Go Back   CruiseMates Cruise Community and Forums > People > Open Debate
Register Forgot Password?

Open Debate The only forum to discuss politics and religion. Please keep it civil.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old February 2nd, 2013, 10:06 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 566
Default

I'm 50 and was an Eagle Scout. Most scout leaders were gay back then, or at least interested in virile young men.

This isn't exactly news to anybody in the boy scouts back then.

Everybody knew, which is precisely why the organization is officially and publicaly so freaked out about gays.

The comparisons to the Catholic church and the irony of it all is accurate.

Last edited by Aidan; February 2nd, 2013 at 10:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old February 2nd, 2013, 11:42 PM
AR AR is offline
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,481
Default

Mars and Mike

Thank you for two really great posts. Mars graciously says that he feels that a lot of the resistance doesn't come from bigotry, but from concern for the kids. I agree that concern for the kids is absolutely at the root of all of this. But in order to channel that concern effectively, fairly and humanely it is necessary for people to be. . .

--Informed. The amount of misinformation running around on this string and elsewhere is staggering. At the very least you have to know the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia to even discuss the topic rationally.

--Open to people of good will. Enough said.

While I can never agree with Mike about the death penalty, I do agree that it is hard to imagine anything more cruel on this earth than the abuse of a child. But as you guys both say, it is tough to defend the kids effectively if we come to the subject uninformed and biased--especially when those biases are directed at the wrong people.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old February 3rd, 2013, 09:51 AM
Marsdude's Avatar
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
While I can never agree with Mike about the death penalty, I do agree that it is hard to imagine anything more cruel on this earth than the abuse of a child. But as you guys both say, it is tough to defend the kids effectively if we come to the subject uninformed and biased--especially when those biases are directed at the wrong people.
AR, I understand your stand on the death penalty, and I respect it. I have, and do, wrestle with this one as I am sure most thinking people do.

However, a child molester is the one of the times I might be in favor of the death penalty. If there is a God, it seems most religions have provisions for this. Seems God puts these decisions in our hands!

If there is no God or supreme entity than these decisions rest with society, or in our hands.

If you can view our society as a living organism, and I believe that this analogy is not far off, you can view a pedophile as a cancer.

What is the best thing to do with cancer - remove it from the living organism.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old February 3rd, 2013, 11:02 AM
AR AR is offline
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdude View Post
If you can view our society as a living organism, and I believe that this analogy is not far off, you can view a pedophile as a cancer. What is the best thing to do with cancer - remove it from the living organism.
Agreed, but of course I argue that there's more than one way to remove it. Life imprisonment effectively accomplishes that in practical terms too.

Seems to me that with the empirical arguments that have been used for years now having been given the lie (deterrence and cost), the arguments that are left seem to be revenge and "closure." The huge majority of victim families as well as mental health professionals say there's no such thing as closure--it's a myth. They say that, as always, time tends to heal, but little else.

To me then, that leaves societal revenge. And I could never support killing on that basis.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old February 3rd, 2013, 11:32 AM
Marsdude's Avatar
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
Agreed, but of course I argue that there's more than one way to remove it. Life imprisonment effectively accomplishes that in practical terms too.

Seems to me that with the empirical arguments that have been used for years now having been given the lie (deterrence and cost), the arguments that are left seem to be revenge and "closure." The huge majority of victim families as well as mental health professionals say there's no such thing as closure--it's a myth. They say that, as always, time tends to heal, but little else.

To me then, that leaves societal revenge. And I could never support killing on that basis.
I agree with the above.

Life imprisonment without a chance of parole would be acceptable, however then WE pay the cost to house this individual for the rest of their life. I am not sure this is the best use of resources.

The convicted could work labor to reduce the costs, but this would only reduce it, not cover the full expense. It also takes jobs away from those who are law abiding citizens.

I know I am really oversimplifying this. However, I am not sure that there is really any good reason NOT to execute those who are this damaged and proven threats to the most innocent.

We also need to revamp our current laws. At the present, if an 18 year old transports a 15 year old of the opposite sex across state lines, they can be labeled as a sex offender for the rest of their lives.

I would submit that in many times it is a matter of immaturity and poor judgement in these cases rather than a true case of someone who is a predator.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old February 6th, 2013, 02:44 PM
AR AR is offline
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,481
Default

Well, boy was I wrong!

