Zahnada

And up steps good ol Zahnada, Ready to vote for Obama. But if Baracks fate, Was decided by this debate, Id say it helped him, absolutely nada. While McCain had distain and he muttered, Obama had a lotta times where he stuttered. He didnt fire back, To Johns relentless attacks. Baracks performance gave me some shudders. Although I just gave him some knocks, Im still going to vote for Barack. Im sad to confess, Our economys a mess, And McCains budget strategies are just a crock.

Hops, I knew a boy who almost earned all, And his Scout Spirit was never called small. Youre too quick to judge, And hold such a grudge, Cause that boy answered every call. Mark, Thats an interesting question you pose, How to stop liars, nobody knows. There are no patch cops, At the scout shops, Once people pay, then anything goes.

I dont understand the resistance, To offering Troy kind assistance. The negativity of some, Make the forum less fun, And soon scouters will start keeping their distance.

For merit badges, I only got 28, If you earn all, I think that it's great. Earning all in addition, Deserves recognition. Just follow the rules and we'll end this debate.

I must say "I'm sorry" to Ed, For I came in and hijacked his thread. But a poetic bent, Rather than arguments. STILL caused a fight over what others said. I'm amazed that anger is swelling. On strange issues some posters are dwelling. We just saw a fight, 'Tween Winger and White, Over proper nautical spelling. And although I feel scouting's the best, Some scouters here can't take a jest. I found the decorum, Of some on this forum, Actually made me enjoy scouting less. So I slip on and off of this board, Certain posters, I try to ignore. Things stopped getting worse, When I went into verse, And my enjoyment has suddenly soared. But I sadly must bid you adieu, Once again, for the time, I am through, But when someone gets to your goat, Just delete what you wrote, And write a limerick, it's good for you!

There once was a scouter Gold Winger, Who outstretched his nagging finger. But I'm sorry, my mate, Words don't carry weight, Unless written as a limerical zinger. See, doesn't this make arguing fun? Shouldn't this be how all forums are run? Once posters grow weary, Of this lyrical fury, They will ditch the 'net for some sun.

Its Me had something to say, But limerick guidelines may cause his dismay. His etiquette vignette, Was in rhyming couplet, While limericks go A-A-B-B-A. Now before others get frantic, Please note that Im not very pedantic. I would never say stow it To an aspiring poet, So lets just hug and forget these semantics.

Nothing quite makes me sicker, Than watching scouts start to bicker. But let's try this trick- We'll argue in limerick, The right answer will be whoever's rhyme is slicker.

Disclaimer: I have not seen this movie, nor do I intend to. Everything I say is purely me theorizing. It's not hard for me to imagine that the scene in question was written as a back-handed slap at BSA's policy towards gays. As someone who works in Hollywood and has seen the different stages of production on major movies, I have first-hand experience of the "new image" of BSA. Merlyn's observation is correct, at least in many circles on the west coast. Before, when Boy Scouts were used or mentioned in films, it meant a goody-two shoes, all-American boy who helps old ladies cross the street while obeying all rules ("Jim Kirk was many things, but he was NEVER a Boy Scout.") Indiana Jones was an adventurous Boy Scout, but that was outside the norm. Now, there's a conflicting public opinion of the Boy Scouts. We still have the All-American vibe, but there's also a fairly hefty portion of society who view us as "intolerant," "bigoted," and even "hateful." It's a new image that we should be conscious of and not ignore. I know that whenever I bring up Boy Scouts (which is very frequent because it played such a huge role in my youth), I always get a few raised eyebrows. As for the movie, I doubt the scene is political or meaningful. I bet it was created as a gag. It's not going to form public opinion or hurt recruitment or have any real consequences. It's not a big deal at all. It's just another reminder of the adjusted image that BSA has.

It's not quite the same thing. Yes, the universe is expanding and objects are becoming more and more distant. Some physicists theorize that this will either result in a universal "rip" or that it will all suddenly stretch so far, that it snaps back (like a rubber band) resulting in a sort of reverse Big Bang. But I'm talking about all the matter in the universe being consumed and us being left with a universe filled with nothing. Of course, everyone else is talking about Global Warming.

