Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against homosexuals
J Young
It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
should be working with underage boys.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
homosexuals
A pro-family activist devoted to countering the homosexual agenda says
the United States has clearly reached the depths of depravity when a
major U.S. city can decide to financially punish the Boy Scouts of
America because they refuse to allow homosexuals into their group.
The Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, which
serves about 64,000 scouts in Philadelphia and its suburbs, has been
paying $1 a year rent for its downtown office. But recently the city
decided that the Scouts must pay the fair market rent of $200,000 a
year to remain in that city-owned location because the group
"discriminates" against homosexuals.
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality,
says, "Clearly they have no problem discriminating against this
wholesome program even as they pander to homosexual activists. I think
it's a sad day for America when cities court homosexual activists
promoting deviant sexuality, while they punish wholesome groups like
the Boy Scouts."
Meanwhile the Cradle of Liberty Council says it will ask the city
solicitor for details on the appraisals that yielded the $200,000
figure. A spokesman said the higher rent money would have to come from
programs, like the creation of 30 new Cub Scout packs or the ability
to send 800 needy kids to a summer camp.
In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Scouts have a First
Amendment right to bar homosexuals from membership.
IAAH
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
>
And no religious, discriminating organization
should get public funds, either. Did you have some
other point?
parsi...@gmail.com
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
And here we go with another of those J Young's posting where he
"pretends" not to know the difference between pedophilia and
homosexuality.
According to his "logic", I guess then that heterosexuals shouldn't be
put in contact with young girls...
>
> http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
Ah... the usual source...
Ray Fischer
>It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
That's another lie.
Moral people bash pedophile priests.
You defend pedophile priests.
That's how we know that you're not moral.
>http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>
>Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
>homosexuals
And atheists.
If the Boy Scouts want to be private organization free to discriminate
against certain people then they should be treated like any other
private organization and be require to pay market rate for rent.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Nosterill
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
>
> http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>
> Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
> homosexuals
They are not being punished. The City merely declines to subsidise -
with tax payer's money - a discriminatory organisation.
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests ...
No - I bash pedophiles like you, pedophile.
MarkA
>
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
>
LOL!! You really are a hopeless fuckwit, aren't you? The "liberals who
bash gay priests" aren't bashing them because they are gay, asshole;
they're bashing them because they were raping children, and the Holy RCC
was covering it up. You can't REALLY be this stupid, can you?
>
>
>
> http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>
>
>
> Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
> homosexuals
>
>
I like how you put the word 'discriminating' in quotation marks. Kind of
like you aren't sure if saying 'we do not allow homosexuals' is
'discrimination'.
> A pro-family activist devoted to countering the homosexual agenda says
> the United States has clearly reached the depths of depravity when a
> major U.S. city can decide to financially punish the Boy Scouts of
> America because they refuse to allow homosexuals into their group.
>
I guess it would be useless to point out, for the thousandth time, that
withdrawing preferential treatment is hardly "punishment."
> The Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, which serves
> about 64,000 scouts in Philadelphia and its suburbs, has been paying $1
> a year rent for its downtown office.
Isn't that the going rate for real estate in downtown Philly?
> But recently the city decided that
> the Scouts must pay the fair market rent of $200,000 a year to remain in
> that city-owned location because the group "discriminates" against
> homosexuals.
>
Oh, the horror!!! Having to pay "fair market rent"!!! That should be
considered "cruel and unusual punishment"!! Why isn't the ACLU rallying
to their cause?
> Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality,
> says, "Clearly they have no problem discriminating against this
> wholesome program even as they pander to homosexual activists. I think
> it's a sad day for America when cities court homosexual activists
> promoting deviant sexuality, while they punish wholesome groups like the
> Boy Scouts."
>
My definition of a "wholesome group" does not include those that
discriminate against people because of their religious beliefs or sexual
orientation. But then, I'm a decent person.
> Meanwhile the Cradle of Liberty Council says it will ask the city
> solicitor for details on the appraisals that yielded the $200,000
> figure. A spokesman said the higher rent money would have to come from
> programs, like the creation of 30 new Cub Scout packs or the ability to
> send 800 needy kids to a summer camp.
>
> In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Scouts have a First
> Amendment right to bar homosexuals from membership.
In this case, it's going to cost them $199,999 to continue that practice.
I hope they think it's worth it!
--
MarkA
(My OTHER sig line is clever)
Liz
wrote:
>
>It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
>the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
>should be working with underage boys.
