arguement.. If you really truely believe that earth as just a lump of earth forget all the beauty and wonder upon it is greater then self, and will defend it in your heart & soul.. And it is not something you are simply using for the arguement, then so be it.. Earth it is.. But, don't get upset if I disagree with you.. Be confident of your conviction. I think you are tripping over the difference between God & god.. Because you just don't want to see it.. But I can see the problem.. As you say, BSA does not allow atheists and it is because you don't believe in a god.. But, as you say.. I'm quite sure that the vast majority of atheists have "some form of personal belief beyond self", but are rejected because they don't believe in any gods. I agree with you.. So you believe in God, not god and can be an atheists.. BSA is looking for a belief in God, not god.. So there is no arguement over not allowing in an atheist.. But, then by BSA standards if you believe with all you heart in the rock, you are then not a atheist.. Yet I am sure you will argue that you can believe in a rock, you can believe in the earth as a big rock, and you can believe in humanity, in a way that BSA would state that constitutes your belief in a God, and still be a atheist.. Bottom line atheists can believe in a God, they just can not believe in a god.. So why are the singled out.. Because according to BSA, if you believe, you might think by your interpretation you are an atheist, but by their interpretation you are not.. The concept of atheist is subject to interpretation just as 'self' is, just as 'greater than' is (as I interpret it to mean superior to, but you obviously do not).. and just as the fact that God is different then god is subject to interpretation.. So Merlyn if you truely believe in humanity as 'greater then self' can you accept the fact that BSA does not think you are an atheist???? You are now free to sign up to be a Boy Scout leader, and check the box that you believe in something greater then self.. And continue to say although BSA says I am not an atheist because I believe in humanity as 'greater then self' I disagree with BSA I think I still am an atheist while believing in humanity ! Because atheists can believe in God, but we do not believe in god... And I can still argue that I think 'self' to mean the human race, though BSA disagrees, and you & packsaddle disagree.. I can also disagree with BSA that a rock is a God.. (Now packsaddle about this rock I would love to know where you heard this from.. Who argued and won on his theroy of a rock being his God?)

Shame Kudu - releasing to the public documents that are to be internal & confidential! did not understand the part on the For each of the activities and sports below please tell us if you do it for fun or as part of a team/at a competitive level. then we have the % of scouts vs non-scouts in the various grade levels.. but don't see the distinction of if it is for fun or team/competion..

Packsaddle as stated, I had guessed someone might disagree with my interpretation.. I see self as SELF meaning the human race that I belong too.. You see self as self meaning your own personal being.. Interesting.. My viewpoint is partially based on not ever being catholic, so I dont hold with making people saints and what not either.. So could Merlyn also believe in Isaac Newton in your view as greater then self?.. hmm.. Now I might go for belief in his theory of momentum.. Merlyn states I'm a proper subset of humanity, mammals, living things on earth, earth (as including the life on earth), the solar system, the milky way galaxy, and the universe. All of these are greater than myself, because I'm only a small part of each. Well (to me) the earth is kindof like the belief in the lamppost, if you just are looking at rock, water, etc.. I would (personally) say no, but if the head of our Eagle board is to be taken at his word, he would say yes.. But, (for me) if in earth you state a belief in the cycle of life, the bubbling brooks, the wind in the trees, the rain then I would say yes also And here Merlyn might call me out that these can be viewed as inanimate also.. But, there is a sense of life to these things, that take on a meaning of "greater then self" (Again, my viewpoint) The universe? Again are we talking of in as inanimate clumps of rock floating in space.. Or the spinning and orbits and gravity, the life & death of a star, Halie's Comet etc.. So, you have it Merlyn.. It is a complex subject and, like religion the ideas of what constitutes greater then self are subject to interpretation, and argument.. So ponder it.. What do you believe is greater then self.. Have enough conviction to argue it with passion, and defend it like all ther rest of us on this forum defend our beliefs.. (For sure, what I think and what packsaddle think, neither will be agreed with by a third person) But, according to BSA, if you believe in something greater then self, and if asked, can defend it, then you are in.. But, then according to BSA, you are not an atheist anymore.. As I always stated, I do not quite understand the atheist, because something... SOMETHING has to be considered greater then self, even if it is a belief in things that can be explained scientifically.. Is it something that is out of your control?? Well, then that is an entity greater then you.. Merlyn stated.. Does this "greater than" thing HAVE to be a god now? Or are non-gods still in the running? Again Merlyn, not god.. but God.. which can be a non-god as you put it. As I said before Merlynn ponder it.. When you are content with what you believe in, then it will not matter if I disagree with you. (This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Sorry Merlyn, so what other entities or concepts do you find more superior then humanity? Somewhere in there maybe something that will work.. Humanity may be greater (as in bigger) then you, but bigger is not always better. If you choose to, you can choose to be a better person then the collective herd.. Which means there are a few exception people out there that rise above humanity.. Still I would not label them a God, though they may be instrumental in raising the score of humanity up a notch or two..

