home
RSS
February 6th, 2013
06:07 AM ET

Boy Scout leaders to vote on ending ban against gay membership

By Casey Wian and Holly Yan, CNN

Irving, Texas (CNN) - The polarizing debate over whether Boy Scouts of America should allow gay members could culminate with a vote on a new policy Wednesday.

But no matter which way the vote goes, activists on both sides aren't going to be satisfied.

The controversy pits leaders of religious groups that sponsor about 1 million Boy Scouts against activists who want the organization to end its ban on openly gay Scouts and Scout leaders.

Neither side is happy with BSA's proposal to let local troops decide if they want to allow gay members.

FULL STORY
- A. Hawkins

Filed under: Homosexuality

soundoff (367 Responses)
  1. Mohammad A Dar

    how many gay scouts are we talking in over 1 million straight boy scouts? so why worry?

    February 6, 2013 at 5:18 pm |
    • akhaddd

      tal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved – the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced! With the ra

      February 6, 2013 at 5:57 pm |
    • sam

      @akhadd – huh?

      February 6, 2013 at 7:18 pm |
  2. lol??

    It's okay to be a troll if you are a troll for Jesus.

    February 6, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
    • ¿¿lol

      lol?? claims the OT "author" to rule supreme on such issues. the danger of course is appearing to know the mind of a deity based on the ancient unfounded hearsay fable. just as dangerous are the ones who had to make excuses for the gospels looking very much like earlier stories. the only excuse they could come up with was that Satan had made a pre-emptive strike.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
    • lol??

      Hijack, Satan's tryin' to appear as an angel of light.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:58 pm |
    • Akira

      No, it's not okay to be a troll; trolls are assholes. Trolls who do it in the name of Jesus are even bigger assholes, because I am almost certain that Jesus doesn't condone asshole behavior being made justifiable by evoking his name.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:00 pm |
    • lol??

      I'm leaving for now. Thinking about that 70's show gave me a headache and Donna didn't help either. Have at it lightster.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:01 pm |
    • ¿¿lol

      lol?? must be a hoot at a baseball game. wonder how many times he'll change his hat position thinking it will help his team.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
    • ¿¿lol

      I may be a troll, but I'm not a Hijack and they tested and said I wasn't a witch.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:04 pm |
  3. Donna

    And Christians like this don't see themselves as bigots. Amazing!

    February 6, 2013 at 3:25 pm |
    • Cheese-Us of Nazareth

      God says it is okay to be a repressive bigot as long as you are a repressive bigot in his name.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:31 pm |
    • lol??

      Aren't you the bimbo from that 70's show? NNnnaaahh.

      Donna, Donna the Prima Donna
      Broke my heart.
      We're apart.
      Thinks she's smart.
      I met a girl a month ago
      I thought that she would love me so.
      But in time I realized.
      She had a pair of roving eyes.
      I remember the nights we dated,
      Always acting sophisticated,
      Talking about high society,
      Then she tried to make a fool out of me.
      They call her Donna, Donna the Prima Donna
      Broke my heart now.
      Thinks she's smart now.
      We're apart now.
      Pretty little girl you're just having fun
      You're running all around and breaking lover's hearts.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
    • psych ward staff

      Aww, look who wants so badly to be taken seriously (lol??). Eat your applesauce like a good boy now.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
    • Jesus

      You know, lolly, when I said "do unto others . . . ", that pretty much means you are violating my rules. And you bore false witness against Donna, which violates the Ninth Commandment.

      You get a long soak in the Hot Tub of Fire to think about it.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:49 pm |
    • lol??

      Still takin', psychward sociopathic psychopathic PUblic Servant?

      February 6, 2013 at 3:52 pm |
    • Akira

      Still being a douche for Jesus, lol??

      February 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
  4. Satan

    It is better to get them started on s e x at an early age. Boy scouts need to focus more on s e x u a l activities.

    February 6, 2013 at 3:11 pm |
    • S.ex god

      The world revolves around me 3:)

      February 6, 2013 at 3:18 pm |
    • sam stone

      I thought that is what alterboys were for

      February 6, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
    • Mary Rodgers

      Wow – what an idiot.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
    • lol??

      You sure do know how to manipulate a society with the given up ones. Too bad you're so ticked YOU can't quit. BBBBBBbbbbwwwwwwaaaaaaaahahahaha, Not much time left? BBBBBBbbbbwwwwwwaaaaaaahahahahaha

      February 6, 2013 at 3:26 pm |
    • Mary Rodgers

      This poster Satan is bad enough – what it the deal with this lol?? idiot? I suppose kids just have fun on here.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:33 pm |
    • Satan

      Saggy ole' mary rodgers step aside. We have a separate '90s club for ya! Grampa evil will see you soon

      February 6, 2013 at 3:49 pm |
  5. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

    It's an organization that teaches children social and political values. They wear uniforms and are taught paramilitary skills of camping, order, obedience and loyalty. They are organized in a military-style heirarchy, with flags and rank and badges and medals. Physical fitness is emphasized as well.

    As you see, there is little difference between the Boy Scouts and the Hitler Youth.

    February 6, 2013 at 2:59 pm |
    • lol??

      Hitler flunked out of scouts, you idiot.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:13 pm |
    • Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

      Nice reading comprehension skills, you moron.

      Oh, by the way, scouting founder Baden-Powell was an admirer of the fascists before WWII. He wrote in a 1939 diary entry that Mein Kampf was "a wonderful book, with good ideas on education, health, propaganda, organisation etc."

      February 6, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
    • lol?? is a liar

      Hitler was never in the Scouts. He was 20 by the time the first scout organization appeared.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:25 pm |
    • lol??

      Hey you idiots prove it, 'sides what's a decade when the whooppppers you tell about being 400,000 years old. That's like a.000000000000666 microminiscule of a second mistake using your time frames of reference, liars. Boy what time bigots!

      February 6, 2013 at 3:48 pm |
    • Bet

      Lol?? is off his meds again.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:00 pm |
    • justme

      Don't be dissin' the Hitler Youth now. It was good emough for the pope!

      February 6, 2013 at 4:49 pm |
  6. Yeah

    Religion: bizarre ancient bigotries and rules given the quasi-legitimacy of an imaginary superfriend.

    February 6, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      well put.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:51 pm |
    • lol??

      Fear eh? Why were the gays afwaid to stay in the closet?

      February 6, 2013 at 2:53 pm |
    • Akira

      Because of people exactly like you, lol??.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:55 pm |
    • Donna

      Yes, religious views are the last socially acceptable forms of bigotry.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:56 pm |
    • lol??

      Donna sounds like you are so bigoted about bigotry that it has clouded your views.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
    • ¿¿lol

      lol?? claims the OT "author" to rule supreme on such issues. the danger of course is appearing to know the mind of a deity based on the ancient unfounded hearsay fable. just as dangerous are the ones who had to make excuses for the gospels looking very much like earlier stories. the only excuse they could come up with was that Satan had made a pre-emptive strike.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:17 pm |
    • Akira

      lol??, do you even know what the word "bigot" even means?

      February 6, 2013 at 3:52 pm |
  7. Hmmmm

    So why is it that Boy Scouts sounds normal but Man Scouts would sound ultra gay?

    February 6, 2013 at 2:45 pm |
    • lol??

      You think that's bad. Have you heard about Hillary and Monica's Sewing and Dress Supplies?

      February 6, 2013 at 2:51 pm |
  8. Scout Mike Hunt

    I can say with absolute authority that lol?? and pervert alert are NOT GAY. Sure they may have shared a sleeping bag and played "penis cleaners" with their mouths on each others genitals like any confused Christian kid's would, but they are NOT GAY. There is nothing wrong with being gay, but there is definately something wrong with those two boys...