I have never bashed gay priests. I think the priesthood is the
perfect place for religious men who have no desire to have sexual
relationships with women. I have, however, condemned pedophile
priests for their illegal, predatory, abusive behavior. There is a
difference whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.
Liz #658 BAAWA
KRP
"J Young" <youngi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1193111719.3...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
It is ALL about "ACCESS." They have an equal fit about banning gay priests.
Al Klein
wrote:
>The Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, which
>serves about 64,000 scouts in Philadelphia and its suburbs, has been
>paying $1 a year rent for its downtown office. But recently the city
>decided that the Scouts must pay the fair market rent of $200,000 a
>year to remain in that city-owned location because the group
>"discriminates" against homosexuals.
Nope.
At the insistence of the BOY SCOUTS, they were legally declared a
private organization. The city merely refuses to allow ANY private
organization to use its facilities without paying fair market rent.
If the Council wants to get free (or for a nominal fee) use of public
property, it has to get itself declared a PUBLIC organization. Of
course that would mean admitting admitted homosexual and atheist
youth, since public organizations can't discriminate on religious
grounds (and the ONLY reason for discriminating against homosexuals
and/or atheists is a religious one). And since they's NEVER agree to
that, they have to pay fair market rent.
Nothing to do with the city punishing them (or even demanding rent
from them) because they discriminate. The city wants rent from them
merely because they're private.
Reality bites when you're on the irrational side.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more
closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain
folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House
will be adorned by a downright moron."
- H. L. Mencken
Cary Kittrell
>
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
I believe you meant "who bash practicing pedophiles" there.
> take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
>
>
>
>
> http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>
>
>
> Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
> homosexuals
Yep. Their choice: they want to discriminate (as opposed to
"discriminate"), then they get off the public teat and
pay rent just like any other private entity.
-- cary
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
> In article <1193111719.332737.259...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com> J Young <younginsig...@aol.com> writes:
>
>
>
> > It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
>
> I believe you meant "who bash practicing pedophiles" there.
>
> > take
> > the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> > should be working with underage boys.
>
> >http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>
> > Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
> > homosexuals
>
> Yep. Their choice: they want to discriminate (as opposed to
> "discriminate"), then they get off the public teat and
> pay rent just like any other private entity.
>
> -- cary
What do you have against the Boy Scouts? They
are a wonderful organization and they have the
right to make a stand for decency.
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Forgery.
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
wrote:
> On Oct 24, 4:27 am, Gwyne Bennetdottir <benetwitho...@mail.com>
Forgery
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, JYOUNG - I made your forgery quite clear.
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
wrote:
> On Oct 24, 4:34 am, Gwyne Bennetdottir <benetwitho...@mail.com>
You are the forger.
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
>
> - Show quoted text -
You are, indeed, the forger, JYoung.
The Chief Instigator
>On Oct 23, 6:19?pm, c...@afone.as.arizona.edu (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
>> In article <1193111719.332737.259...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com> J Young <younginsig...@aol.com> writes:
>> > It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
>> I believe you meant "who bash practicing pedophiles" there.
>> > take
>> > the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
>> > should be working with underage boys.
>> >http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>> > Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
>> > homosexuals
>> Yep. Their choice: they want to discriminate (as opposed to
>> "discriminate"), then they get off the public teat and
>> pay rent just like any other private entity.
>What do you have against the Boy Scouts? They
>are a wonderful organization and they have the
>right to make a stand for decency.
...and AOL has a right to stomp your forging ass, Jackass Young.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2007-08 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 6, San Antonio 5 (SO) (October 19)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, October 27 at San Antonio, 7:05
KRP
"Al Klein" <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:tqrsh319i3a5hs298...@4ax.com...
>>The Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, which
>>serves about 64,000 scouts in Philadelphia and its suburbs, has been
>>paying $1 a year rent for its downtown office. But recently the city
>>decided that the Scouts must pay the fair market rent of $200,000 a
>>year to remain in that city-owned location because the group
>>"discriminates" against homosexuals.
>
> Nope.
>
> At the insistence of the BOY SCOUTS, they were legally declared a
> private organization. The city merely refuses to allow ANY private
> organization to use its facilities without paying fair market rent.
Especially those FUKKKKKKKKKKKKKING Xtians, right Al?
WHO DO THEY THINK THEY ARE????
Pr0r3p
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
>
Ahhh, another dumbass who confuses homosexuality and pedophilia.
Why am I not surprised?