Sorry Merlyn, just my opinion here so others may say yes.. But belief in humanity as superior entity is still belief in yourself as the superior entity, as you are human and are a part of humanity. Really? You think that humans are the most superior entity of the universe? Boy we are seriously scr**ed... I would at least believe there must be superior life on some galaxy that has to be doing a better job then us! Sometimes I will even believe cats, dogs and other furry critters are not as messed up as we are..

Merlyn - It may be subject to "interpretation".. But, that is all our District requires.. Belief in something greater then yourself.. As the head of our Eagle board states (a little sarcastically) "If you want to tell me you believe that the streetlight outside is superior to you, then that is all I need to accept your belief in something higher then yourself.. But, you can believe in the wonder of nature, or aliens that are superior to mankind, or whatever.. But, I am sure other heads of Eagle boards, or SM's or what not would not except a belief in the lamppost as something greater then yourself.. Or at least state it can't be an inanimate object.. and to truth, I don't know if the head of our Eagle board would really allow belief in an inanimate object..

Very true skeptic.. Beav can believe in the Bible and every rule his church creates.. I can not believe in the Bible or any rules of the church, yet still believe there is a supreme being.. But not sure what it is.. In our likeness? Really a man? I can believe in some sort of life after death, though I don't see angels in clouds.. I know part of this belief is because it gives me comfort.. And my husband can be born into a faith that he believes in about half of what they do and questions or does not believe in the other half. Since he was born into it, noone made him sign something stating he had to believe in it all.. All comes back to the question of why some people can try to tell you their belief is right and yours is wrong, and try to prove it by quoting passages from the Bible, or their Pope, biship, minister, or Dalai Lama.. Which all goes back to people trying to prove they are right in their belief that homosexuality is a mortal sin snd those who are are not morally straight so can not join the BSA, and their attempts to prove it.. They are only right for their own belief, but they can not force their belief onto the world as fact.. And although BSA has chosen a side, that is not proof either, because the BSA is not God either.. It just means that they are not respectful of everyones religious beliefs.. If someone takes comfort in the Bible.. Great.. If they can inturpret something out of it beneficial to their beliefs, or makes sense of their world or gives them comfort and joy.. Great!.. But don't tell me I have to believe in it because it is documented proof, even if it has stood the test of time..

Maybe successful, but at what? I agree with Engineer.. Successful at controlling the Masses.. At least that is the only thing that can be measured.. And since less & less people are attending church, and more & more churches are closing, and few people entering into that vocation, I think it is time to sit down and rewrite or reinterpret the Bible soon. Edited to add: I guess another success it has is if it makes people feel more secure.. What they feel more secure about is personal to them.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

I am sorry to say, I don't remember my sons face. I remember the bridge, him meeting the troop on the otherside.. The career arrow wasn't used at that time.. At least I never heard of it until my boss about 2 years back, as a WDL complained of building the blasted arrows and the work put into them and he only had 3 in his den... Strangely the most I remember of that day was my son's uncle, my husbands brother.. He came all decorated with his eagle pins, and sat in the audience puffed out with pride at my sons accomplishments. I don't even remember who else from the family came that day. I do know there were others, we went out to brunch with everyone before the crossover ceremony.. I am sure my husband wore his eagle medal, and if his other Uncle was there he did too, so it was not the oddity of his wearing his eagle medal.. Just the total beaming pride he had all day long..