    February 6, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      lol?? is a proud member of NAMBLA.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:52 pm |
    • lol??

      You're dreamin'. NIMBY

      February 6, 2013 at 3:15 pm |
    • The Truth

      My guess is that lol?? has had plenty of things stuffed into his backyard...

      Me thinks she doth protest too much...

      February 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
    • sam

      lol?? has had many a tent pitched in his backyard.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:20 pm |
  9. End Religion

    http://www.change.org/peti%5BDELETE%5Dtions/boy-scouts-don-t-let-your-anti-gay-policy-deny-my-son-his-eagle-award

    February 6, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
    • End Religion

      that didn't work. Get rid of the period in "petitions"...
      http://www.change.org/peti.tions/boy-scouts-don-t-let-your-anti-gay-policy-deny-my-son-his-eagle-award

      February 6, 2013 at 2:26 pm |
    • lol??

      Bootsie said it best, methinks the girly men doeth protest too much.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
  10. lol??

    Kick out the kweers disguised as catholic priests and they pop up in the scouts.

    February 6, 2013 at 2:16 pm |
    • Zingo

      It's really hard to imagine someone as dumb as you, but there you are.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:41 pm |
  11. Sane Person

    As if the Boy Scouts wasn't gay enough already

    February 6, 2013 at 1:59 pm |
  12. Alien Orifice

    I am not Gay, Scouts honor. Now let's have a jubilee with all of the other straight scouts who are not possibly Gay, Scouts honor, too.

    February 6, 2013 at 1:56 pm |
  13. lol??

    The gays SAID they wanted the gubmint "out of their bedroom"s but what they really wanted to do was use the gubmint to get in everybody's face.

    February 6, 2013 at 1:27 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      you consider wanting to be treated equal getting in someone's face. good. hope they're all up in your face. but i'm not so sure you'd mind...

      me thinks the lady doth protest too much...

      February 6, 2013 at 1:30 pm |
    • Akira

      lol?? = the sex police.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:56 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      @ Bet:"Don't attempt to make it a part of any organization responsible for forming children's behavior.
      Make what a part? Their se.xuality? Is that what you're afraid of? How ridiculous."

      Apparently, making their se.xuality part of the organization is EXACTLY what these people want to do. They are public about it. Minors do not need to be introduced to this sort of information. Frankly, the adult general population doesn't need to know this information about an individual either, but you can't really avoid having it told to you, demonstrated in front of you or basically getting your face pushed into the information. If these adults are not there for the purpose of insisting on sharing this information with children and attempting to make them believe it is acceptable behavior, then there would be NO reason for ANYONE to know about what goes on behind closed doors. If no one knew about this behavior, know one would be prohibiting this interaction and there wouldn't be any hullabaloo until specific incidents with minors occurred.

      "Do you show your (insert vulgar terminology provided by Bet) to the kids in your child's clas.room? No? Neither do gay people who work with children's groups."
      No, as a matter of fact I don't discuss my se.xuality with the children in my clas.. I don't discuss my personal life at all with them. Neither should the adults who work with my child. The fact that anyone working with children identifies themselves as gay proves that your statement is wrong. By making this self identification, an individual introduces his se.xuality as a topic which is exactly what parents do not want. That a person chooses to do this in an organization comprised of members who belong to family groups that find their behavior morally wrong, reveals that the issue is not about camping and teaching outdoorsman skills. Rather, it is about going somewhere to flaunt behavioral choices that conflict with those of the membership.

      "I can't believe you actually think that way."
      Why does this shock you? I have NEVER asked any person about his orientation, yet I can count at least a dozen adults who have felt compelled to announce this to me. Of the ones who are still alive, five of them were close enough for me to either know family of origin or were told of it in intimate detail. All shared histories that included same gender molestation while children or young adolescents and all discussed additional child abuse experiences (verbal, emotional, physical or a combination of). This isn't information that I sought and it's not something I really want. Obviously, this number is not a statistically significant sample but it is a sample of people I know personally and it is painful to know that these incidents occurred. Each had horrible childhood experiences and each is currently experiencing emotional issues in adulthood related to childhood. I find that it is too coincidental that these experiences are clustered in this fashion to believe that there is no causal relationship. That parents do not want to expose their children to the same sort of possible abuse should not be surprising nor should we, as a society, expose children to this possibility to satisfy the agenda of those who choose to engage in behavior that has been prohibited in the majority of cultures around the globe for all of recorded history.

      February 7, 2013 at 2:09 am |
  14. Bootyfunk

    voting to see if they should remain prejudiced h.omophobes.

    way to stay classy, scouts!

    February 6, 2013 at 1:24 pm |
    • lol??

      Wonder if Billy Bob Clinton threw his class into the pot?

      February 6, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      what would that have to do with it? keep reeeeeeeeaching......

      February 6, 2013 at 1:32 pm |
    • lol??

      For Eagle Certificates, "..........Past certificates included both the BSA president’s signature and that of the president of the United States."
      Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2000/08/474/#iWyX8zs4R7qypKi8.99

      Cub (bear, commie) Clinton.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:59 pm |
    • Bet

      His middle name is Jefferson, not that facts matter to lol?? and his diarrhetic keyboard.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:02 pm |
    • Akira

      What is your point lol?? Besides there apparently has never been a POTUS that you've ever approved of...

      All the more reason for the government to stop helping discriminatory organizations. It's totally anti-American.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:12 pm |
    • lol??

      Pass on the Gray Poopon.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • LOL@lol??

      Here is how the WorldNetDaily idjits describe themselves:

      Independent conservative news website with an emphasis on aggressive investigative reporting and gossip.

      Its commentary pages feature editorials from the site's founder, Joseph Farah and other social conservative authors such as Pat Buchanan, Ellis Washington, Ann Coulter, David Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Chuck Norris.

      LOL@lol?? Need I say more? Right wing lunacy from a right wing lunatic. Shut up.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • lol??

      Bullyin' is a gay trait and picked up by the socialistic sociopaths when they run out of manipulatin'.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • Akira

      Bullyin’ is a lol?? trait and picked up by the Christian sociopaths when they run out of manipulatin’.

      You're one of the guiltiest ones here.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:44 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      ever feel like you're talking to a wall, Akira? a very very dumb wall? you're using reason and logic when you know lol?? is allergic to cognitive thinking.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:50 pm |
    • As a Wall

      I resent that comparison.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:52 pm |
  15. HotAirAce

    Eliminating religion is always a good thing and if this is the wedge issue that separates religion and scouting, that would be excellent. Religion is no different than astrology – do scouts get a merit badge for astrology?

    February 6, 2013 at 10:48 am |
    • Donna

      Hey, there's tons of references to astrology, positive ones, in the Bible. What the hell do Christians thing God's "signs" are?

      February 6, 2013 at 11:04 am |
    • HotAirAce

      If you can show that astrology is real, that the position of celestial objects determines events, then this would be a plus for The Babble, else it is another point against. I'm going with "The Babble is junk" until conclusively proven otherwise.

      February 6, 2013 at 11:15 am |
    • NClaw441

      I acknowledge your right to free expression under the First Amendment, which, as it turns out, expressly protects the right of free exercise of religion. Other than free exercise, what other rights do you wish to remove from the Bill of Rights?

      February 6, 2013 at 11:54 am |
    • Akira

      Where does he say that he wants to remove any rights at all?
      Keep religion out of our laws. Period.

      February 6, 2013 at 12:10 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      Thanks Akira! Everyone is free to believe whatever they like but if they bring their delusions into the public square they should expect to have them challenged. Astrologists seemed to have settled on largely practicing their beliefs in Las Vegas casinos and in the same section of newspapers as cartoons – that should be good enough for believers of the jesus and other myths.