I listened to "the common wisdom" and drank the Kool-Aid that the Scouts would lift their ban on gays today.

No such thing. Instead, the board kicked the can down the road, and left the decision to some other Scouting body.

I should have realized that the common wisdom was shaky because I should have remembered that large swaths of Scouting are "owned" (sponsored) by the Mormon and Southern Baptist churches, both of which are institutionally homophobic, with published and very specific anti-gay policies.

So, it will take a little longer. Right now, the ranks of Scouting are declining alarmingly, and if they stick to their outdated beliefs that trend will probably continue to oblivion, at least in some parts of the country.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old February 6th, 2013, 03:13 PM
Senior Member
First Mate
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 257
Default

I sure wouldn't send my son to Catholic Church. I think we'll find far more instances of child abuse and pedophilia there than the Boy Scouts
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old February 7th, 2013, 09:03 AM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 211
Default

well said.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old February 7th, 2013, 01:02 PM
AR AR is offline
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BernieG View Post
I sure wouldn't send my son to Catholic Church. I think we'll find far more instances of child abuse and pedophilia there than the Boy Scouts
No arguments there!

I mentioned the Mormons and the Southern Baptists only because they're well known to be both institutionally homophobic and heavy funders of the Scouts, and therefore probably influenced yesterday's decision to avoid doing the right thing. I'm not sure that the Catholics donate heavily to Scouting (in fact, I'm pretty sure they don't).

But for chilling, shocking insights into the pedophile priest scandal, I call your attention to the documentary currently running on HBO: Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God. We watched it last night, and although we thought we knew something about the issue, this was an absolute stunner. The documented culpability at the highest levels is brought into sharp focus, including the silence of the current Pope, Ratzinger, in the face of conclusive evidence.

I'd rather let my kid play football without a helmet than be a Catholic altar boy.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw

Last edited by AR; February 7th, 2013 at 01:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old February 7th, 2013, 01:25 PM
Senior Member
First Mate
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR View Post
No arguments there!

I mentioned the Mormons and the Southern Baptists only because they're well known to be both institutionally homophobic and heavy funders of the Scouts, and therefore probably influenced yesterday's decision to avoid doing the right thing. I'm not sure that the Catholics donate heavily to Scouting (in fact, I'm pretty sure they don't).

But for chilling, shocking insights into the pedophile priest scandal, I call your attention to the documentary currently running on HBO: Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God. We watched it last night, and although we thought we knew something about the issue, this was an absolute stunner. The documented culpability at the highest levels is brought into sharp focus, including the silence of the current Pope, Ratzinger, in the face of conclusive evidence.

I'd rather let my kid play football without a helmet than be a Catholic altar boy.

Very scary isn't it? I'll never understand the thought process or probably lack of thought process behind the correlation of being gay and abusing children. Some people are very messed up.
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old February 7th, 2013, 03:32 PM
Paul Motter's Avatar
Administrator
Admiral
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: in my office!
Posts: 10,910
Send a message via AIM to Paul Motter
Default

It is truly a sad thing for the church that they let that scandal go on for so long.

Obviously it was practically institutionalized to the point where a number of priests felt it was part of the job....... why? I have no idea, but possibly that is what happens when you deny grown men the right to have normal sexual relations.
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old February 7th, 2013, 03:50 PM
AR AR is offline
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Motter View Post
It is truly a sad thing for the church that they let that scandal go on for so long.

Obviously it was practically institutionalized to the point where a number of priests felt it was part of the job....... why? I have no idea, but possibly that is what happens when you deny grown men the right to have normal sexual relations.
I think that's it in a nutshell, Paul.
__________________
The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. -- George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old February 8th, 2013, 04:57 AM
ship2shore's Avatar
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 928
Default

quote Paul Motter "that is what happens when you deny grown men the right to have normal sexual relations"

I disagree. Paedophilia is not a "nurtured" condition. Nor is it apparently cureable.
It is a crime of opportunity, and these scum are attracted to the "careers" that allow them to practice their perversion with the most impunity. Catholic priests, clergy in general, scout masters, sports coaches, educators, and even volunteer positions in support of same, are all vulnerable to infiltration and we must be incredibly vigilant. Many paedophiles have families and children, so they just dont fit the "gay" mold. They (some) even admit to creating a marriage and offspring as "cover" for their activities, and their families (the people who know them the best) are often none the wiser. Are they straight? Bi? Gay? None of the above... they are simply sick predators, willing to go to ridiculous lengths for their perversions.