Beav said - But I trust it enough to get on an airplane. I trust it enough to take medications that I do not fully comprehend. I believe it's close enough to make use every day of electricity, and radio signaling, and chemical combustion. I put my life at risk daily crossing bridges and entering buildings engineered based on mere men, relying on other men, none of whom were Nature itself. The science has the history of being proved or disproved.. Things have improved over time, and other things have gotten worse.. They improve with medicine hopefully within test labs, but sometimes with death and deformed babies. People are living longer, but people are much more dependent on pills to get them through the day than ever before, some necessary, some not.. A lot more people on anti-depressants with warning labels of (it might increase thoughts of suicide.. Hmmm.. not so anti-depressant if it does that).. Well anyway people are living longer. Airplanes have come a long way since the Wright brothers, along with other transportation methods. Faster, sleeker, less gas, better safety features so Beav can put his trust in them.. But, they are always changing, you cannot put your trust in the fact that todays model will be anything like what will be bought 10 years from now.. Technology is always changing.. The only thing you can trust in is that the computer you buy today is either already outdated, or will be next month.. Some things have gotten worse as people prove it is cheaper to make something using sub-par materials or if construction is good enough to meet code, using sub-par methods.. Take an antique handmade chest of drawers over todays manufactured ones.. We are now a throwaway society because manufactures build them that way, it is cheaper and they make more money off you if you have to buy a new whatever every 2 to 5 years rather than be able to use your whatever for a lifetime.. The only thing you can count on with science is that it is constantly evolving and changing.. Now that is all with science that you can put your trust in, because there are ways to prove things with experimentation. The Bible is suppose to be the word of God.. There is no proof that it ever was.. It has been changed over the years sometimes by well meaning souls believing they knew what God meant, or somehow God forgot to mention, so he added it for him.. Sometimes by people with their own agenda, who wanted an army that would follow them on a mission. There is no way to prove any of it.. If part of it is truly the word of God, how do you separated it from what was added to it.. And here is a question, if there is something that is truly the word of God as he believed thousands of years ago, who is to say that over the next thousands of years, he has not rethought things and has some different ideas? What is it that God really wants us to do, what will make him happy and proud of us? No one really knows, I cannot prove that what you believe is wrong, you cannot prove that what I believe is wrong.. Neither of us can prove that what an atheist believes is wrong.. Or any of the other multitudes of religions out there that is not the same as our own beliefs.. And you sorry but you cannot prove that you are right by thumping the bible at me.. And even if you do thump the bible at me and quote the passages that prove your beliefs, someone else can either reinterpret those very same passages to mean something totally different, or find different passages in the very same Bible that they interpret to disprove you.  

Drmbear - Of course I think it was rude and wrong what these folks in LA did. If they had gone out to present something they love about the season and time of year without knocking anything others believe, I doubt we would ever have seen anything about it in the news. I guess this is how I feel about it also.. Had the atheists won the lotteries and just put up what they like about this time of year.. Be that Festivus and Momentous with lots of apples and Isaac Newton figurines.. Or just some winter wonderland scene.. Or as suggested by some just given the view back to the people and put a low plaque up saying This scene was brought to you by your neighborhood Atheist group.. Maybe the story would not be sensational, and get the storyline this did. But it would tell their neighborhood that atheists are good neighbors, and can contribute to positively to society rather than tear it asunder.. Also if I lived in this neighborhood I would be embarrassed to have my parents or others from their generation see the display.. It speaks volumes about how my generation and the ones after mine have become so much more self-centered and uncaring..