      February 6, 2013 at 12:23 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      astrology... laughable. the idea that everyone born in a certain month has certain personality traits. being born in a specific month doesn't mean you're stubborn or love water. hahaha.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:28 pm |
    • Akira

      Since when is the desire to marry the partner of your choice a "new' relationship, fred?
      No.
      It's not new. What is fairly recent is the knowledge that gay people, going against certain preconceptions, want to wed the person of their choice, and not just some wild and crazy people out to get their nut off.
      I am tired of the self-righteous people marginalizing a whole segment of society.
      Thank GOD that the tides are turning, and soon religious bigots will themselves have to go into a closet to hide like so many people have had to do over the years to hide what they really were.
      Keep God out of our laws. PERIOD.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:14 pm |
  16. Topher

    Breaking News: "The Boy Scouts say a ban on gay members will continue at least until May, when a vote will be held on possible changes. "

    February 6, 2013 at 10:45 am |
    • tallulah13

      Breaking news: The Post Office will stop delivering on Saturdays.

      February 6, 2013 at 10:53 am |
    • Topher

      Kinda torn on the whole Post Office thing. I guess it would be good for the employees. But just like the Boy Scouts issue, it all comes down to money.

      February 6, 2013 at 10:58 am |
    • HotAirAce

      Re: Boy Scouts, what idiots like Topher fail to realize is that it is not really about the money. Sponsors do not want to be associated with organizations that discriminate, even if that discrimination is legal. Money is only the lever being used by sponsors to get the scouts to do what the rest of society has already determined is the right thing – to end discrimination. This is not unique to scouting – Augusta National Golf Club was also dragged into the 21st century.

      February 6, 2013 at 11:11 am |
    • LinCA

      @Topher

      You said, "I guess it would be good for the employees."
      How would it be good for the employees? The move to eliminate Saturday mail service is to reduce wages paid to the postal workers. By eliminating a day of deliveries, they need fewer carriers, and the Monday load will increase.

      You said, "But just like the Boy Scouts issue, it all comes down to money."
      The BSA issue appears to be, at least in part, motivated by money. They stand to lose support from their largest financial backers if they lift the ban but are starting to feel the pinch from losing corporate support for leaving it in place.

      I guess they figured they could persuade the corporations to support them (again), while allowing the discrimination to remain in place by pushing it down to the local level. They may have been surprised by the rampant hate and bigotry still present in their ranks.

      February 6, 2013 at 11:14 am |
    • Topher

      LinCA

      " How would it be good for the employees? The move to eliminate Saturday mail service is to reduce wages paid to the postal workers. By eliminating a day of deliveries, they need fewer carriers, and the Monday load will increase."

      Very fair points. I hadn't thought of it that way.

      " The BSA issue appears to be, at least in part, motivated by money. They stand to lose support from their largest financial backers if they lift the ban but are starting to feel the pinch from losing corporate support for leaving it in place."

      It's my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, but they've recently lost a couple of very big sponsors.

      "I guess they figured they could persuade the corporations to support them (again), while allowing the discrimination to remain in place by pushing it down to the local level. They may have been surprised by the rampant hate and bigotry still present in their ranks."

      Let's face it. In this economy, those sponsors aren't coming back. They've already found something else to do with the money. But I think pushing it to the local level is going to hurt them more than they realize. Do you know how many of the (is it troops or packs?) are supported by churches or hold their gatherings in churches?

      February 6, 2013 at 11:22 am |
    • sam stone

      So what, Topher?

      February 6, 2013 at 11:27 am |
    • $#@$%%#@

      Make sure to get a list before you send the boys off
      boy scouts of america s-ex offender list

      February 6, 2013 at 11:35 am |
    • Topher

      So what about the churches?

      February 6, 2013 at 11:36 am |
    • Akira

      Unfortunately, the USPS has to pre-pay into it's future employees retirement/health care fund; why did Congress, under GWB, pass such a measure?

      February 6, 2013 at 11:48 am |
    • Topher

      Well, what are those churches going to say when given the option? They'll say no. But then you'll likely have certain legal organizations messing with the churches. What will they do then? Disband the groups.

      February 6, 2013 at 11:49 am |
    • $#@$%%#@

      Toper here is part of the churhes RCC pays out 660 million for se-x crimes

      February 6, 2013 at 11:54 am |
    • Akira

      Topher:
      Is it your position that it is better to let the BSA have use of a chruch's multi-purpose room rather than let the BSA discriminate against a segment of our society?

      February 6, 2013 at 12:16 pm |
    • Topher

      Akira

      You and I are probably going to have differences of definitions here. You call it discrimination. I call it not condoning an immoral act.

      February 6, 2013 at 12:30 pm |
    • Richard Cranium

      Topher
      You are not just discrimintating for an act.
      What if the individual is gay, but abstinent, then it would be OK?

      February 6, 2013 at 12:34 pm |
    • Topher

      Richard Cranium

      " What if the individual is gay, but abstinent, then it would be OK?"

      If that person repents and turns away from those urges, absolutely they are welcome to the church. We all have sins we must repent of. I'm no different.

      February 6, 2013 at 12:43 pm |
    • Mohammad A Dar

      Good news, the US Post Office will allow gay delivery men, except Saturday.

      February 6, 2013 at 12:51 pm |
    • Akira

      Topher:
      So I guess your position IS that it's okay to discriminate against a segment of society. Okey dokey.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:08 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Topher

      You said, "It's my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, but they've recently lost a couple of very big sponsors."
      I was agreeing with you on that point.

      You said, "Let's face it. In this economy, those sponsors aren't coming back."
      The economy is doing pretty well for corporations. The big guys are raking it in. It's particularly hard for the workers. The two effects are loosely coupled. By squeezing their employees in the form of stagnating wages, fewer benefits and outsourcing of their jobs, companies are extracting more productivity from their workers. It keeps unemployment high enough for the labor market to work in favor of employers. It allows them to expect more for less from their current employees, while keeping starting wages for new ones low.

      Quite a few of the corporate sponsors that the BSA lost, didn't sponsor them directly (much). A lot of the sponsorship came in the form of matching of employee donations. Those donations are typically restricted to company approved non-profit organizations. By removing the BSA from the list of approved organizations, employee donations were no longer matched.

      You said, "They've already found something else to do with the money."
      Other non-profit groups, I suspect.

      You said, "But I think pushing it to the local level is going to hurt them more than they realize. Do you know how many of the (is it troops or packs?) are supported by churches or hold their gatherings in churches?"
      A large majority, but how is that relevant? I thought that a large portion of the people that would like to keep the ban in place are also the same people that tend to favor local control when it comes to education and other aspects of life? By giving the local organizations the final say on this matter, wouldn't that be preferable?

      The benefit of pushing it to the local level is that it would provide more clarity as local organizations would be exposed if they choose to discriminate. They would no longer be able to hide behind the national organization's ban.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
    • Topher

      Akira

      Those are your words, not mine.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
    • sam stone

      No, Topher, "so what" about the Boy Scouts delaying their vote on allowing gays in

      February 6, 2013 at 1:13 pm |
    • sam stone

      topher: you have no authority to declare what is moral or immoral.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:19 pm |
    • Topher

      Sam

      They can delay it all they want. I don't care.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:19 pm |
    • Topher

      Sam

      God declared it. And He has all power to do so.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:20 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      So what about the churches?!?! Fuck 'em! They can join the 21st century or form their own small minded discriminating boys club.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:21 pm |
    • ME II

      @Topher
      "You and I are probably going to have differences of definitions here. You call it discrimination. I call it not condoning an immoral act."