I think the scouts are just perpetrating their particular value discrimination, and it has NOTHING at all to do with preventing paedophilia. An openly gay scoutmaster (in this climate of ridiculous stereotypical fearmongering) is probably the safest leader your child could possibly have.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------------
Norwegian Breakaway 12 Day Caribbean Jan. 18, 2015


So you thought YOU were having a bad day???
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old March 18th, 2013, 02:39 AM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kandahar, Afghanistan
Posts: 124
Default

I've read about half of the above, and the argument comes down to whether it's ok to be gay or not. But the original subject was Gay Scout Leaders.

It is my opinion that a child in the ages of 8 to 17 shouldn't be concerned about sex at this time. Scouting is about building character, for example the Scout Law: A Scout is Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent. There isn't a word in there about exploring your sexual orientation.

I am NOT saying that anyone has to be those things. But that is what a Scout is SUPPOSED to be, and if not, the ideal he is supposed to strive towards. I'm also not saying that people can't form any organization they want and allow anyone they want to be a member. But going to an organization with a creed that you don't agree with and expecting it to change to suit you it the height of selfishness and self-centeredness. YOU ARE NOT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE and right and wrong is not based on how you feel about it. If you aren't willing to conform to my standard of right and wrong (and I am not saying that anyone should) then don't expect me to conform to yours.

To expect otherwise is to suggest that an Athiest could be elected as Pope in the name of equality, or Jesse Jackson should be able to join the KKK, or George Wallace elected the head of the NAACP. Wouldn't these be examples of TOLERANCE, or is tolerance nothing more than the least common denominator and gays getting their way at my expense?

SO, if sexual orientation is more important to someone than the Scout Law, whether they are gay, straight, or crooked as a boar's prick, then they DO NOT NEED TO BE A SCOUT LEADER. I don't care what you are in your home. If your sexual orientation is so important that you can't avoid displaying it publically, then form your own organization and leave mine alone.

Bionic Toad, Eagle Scout 1973.
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old March 18th, 2013, 06:39 AM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kandahar, Afghanistan
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
I'm 50 and was an Eagle Scout. Most scout leaders were gay back then, or at least interested in virile young men.

This isn't exactly news to anybody in the boy scouts back then.

Everybody knew, which is precisely why the organization is officially and publicaly so freaked out about gays.

The comparisons to the Catholic church and the irony of it all is accurate.
I'm 57 and was also an Eagle Scout. Sorry about your experience, but I never knew a gay person until a predator approached me at college. So maybe your broad statement about "most scout leaders" is just another example of unthinking prejudice. Or maybe things changed an awful lot in 7 years.

Unlike the other side, I'm aware that I don't know everything, and I'm careful not to claim that what I want to be true, or what I believe is true, really is true.
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old March 21st, 2013, 10:42 AM
twoAlaskans's Avatar
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Williamsport, Indiana
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truck Cruiser View Post
I agree with you Paul! I had applauded the boy scouts for keeping to their Christian values.....seems they are loosing their way.
Sorry but I have been a part of the BSA for 40 years both as a scout and now as a leader...never, NEVER has the scouts been "Christian" and Christian only...
__________________
Our first Cruise: Carnival Conquest 9/16/12 to 9/23/12

Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old March 21st, 2013, 10:47 AM
twoAlaskans's Avatar
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Williamsport, Indiana
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ship2shore View Post
I bet they will call themselves "Christians" if and when they try to do it.
Why do you have to be as intolerant as the anti gay crowd? I am a Christian and am not against gay scouts or leaders, I understand the difference between homosexual, and pedophile, and respect all...except intolerant people, of which you and the OP to the GOP are...being intolerant can go both ways...respecting but disagreeing with someone is fine...categorizing everyone as something bad is exactly the same as the anti-gay crowd...you and they are both wrong
__________________
Our first Cruise: Carnival Conquest 9/16/12 to 9/23/12

Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old March 21st, 2013, 10:51 AM
twoAlaskans's Avatar
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Williamsport, Indiana
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zydecocruiser View Post
Another day another phobia. The GOP certainly goes out of it's way to make sure it will never win another Presidential election. It's a diverse country. Hopefully it will never turn into Germany pre-WWII.
so what you are saying is anyone who is GOP is anti-gay? or are you also being intolerant and stereotyping all?