There's no need to worry. In a few million years, the Sun will have converted all of its hydrogen to helium, and thus have spent all its fuel. At which point, it will swell in size to a red giant. In the process, Mercury and Venus will be swallowed up, while a singed and fiery Earth will be kicked off its orbit. Luckily, the size of the red giant will make life on one of Saturn's moons very hospitable. Hopefully, humanity will move there. Unfortunately, the red giant will then collapse in a supernove (after a few million more years) and form a neutron star. The weight of the neutron star will be so heavy that gravity actually sucks it into space, thus creating a black hole. Good thing for us that black holes emit Hawking radiation, and hopefully but the time we get to this stage, we'll be able to harness the radiation for energy. Eventually, all stars will burn off like this and form blackholes. The blackholes will then begin to merge into super-massive blackholes and all rocks and debris in space will join their orbits. As the blackholes slowly emit their Hawking radiation, they are actually giving off the remainder of their mass. Several billion (possibly trillion) years down the road, the universe will have no light and no bodies of mass. Instead, it will be a giant, empty space filled with nothing but energy. So why worry about Global Warming?

In a forum that's made for Scouts, One wouldn't expect interpersonal bouts. But we must learn to censor, Our argumentative nature, But if a thread's closed, there's no need to pout. Hmmm... "censor" and "nature" is a bit of a stretch. My limerick skills are a little rusty, but I'll be back in form in no time. Are there any troops here from Nantucket?

I've been on and off this forum for awhile. But I have to say, in all these years, this is the FIRST time I have ever read a post where someone writes a limerick! AWESOME! Limericks truly are the purest form of poetry.

Dankroh, Yeah, I'll be the first to admit that just about all analogies are flawed. But I would like to debate some of your points. 1. "First, being a Christian is a choice. Being a homosexual isn't." I have no problem with the second half of that statement. But, many Christians will say they didn't have a choice in the matter. They feel that God spoke to them and has guided their hearts towards Christianity. And believe me, they feel their religion is completely natural (much like a gay man feels his sexuality is completely natural). 2. "Second, there is the issue of prosletyzing." This is actually the reason why I'm against prayer in public school - it makes it too easy for a teacher to force their views upon their students. But remember that many parents feel that the teacher in question was also prosletyzing. I believe my example was not one of prosletyzing, but rather one of an inappropriate classroom experience. The teacher in my example was not passing out flyers. He was just explaining that he's Christian and it's made his life better. From what I understand, that's exactly the same message the gay teacher was spreading. "It's okay to be gay. It worked well for me." "It's okay to be Christian. It worked well for me." Not all Christians are on a conversion mission. 3. "Third, there is also the constitutional angle (a minor point)." Yeah, I also don't know much about the legalities of this, so I can't argue this exact point. But I will say (and I believe you agree with me) that it's inappropriate to raise such morally controversial issues to a class of 7 year olds. Especially if these teachings are against the wishes of the parents. It's not so much that I feel the teacher was in the wrong for the message. I feel he was in the wrong for having so blatant a disregard for the parent's right to their children's upbringing.

Brent, I can't argue with much of what you say. It's true that, overall, it appears the Dems care less about moral infractions. Heck, most Dems laugh about the Clinton sex scandal and say, "Well, if it were me, I would have lied too." So what's shocking to the nation is that this current scandal involves a member of the Republican Party - a party who sets themselves up as morally superior, more value oriented, more family friendly. People see this as a slight hypocrisy in the party. When a Democrat has a sex scandal, it's seen as less hypocritical because they don't set themselves up as the party of traditional values. (I can see the reponses coming now. Believe me, it isn't "right" that there's the distinction, but it exists. It doesn't give the Dems a free moral pass by any means.) Let me give you an example. If kid holds up a liquor store and gets caught, it's not news. But if an Eagle Scout (yay! I brought this back to scouting) holds up a liquore store, it IS news. Because it goes against what we've been taught to believe about Eagle Scouts. Personally, I'm sick of the Dems always whining. Right now, their platform is, "We're not the party of Bush and Foley." Ugh. Yeah, that's an inspiring platform. The Dems need to come up with some clear statements of purpose. What really infuriated me was when the Democrats started criticizing the administration during the whole "Cheney shoots lawyer" thing. Come on! Just shut up and let the late-night pundits run with it! It's amazing how weak both parties are right now. If the Dems had any strength, they would have been able to tear apart the Republican Party after Katrina. But they just moan and complain and never rally. Both sides are looking pretty disgusting right now.