About those anti-aviatoin newsgroups

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
| "C J Campbell" wrote in message
| ...
| My personal feelings about the matter is that any private organization
| should be able to discriminate against any group that it wishes for any
| reason.
|
| I agree with you there. However:
|
| * The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any
sort
| of government support. As a private organization, they should be
| self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate.
|

I really get tired of that canard. The Boy Scouts do not get any more
government support than any other private organization. Yes, they are
allowed to meet in public schools, just like the gay rights groups -- many
of whom do not allow straight members. Yes, they are allowed to use the
public parks, drive on the public roads, and even breathe the public air,
despite the fact that I have heard from numerous activists who do not think
any of these things should be allowed.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
| "Cub Driver" wrote in message
| ...
| In any event, the homophobe you speak of is not denying anybody's
| rights
|
| Of course they are. These bills say, in essence, "gays will not be
granted
| the right to marry". I don't know how much more clearly someone's rights
| can be denied.
|

Baloney, as you say. The bills say they do not allow same-sex marriages.
There are no prohibitions against gays marrying persons of the opposite sex.
The restrictions are the same for everybody. Really, though, marriage has
been so re-defined and watered down in the courts and through legislation
that it has become almost meaningless from a legal standpoint. And there are
no laws against same-sex marriages being performed outside of government
sanction.

Here we have gone from "we don't want any government restricting our sex
life" to "we want the blessing of the government on our social
relationships." Seems hypocritical, to say the least.

Peter, can you show even one law on the books that does not attempt to
impose one person's morality on another?

bush's faith base iniative program - which thankfully according to this article
is not going anywhere

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/103/31.0.html

AND - this quote from latest speech:
"i believes the sanctity of marriage, which must be between a man and a woman."

shouldn't the fact that a PRESIDENT's statement starts with "i believe"
disqualify it from any credit at all? he's stating his personal BELIEFS!!
something that has nothing to do with laws, science and civil liberties.

it's already been medically proven and accepted by psychology professionals
that being gay is not a choice, or any kind of mental deficiency.

given that the only leg anti-gay rights folks stand on is "God's will" this,
and "Leviticus" that.
(reminder: we are not a CHRISTIAN nation, as many from the pulpit would have
you believe)

or - of course the other "slippery slope" argument: Well.... if you legalize
gay marriage what's next? Marrying a monkey because it's your "lifestyle"
choice? or sex with children?
reminder #2: stats show most pedo's are straight men.

so if anyone that thinks someone chooses to be gay consider this:

suppose i'm gay, and you convince me i'm a sinner and God needs me to be
straight to avoid spending eternity in ye 'ole lake o' fire. i go ahead and
suppress my urges, live a straight life, marry your daughter and have a family.
later on i wise up, realize i'm living a lie, causing turmoil for my family and
myself - and many a letter to ann landers.

this DOES happen in real life.

wouldn't you just rather me have my own gay marriage with my appropriate equal
rights - and live my life as i please - without disturbing you?

for a commited couple you'd be surprised at how important mundane basic rights
are. why should gays be screwed out of tax money because they can't file
together. if someone's partner is in an accident and in ER - how do they get
past a nurse or guard that says "sorry - immediate family only" that's not
even involving power of attorney matters.

just some fun things to consider...

Check out "The right wing's summer of hate":

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature.../index_np.html

Cub Driver wrote:

There is a great article in the latest
New Yorker on the subject.

Yes, regretting that liberals don't have an equivalent of Rush
Limbaugh--rather forgetting that they've got Heinrich Hertzburg, whose
hate-filled diatribes about Bush occupy the leading article in Talk of
the Town most every week.

The funniest thing about lefties is that they truly believe they're
moderates. How many times have you read in the New Yorker or New York
Times about right-wing Republicans (answer: most every issue), and how
many times about left-wing Democrats (answer: never)?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

"Ted Huffmire" wrote in message
...

Check out "The right wing's summer of hate":

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature.../index_np.html


Pretty much what you'd expect from Blumenthal and Salon.

* The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any
sort
of government support. As a private organization, they should be
self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate.

This argument was used against the Scouts here in Iowa City, and has
resulted in them being charged the "corporate rate" for using the schools
when they want to hold a meeting or function. Of course, this price is
impossibly high, and has resulted in the Scouts being driven out of the
schools.

Strangely enough, the Scouts presented a cost-benefit analysis to the School
Board during the debate, proving that for every penny the City "spent" on
the Scouts (by letting them use the schools for cheap) they received back
five-fold in donated work, landscaping done for "Eagle Scout" projects, etc.
The city actually *profited* from the Scouts, because they did work that the
school district would otherwise have to buy.

This argument did not sway the gay community, and the Scouts were
effectively banned.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:%U90b.183507$uu5.35115@sccrnsc04...

This argument was used against the Scouts here in Iowa City, and has
resulted in them being charged the "corporate rate" for using the schools
when they want to hold a meeting or function. Of course, this price is
impossibly high, and has resulted in the Scouts being driven out of the
schools.

Strangely enough, the Scouts presented a cost-benefit analysis to the
School
Board during the debate, proving that for every penny the City "spent" on
the Scouts (by letting them use the schools for cheap) they received back
five-fold in donated work, landscaping done for "Eagle Scout" projects,
etc.
The city actually *profited* from the Scouts, because they did work that
the
school district would otherwise have to buy.

This argument did not sway the gay community, and the Scouts were
effectively banned.


Cogent argument will never sway the gay community.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:5N90b.183470$uu5.34945@sccrnsc04...
|
| Assuming it's actually held there. You see, black activists are now
| protesting the fact that "A.P. Hill" was a Confederate general, and the
| Scouts should therefore not be allowed to hold their Jamboree at a
facility
| that "honors" the Confederacy.
|
| Political correctness is everywhere.

Which is why the Confederate Air Force changed its name, even though the
name had nothing to do with commemorating the CSA or the War Between the
States.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
| "C J Campbell" wrote in message
| ...
| My personal feelings about the matter is that any private organization
| should be able to discriminate against any group that it wishes for any
| reason.
|
| I agree with you there. However:
|
| * The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any
sort
| of government support. As a private organization, they should be
| self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate.
|
| * As a former scout myself, I look forward to a day when in good
| conscience allow my own son to participate in the BSA.

You were able to participate in good conscience when you were younger, but
the BSA's policies have not changed. Instead of trying to force your views
on the Boy Scouts, why not help found another organization that espouses
what you believe?

Jay Honeck wrote:

* The BSA should not enjoy preferential treatment or be granted any
sort
of government support. As a private organization, they should be
self-sufficient if they wish to discriminate.

This argument was used against the Scouts here in Iowa City, and has
resulted in them being charged the "corporate rate" for using the schools
when they want to hold a meeting or function. Of course, this price is
impossibly high, and has resulted in the Scouts being driven out of the
schools.

Jay,

Would you feel the same way if the BSA had a no blacks or no Jews policy rather
than a no gays policy?

Margy