DanKroh

I second the question about the ages of the boys who have not yet earned the AOL. Is there some reason that they do not want to earn the award? Why wouldn't they take advantage of the 5 months remaining until they finish 5th grade to try to complete the requirements for AOL? My experience in our pack is that boys who do not get their AOL by February do not cross over then and, instead, stay with the pack until the end of the school year. Can't say for sure how many of them have still gone on to earn the AOL at that point. It has been my impression that the few boys who did not earn the AOL generally did not continue on to Boy Scouts anyway. If the boys who have not gotten the AOL meet the age requirements and want to cross over the Boy Scouts right then, I like Prairie_Scouter's idea.

Your high school AP Psychology teacher is using outdated information. And unless you take a COLLEGE level psychology course at a university where there is a religious bias (or from an instructor with a religious bias), you will never hear that again. And just read what you said, "One of my best friends is bisexual, and he agrees that he wasn't born gay, that it is a choice for him." OK, so he was born bisexual. Which gender he decides to enter a relationship with may be a choice, but who he is attracted to is not. He IS bisexual. But this, like religion, is another issue where both sides think they are right and are not likely to convince the other. And if you were a woman, would you feel comfortable working at Hooters, knowing that the only reason you were hired was because you had a well endowed chest?(This message has been edited by DanKroh)

Well, actually, I agree that you should decline to work there, but for different reasons than Ed. You implied in your post that one of the reasons you make so many tips in this establishment is because you are an "extremely attractive exotic-looking male". So basically, you are presenting yourself as "eye-candy" to you customers. My feeling is that this is somewhat duplicitous on your part. How are you going to react the first time one of your customers flirts with you or makes a pass at you? How are you going to react the first time you are called by a homophobic slur by someone on the street who sees you leaving work? I think ronvo has the gist of it. If you feel you can honestly say that you are comfortable enough with the environment and the patrons to handle the scenarios I listed above, then go for it. Scouting should not enter into it, since you are not in violation of any BSA policies (that I know of). And just because no one else has said it yet, I will. I wouldn't worry about "turning gay" because you can't. You either are or you aren't. You don't absorb "gayness" by osmosis.

Rooster, so "peace on Earth, good will toward men" is NOT an appropriate sentiment of the Christmas season? I just want to be sure, so as not to offend. SR540Beaver, I agree with you in principle, as long as respecting my "right to believe" also means that my beliefs will not be publically mocked or belittled, and that I won't be told I'm going to the Christian's hot place because of my beliefs. For example: "I respect your right to worship the Devil himself and to condemn your soul to eternal suffering because of it" Nah, that kind of respect doesn't work for me, either.... (Not that I've gotten that on this forum; at least, not as blatantly as that). And Ed, I, for one, can't say I'll feel left out. Never been a big fan of restricted membership policies.

Ahhhh... If I may reminisce for a moment (and at the risk of sounding like an old fart), I remember when gaming meant pencils, graph paper, character sheets, dice, books, and if you were really into it, miniature figures.... But I do remember a lot of the same comments made about D&D back in the day. What's the appeal? Doesn't it teach violence? Won't it make my child antisocial? Well, I think with both D&D and video games, what you do or don't get out of it depends a lot on how you play. Our D&D campaigns were just that, well-planning, imaginative, epic adventures that required the use of skills like problem solving, teamwork, imagination. Other kids played "hack and slash" that pretty much required no thought. My sons both love video games. I try to steer them toward the ones that require you to solve puzzles or at least use their imaginations to advance in the game, rather than just be able to push a button to hit and run faster than your opponent. But I also let them play Road Rage and a couple of the other "hack and slash" (or in this day and age, "shoot 'em up") games as long as the violence is not over the top. They are mostly restricted to E games, a couple of T ones that I have approved (no M yet, but the oldest is only 11). Kids these days have a lot of expectations placed on them, and just like adults, need a way to decompress at the end of the day. As long as they are playing video games that I've screened for appropriateness, they can have their fun in a way they choose. Edited to add: Oh, and anyone who thinks all video games have to be sedentary haven't seem my boys bouncing around and working up a healthy sweat playing Dance Dance Revolution! (This message has been edited by DanKroh)

Nicely said, Semper. And may the spirit of Christmas bring you and yours great joy, blessings, and peace.