BTW I am an independent, but also lean to the right on fiscal things and left on social issues...I try not to point the finger at someone and call them "all out" as bad because that is exactly what they are doing...both sides are intolerant...do I like the fact that gays don't have equal rights? no, however I also do not want the government to force any church to preform gay marriages or recognize them, nor do I want the government to force churches to pay for abortions...that to me is just as wrong as banning them
__________________
Our first Cruise: Carnival Conquest 9/16/12 to 9/23/12

Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old March 21st, 2013, 11:01 AM
twoAlaskans's Avatar
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Williamsport, Indiana
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike M View Post
I have to disagree with Paul on this one.

The only pedophile I have had to deal with was my Scout Master. He asked me to come to his tent on a camp out and when I found out why I was immediately out of there. I then went to the assistant scout master and told him what happened. I was reprimanded for lying and basically kicked out of the troop when we returned home. When that happened three other members of the troop came forward and told of what had happened to them. The scout master was dismissed and the entire thing was basically swept under the rug. We were told that it was our word against his. My father did openly tell him that if he came near me again he would kill him. This was in the late sixties and a mid-sized, Minnesota town. However word got out and the former scout leader moved within six months.

This man was a supposed heterosexual with a wife and two children.

This is the reason why I believe that pedophilia and abuse of children are the worst of crimes. Someone in a position of authority has great power over children and when it is used to take advantage of a child it can destroy that child's life. I was lucky and knew enough to not be intimidated or think it was OK. There are many kids who believe that they should do what this person wants and that they will be in trouble if they don't. I am still friends with one the kids in this troop that this leader molested and he still has issues to this day.

I can "understand" many capital crimes and believe that a life sentence is sufficient but I truly believe that molestation of a child by an adult should be punishable by death. A pedophile isn't rehabilitated. They are a cancer of society and like any cancer should be removed. Harsh, yes but it is how I feel.

So I'll take a gay scout master any day. Being gay doesn't make them a poor role model. Gay or straight I don't want a scout master even discussing their sexual preference.

Take care,
Mike
Thanks for sharing Mike and that is something some of these folks will never understand that their is a difference in pedophile and homosexual....heck I was attacked at my scout troop committee meeting when I voiced we should support something that allows the chartering organization to make the choice...the southern Baptist members of the troop actually used the words abominations that should be put to death...the others like me were shocked at this....we are chartered by the American Legion and as such are non-denominational...my personal faith tells me to love everyone and show all God's love an grace...I never understood the hate for a sin - I guess these people are not committing any sins themselves...weird as I only thought there was one sinless person in the world - I teach to my children love the sinner hate the sin...that includes all forms of sin...
__________________
Our first Cruise: Carnival Conquest 9/16/12 to 9/23/12

Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old March 21st, 2013, 11:03 AM
twoAlaskans's Avatar
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Williamsport, Indiana
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsdude View Post
I agree with the above.

Life imprisonment without a chance of parole would be acceptable, however then WE pay the cost to house this individual for the rest of their life. I am not sure this is the best use of resources.

The convicted could work labor to reduce the costs, but this would only reduce it, not cover the full expense. It also takes jobs away from those who are law abiding citizens.

I know I am really oversimplifying this. However, I am not sure that there is really any good reason NOT to execute those who are this damaged and proven threats to the most innocent.

We also need to revamp our current laws. At the present, if an 18 year old transports a 15 year old of the opposite sex across state lines, they can be labeled as a sex offender for the rest of their lives.

I would submit that in many times it is a matter of immaturity and poor judgement in these cases rather than a true case of someone who is a predator.
Actually studies show that the death penalty costs more then life without parole...
__________________
Our first Cruise: Carnival Conquest 9/16/12 to 9/23/12

Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old March 21st, 2013, 04:29 PM
ship2shore's Avatar
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 928
Default

quote BionicToad " I seriously appreciate you for revealing yourself for the hate-filled, intolerant, uncivil fanatic you are."and "It's not my fault that you are prejudiced and intolerant, but too self-righteous to see it."