      So you think they should ban all liars, thieves (even minor), and adulterers (even thoughts of lust) from the Boy Scouts.
      That would be a pretty small organization, I think.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:21 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      Topher, more correctly,the imaginary being you believe in, despite there being no factual evidence for, allegedly declared something. An honest person would add this clarification every time they make statements for which they have no proof. And you have none, nothing, zero!

      February 6, 2013 at 1:25 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      I was wondering how long it was going to take Topher to get on his bullshit high horse.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:26 pm |
    • Topher

      ME II

      "So you think they should ban all liars, thieves (even minor), and adulterers (even thoughts of lust) from the Boy Scouts.
      That would be a pretty small organization, I think."

      Isn't it part of the scout's code up uphold morality? So yeah, if you've got a boy who delights in lying, I should hope the scouts take some action. Who hasn't lied stolen or looked with lust? The point is to turn from those things and do what is right. If it means it becomes a small organization, so be it.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:27 pm |
    • Topher

      Yay! Two hecklers. Anyone ever tell you guys you're good for business?

      February 6, 2013 at 1:28 pm |
    • Akira

      Topher: yes; you would never be so open as to admit that you think it's perfectly all right to deny a person civil rights based on their gender preference; I did it for you.
      You're welcome.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      way to stand up for prejudice, Topher!

      February 6, 2013 at 1:33 pm |
    • Tommy

      Me, if you use Topher's logic the boy scouts would have to ban all humans because we are all born sinners.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:38 pm |
    • Topher

      Tommy

      That's not what I'm saying at all. The scouts should be able to deny or admit whomever they want. It's their organization.

      And yes, we are all sinners, but some of us have repented of those sins and have been forgiven by God.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:41 pm |
    • Topher

      I reject the idea that it's a civil right.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:42 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      just as you would have rejected blacks and whites being able to marry if this was the 60s. and you'd claim that wasn't a civil right either.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:46 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Topher

      "That's not what I'm saying at all. The scouts should be able to deny or admit whomever they want. It's their organization"
      Not when they get massive amounts of government money. I don't give a shit if they want to be backwards, bigoted fucks, but not when tax dollars from the very people they discriminate against go to pay for that idiocy.
      Not that you'll actually answer me. Can someone make this point to Topher for me?

      February 6, 2013 at 1:57 pm |
    • Topher

      No, that WOULD be a civil right.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:58 pm |
    • Akira

      God declared it. And He has all power to do so.

      God has no place in our laws. Sorry.

      I reject the idea that it’s a civil right.

      You can reject it all you want. Doesn't matter. Denying a segment of our society equal rights based on their gender preference, no matter how YOU personally feel about it, is discrimination.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:06 pm |
    • Tommy

      Topher says it's not a civil right, and as usual he is wrong.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:11 pm |
    • Topher

      Akira

      "God has no place in our laws. Sorry."

      MOST of our laws are based off His. So perhaps you'd like us to just scrap every one of them and start over.

      "You can reject it all you want. Doesn't matter. Denying a segment of our society equal rights based on their gender preference, no matter how YOU personally feel about it, is discrimination."

      Call it what you want, but this is not a civil right. It doesn't come close to meeting the very definition.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:12 pm |
    • sam stone

      Topher: God did not declare it. Iron Age sheep molesters declared it and claimed that God told them.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:14 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Topher

      Lie after lie after lie.
      Are you done being a fucking coward and actualy going to answer me, or are you just that much of a pathetic, scared, insecure little zealot to do so?

      February 6, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
    • sam stone

      "MOST of our laws are based off His"

      Two, maybe three of the ten commandments are laws. Is this MOST to you?

      February 6, 2013 at 2:18 pm |
    • End Religion

      Topher has slipped on his trusty tap dancing shoes. He'll now show you how to redefine "discrimination" as "not condoning an immoral act".

      Dance, monkey, dance! And don't forget the jazz hands this time. It's sizzling hot razzle dazzle!

      February 6, 2013 at 2:19 pm |
    • sam stone

      Is it a surprise to anyone who has been here any amount of time that Topher is a duplicitous liar?

      Most of our laws are based on God's? Can you support that, or are you just, as usual, using this forum to spew forth your verbal diarrhea?

      February 6, 2013 at 2:21 pm |
    • sam stone

      Hawaii: We all know that Gopher is too much of a coward to answer a direct question directly

      February 6, 2013 at 2:23 pm |
    • Tommy

      Topher I suggest that you stay away from church for at least one month. It will do you a load of good.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
    • Akira

      No, Topher, most of our laws are not based on His laws.
      In fact, almost none of them are.
      And although I realize that you are stringent in your convictions, as they so not affect you at all, it would be quite a different thing if you were not allowed to live your life enjoying the same rights as everyone else because of your gender preference.
      And, fortunately, our laws are starting to reflect that discrimination of ANY sort is a violation of a person's civil rights, even if YOU don't personally think that right should be extended to an entire segment of people.
      Too bad, so sad.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:41 pm |
    • sam stone

      He danced like a little punk b1tch around the concept of Free Will. He dances around everything. He feels that he knows (through the words of (some) ancient men) the mind of god. It must be tough being him. But, he is entertaining, in a watch-the-geek-at-the-circus kind of manner

      February 6, 2013 at 2:42 pm |
    • The Truth

      @Topher – "I reject the idea that it's a civil right."

      Civil: 1.Of or relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters.

      Civil Rights: 1. The rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality.

      What can be more "social freedom" than being free to choose who you want to share your life with? Those who disagree are being dishonest so as to justify their hate and violence against those who are different.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:59 pm |
    • Akira

      Topher: "Call it what you want, but this is not a civil right. It doesn’t come close to meeting the very definition."

      Here is the definition of civil rights:

      The rights belonging to an individual by virtue of citizenship, especially the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and by subsequent acts of Congress, including civil liberties, due process, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from discrimination.

      Gay rights definitely fall under this definition. Try again.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @sam

      Oh I know he's just a pathetic moron. It's fun to point it out and see him give a pathetic little backward comment when he had to go to work and gets relieved of all the points he hasn't actually addressed from everyone. Probably deludes himself into thinking he's "logical".

      February 6, 2013 at 3:05 pm |
    • fred

      @hawaiiguest
      @sam
      Is name calling part of the godless profile?

      February 6, 2013 at 3:35 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Seems like being a dishonest fuck is part of your and Tophers profile.
      Let us know when you get something called integrity, then you might have some credibility.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:40 pm |
    • fred

      Akira
      All of our laws are based upon the absolute law and word of God:.

      =>Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your being. This is basis of all that is good. Should anything in this world take that place in your life the blessings God has will not be with you individually and the same applies to Nations.
      The founders saw to it that this law cannot be tampered with at any level of government or by any power or authority established under the consti-tiution. We are free to worship and love God with all our hearts and all our might.

      =>Love your neighbor as yourself.
      The const-itution safeguards the rights, liberties and freedom for all. My neighbor is ent-itled to the same goodies I am.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      And where in our laws are those two things? Does only what Jesus said matter? If so, then gay marriage should be unequivocally allowed. No debate, no "God don't like it". How about instead of your dishonest non-answer bullshit, you actually try honesty for a change.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:48 pm |
    • Bob

      fred, your post is bullshit, and for the most part, it is better for humans to ignore the demands and laws claimed to be of the Christian god, since those laws are mainly from that god's apparent vanity, and from his overall nastiness, given that the Christian bible presents hideous demands from your sky fairy such as these:

      Numbers 31:17-18
      17 Now kiII all the boys. And kiII every woman who has slept with a man,
      18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

      Deuteronomy 13:6 – “If your brother, your mother’s son or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul entice you secretly, saying, let us go and serve other gods … you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death”

      Revelations 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

      Leviticus 25
      44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
      45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.
      46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

      Note that the bible is also very clear that you should sacrifice and burn an animal today because the smell makes sicko Christian sky fairy happy. No, you don't get to use the parts for food. You burn them, a complete waste of the poor animal.