Ed says: " Dan, I respect your beliefs." Well, I'm very glad to hear that Ed. However, I am concerned about how quickly you were willing to compromise ALL your beliefs to admit that. I asked: "Ed, could you please specify which of your beliefs you would have to compromise to be respectful of a Pagan Scouter's beliefs?" To which Ed replied: "What beliefs would I have to compromise? All of them."

So Ed, then how do you reconcile the fact that as a Scouter, you swear to uphold the Scout Law, which says you should respect the beliefs of others, to the fact that you feel you cannot respect my beliefs without compromising all of your own?

Ed says: Earned a pagan Scouters respect how? By compromising my beliefs? Or by caving in and saying I believe in something I don't? Actually, Ed, you don't have to earn my respect. I give it freely until such time as you might prove yourself unworhty of it. But I'm truly curious, Ed, could you please specify which of your beliefs you would have to compromise to be respectful of a Pagan Scouter's beliefs? Could you also specify what you think you would have to say you believe in that you don't in order to be respectful of a Pagan Scouter's beliefs? For me, I have to say that I don't feel that I've had to compromise any of my beliefs, cave in to anything, or say I believe anything that I actually don't in order to (at least give my best effort to) be respectful about the religious beliefs of others. Ed also says: If you want to base who you respect on what is posted in these forums that's up to you. I prefer to meet someone face to face & spend some time whit them before I respect them or not. Doing anything less is shallow. Well then, color me shallow. But being a devout UU Pagan, I'll continue to follow the doctrine of my religion that says that all people are inherently worthy of respect (until they prove themselves otherwise). Although, frankly, I'm surprised that while you are not being respectful to someone because you have not met them "face to face & spend some time [with] them" that they are willing to meet you face to face and spend time with you in order to earn your respect.(This message has been edited by DanKroh)

Ed says: Respect is earned. I must have missed the version of the Scout handbook where the 12th point of the Scout laws reads: "A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others as long as that respect is earned and he thinks those beliefs are valid and true." In my version of the Scout Handbook, Ed, the Scout law ends "He respects of the beliefs of others." Period, end of statement. So tell me Ed, with these statements: "Saturnalia was basically a sex & booze orgy!" "The god Saturn? And pray, what does this god do that would make anyone want to celebrate it?" "Cool planet? That's it? That's what I figured. Nothing!" do you think that you have earned the respect of Pagan scouters and scouts (and this Pagan in particular)? Do you think you have done your best to earn the respect of Jewish and Muslim scouts and scouters? Should those scouts and scouters extend respect to you and your beliefs if you have not earned it?

Semper, I have thought of another answer to your question for your consideration. Some people believe that respect is earned by being given. If your worshipper of the "Spirit of Intolerance and Disrespect" does not give respect to others, then he has not earned respect for his beliefs in return. Personally, I think respect should be given by default (not earned), but it can also be taken away if it is not returned in kind. I will respect you and your beliefs up until the point when you have been disrespectful to me and my beliefs, then I am no longer under any obligation to give my respect. Still doesn't mean I will publically "dis" you or your beliefs, but the respect will no longer be there. What happens when our beliefs are in conflict, as I'm sure some of them are? Well, then we try to discuss them in a civil fashion, perhaps giving our reasons why we each have our beliefs, but that can also be done without being disrespectful. I admit it is unlikely that either of us would convince the other, which is why I usually find those types of debates futile if that is your goal. However, my goals are usually more along the lines of educating others, maybe encouraging them to think critically about their own beliefs (and bringing about my own self-examination), but I know that convincing is probably futile.

Semper asks: If one's 'religious belief' involved the worship of the Spirit of Intolerance and Disrespect, calling him or her to be blatantly disrespectful of all religions other than their own, as well as those that follow them, then by your own words, you would respect that belief and would therefore not be offended by the comments of such a person? Ah, I thought I smelled a "trap" in your question. I was hoping I was wrong, but at least your trap shows imagination. While I would respect their right to have that belief, I would draw the line at them expressing their intolerance and disrespect to me. Just as I respect the rights and beliefs of Christians, but do not have to put up with the disrespect and intolerance of some of them, either. I never said that I was not offended by the beliefs of some people, just that I would not be publically disrepectful of their beliefs. You are welcome to think that my beliefs are stupid, silly, and evil, just please have enough respect to keep those opinions to yourself. Also, now you are talking about actions instead of beliefs. If there was a pagan religion that actually required the sacrifice of infants (and it existed somewhere other than the imaginations of anti-pagan critics), then I would oppose their right to use those actions to practice their beliefs as well.

