packsaddle

"...it would have to be the murder of course." And I would agree. The important part, to me, is how you arrived at that choice. (The potential victim, on the other hand, might not care less.) I know how I arrive at my choice. And part of that process amounts to ranking things according to how I value them, both good and bad. So please explain how you arrive at that particular choice without some kind of 'weighting' for the 'relative' goodness or badness of the outcome, or some other rationale? Help me out. I really can't see how you can come to that choice without having judged the two options in terms of relative 'degree' of goodness or badness. "However God still views both as a sin and as such both would need to be addressed." Who made you God's spokesperson? I place much more validity in your statements if you speak for yourself, and not try to dictate to the rest of us how God views things. As far as I'm concerned, until you persuade me, Fehler's (or anyone else's) version of faith is as valid as yours. RememberSchiff, I'd guess that she would not have gotten much help in West Virginia but I don't know that for sure. What I do know is that she HAS gotten some sympathy in the present situation.

DLChris71, life is full of choices. My hypothetical is a loaded one as Beavah has sensed. The intent is first to see if you can make a choice (you didn't as far as I can tell). And second, by allowing you to explain that choice, it will allow me to understand better what you are trying to communicate with respect to sin-by-degree. So if you cannot choose between preventing petit theft and preventing murder, just say so. As it is that seems to be the case and you seem to have explained why you cannot make such a choice. P.S. If "physical harm" was all there was to this, it would be an easy answer. I'm aware that there are more than one aspect of "spiritual harm" involved and that is the part I'd like you to explain if you can. But you have to choose first. Or admit that you can't. Edit: Oops, Lisa, I don't intend to 'equate' paperclips and lives ...to me the choice is easy on all levels. And if anyone needs paperclips, just ask. (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Beavah, how is it that you think you know with such certainty what I believe...that you confidently report to others what that is, that I "only" believe certain things? Why don't you just let my question be answered by the person to whom it was addressed? Do you think that person is incapable of thinking of a good answer? Or are YOU incapable of thinking of a good answer and so conclude therefore that HE can't possibly answer it...if YOU can't? DLChris71 has stated a position based on his faith. Give him some credit and let him speak for himself instead of giving him a 'way' to run away from the question, which is evidently what you just did.

You're certainly consistent with that. If you had to choose the two most likely extremes which would 'test' your belief of there not being different degrees of sin, what would those be? I'm thinking in terms of committing murder versus swiping a paperclip from the office. Or is there a better one that you've heard of? OK, the paperclip will probably work. Situation: you are in a position to prevent one of two different sins. On one hand you can convince someone not to swipe a paperclip. In the other alternative you can convince someone not to commit murder. You know that both of these will happen without your intervention but you can only chose one option. How would you decide? By this I mean: what rationale would you use to make your choice? (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Are you saying that your opposition to the sin of the death penalty is based on Biblical scripture?

So it is for your amusement. OK, then please explain what you mean by "sin by degree". It is a concept with which I am unfamiliar.

Thanks guys. Any lingering doubt that I had, any wisp of the thought that I needed to do WoodBadge....is dead. That thing about the numbers? Awesome!

While slavery is almost the most extreme way to deny rights, denial of rights to people because of who they love IS denial of rights to a group. If you think homosexuality is a choice then it is denial on the basis of conscience, and if you think homosexuality is their 'nature' then it is essentially the same as denial on the basis of race. I can't know, for sure, whether or not any of the members of this forum actually hate gay people. I do know for sure that those who would deny rights to gay people (BSA membership policy included) have that in common with the people I know who for sure DO hate gay people.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Wow, so many local references..where to begin... Cambridgeskip, "Can you find me a single person in the USA or the Western world that honestly believes that slavery is right on any level?" I can, within a 10-mile radius of this keyboard, find at least a score of such individuals. Expand that radius and I can show you many, many more. Today. Did you ever wonder how a community got the name of 'Sunset'? Ahhhh, the good Reverend Furman. Namesake of a venerable institution which I know quite well. Just remember, Beavah, that Furman was a New Yorker. 'Yankee' does not automatically translate into 'abolitionist'. The institution, fortunately, has changed and rejected the views of the man for whom they were named. They basically told the Southern Baptist Convention to 'take a hike'. Good for them. Not so good, on the other hand for poor Shorter College (now a university), the crazies are taking over! According to my inside scoop there, 50% of the faculty have already announced their departure...ahhhh, the Darwinian selection process, I love it so. And then the reference to good ol' Bob Jones (same town as the good Rev. Furman's intellectual offspring), one of my favorite hate-mongers (Jones, that is), and founder of another good Christian University bearing his name, and who famously and publicly, at a sermon from the pulpit, labeled First Lady Betty Ford a slut. You know, people just were afraid to take him on the way they did poor Rush Limbaugh. Maybe if Rush had covered himself with a veil of sanctimonious reverence and backed up his slur with Biblical authority...he wouldn't have had to apologize (insincerely) the way Bob Jones didn't. NJ is right. BSA painted itself into a corner. Local option is the only way out...BSA can't possibly DO what the homophobes want and I doubt BSA even wants to. It's bad enough already.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

It's a FAMILY campout. It shouldn't take many neurons to figure this out. The family takes priority about what they do as a family.

What Beavah said. The way I view SA, etc. is that if YOU decide to take the troop out on YOUR watercraft, you must meet those requirements. But if you charter a commercial outfit to provide those services, what you really need to do is make sure that commercial outfit has the expertise, experience, resources, and liability coverage that they should have - before you contract with them. If they do, then you just need to keep the camera ready, hopefully the frying pan as well.