Those are, by definition of TOS, "personal attacks".
Shall we involve a moderator?

penalties for violation of TOS:

Direct Attack or Insult 2 12 Months

Threatening or Demeaning other Poster 5 12 Months
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------------
Norwegian Breakaway 12 Day Caribbean Jan. 18, 2015


So you thought YOU were having a bad day???
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old March 22nd, 2013, 04:23 AM
zydecocruiser's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BionicToad View Post
Of course you are entitled to your OPINION. And frankly I'm surprised that you can manage to describe it as an OPINION, having just called one of the moderators of this board a liar.

Did you post in a DEBATE forum to discuss, or was your only purpose to call people liars for failing to answer your question the way you think it should be answered? Calling people LIARS is pretty uncivil - maybe you are in violation of the TOS.

As to the TOS, there is NOTHING I said that isn't a demonstratable fact. Judging people you don't know and calling them a liar for refusing to kowtow to your peccadillos is just as UGLY as the most prejudiced cracker on the planet. You have a lot of nerve preaching tolerance while you are so intolerant of people who don't agree with you.

Deal with it. Or don't. It's not my fault that you are prejudiced and intolerant, but too self-righteous to see it.
Talk about two faced (I'm being polite). You insult and harass me and others?

And now you presume to be a moderator?

Invest in a mirror and judge yourself for a change.
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old March 22nd, 2013, 04:27 AM
zydecocruiser's Avatar
Senior Member
Admiral
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twoAlaskans View Post
so what you are saying is anyone who is GOP is anti-gay? or are you also being intolerant and stereotyping all?
Are you that ignorant?

I have no doubt that the GOP is less tolerant of gays than the Democrats. Do you disagree that the GOP is less tolerant?

Or less tolerant of Hispanics. or of diversity in general?
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old March 22nd, 2013, 05:08 AM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kandahar, Afghanistan
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zydecocruiser View Post
Talk about two faced (I'm being polite). You insult and harass me and others?

And now you presume to be a moderator?

Invest in a mirror and judge yourself for a change.
GOOD, someone is finally starting to get it. Yes, I'm being over the top because I want people who think that everyone who is against their gay-rights agenda to recognize intolerance, hatred and bigotry are on their side as much as on the anti-gay side. I detest the attitude of many christians, and their, "If you don't believe what I believe you are going to hell" attitude. But it's no less ugly when some gay-rights bigot says, "If a gay person sneezes around you, you might catch it."

Let's put bigotry, intolerance, and hatred aside and see if we can have a discussion. Or not and we can continue with what we are doing. But don't piss down my back and try to tell me it's raining.

My problem with gay rights has NOTHING at all to do with god or religion or what the bible says. My problem is with people, gay or straight, whose sexual preference is so important to them that they have to discuss it with children. My problem is with people who just can't be happy until they can FORCE everyone else to acknowledge whatever they are doing is a good and proper thing to do. I have a problem with people who make a choice and expect ME to pay for it.

I am a live and let live person. If you aren't satisfied in yourself with what you have chosen, forcing me to say "it's ok" isn't going to help.
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old March 22nd, 2013, 05:29 AM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kandahar, Afghanistan
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zydecocruiser View Post
Are you that ignorant?

I have no doubt that the GOP is less tolerant of gays than the Democrats. Do you disagree that the GOP is less tolerant?

Or less tolerant of Hispanics. or of diversity in general?
TwoAlaskans, personally I appreciate your attempt at moderation, even if I don't agree with you. But look at the difference between what you wrote and what Z's reply is. You said there are members of the GOP who support gay-rights. He counters with the GOP is less tolerant. (Of course, he's probably never heard of Log Cabin Republicans.)

You see? The politics of division have become too important in this country. Both sides talk about bipartisanship, but what happened in the last election? Moderate dems and reps lost, and those elected to replace them were almost exclusively from the more extreme positions.

Take the debates of the day: Abortion, either none at all or an absolutre right up until the umbilical cord is cut. Take immigation, either give them citizenship or deport every one. Take gay-rights, either none at all or state sponsorship at the expense of everyone else.

Is there no middle ground on these issues? I don't expect an extremist to ever accept a compromise, but you don't even hear them discussed, or if they are, some facist, radical, bigot will demean any possible discussion because it threatens the extremist position he supports.

Middle grounds could be: Abortion - available up to the point where the fetus could have a reasonable chance of surviving, perhaps beginning 3rd trimester. Immigration - a guest worker program and all current illegal aliens issued a guest worker card. Gay rights - civil unions and an end to tax breaks for marriages over singles.