Semper asks: So, should I take that to mean that all beliefs are equally valid and true? Depends on the nature of the beliefs. If it is a belief about something that is observable and verifiable, then no. If you believe that the sky is green, then that belief is not true. However, if we are talking about religious beliefs, they are for the most part unverifiable by anyone else. So yes, unverifiable religious beliefs are all equally valid and true because they are valid and true to the person who holds them, and therefore, deserving of respect by the rest of us. Rooster said in a previous post that he is dumbfounded as to why people can not see the "simple truth" of his beliefs. Well, that's because while they may be HIS truth, they are not necessarily "truth" to the rest of us. My "truth" is that all gods are really the same, so it doesn't really matter to me what you decide to call your god(s) because we are all really worshipping the creative force of the universe. Why doesn't he (and you) see my "simple truth"? Because it is unverifiable; I can not prove it, and you cannot provide proof that contradicts it. That is the nature of faith. Why should anyone's faith be less valid than anyone else's? Yes, it is shameful that there is intolerance for the beliefs in others in all religions. However, since Christianity represents the majority religion in the country, don't they also represent the majority of the intolerance? Now, again, I'm not trying to paint all Christians as intolerant bigots. I'm just trying to get back to the title (if not point) of this thread, which is that the only people who see a "war on Christmas" are Christians who do not want to seem to acknowledge that Christmas is not the only holiday being celebrated this time of year. I know of no Jews who are offended by being told Merry Christmas. I know of no Pagans who are offended by being told Merry Christmas. Yet, if you listen to the media, there are thousands of Christians out there who are offended if they are told ANYTHING BUT Merry Christmas. Offended to the point where they will boycott stores that do not use the word Christmas in their advertising and who do not force their store workers to say Merry Christmas to all their customers. It seems the only people who are publically "airing their grievances" are Christians. Everyone else mostly seems to be simply reacting to being told that they are oppressing the Christian's right to celebrate Christmas.

Nope, you wouldn't be silly. You simply have a different belief about Morrigan than I do. However, I would praise you for your knowledge of Celtic mythology. However, I am interested in the answers to two questions from my last post: 1. Do you disagree that there is intolerance for the beliefs of others within certain groups of Christians? 2. What denomination of Christianity to you personally subscribe to?

Well, thank you SemperParatus, for your sincere interest in learning more. Just to clarify, the belief that I feel was being disrespected was my belief that Jesus was a great teacher, but not necessarily divine. This belief has been called "silly", and that it must result from "ignorance". If those are respecful words, then I'll eat my neckerchief. To clarify my position on "Merry Christmas", I am not bothered by the greeting itself (when given in the appropriate spirit), but rather the assumption that I must be Christian. But you asked me to define my beliefs for you. Sure thing. I am a Unitarian Universalist Pagan with Wiccan leanings. I do not follow Saturn (that would make me a Roman Reconstructionist). Wicca is a pagan religion based on a belief in the sexual duality of the divine, that is, that there is both a God and a Goddess. It is also very nature based, so holidays are based on astronomical and agricultural events such as soltices and equinoxes, and planting/harvest festivals. We also celebrate the phases of the moon, especially the full and new moons. My personal belief about divinity is that all gods are simply human interpretations of the Divine Creator of the universe, a Spirit which is beyond mortal ability to understand, so we create "avatars" to represent different aspects of that Spirit. The particular avatars that I use are Celtic in origin (Herne, Morrigan, Bran, Cerridwen, etc). I accept that others believe in the divine nature of their avatars, they just aren't MY gods/God. My chosen place of worship is the UU Church, where I worship next to Christians, Jews, Hindus, Agnostics, probably some Muslims and Atheists (although I don't personally know any in my church), and other Pagans. We draw inspiration from the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, as well as the philosophical writings of teachers in many other religions, as well as humanists (Thoreau is a fav). We believe in the inherent worth of all human beings and tolerance for all beliefs. We believe that we are stewards to this planet, and see care for the environment as a calling as well. I generally do not discuss the specifics of my beliefs on boards such as this because of the atmosphere of intolerance for non-Christian beliefs that I have encounter. I do not believe that all Christians are intolerant bigots. However, at the same time, I think there is a tendancy within certain groups in Christianity to be intolerant of the beliefs of others. Do you disagree with that? Edited to add: And just to return in kind, what particular brand of Christianity do you subscribe to?(This message has been edited by DanKroh)

