packsaddle

Yes, Public Affairs. Here is an old thread that covered this subject nicely:

You guys do know, don't you, that this thread is, like, years old or something? Trevorum, sometime after that Beavah took me to the woodshed for diminishing people who believe in Satan by saying that Satan is a (oops, almost used the m-word...Beavah worked me over again later for using that term as well and basically says I can't use it at all). So Trevorum, gird your loins.

"If it feels good, do it." Show me the cub scout or boy scout group that doesn't adhere to this...with no leaders present. For that matter (applied to food, drink, etc.) it is probably true for a lot other people of any age. Why are you so hung up on sex? Sex! Sex! Sex! This forum, more than anything else, seems to revolve around sex, sex, sex. What's with the obsession about sex?

Back when I was working on projects for various bases around the country I would always check on the resources for 'outreach' or community services, and if it was possible I'd ask about interactions with scout troops. Of course everyone was polite but the results varied quite a bit. Most of it depended on the region, proximity to different population densities, the natural features...and of course, the fundamental purpose of the base. Some had really nice places to camp and programs for young people, others were cordial. My guess is that if enough troops inquired, the PR people for even the ones that had few resources would probably try to find resources if there was enough evidence of interest. My favorite: Ft. Benning. I mean to tell you I've never seen as many cottonmouths anywhere as I did in the streams on that base. Spectacular!

"I appreciate the fact that you are, as you claim, innocent of the ways of gay-oriented child pornography, as well as the fact that most gays would cringe and recoil with disgust at you for linking the words "gay" and "child pornography" as you have done. You know what NAMBLA is, so I find it a little far-fetched that you have never heard the term "gay boy" used in the context of someone who wishes to molest boys." Well, I haven't been cloistered and I'm going to guess I've heard or read the term 'gay boy' maybe 5 times in my life, at lease in the context it's being used here - and I'm not even sure about that for that matter - most of them (now) from this thread. It isn't exactly the kind of thing that gets thrown around a lot in this area but then I'm evidently completely ignorant of child pornography...which I'm pretty sure, if your description is correct...that I'd need to be quite familiar with in order to remotely recognize those titles as being FROM that kind of stuff. And I do know what the NAMBLA acronym stands for. OK, I think I'll wash my hands now.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Yeah Rush, you pill-popping, woman-hating addict. It ISN'T all about money after all. Thanks OGE, for putting the 'bald ego' in his place.

There will always be a clogged-up place in my heart for KFC.

'Johnny' is a common nickname for John (When Johnny comes marching home or 'Johnny Got His Gun'), occasionally the nickname applied is 'Jack' (JFK's nickname). The book of the Bible isn't "The Book of Jonathan" and that famous verse isn't Jonathan 3:16. Edit: Just checked that river of wisdom, Wikipedia, and it lists 'Jon' as a nickname for Jonathan. Perhaps that's a source of confusion. (but it didn't list 'John')(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I shudder to think about some of the endearments that my wife has applied to me. But when I address the boys I use their name. I never use a nickname unless I've been asked by them to use it. Other than that, unless I've missed something, I can't think of many times, any really, in which boys called each other names in a mean way. It didn't happen in my troop when I was a boy, either, and there were plenty of times it could have. Most of the time, the boys apply derogatory names to adults. Some are quite creative.

I own stock in several companies. That makes me a partial 'owner', depending on the fine print. I get to vote on management and policy according to that same fine print. I am also a customer to numerous businesses. I get to vote there too. But in the latter case my vote is in the form of my dollars spent...or withheld. Want to vote for a business practice, buy their product. Want to vote against a business practice, buy from a competitor. Customers, collectively, matter a lot. Like Rush says, it's all about money. BSA is no exception.

Beavah, in 'chickengate', some mayors were 'called out' because they were trampling free speech. Rightly so. In the health care/Catholic hospital argument, you made persuasive arguments about religious freedom. While reading many responses to many threads over the years, I have been impressed with some persons, you for example, who try to champion a measured, kind, fair, and pragmatic approach to youth. I join in this tendency to defend young persons against such things, for example, as 'zero tolerance'. So far so good. The UUA, like they often are, were among the first to express their concern about BSA membership policies, namely the same underlying issues as in 'chickengate'. They exercised their rights of free speech and to express ideas based on their faith in their own documents for their own religious award. BSA didn't like it. BSA managed to convince the UUA to modify their own religious documents but evidently not enough to satisfy BSA. BSA could not force the UUA to modify those documents to the satisfaction of BSA so no resolution was reached. At this point, there was no way for BSA to prevail over the first amendment rights of the UUA. And at this point BSA could have just accepted that they had failed. But BSA didn't. BSA had one weapon left and they aimed it at UUA youth. BSA announced that because the UUA would not set aside their own doctrine, BSA would no longer recognize the religious award. It was a small move in every sense because it not only failed to resolve anything, it only affected the youth. I said it was small. I could also add that it was a shameful and spiteful act of cowardice and bullying, by a big organization who needlessly and gratuitously attempted to harm a small number of youth who had never done anything to deserve it other than try to follow their own faith and the Scout Law. The irony is that members of these forums seem to use the first amendment to defend certain faiths and certain speech, but when it came to those UUA youth, some of those forum members who might have approached this with the same sense of fairness and kindness... turned their backs. And still do. I call it irony. Perhaps there is a better term.