<snip>
Cary Kittrell
Yes, Absolutely they do.
But if they choose to be discriminatory -- against
gays, against atheists, to be specific -- then legally
they cannot receive government funding. And that
was the path they themselves chose to take.
-- cary
Cary Kittrell
> On Oct 24, 4:27 am, Gwyne=F0 Bennetdottir <benetwitho...@mail.com>> > > In article <1193111719.332737.259...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com> J Yo=
> ung <younginsig...@aol.com> writes:
> >
> > > > It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
> >
> > > I believe you meant "who bash practicing pedophiles" there.
> >
> > > > take
> > > > the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> > > > should be working with underage boys.
> >
> > > >http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
> >
> > > > Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
> > > > homosexuals
> >
> > > Yep. Their choice: they want to discriminate (as opposed to
> > > "discriminate"), then they get off the public teat and
> > > pay rent just like any other private entity.
> >
> > > -- cary
> >
> > What do you have against the Boy Scouts? They
> > are a wonderful organization and they have the
> > right to make a stand for decency.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Forgery.
>
Was it? Oh.
Well, I appear to have answered it anyway.
-- cary
bo_da...@mactan.org
Of course you wrong because your reason for discriminating against BSA
is their willingness to stand up against political correctness and
pressure from perverted promiscuous special interest groups such as
atheist and homosexuals.
lero...@pillinor.net
wrote:
>the ONLY reason for discriminating against homosexuals
>and/or atheists is a religious one).
There are so few atheist that there exclusion is of little consequence
and of no concern to the average US citizen. Of course with regards to
you statement about homosexuals, that is totally false.When it come to
homosexuals Discrimination most often can and should be based on the
fact that they are a health hazard and should in effect be
quarantined.
You find the answers why in this CDC report:
Men who have sex with men (MSM) and AIDS in 2005
(The following data are from 50 states and the District of Columbia.)
* An estimated 19,248 MSM (17,230 MSM and 2,018 MSM who inject
drugs) received a diagnosis of AIDS, accounting for 65% of male adults
and adolescents and 47% of all people who received a diagnosis of AIDS
* An estimated 7,293 MSM (5,929 MSM and 1,364 MSM who inject
drugs) with AIDS died, accounting for 60% of all men and 45% of all
people with AIDS who died.
* Since the beginning of the epidemic, an estimated 517,992
MSM (452,111 MSM and 65,881 MSM who inject drugs) had received a
diagnosis of AIDS, accounting for 68% of male adults and adolescents
who received a diagnosis of AIDS and 54% of all people who received a
diagnosis of AIDS.
* Since the beginning of the epidemic, an estimated 300,669
MSM (260,749 MSM and 39,920 MSM who inject drugs) with AIDS had died,
accounting for 68% of male adults and adolescents with AIDS who had
died and 57% of all people with AIDS who had died.
* At the end of 2005, an estimated 217,323 MSM (191,362 MSM
and 25,961 MSM who inject drugs) were living with AIDS, representing
67% of male adults and adolescents living with AIDS and 52% of all
people living with AIDS.
Sexual Risk Factors
Sexual risk factors account for most HIV infections in MSM. These
factors include unprotected sex and sexually transmitted diseases
(STDs).
* Having anal sex without a condom continues to be a
significant threat to the health of MSM. Unprotected anal sex
(barebacking) with casual partners is an increasing concern. Not all
the reasons for an apparent increase in unprotected anal intercourse
are known, but research points to the following factors: optimism
about improved HIV treatment, substance use, complex sexual decision
making, seeking sex partners on the Internet, and failure to practice
safer sex. Some of these men may be serosorting, or only having sex
(or unprotected sex) with a partner whose HIV serostatus, they
believe, is the same as their own. Although serosorting between MSM
who have tested HIV-positive is likely to prevent new HIV transmission
to persons who are not infected, the effectiveness of serosorting
between men who have tested HIV-negative has not been established.
Serosorting with condom use may further reduce the risk of HIV
transmission. However, for men with casual partners, serosorting alone
is likely to be less effective than always using condoms because some
men do not know or disclose their HIV serostatus.
* STDs, which increase the risk for HIV infection, remain an
important health issue for MSM. According to the Gonococcal Isolate
Surveillance Project, the proportion of gonorrhea-positive test
results among MSM increased from 4% in 1988 to 20.2% in 2004. Rates of
syphilis among MSM have increased in some urban areas, including
Chicago, New York, San Francisco, and Seattle. In the 9 US cities
participating in the MSM Prevalence Monitoring Project, the rates of
STDs and HIV positivity varied by race and ethnicity but tended to be
highest among black and Hispanic MSM. In addition to increasing
susceptibility to HIV, STDs are markers for high-risk sexual
practices, through which HIV infection can be transmitted.