SemperParatus says: Are these the actions of a mere teacher? Never said there was anything "mere" about Jesus. Actually, the phrase I used was "great teacher". I guess you also missed the part where I said that I think he was certainly "touched" by God. And the actions I had in mind were more along the lines of how he lived his life and how he treated the people around him, rather than a laundry list of the miracles he may have performed. Things like (just a few examples): Asking the rich to help the poor. Calling for an end to discrimination based on social class. Showing compassion for those that others considered outcast (lepers, etc.) Encouraging people to be responsible for their own actions, and to be judged on those actions rather than on their words (especially when the two contradicted each other). So riddle me this, SemperParatus, is your request for an explanation of my beliefs out of simple curiosity and respectful desire to better understand the beliefs of others, or due to some need to prove my beliefs invalid and silly? Again, I would point out that I have not demanded that you justify your belief about Christ's divinity, so why do you feel it necessary that I justify mine? Do you feel that you have truly shown respect for my beliefs?

Well, then Rooster, I thank you for the good intentions of your Christmas greeting, and wish you and yours a sincere and heartfelt Happy Yule. May the return of the sun shine bright blessings on your house.

Kudu says: I'd say just the opposite. The accounts of his supernatural miracles are suspect, but his moral allegories as recorded by his chosen disciples may be intact. That's an interesting theory, but here's my theory. In studying other languages, my experience is that the words for ideas and abstract concepts are much more nuanced, and much harder to translate than the words for actions and concrete concepts. Therefore, it is more likely (assuming that no one writing the Bible has out and out lied about events and ideas), that more complex, abstract concepts (like divinity and morality) are more susceptable to misinterpretation and mistranlation than descriptions of actions. And I'm sure that those who believe that the Bible is inerrant will consider this another silly idea.

Well, SemperParatus, since you have (IMHO) the cheek to demand that I justify my beliefs to you.... I base my label on actions rather than words. Words are cheap, and can be misinterpreted and misquoted. Actions speak much louder. It is how Jesus lived his life that I admire, how he treated the people around him, rather than what he actually prosletized. Now, I do have to make some assumptions that Christ's actions have been relatively accurately portrayed in the Bible, but I find it more likely that his words might be distorted than accounts of his actions. Now, I am not disrespectful of your faith to demand that you provide a logical reasoning of your belief in Christ's divinity (one which does not involve the circular reasoning of, "Because he said so"). I understand that the acceptance of his divinity is a matter of faith, which by definition means that it is without proof.

Yes, Jack Lewis' quote is an excellent summation of the intolerance of many Christians for beliefs that do not match their own. You know, if you wanted to believe that Herne was a nice myth, but you didn't believe he was a god, thank you very much, I would not be offended as a follower of Herne. In fact, you could believe that Herne was the devil incarnate as long as you were at least respectful to me to not say it to my face. I'm not going to dictate to you what you have to believe about my gods. In fact, I couldn't give a hoot what you believe about my gods, as long as you are respectful of MY beliefs. I respect your belief that Christ was the Son of God. I'm glad it brings you comfort and gives your life meaning and a moral compass. I have neither belittled you for having that belief nor told you that there is no way that he was divine. All I ask is the same respect in return.

Rooster: Why do you suggest that non-Christians will be, or ought to be, offended when others wish them a "Merry Christmas"? Well, how about that it assumes that I celebrate Christmas, which according to you, must mean that I am a Christian (since it is silly for non-Christians to care about that holiday). On the other hand, why would a Christian be offended by being wished "Happy Holidays"? Ed: Cool planet? That's it? That's what I figured. Nothing! Well, not being a follower of Saturn, I can't tell you what the appeal is for those people. However, I can't tell you what the appeal is for a Hindu to worship Vishnu, either. But that doesn't mean that I would mock the beliefs of either (or any) religion. I see that it is easy for you to talk the talk of respecting the beliefs of others, but when it actually comes to walking the walk, you could use a wheelchair. Seems to me that both you and Rooster are of the opinion that some religions are more deserving of respect than others. I would be happy for you to contradict me and show that you truly do respect the religious beliefs of everyone.