The irony is the selective devotion to the first amendment by forum members. Get it now?

Actually I think no evidence is left if a moderator deletes a post or a thread.

Those delicious ironies...so many of them. So, 'chickengate' boils down to a guy who exercises his First Amendment right and because it's somewhat controversial there are strong opinions expressed about him, his product, etc., both in support and in opposition. All this guy did was express his opinion on gay marriage. That's all. He's allowed. And all of a sudden there's a surge of support for him and his business as if there's a boycott (which there isn't)...and that is really interesting AND, If a hospital wants to limit the medical procedures to patients on the basis of religious beliefs, not to mention the hullaballoo about insurance coverage for their employees.....that is again protected first amendment stuff. So far so good. BUT if a church decides to put a simple statement of disagreement with BSA with regard to the membership policy, exercising their first amendment right to both speech AND religion, into THEIR OWN literature for their OWN religious award, those of us who held one position in 'chickengate' and who were outraged at the threat to religious freedom at religious hospitals, etc.....seem to have given complete support to disregarding THAT religion's first amendment freedoms when BSA took action to disallow the award on the uniform. Such delicious ironies.

One of the advantages or perhaps disadvantages of having lived during most of those times, is that I can relate to the actual social context of those crimes and the correspondence detailed in those documents. At least one of those guys was really nearby to me and while, yes, the times were different then, the sense of anger toward the man and the sense of betrayal of the most egregious kind by BSA is sickening. How this organization could know those things and yet do so little is a betrayal of humanity itself, of the lowest kind. Someone, perhaps many persons, need to serve serious time for what they did...or didn't do.

Then I'll use YOUR words. You began with the statement, "The fact is there are often plenty of good reasons for "discrimination."" and then you proceeded to list several examples, all related to racial segregation, presumably demonstrating the "good reasons for discrimination." What else is the reader to conclude? Edit: I guess I should give you credit for acknowledging the direct analogy between inclusiveness with regard to race and inclusiveness with regard to sexual orientation.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

SeattlePioneer, until now I had no clue that you supported racial segregation.

"Basically an old coot who happens to own a restaurant chain".....at least he didn't run as a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, lol. I'll stick with the large iced tea from McDonalds for $1. If CfA can match that price for lemonade I might switch.

Fred Thompson, Clint Eastwood, Jesse Ventura. I can't explain the absence of the other side of the political spectrum. Al Franken was probably just a fluke. I guess cameo appearances don't count.

Autry, Rogers, Hickok, Cassidy, Kid (some people spell it 'Kidd'), King (actually it was 'Skylar'), Lone (and Tonto [Jay Silverheels, I think]) and later Dillon and Adam, Hoss, Ben, Little Joe, Hop Sing (he was the coolest of all). Back to Gunsmoke, I remember how Burt Reynolds got his start there as a blacksmith, Miss Kitty has been the name of several of our cats, Doc Stone was modeled after my childhood doctor, and then later Dennis Weaver had that signature limp but Festus was my favorite of the deputies. Ours was a 12-inch Motorola. One channel, WBTV (Watch the Buicks Travel). Edit: oh yeah, the animals. Trigger, Dale Evans rode Buttermilk, and Bullet ran along barking once in a while. Family: Sky King's neice was Penny but I can't remember the nephew's name. How about Captain Midnight or Tales of the French Foreign Legion?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I'm deeply saddened to have to correct the trivia master, OGE. But it was Pat Brady who owned Nellie Belle (the jeep) in the Roy Rogers show. Jingles Jones was the sidekick of Wild Bill Hickok. Man, we've gotta get together sometime to work on these memories.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Shortridge, I certainly won't. Actually, I'm glad that he has the courage to express his views so honestly and openly. Surely no person can criticize him for being dishonest.

GP1971, a sense of humor helps. I was thinking in terms of Andy Devine. You know, Jingles Jones, Andy's Gang, Froggie's magic twanger, Midnight the cat, etc. Now THAT is retribution! Or you can think in terms of other stupid claims of divine retribution like those made by various televangelists with regard to various sins - Jerry Falwell, for example. Just roll your eyes and think quietly....'what-EV-er!'

I know a couple of Buddhist scout leaders. They are reluctant to say much about this but they have told me in the past that there are some Buddhists who (and I don't understand this at all) refer to Buddha as 'God' but that they and most of their fellows in this area are basically atheist. To me this is a pretty bad inconsistency for BSA policy. The thing that seems most inconsistent is that it seems that a Buddhist can be an atheist and BSA is ok with that. But if a Unitarian Universalist is an atheist (and this does happen, so they claim) BSA is NOT ok with that. Broken record time now....local option would take care of all this as well.

I'm still suspicious. There's something about the absence of article adjectives and anonymous den leaders who develop online software. Especially if someone is going to enter email addresses, names and other information about young people into an unsecured web site. So...if the den leaders developed the site, tell them they should identify themselves on the site and list a physical address and other contact information. It would be nice to hear a human voice at the other end of a phone...in case of the need for technical assistance. Sounds like two forum members already could use a little. Like I said, I'm suspicious. You have a steep hill to climb with me. It's getting steeper.