In short, you are wasting your time trying to convince an extremist that you respect their position, because they can't respect anything but theirs.
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old March 22nd, 2013, 02:04 PM
twoAlaskans's Avatar
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Williamsport, Indiana
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zydecocruiser View Post
Are you that ignorant?

I have no doubt that the GOP is less tolerant of gays than the Democrats. Do you disagree that the GOP is less tolerant?

Or less tolerant of Hispanics. or of diversity in general?
why do you have to be mean and call names...and no I am not ignorant, all I said was stop saying all...man you love to go extreme it seems...sad really and shows why we have problems in this nation...
__________________
Our first Cruise: Carnival Conquest 9/16/12 to 9/23/12

Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old March 22nd, 2013, 02:16 PM
twoAlaskans's Avatar
Member
Familiar Face
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Williamsport, Indiana
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BionicToad View Post
TwoAlaskans, personally I appreciate your attempt at moderation, even if I don't agree with you. But look at the difference between what you wrote and what Z's reply is. You said there are members of the GOP who support gay-rights. He counters with the GOP is less tolerant. (Of course, he's probably never heard of Log Cabin Republicans.)

You see? The politics of division have become too important in this country. Both sides talk about bipartisanship, but what happened in the last election? Moderate dems and reps lost, and those elected to replace them were almost exclusively from the more extreme positions.

Take the debates of the day: Abortion, either none at all or an absolutre right up until the umbilical cord is cut. Take immigation, either give them citizenship or deport every one. Take gay-rights, either none at all or state sponsorship at the expense of everyone else.

Is there no middle ground on these issues? I don't expect an extremist to ever accept a compromise, but you don't even hear them discussed, or if they are, some facist, radical, bigot will demean any possible discussion because it threatens the extremist position he supports.

Middle grounds could be: Abortion - available up to the point where the fetus could have a reasonable chance of surviving, perhaps beginning 3rd trimester. Immigration - a guest worker program and all current illegal aliens issued a guest worker card. Gay rights - civil unions and an end to tax breaks for marriages over singles.

In short, you are wasting your time trying to convince an extremist that you respect their position, because they can't respect anything but theirs.
Thanks and I agree with what you are saying...I like to steer clear of far left/right wing people...me I am independent, middle right with some left leaning when it comes to social programs...on those subjects you spoke of, I am ok with gay marriage, just don't force churches to recognize or preform, I am ok with abortion just don't force me and my church to pay for them, I am ok with everyone's rights and their freedom to believe but don't turn into the very enemy I fought in Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and Northern Africa...I will fight here to protect the rights of people I disagree with only because I feel rights are God given, and in no way do I feel the need to stone someone just because they are not the same religion/belief system as me...weird how the far right Christians are exactly like the far right Islamist....and the far right and far left are one in the same in their intolerance for all others not like them...they all need to look in the mirror when calling someone out...
__________________
Our first Cruise: Carnival Conquest 9/16/12 to 9/23/12


Last edited by twoAlaskans; March 22nd, 2013 at 02:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old March 23rd, 2013, 05:26 AM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kandahar, Afghanistan
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twoAlaskans View Post
Thanks and I agree with what you are saying...I like to steer clear of far left/right wing people...me I am independent, middle right with some left leaning when it comes to social programs...on those subjects you spoke of, I am ok with gay marriage, just don't force churches to recognize or preform, I am ok with abortion just don't force me and my church to pay for them, I am ok with everyone's rights and their freedom to believe but don't turn into the very enemy I fought in Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines and Northern Africa...I will fight here to protect the rights of people I disagree with only because I feel rights are God given, and in no way do I feel the need to stone someone just because they are not the same religion/belief system as me...weird how the far right Christians are exactly like the far right Islamist....and the far right and far left are one in the same in their intolerance for all others not like them...they all need to look in the mirror when calling someone out...
I'm a Libertarian, and like many of us, I'm liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal ones. But no one has the right to swing their fist without regard to someone else's nose, something the gay-rights crowd has a lot of trouble with. When one person's right requires that another give up theirs, that's wrong. If the shoe were on the other foot, they might understand better - or not, after all , logical thought isn't their strong point.