      Yes, the bible really says that, everyone. Yes, it's in Leviticus, look it up. Yes, Jesus purportedly said that the OT commands still apply. No exceptions. But even if you think the OT was god's mistaken first go around, you have to ask why a perfect, loving enti-ty would ever put such horrid instructions in there. If you think rationally at all, that is.

      And then, if you disagree with my interpretation, ask yourself how it is that your "god" couldn't come up with a better way to communicate than a book that is so readily subject to so many interpretations and to being taken "out of context", and has so many mistakes in it. Pretty pathetic god that you've made for yourself.

      So get out your sacrificial knife or your nasty sky creature will torture you eternally. Or just take a closer look at your foolish supersti-tions, understand that they are just silly, and toss them into the dustbin with all the rest of the gods that man has created.

      Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
      Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
      http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

      February 6, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      Dishonesty :
      lack of honesty : the quality of being dishonest
      Topher does not fit the common use of that term. Why is it that the godless often apply the term dishonest where they know it does not belong? Topher is speaking honestly from his belief that is based on the Bible and the presence of the Lord in his life.

      February 6, 2013 at 3:54 pm |
    • ¿¿lol

      dishonesty could be used to describe the early Christian apologists who said that the reason their gospels looked so much like earlier stories was that it was a pre-emptive strike by Satan. caught with their pants down.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:00 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Saying most of our laws are based on the bible is a FLAT OUT LIE!
      You make the same claim, yet never actually demonstrate it when challenged. Instead, you just go off on irrelevant bullshit, as is your MO, and Topher merely ignores any challenge. This is textbook dishonesty.
      You are both dishonest, pathetic, self-righteous fucks without an ounce of integrity.

      Now fred, go off on irrelevant bullshit, ignore me, or wait a few hours and hope that I've left the thread so you can post irrelevant bullshit that probably won't be read by me and somehow delude yourself into thinking that you have somehow addressed something.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
    • Akira

      Fred:
      You neighbors would not be entitled to the same rights if they were gay, now would they?
      Something that will be rectified, and hopefully soon.
      Keep God out of our laws. Period.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:09 pm |
    • Topher

      Akira

      If I had gay neighbors, what right don't they have? Not sure I understand what you are asking.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:13 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      “And where in our laws are those two things?”
      =>As stated in my post it is our Const-itution. Religious freedom to worship and love God is a const-itutionally guaranteed right provided in the religion clauses.

      “Does only what Jesus said matter?”
      =>Jesus was the full reflection and radiance of God. Everything Jesus said and did was in line with the will the God and never conflicts in any way with the Law of Prophets that go all the way back to the writings of Moses. In case you cannot read my answer let me say that the word of God is the word of God period. If you expect that the few verses recorded of Jesus speaking reflect all the words God has spoken then you are off base. Jesus did give us all we need to please God so in way what Jesus said is all you really need to know.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:16 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      And now Topher goes with the disingenuous route while still ignoring the challenge to demonstrate his assertion that most of our laws are based directly on the bible. How...predictable.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:17 pm |
    • Saraswati

      "If I had gay neighbors, what right don't they have? Not sure I understand what you are asking."

      For a start...

      The right to live with the person of their choice supported by national immigration policies.
      The right to inherit their partners savings and IRAs without paying the death penalty.
      The right to full federal marriage benefits as a federal employee (in process of changing...)
      The right to divorce if you move from a state that allows marriage to one that does not.
      The right to health benefits from your partners employer if you live in certain states.
      Numerous rights reserved only for opposite se'x parents depending on state.
      The right to be the default primary guardian of one's partners interests when incapacitated. (varies again by state, so it depends where you live)

      February 6, 2013 at 4:29 pm |
    • mama k

      fred saying that our laws are based on the Bible is ridiculous. It's just not true. True that our Const-itution guarantees religious freedom, but it in no way suggests how that freedom is to be utilized and that it in any way suggests the God of Abraham for that matter. Many of the key framers were Deists around the time the Const-itution was being put together. I would contend the idiotic behavior of the Christian sects around them at the time is what drove the key framers into keeping the word God out of our key law.

      I do remember Topher saying that laws and the judges coming from the bible. Also just not true. The bible described times and events involving the setting up of law, but to say that was where law and judges were first in use is just laughable.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:30 pm |
    • fred

      Akira
      “You neighbors would not be ent-itled to the same rights if they were gay, now would they?”
      =>in the context of marriage rights yes they would as any man or woman that marry would have. The law in its attempt to protect the welfare of its people has placed various limits on marriage. Marriage between say same $ex individuals is not marriage between a man and women. Should our legal authorities determine that same $ex marriage protects the welfare of its people It could be changed.
      You are really asking for special rights that did not previously exist for a new form of relationship. Politicians are always granting special rights without consideration of the welfare of its people.

      “Keep God out of our laws. Period.”
      =>I thought you were an atheist, there is no God. If you are suggesting that the delusion of God should be kept out of our laws I think the Consti-tution of the United States is full agreement with you. If you were to know God then you would know He is the authority that has allowed these laws to be for His purpose. If you were to know God you would also know that God is more than capable of working gay marriage into his perfect will if He has decided to do so.

      February 6, 2013 at 4:36 pm |
    • fred

      mama k
      “our Const-itution guarantees religious freedom, but it in no way suggests how that freedom is to be utilized and that it in any way suggests the God of Abraham for that matter.”
      =>sorry, but facts are facts period. Our const-itution specifically safeguards the right of the people to love God with all their heart and all their might. That was guaranteed to the people and no one has yet to touch it. Better check those blinders as they may be on a bit tight today. I know that you do not actually believe that the const-itution would have sufficient space to elaborate on the God of Abraham or Christ yet alone the God of Jefferson.

      “The bible described times and events involving the setting up of law, but to say that was where law and judges were first in use is just laughable.”
      =>Moses recorded the setting of the law and subsequent judges following the Exodus in say 1446 BC. Some of this was based upon what he gathered from the presence of God while some was gathered while in the best schools of Egypt. The absolute laws established by God go back to before the foundations of the earth. God is Alpha and Omega, self-existent, eternal, self-sufficient, immutable, omnipotent, omnipresent and all imaginable omnies………! If you want to address God then you really need to get outside that state of naturalism you have confined yourself in.
      God has already judged the world it is finished. We really need to stop limiting reality to this small time line we call existence.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:04 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      The christians are the ones who "limit god." As an atheist, I have put no limits forth at all. God could and might be anything, and that's just fine, but there's no sense in me believing any particular thing about god until I have some actual evidence one way or the other on any particular idea.

      If god is "everything" then there's not much I can do other than marvel and explore "everything" in the most sensible way possible. If god will judge me, then I will respect his judgment as I must. If god wants me to do something about his existence, though, he's going to have to do something that makes some sort of sense.

      I'm willing to consider most possibilities, but I will NOT LIMIT god to being the childish bully azzhole described the bible and the christians. I will not do any possible god that extreme disservice. Our existence may be ridiculous, but it's not as ridiculous as the god of the bible.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:14 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Are you just intentionally dishonest? The Constitution deals with ALL RELIGIONS. Not just yours. The first amendment deals with the free excercise of religion. Saying that the first amendment deals specifically with "God" capital G if wrong, discriminatory, and stupid.