OldGray - Never thought of it that way.. So I was Protestant, I now am just self-advised.. So now I should say Happy Holidays.. But as a Protestant, we don't hold Mass, we hold services.. So I should have been saying Merry Christservice.. Never occured to me that "mas" meant Mass like a Catholic Mass, since all Protestants call it Christmas without ever holding a Mass..

packsaddle - I had rented from Netflix this year "The History of Christmas" put out by the History Channel. It was interesting. I knew it started as a pagen holiday, but always thought at some point in time the Christians took it over renamed it, made it theirs and made it something "Holier then thou".. Then the merchants came in and commercialized it.. But, the way it was depicted, the religion took 12/25 because it was a specific pagan Holiday. Something about winter coming in, and eatting and drinking the food that could not be stored over winter, and they also celebrated fertility on this day.. But the religion was always happy with being a small part of the normal celebrations that went on, they never took it over completely.. Then it got too out of hand, so they did away with all celebration it was against the law to celebrate at all on and around the 25th, but some quietly did some small gatherings of friends.. When it came back was when the retailers revitalized it for commercialism.. After watching it, I was surprised anyone complains about the commercialism of the holiday that upstaged the religion around the holiday.. The religion was never, ever, ever, ever a big thing of this holiday! So Merlyn, do you decorate in "Isaac Newton"? What does an Isaac Newton tree look like? Send out Isaac Newton greeting cards? Anyway "Happy Festivus and Momentous" to you and yours.. qwazse - In the show there wasn't a jewish faith turned away from displaying. Just the atheist who wanted the nativity not put up, and the lawyer telling them that either they had to not put it up, or allow other seasonal displays.. The Christians would not even consider the option, no discussion on what other types of displays they would have to open up to.. As to Chanukah being done before Christmas, I am not up on that. I know this year it runs from Dec. 20th thru the 27th.. And the Nativity normally is not just displayed on the 25th, but for weeks up to and maybe doesn't get removed until New Years. It definatly runs during the holiday celebrations and should have the right to display around the same times as the Nativity display.. Never heard of a St Nicholas day, I doubt many have.. For the world his day is also the 25th because thats when he does he sleigh ride and visits everyone especially me because I have been a good girl all year long!.. And I have seen many Winter wonderland displays that are put up for xmas, xmas decorating isn't just the nativity set.. And many many still celebrate the holiday with no belief in the birth of Christ.. Even if they do believe in Christ many opt for the fun of the holiday rather then somber religion. (This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Sorry - Didn't know that you had diffence of "Not believe in God".. Didn't know there were different beliefs in how to "Not believe in God".. Now I have heard of atheist & agnostic, but I thought agnostic was not an atheist because they just were not sure if there is or is not a God.. So sure let the agnostic have a plot (if they want one, I think this group would stay out of the fight..)... Now what is the difference in beliefs of "Not believe in God" seperates the atheists from the new atheists?? Upset that the Christian displays lost their 14 spaces at Palisades Park this year, the Santa Monica Nativity Committee is asking city officials to the necessary steps to assure the 14 Nativity scenes are allowed on Ocean Avenue in 2012 and forever after. Sigh!! "Can't we just all get along!!!".. Well the atheists started war.. The religions just have to figure out the right way to engage in this war, or the town will have to find out how to end the war.. We just watched some Christmas special, in which some poor athiest Scrooge was doing something similar.. Didn't want a park spot, but didn't want the Christians to put up a nativity.. Along came a lawyer who said that they had to make a choice, or no nativity, or opening the park for other holiday displays.. Christians said "No.. No.. Only nativity".. Hubby & I just looked at each other and shook are heads.. What was wrong with allowing a jewish display?? Or a Santa display?? Or some other winter wonderland display?? (Of course we were not thinking at the time of a athiest display of mock and ridicule and hate..).. Well the church won and scrooge lost.. Basically it was discovered Scrooge was very very poor, lost all his money.. So the church folk came with gifts and melted the Scrooges heart.. And he dropped his protests, and even helped put up the nativity set.. And now Merlyn is gagging.. Well hubby and I at the end of the show still sat there and said, "What's wrong with allowing other displays???" So Merlyn, are you a "Bah.. Humbug.." atheist.. or a "Happy Holiday" atheist???