Rooster says: Jesus proclaimed that no one could come to the Father except through Him. He made it clear in many different ways, if you want salvation, you must accept Him and His perfect sacrifice on the cross. In order for those words to make sense to anyone, one must believe in Jesus divinity. So you believe. I don't. The difference is, I'm not trying to tell you what you can and can't celebrate based on your beliefs. If you want to celebrate Hannukah or Yule, go for it. If I want to celebrate Christmas based on my beliefs about who and what Jesus was, you don't get to naysay me. I'm sure I don't celebrate Christmas in the same (spiritual) way as you, but I'm not going to tell you HOW you have to celebrate Christmas, either. My original point is that my main winter holiday is Yule. Many of the customs and outward symbols of Yule are similar to those of Christmas, yet many Christians feel they don't need to acknowledge or respect the other holidays being celebrated during this season. An evergreen tree is a "holiday" tree because it can represent two different holidays, Christmas and Yule. "Happy Holidays" IS a respectful greeting because it acknowledges that there are many holidays (Hannukah, Kwanza, Yule, etc.) going on this time of year. Those people who insist that you absolutely MUST say "Merry Christmas", even when you know that the person you are addressing is not a Christian are not being respectful of the beliefs of others. And since we don't all walk around wearing little badges on our coats to designate our religion, not everyone is comfortable assuming that the person they are addressing is Christian, and are happier saying "Happy Holidays" because they feel it is more respectful to everyone.

Rooster says: Your statement is truly a foolish one. Jesus Christ was either who he said he was, or he was a mad man. If he is not who he said he was; theres no reason to recognize Christmas. Christians and others, who present Jesus as merely a great teacher and/or philosopher, have not examined His life or His message. They are attempting to intellectualize Christ as someone other than whom he really was and is Gods son. And your statement is equally foolish. What makes you think that I have not examined the teachings of Jesus only because I do not accept the idea of his divinity? And why can't I celebrate the beauty of his life just because I do not accept that he was divine? That's like saying that because I'm not black, I can't celebrate MLK Jr. Day. To me, Jesus was a great man who was certainly touched by God. To you, he was/is the Son of God. You are entitled to your belief, just as I am entitled to mine. It is not part of the doctrine of my religious beliefs that I get to tell other people that their beliefs are wrong. Just because your interpretation of the teachings of Christ allow you to believe that you get to tell other people that they are wrong, doesn't mean that I have to accept your judgement, either.

Ed says: Saturnalia was basically a sex & booze orgy! Wow, now there's a statement that couldn't be farther from the truth. In ancient times, Saturnalia was a harvest celebration, marked by feasting, gift giving, and the relaxing of social structures that allowed slaves to be treated as equals to their masters for the day. Today, Saturnalia is a celebration of the harvest, and the rebirth of the Sun, like many other solstice celebrations. BTW, Ed, the Roman Empire was not a religion. Many religions actually florished during the Roman Empire, including Judaism and many Pagan sects. Again, even though the Roman Empire is gone, the religions that were practiced during that time are still, for the most part, alive and well around the world.

Kahuna says: Regardless of the history of why Christmas is celebrated on December 25, that is the holiday celebrated on that date. The trees are Christmas trees. Yeah, and Yule is the holiday celebrated on the winter solstice, in some Pagan traditions. My tree is a Yule tree. So what's your point? Again, part of the problem is that Christmas is not the only winter holiday that has an evergreen tree as it's symbol. So by calling them "holiday trees", people are at least giving a passing nod to the fact that they might be representing different holidays for different people. It has been my experience by and large that the only people who really get offended by not getting the holiday greeting that they think they deserve are certain fundamentalist Christians who think it is disrespectful to them to wish them anything but a Merry Christmas. Actually, I think I'm getting kind of partial to "Happy Holy Days"