      As for your second paragraph, then why actually take anything else from any part of the bible? If all that Jesus said matter, why aren't you pennyless and not worrying about food, shelter, or anything else, and merely just relying on god and god alone to provide for everything, just like Jesus said. So not only are you dishonest, you're a self-righteous hypocrite as well.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:18 pm |
    • mama k

      I said: “our Const-itution guarantees religious freedom, but it in no way suggests how that freedom is to be utilized and that it in any way suggests the God of Abraham for that matter.”

      fred replies with: "sorry, but facts are facts period. Our const-itution specifically safeguards the right of the people to love God with all their heart and all their might."
      ----

      show me in the Constitution where it says "to love God with all their heart and all their might", fred. what you said and what I said are almost the same regarding religious freedom - only you're putting words in the framers mouths that just aren't there. Do you know why they are not there? Because of religious zealots like yourself trying to infuse their own brand of fairy tale worship upon the rest of the people.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:27 pm |
    • mama k

      And secondly, fred, just because some people wrote some overly-revised fable with poor foundation in one part of the world that mentions government and judicial concepts does not mean those concepts originated there and were not paralleled in other places around the same time as well. Again – laughable.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:34 pm |
    • fred

      mama k
      “ just because some people wrote some overly-revised fable in one part of the world … does not mean those concepts originated there”
      =>It was the foundation of the Chosen People and the basis of their laws many of which were incorporated into various societies. I also mentioned Moses picked up some education in Egypt that influenced his ways so we agree so far as concepts not required to have originated from there. The foundations of various socioeconomic ways were around long before Moses.
      God works through the creation and we are part of that creation which places the foundation of the law and final authority with God. If there is no God then we are in complete agreement with the exception of the affect of the illusion of God.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:49 pm |
    • fred

      mamma K
      “Do you know why they are not there? Because of religious zealots like yourself trying to infuse their own brand of fairy tale worship upon the rest of the people.”
      =>sounds like speculation to me from the atheist camp.
      Since I like you I have no choice but to tell you the honest to God truth. God guided the hands of the framers from the day they were born. They all knew the story of the tower of Babble and what happens when a bunch of powerful people get together under the likes of a Nimrod which comes around in every generation. When you combine the prideful heart of man and the religion of the self serving masses a tower is erected that glorifies evil and eventually results in oppression.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:02 pm |
    • mama k

      mama: "“Do you know why they are not there? [fred's words using referencing God in the Const-itution] Because of religious zealots like yourself trying to infuse their own brand of fairy tale worship upon the rest of the people.”
      fred: "=>sounds like speculation to me from the atheist camp."

      really, fred?

      You do realize that Quakers were being hung in Massachusetts; that Christian infighting was occurring in Virginia, Madison and Jefferson's home state? Do you think that could have anything to do with Madison (the key framer of the Const-itution & 1st Amendment) writing:

      Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt. will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.

      The Civil Govt, tho' bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability and performs its functions with complete success, Whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State.

      ??

      Sounds like a more reasonable "speculation" than that they were guided by the deity from your fable.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:14 pm |
    • fred

      Moby Schtick
      “The christians are the ones who "limit god."
      =>I agree many do not understand the attributes of God.

      “God could and might be anything,”
      =>no, God simply is and has revealed all we can comprehend about God.

      “no sense in me believing any particular thing about god until I have some actual evidence”
      =>well God has expressly told you how you to receive that evidence

      “If god wants me to do something about his existence, though, he's going to have to do something that makes some sort of sense.”
      =>That requires your acceptance of the Holy Spirit. Would you like me to pray for you?

      “I will NOT LIMIT god to being the childish bully …..bible….christians”
      =>that is a good start !

      “Our existence may be ridiculous, but it's not as ridiculous as the god of the bible.”
      =>that is a ridiculous amount of self limiting.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:20 pm |
    • fred

      mama K
      We are saying the same thing as to why no one is authorized to restirct my love of God with all my heart and all my might. My speculation is wrong if there is no God whereas yours is possibly right if there is God.........that tilts the scale in your direction. Take down for mama k !

      February 6, 2013 at 6:30 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Oh look, fred started to ignore my posts a post later than I thought. Still, his dishonesty is on display in full force.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:30 pm |
    • Akira

      Since when is the desire to marry the partner of your choice a “new’ relationship, fred?
      No.
      It’s not new. What is fairly recent is the knowledge that gay people, going against certain preconceptions, want to wed the person of their choice, and not just some wild and crazy people out to get their nut off.
      I am tired of the self-righteous people marginalizing a whole segment of society.
      Thank GOD that the tides are turning, and soon religious bigots will themselves have to go into a closet to hide like so many people have had to do over the years to hide what they really were.
      Keep God out of our laws. PERIOD.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:30 pm |
    • Moby Schtick

      @fred

      Let me dumb it down for you.

      I don't put limits on what god is or isn't and what he can and can't be; you christians do that.
      The tiny and silly box you limit your god to isn't a real option for me.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:35 pm |
    • Chandler Bing

      =>That requires your acceptance of the Holy Spirit. Would you like me to pray for you?

      Could you BE any more arrogant?

      February 6, 2013 at 6:42 pm |
    • mama k

      Moby: “God could and might be anything,”
      fred: "no, God simply is and has revealed all we can comprehend about God."

      Nope, fred. That's just your take, from trusting fable that came from other fable – that goes back to what Moby said about Christians limiting god.

      Moby: “no sense in me believing any particular thing about god until I have some actual evidence”
      fred: "well God has expressly told you how you to receive that evidence"

      Circular/self-reference is not evidence at all.

      Moby: “Our existence may be ridiculous, but it's not as ridiculous as the god of the bible.”
      fred: "that is a ridiculous amount of self limiting."

      I can understand why you would feel that way, fred, But some people have moved past the obvious fable from frightened ancient peoples (and their associated snake-oil members) in search of more information. Some people have seen through the deception by the early apologists. So for some of us, we are not limiting, but methodically learning, and not jumping to conclusions just because someone else claims something (for which they provide no credible evidence)

      February 6, 2013 at 6:43 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Chandler

      fred if the epitome of dishonest, condescending, arrogant asshat. His preacher must be so proud.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:44 pm |
    • fred

      hawaiiguest
      “The Consti tution deals with ALL RELIGIONS.”
      =>no kidding, we would not have a country if the signers of the declaration of independence did not water down “God” to a palatable Creator and Supreme Judge of the world.

      “ The first amendment deals with the free excercise of religion”
      =>correct no authority is given to anyone that would restrict a believer from Loving God with all their heart and all their might.

      “Saying that the first amendment deals specifically with "God" capital G if wrong, discriminatory, and stupid.”
      =>but it does. It specifically deals with the right to worship and love God. Please have atheist.org file a law suit to interfere with the right to worship God.