I would encourage you to forget the leader/member idea. Instead focus on working with your son as an involved cub parent. As an involved cub parent (or scout parent for that matter, just less involvement) there is no need for any disclosure. So just be his dad and have a great life.

Scoutingagain, "Most will never notice it happened, except at the few local units that end up with an openly gay leader." This is the part that I always marvel at because it is already the case, even now. It's called "don't ask, don't tell". The key element is a single term, "avowed". The homophobes protest at the prospect of something that's already reality, they just don't know it. The only difference is how open it is, really it's just superficial appearance.

True enough about Saints. But OTOH I don't hold much optimism for a convicted felon. I'm fairly certain this CO would not even consider the application in that case - BSA would never see it.

Moosetracker, I tell you I'm shocked that you would even admit it about that scrap of paper. I feel ashamed that I even read about it. I couldn't be sorrier for you if I'd found you passed out drunk, face down in the toilet at the New York Port Authority Bus Terminal. But you must now accept that you now are of equal rank to murderers, rapists, and pedophiles. But.....at least you didn't use the 'M' word.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Forging a doctor's signature is a crime. The other stuff is also in character for them. They are liars. Call them out individually and privately for what they are. Then put distance between them and you and yours.

Hi Trev, I've made the same observation. About attitudes, not the one about how long you've been in these forums. If you look at your registration date.... But you're sure right about some of those years past. I too am encouraged but I'm not going to kid myself, the hate dies hard...especially when persons self-deceive themselves into justifying it on the basis of faith. DLChris71, you wrote: "I've never been able to sit down with an atheist to find out where they think their moral code comes from, that point has always been a minor interest to me." And while it might be a waste of their time, and while I can't speak for them, I can say with confidence that religious faith is not necessary in order to make moral judgements or to form a moral code. If you think that moral absolutes exist, and base that on your faith, that is good for you. But that is your belief and no better than anyone else's belief. Edit: Horizon, excellent point, both times.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

DuncanHill, "I have no idea what your comment about a cow mooing means! I'll put that down to being divided by a common language" actually it made no sense to me either.

Those poor Mormons.... "If any miserable scoundrels come here, cut their throats." Brigham Young http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds_mass.htm They must have had it coming.

With the exception of going past the TSA trolls, I have a stockman-style pocketknife on me almost every waking hour, including on campus. No one has ever questioned it. For the trolls, I pack it in the checked bags and then retrieve it at my destination. Eamonn, 'zero tolerance' is not good. It is thoughtless and hurtful. It is stupid. It substitutes a faceless regulation for good judgement. Your son suffered an injustice and all the authorities involved knew it. They were just too panty-waisted to stand up and do what was right, which was to challenge the law and the system, to ridicule it if there was no other way, but at least make all involved know what they were...cowards.

"It does impress me though to what extent activist will go to gain acceptance and in turn attempt to trample the views of others." Yeah....I used to hear words like this frequently. Back in the 1960s. Those 'activists'...the gall of them thinking they should have equal rights under the law. Yes, even from the pulpit I witnessed the outrage that those 'activists' who did know quite well what their place in society was, didn't want to remain 'in their place'. The very idea that they should be treated as citizens with equal rights...it's almost as if it wasn't unnatural or something!

"Money is power." - Commodore Vanderbilt "It's all about money." - Rush Limbaugh "I have mentioned earlier that money is the primary motivator for National to make major changes in the program." - Eagledad "The only thing that matters to BSA National is: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$" - nldscout "I haven't seen a single sexual orientation lobby offer the BSA large sums of cash for a policy change." - qwazse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:El_Greco_016.jpg

cbowe, welcome to the forums. Don't apologize for writing from the heart, we all do it eventually. Your son sounds like an outstanding individual whether in or out of scouts and I applaud his achievements. These forums are an interesting cross-section of scouting and they have evolved a bit over the years. I enjoy reading them because I can see, here and there, elements of social behavior that I find fascinating...in me as well. If you've been lurking, you already knew what you would be getting into and I'm glad you did. Sometimes it takes someone like you to stand up against prejudice. And we're all susceptible to that. Anyway, welcome. Come back and write again whenever you like.

I'm not sure about that MSDS-for-a-brick but the people we have who are charged with reducing risk in labs come by periodically to count their beans. And MSDS is one of their beans. So what do they ask for to test me? "Show me your MSDS for water" That's right, water. Ultra pure water. That's because I actually have several reagent bottles of...water...displayed prominently because I know the bean counters will take what they think is the most esoteric option...they are just soooooo stupid. It works every time. So I heft one of the three volumes of MSDS sheets off the shelf, blow off the dust, and page to the MSDS sheet for...water. The thoughtless bean counters nod in approval as if they've just saved lives or at least shown how little risk there is with regard to this lab. And then they check the spot on their form which proves they've earned their pay. And then they leave, satisfied. This is the world that Richard lives in. The greatest risk in his world has almost nothing to do with reason or thought. It doesn't have to because at his level he has 'the power'. He doesn't have to be susceptible to reason. In that world the greatest risk is counting the beans and coming up short, or heaven forbid, counting them incorrectly. And when he wakes at 3am in a cold sweat, the nightmare is one in which there are no more beans. So folks, take heart. WE are his greatest nightmare. Mu-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!

Did it both directions over the years. I was up near that section a couple of weeks ago and it's already getting too hot and crowded for my taste. I prefer the dead of January. So make sure you plan for water access and potential problems. As already said, it's a really nice section of trail. I hope it's not too crowded...hope you don't add too much to the crowd. This time of year, some places take on the aura of a refugee camp in the evening. Me, I'll take January.