Merlyn - you seem to be lumping all religions into a group of one or seem to know that the town only has one religion.. Catholics is one group, Methodist is one group, Jewish is one group, Episcopalian is one group, Baptist is one group, LDS is one group, then your athiest is one group.. I disagree with unlawfully gave one particular religious group a public forum that nobody else could use for 60 years First off it is not one religion.. Second off if the athiests had been fighting for a spot at Christmas and denied for 60 years, you could say they unlawfully did not treat them equally.. I doubt athiest have been fighting for a spot in the park for 60 years unsuccessfully.. PackSaddle - There are all the religions of the world.. Then there are the religions in this town who want to have a display.. Currently what you had was each church as a group of people enter the lottery with a single entry, and athiest as individual people (not a group) enter the lottery, although it is obvious they acted as a unified source.. Either that, or the Religions will counter attack next year by having each individual member of each church enter the lottery same as the individual athiests entered it.. That way the Catholics of one church may get 3 plots, the Baptist 2 plots etc.. Most likely if the churches unified and had their members each send in a seprate ballot they can in numbers out flood what the Athiests did this year, because not all Athiests are unified in mocking the religions, they just are quietly happy with their beliefs and still respect their friends and family who remain with religious faith.. I don't doubt you have had nastiness sent your way Merlyn, but then you give as well as you get.. And about the gays we are in agreement.. The idea of what is morally straight is different between individuals and between religions.. The idea that homosexuals are not morally straight is following only some religious beliefs and not respecting the beliefs of other religions or individuals.. Also although I don't know how it can happen.. I am one of the small few in this group who can see athiests allowed someday.. But, reverent must be followed in at least the version of the dictionary which is to be respectful of others (I only see the defination of reverent meaning a belief in God, in the BSA definition).. Also to join the rest of the BS Law would need to be upheld by it's members.. Therefore, if ever BSA allowed athiests, those athiests who wish to join BSA to destroy the beliefs of others, and feel that fair is only when they get their way, would still not have a leg to stand on when they were booted out the door... At this point in time Merlyn, although I would love to keep an open mind to the possibility of someday, I have to think that day will be far off.. And I am sorry for that due to those athiest I know who are very respectful of others and can learn to compromise and live in peace.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

So the following article got me to thinking. http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-los-angeles/atheist-displays-displace-nativity-scenes-santa-monica-park-this-xmas.. Personally, I am one of the few who think some day athiest may have a place in BSA, but the do have a slimmer chance then the homosexual issue.. They have a "never" chance with this type of attitude, because they are not respectful or reverent of other peoples beliefs.. Taking up spaces in the park to mock other peoples beliefs, may be "free speech" but is not courteous, kind, helpful, friendly or reverent.. I guess the atheist I know are not like these people.. They have just examined their own beliefs and found it hard to believe in a God. But, they still practice and believe in being courteous, kind, helpful, friendly or reverent.. They respect others peoples beliefs, and I could never see them taking part in something like this. Religions have their "fringe" or "over-zelous" and loud and pompous believers.. Those who protest outside abortion clinics, or protest the war.. Including holding up hateful signs at a military funeral service.. I have always known there were the "radical" atheists out there, trying to do what they can to stomp religion out of everything.. But I have never personally known one.. I am though unsure of what percentage is this way.. Is it a "fringe" group, or half of them? Doubt it is the majority. But this group will definatly be who will make sure BSA will never open up to the "peaceful" atheists, for fear that the other group would come in force the belief in God out of the BSA, rather then peaceful take part in all but this belief. And I know many of you in BSA, can not even foresee allowing a group in that does not accept all that BSA believes in.. Which even if the radical atheist all mysteriously disappeared tomorrow, would still make alot of the BSA not accept them in, because they do not believe in everything that BSA stands for.. As I said, a much harder sell for them to ever be accepted.. For this town, I think the lottery idea was a failure. They said it was the first year they tried it, in order to be open to everyone.. A better way would be to give a spot to each Religion and one spot to the athiest (if they must)..