      “If all that Jesus said matter, why aren't you pennyless and not worrying about food”
      =>read the Bible and note that God will provide.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:47 pm |
    • fred

      Chandler Bing
      Nothing arrogant about that as no one can believe unless God opens the heart.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:57 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @fred

      Fucking shit fred how much more dishonest can you be? You're claiming that the first amendment is supposed to ONLY be for christians, and when challenged on this, your answer is "durrr it just is because I'm saying so". Get some fucking integrity you god damned zealot. You wonder why more people are turning away from religion? It's because of dishonest piles of shit like you who are perfectly happy to twist, turn, and rewrite everything to fit your narrow, bigoted, INSANE view.
      Sometimes fred, I wonder if you're just a fake. Just some dumbass who doesn't believe shit you're saying. Then I realize that no fake with any ounce of self-respect would stay at this as long as you have. It depresses me of how dishonest and just plain evil you are fred. And what's worse, your evil, bigoted ways are traced directly to your religion, which you claim gives you a moral high ground over everyone else.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:04 pm |
    • Peter

      Yo, fred, your god really does seem like a pretty ornery dude. Who the heck is he to blame and roast us for our faults, when he's the maker.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:06 pm |
    • fred

      mama k
      “But some people have moved past the obvious fable from frightened ancient peoples”
      =>the nature of faith and God has not changed. Ancient people may have acted out of all sorts of emotion but that does not address God.
      Abraham did not have faith in God because he was frightened and for that matter there is no evidence that Abel had any other kind of faith. To love God out of fear of a boggy man does not work.
      “Some people have seen through the deception by the early apologists”
      =>oh, apologists are deceptive while flat earth scientists were just evolving.
      “So for some of us, we are not limiting,”
      =>impossible if you have never stepped out in faith to be caught by God you have limited yourself. It is like learning all about sitting in a glider but never doing it.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:09 pm |
    • fred

      Peter
      I need to get back to work. If you are around later I will get back to you.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:11 pm |
    • mama k

      fred – I don't think anyone here disputes the primary purpose of the 1st Amendment and Establishment Cause that one should be free to worship whoever they wish. But go back and re-read your initial and subsequent replies. First you implied that it was the law to love the God [of Israel]; then you implied that the law only addresses the God [of Israel] in its protection of freedom of worship. That's what I have a problem with (with respect to the Const-itution), not whether or not some deity was directing someone.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:12 pm |
    • mama k

      mama “But some people have moved past the obvious fable from frightened ancient peoples”
      fred: "the nature of faith and God has not changed. Ancient people may have acted out of all sorts of emotion but that does not address God."

      what?? acted out?? I'm talking about the factor that ancient superst-ition should be taken into account when wondering whether or not to believe some wild claim. I have no idea what you're talking about.

      mama: “Some people have seen through the deception by the early apologists”
      fred: oh, apologists are deceptive while flat earth scientists were just evolving.

      Again – I have no idea where your head is, fred. Notice I said early apologists. That probably means I'm talking about apologists who were making excuses regarding parts of the bible. I don't need to consider evolution so much when I hear insiders making excuses for their story.

      mama: “So for some of us, we are not limiting,” [see my full reply for this]
      fred: "impossible if you have never stepped out in faith to be caught by God you have limited yourself. It is like learning all about sitting in a glider but never doing it.

      This is a common mistake among the religious – assuming that someone outside their sphere has never been inside their sphere.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:24 pm |
    • fred

      Peter
      God does not blame you for your faults. Recall Jesus said to the women caught in adultry "neither do I condemn you, now go and sin no more"

      February 6, 2013 at 7:46 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      "What if the individual is gay, but abstinent, then it would be OK?" Yes

      "So you think they should ban all liars, thieves (even minor), and adulterers (even thoughts of lust) from the Boy Scouts." If these people are openly advocating lying, theft and adultery as actions that they perform and insist are their "right" to do, then the answer is, of course, yes.

      February 6, 2013 at 8:21 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      So, Chicklet, it's ok if they do it but don't advertise it? Great ethics there.

      February 6, 2013 at 8:31 pm |
    • fred

      mama k
      Akria said "God has no place in our laws.” I replied that;” All of our laws are based upon the absolute law and word of God”. I did not have time to get into the complete absolute law and Word of God so I picked an obvious example everyone knows. Jesus said the Law of the Prophets can be summarized in one “love the Lord your God with all your heart and might and love your neighbor as yourself”
      Our Consti-tution protects that law in many ways. Our founders knew the absolute laws of God (regardless of their faith or level of faith) as did most leaders of that day. Our founders incorporated some of those laws into the declaration (endowed by our Creator and then by the closing request for authority from the Supreme Judge of the World). If there is God then those laws apply regardless of what man does or thinks. Gods law (love God) cannot be overridden by man unless God allows it already knowing the end result . Thus our Establishment Clause is based on the law of God.
      Ditto for the love your neighbor as yourself. I cannot think of any of our laws that are violated if we followed the law of God. The law of God was in existence long before the Consiti-tution

      February 6, 2013 at 8:43 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      fred is, as usual, completely full of sh!t. Our laws are not based on any such thing and only an ignoramus would pretend they are.

      My word, fred, you are unbelievably stupid.

      February 6, 2013 at 8:45 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      So fred continues to just reiterate his bullshit, completely ignoring everything that's actually said. Still worthless fred. Still completely fucking worthless.

      February 6, 2013 at 8:46 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      The basis for our laws existed long before Christianity, you stupid azz.

      February 6, 2013 at 8:48 pm |
    • fred

      Tom Tom
      Ok, at a minimum I appear to lack the ability to get my point across given your exceptional reading and comprehension skills.
      The assumption was that God is the Creator and Supreme Judge of the World. Given that assumption God is the foundation of all that we know. You know the attributes of God who works all things to the good of those who believe. God is the foundation of our Establishment Clause

      February 6, 2013 at 9:07 pm |
    • mama k

      omg, I think god has a new title.

      February 6, 2013 at 9:15 pm |
    • mama k

      fred: " God is the foundation of our Establishment Clause"

      hmmmmmmm. No, fred.
      The concept is the subject of the EC which applies to all people, including those who don't believe exactly the same way that you do.

      February 6, 2013 at 9:17 pm |
    • Chandler Bing

      @ fred

      Could you BE any stupider?

      February 6, 2013 at 9:20 pm |
    • fred

      mama k
      God gives you the choice to believe or not believe and it was by His power that we have the EC. If I want to put on a godless mindset then of course all that is left is the ways and thoughts of man. That being the case you would be correct. Unfortunately it is not the case and there would be no EC if the Supreme Judge of the World did not allow the Declaration of Independence to move forward.
      “We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the recti-tude of our intentions”

      February 6, 2013 at 9:27 pm |
    • fred

      Chandler Bing
      Possibly, so before I run off to my meeting what is your next question and perhaps we will find out

      February 6, 2013 at 9:31 pm |
    • fred

      mama k
      By the way 56 out of 56 representatives signed below that appeal.

      February 6, 2013 at 9:36 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      @ Tom, Tom:
      "do it but don't advertise it?"

      Don't advertise it. Don't be proud to do it. Don't pretend doing it will propagate the species. Don't claim it is normal. Don't insist it should be accepted. Don't say it is hygienic. Don't say it doesn't spread disease. Don't attempt to make it a part of any organization responsible for forming children's behavior. Don't found and sustain organizations like NAMBLA.

      p.s. If one wants to impersonate another contributor, it would be wise to make the post plausible by referencing personal information that applies to the impersonated.

      February 6, 2013 at 9:39 pm |
    • Chandler Bing

      @ fred

      You don't get out much, do you?

      February 6, 2013 at 9:43 pm |
    • fred

      Chandler Bing
      Coming out is more acceptable these days. Not so much for Christians however

      February 6, 2013 at 9:51 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      Being gay is not a choice and there is nothing to be ashamed of. Being a christian is a choice, no different or better than being an astrologist and one should be ashamed of believing pure bunk, or go set up shop beside the astrologists in 'Vegas.

      February 6, 2013 at 9:56 pm |
    • Chandler Bing

      @ fred

      I said get out, not come out.

      Do you even google?

      February 6, 2013 at 10:01 pm |
    • Bet

      @ Chik-fil-a

      Don't attempt to make it a part of any organization responsible for forming children's behavior.

      Make what a part? Their sexuality? Is that what you're afraid of? How ridiculous.

      Do you show your twat to the kids in your child's classroom? No? Neither do gay people who work with children's groups. Your assertions are so stupid, I can't believe you actually think that way.

      February 6, 2013 at 10:10 pm |
    • mama k

      I understand your opinion, fred. Until you can prove otherwise, that's all you have for your belief is your opinion. And yes, fred, I know about the Declaration which had to do with our law? no. that was about something a little different. Regardless, the key framers knew their Amendment had to accommodate everyone. And so there is no occurrence of the word God in the Const-itution. That's not an accident.