Like you say, no one should be forced to deny what they think is right for the benefit of someone else. If a church chooses to marry gay people, that's their choice, and if they don't, same thing. That also applies to the catholic doctor who refuses to perform abortions .. or agrees to do so - his choice, not something which can be forced on him.

But look at the original discussion - Gay Scout Leaders. Ask yourself, who is it that changes EVERY topic into a referendum on whatever their personal axe to grind is? Who is it that has NO respect for anyone's opinion other than their own? The biggest reason I am strongly opposed to the gay-rights movement is because of their people, and this sneering attitude of theirs that anyone who doesn't buy into every plank of their platform is a bigoted homophobe. It's intolerance, prejudice, and discrimination at it's best, and I will oppose it at every turn.

"Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone's lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense."

I don't necessarily agree with the quote, because I don't think it's a problem of our culture, except that extremists are trying to make that our culture. No one is going to get away with pretending that is our culture around me.

Meanwhile, almost everyone here except those two has agreed, more or less, that people who's sexual preference and the expression thereof is more important than the kids shouldn't be a Scout Leader. So just where does that leave the two who want to make this a referendum about something other than the topic this thread is about? Selfish, only interested in what they want to talk about, unconcerned about what anyone else has to say (unless it's slavish agreement with their platform), self-righteous, prejudiced, intolerant bigots.

And until the moderator throws me off, I'll oppose their hijacking of a discussion every time I can.

Incidentally, thanks for your service. I'm with you on defending people's right to make stupid choices and ridiculous, exaggerated statements. I'm certainly not living here for the beautiful scenery.

Last edited by BionicToad; March 23rd, 2013 at 05:43 AM. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old March 23rd, 2013, 12:40 PM
Senior Member
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BionicToad View Post
Take gay-rights, either none at all or state sponsorship at the expense of everyone else.
That is an interesting perspective, but flawed.

Do you consider the rights of black people in the United States to marry and to be treated equally by the government "sponsorship at the expense of everyone else"?

If your answer is "no" (and I hope it's no), would you support the exact same governmental treatment for gays and lesbians?

As far as the Scouts, the issue is much ado about nothing. As a private organization, they can be as bigoted as they like -- as long as they don't get any of our tax money or use our public buildings while doing their rituals.
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old March 24th, 2013, 02:45 AM
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kandahar, Afghanistan
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
That is an interesting perspective, but flawed.

Do you consider the rights of black people in the United States to marry and to be treated equally by the government "sponsorship at the expense of everyone else"?

If your answer is "no" (and I hope it's no), would you support the exact same governmental treatment for gays and lesbians?

As far as the Scouts, the issue is much ado about nothing. As a private organization, they can be as bigoted as they like -- as long as they don't get any of our tax money or use our public buildings while doing their rituals.
Only flawed because you don't understand my point. Marriage has historically been a religious event between a man and a woman. I have no objection at all to civil unions for gays and lesbians, but their demand that marriage be legally changed to include amounts to redefining what vastly more people have been doing to the benefit of a vocal minority. We should not be forced to rename yellow to blue, to accomodate those who insist on having juandice. Likewise when a minority seeks to take something away from a majority to their personal benefit, I object to it.

Should marriage be a "least common denominator" thing? How long will it be before polygamy, marrying farm animals, or whatever forces a similar redefinition? There is even a case in China of a woman who chose to marry herself. What are the tax implications of defining Rover or Fluffy as your spouse? Does that qualify as a family member deduction?

It does not have to be religious to you or to me, but it is to many people, and it's discrimination to take what belongs to them. And as I have pointed out above, it basically comes down to, "If I can't have what I am demanding, I'll see the destruction of what I can't have", and I don't think it's right to consider that. It's not people who support marriage who refuse to let others have their own thing, however they describe it. It them, who have to denigrate something that isn't theirs, in the name of equality.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NCL Gem May 24, 2009 Mediterr: Gay/Gay Friendly Cruisemates dobytn Gay / Lesbian Cruising 1 March 4th, 2009 02:53 PM
Boy Scout Jamboree Cruznut2 Chit - Chat for Cruisers 6 July 27th, 2005 12:26 PM
Is it me or are Girl Scout Cookies not as good as they used Mike M Chit - Chat for Cruisers 25 March 21st, 2005 10:27 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


 

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:20 PM.
design by: Themes by Design

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1