      February 6, 2013 at 10:14 pm |
    • mama k

      I think John Adams sums it up quite nicely:

      The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.

      Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.

      (from A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America [1787-1788])

      February 6, 2013 at 10:17 pm |
  17. hippypoet

    There exists no evidence to support belief in any gods. Fact! There exists plenty of evidence to support belief in evolution. Fact! Since no evidence exists of any gods, gods only exist in the mind. Through the belief in god people have created traditions on how to worship and how to live in accordance to their gods commands. People who believe in gods adhere to a mental structure built to explain and give ease to unanswerible fears such as what happens after death. Since no evidence exists for any gods all belief in them is unfounded and speaks more to the fear of death which is as alive today as it was at the founding of the belief! Perhaps the fact of having a consciousness and our very awareness of life/death screams at us to question it all. And perhaps due to a lack of answers we choose to weave a story to answer everything instead of accept the facts! This part I completely understand. It is very nice to have and in the ancient times with many unanswerable questions it was a comfort. Now however with modern science and todays knowledge of the universe and life, beliefs such as these should be a thing of ancient times not modern. It was primitive mans way of coping with a lack of knowledge. It has served its purpose but now only serves to bring us back to its primitive roots.
    To put it simply, the concept of gods bares no merit at this current stage in the evolution of the human species and it would be a betterment to the species to have the concept removed from accepted delusional realities so prevalent in todays society.

    February 6, 2013 at 9:51 am |
    • Ugh

      Everybody hates hippies and poets.

      But a hippy poet? Run quick. Don't listen to it. And don't ever tell it where you live.

      February 6, 2013 at 10:39 am |
    • NClaw441

      You are correct. Belief in God is a matter of faith, because God's existence cannot be proven with conventional evidence. But I would ask, is there anything or anyone you love? How would prove that love exists? What evidence could be produced that there is such a thing as love? None that I know, yet almost everyone believes it does exist.

      February 6, 2013 at 11:57 am |
    • hippypoet

      love is the reaction to a belief...that is an effect and therefore can be tested. just because we can't see love doesn't prove anything. there is scienitific evidence to support belief in love, however there is no such evidence to support belief in god – any gods.

      there is a testable reaction to the belief in god sure, but again that doesn't prove anything...we can test love in a lab thru looking at a brain in love....however, god .....no such test exists because god doesn't. as an idea, god does however exist and is rather powerful – outside of the believer's mind, god is nothing.

      February 6, 2013 at 12:35 pm |
    • No Tollerance

      Hippypoet doesn't have a clue about anything.

      February 6, 2013 at 12:42 pm |
    • Akira

      Is Tollerance willingness to put up with tolls?

      February 6, 2013 at 1:13 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      i like hippies and poets, so you're wrong, Ugh... which, btw, is a perfect name for you. anytime someone reads something you write, they just think "ugh, what an idiot."

      February 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm |
    • hippypoet

      clue...why i already made my guess, it was mrs. white in the ballroom with the pipe – and she refused to pass it...so i killed her!

      February 6, 2013 at 3:07 pm |
    • Bet

      @hippypoet

      LOL – best thing I've read on these boards all day.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:28 pm |
    • hippypoet

      @Ugh – your a moron...enough said, moving on.

      @No Tollerance – please supply an argument with supporting evidence or at least attempt to refute mine....otherwise you are as equals with those cla.ss clowns who while making others laugh fail the cla.ss...quite the multi tasker aren't we!

      @Bet – thank you....though i admit i am a tad confused on which post you liked, the one about accepted delusional realities or clue?

      February 6, 2013 at 6:21 pm |
    • Bet

      The clue, lol.

      February 6, 2013 at 6:43 pm |
  18. Saraswati

    I always feel sorry for the Boy Scouts walking door to door trying to raise money for their activities. I don't know how it is elsewhere, but here almost no one will give money to an organization that has declared gays and non-believers immoral, and many are quite willing to tell the kids this at the door. It's quite something for these parents to put their kids through, though perhaps a good, if harsh, learning experience.

    February 6, 2013 at 9:03 am |
    • mama k

      Hopefully as they consider their votes they will also consider the growing social trends here in the U.S., but also in the world. I read the other day that in the UK the House of Commons voted 400 to 175 to legalize gay marriage.

      February 6, 2013 at 9:50 am |
    • tallulah13

      I confess that as much as I hate the politics, I do donate a little. I grew up camping and enjoying the outdoors, and the Boy Scouts offer that to kids who may never get a chance otherwise. Should they change their policies, I would be happy to donate more.

      February 6, 2013 at 10:21 am |
  19. No Tollerance

    Keep the pervs out!!

    February 6, 2013 at 8:52 am |
    • Damocles

      Tolerance.

      February 6, 2013 at 8:57 am |
    • .

      @No Tollerance,
      You are free to just not join

      February 6, 2013 at 10:07 am |
    • Akira

      They're not letting pervs in; where did you get that idea?

      February 6, 2013 at 11:17 am |
    • Shaggy

      Keep the Pervs out? I think you misunderstood. The Boy Scouts already let religious organizations be involved with their kids.

      February 6, 2013 at 1:15 pm |
  20. Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things

    Pray without ceasing in 2013
    Prayer changes things

    February 6, 2013 at 7:23 am |
    • Truth Prevails :-)

      replace the work pray with think and you'll actually have a valid point but praying is nothing more than talking to yourself and a sure sign of being borderline crazy.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:39 am |
    • Jesus

      Prayer does not; you are such a LIAR. You have NO proof it changes anything! A great example of prayer proven not to work is the Christians in jail because prayer didn't work and their children died. For example: Susan Grady, who relied on prayer to heal her son. Nine-year-old Aaron Grady died and Susan Grady was arrested.

      An article in the Journal of Pediatrics examined the deaths of 172 children from families who relied upon faith healing from 1975 to 1995. They concluded that four out of five ill children, who died under the care of faith healers or being left to prayer only, would most likely have survived if they had received medical care.

      The statistical studies from the nineteenth century and the three CCU studies on prayer are quite consistent with the fact that humanity is wasting a huge amount of time on a procedure that simply doesn’t work. Nonetheless, faith in prayer is so pervasive and deeply rooted, you can be sure believers will continue to devise future studies in a desperate effort to confirm their beliefs!

      February 6, 2013 at 8:53 am |
    • bobk52

      Satan worship is my thing! I must be on the wrong site?

      February 6, 2013 at 9:40 am |
    • Atheism is Healthy for Everyone - Kids Too!

      Different kinds of fundamentalist Christians now as much as ever are arguing with each other with as much sense and rationality as a flock of chickens. They can't support their beliefs by any reasonable means, yet they deem themselves fit to judge others from those beliefs or attempt to put others in the midst of their religious infighting. Their beliefs have a very weak foundation and are not consistent, ergo the over 30,000 different denominations.

      Thomas Jefferson (POTUS #3, principle author of the Declaration of Independence)

      Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth.

      John Adams (POTUS #2, Patriot of the American Revolution)

      I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved – the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced! With the rational respect that is due to it, knavish priests have added prostitutions of it, that fill or might fill the blackest and bloodiest pages of human history.

      James Madison (POTUS #4, chief architect of the U.S. Constitution & the Bill of Rights)

      During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.

      Thomas Paine (Patriot of the American Revolution)

      I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

      February 6, 2013 at 9:43 am |
    • Southern Humanist

      What pray tell does it change? (see what I did there?)

      February 6, 2013 at 11:51 am |
1 2 3

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke and Eric Marrapodi with daily contributions from CNN's worldwide newsgathering team.