Unknown HIV Serostatus
Approximately 25% of people in the United States who are infected with
HIV do not know they are infected.
* Through its National HIV Behavioral Surveillance system, CDC
found that 25% of the MSM surveyed in 5 large US cities were infected
with HIV and 48% of those infected were unaware of their infections.
* In a recent CDC study of young MSM, 77% of those who tested
HIV-positive mistakenly believed that they were not infected. Young
black MSM in this study were more likely to be unaware of their
infection--approximately 9 of 10 young black MSM compared with 6 of 10
young white MSM. Of the men who tested positive, most (74%) had
previously tested negative for HIV infection, and 59% believed that
they were at low or very low risk.
Ref: www.cdc.gov <HIV, AIDS, STD, MSM, GISP>
lero...@pillinor.net
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
>In article <1193218060.6...@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com> =?iso-8859-1?q?Gwyne=F0_Bennetdottir?= <benetw...@mail.com> writes:
>> On Oct 23, 6:19?pm, c...@afone.as.arizona.edu (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
>> > In article <1193111719.332737.259...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com> J Young <younginsig...@aol.com> writes:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
>> >
>> > I believe you meant "who bash practicing pedophiles" there.
>> >
>> > > take
>> > > the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
>> > > should be working with underage boys.
>> >
>> > >http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>> >
>> > > Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
>> > > homosexuals
>> >
>> > Yep. Their choice: they want to discriminate (as opposed to
>> > "discriminate"), then they get off the public teat and
>> > pay rent just like any other private entity.
>> >
>> > -- cary
>>
>> What do you have against the Boy Scouts? They
>> are a wonderful organization and they have the
>> right to make a stand for decency.
>>
>
>Yes, Absolutely they do.
>
>But if they choose to be discriminatory -- against
>gays, against atheists, to be specific -- then legally
>they cannot receive government funding. And that
>was the path they themselves chose to take.
Homosexuals get free and very expensive treatment for AIDS that they
acquired as a result of their promiscuous sexual life style[1} at the
expense of the tax payers. Which dollar do you think is better spent.
The one that supports BSA or the one that rewards homosexual sexual
promiscuity?
***
1. Men who have sex with men (MSM) and AIDS in 2005
Sexual Risk Factors
Unknown HIV Serostatus
>-- cary
>
lero...@pillinor.net
Yep, Your choice, If you want to engage in unsafe homosexual sex and
contract AIDS, then get off the public tit and cover your medical
expenses for your fuck up yourself.
>-- cary
>
Mark Sebree
> On 23 Oct 2007 06:23:24 GMT, rfisc...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
There is nothing inherently perverted or promiscuous about either
atheists or homosexuals. And there is nothing wrong with standing up
for one's rights and making sure that the government follows the laws
that it wrote and/or are applicable to it. Atheists and homosexuals
are supposed to have the same rights as heterosexuals and religious
people, which means that they have the right to fight for those
rights, and make sure that the government does not show any favoritism
to and group of people just because of their religion, or lack of
religion, or sexual orientation.
The BSA declared that it was a private organization and therefore
could discriminate about who it allowed to be their leaders and
members. This is a protected right under the First Amendment of the
Constitution. (Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Assembly) The
governments said "OK. But that means that you lose your special
privileges and considerations because our laws state that private
groups, especially private religious organizations as you have claimed
to be, must pay fair market value for any government property that
they use." The BSA took a stand, and that stand turned around and bit
them because they did not think about what the consequences would be.
Mark Sebree
Mark Sebree
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:19:19 +0000 (UTC), c...@afone.as.arizona.edu
>
>
>
> (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
> >In article <1193111719.332737.259...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com> J Young <younginsig...@aol.com> writes:
>
> >> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
>
> >I believe you meant "who bash practicing pedophiles" there.
>
> >> take
> >> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> >> should be working with underage boys.
>
> >>http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>
> >> Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
> >> homosexuals
>
> >Yep. Their choice: they want to discriminate (as opposed to
> >"discriminate"), then they get off the public teat and
> >pay rent just like any other private entity.
>
> Yep, Your choice, If you want to engage in unsafe homosexual sex and
> contract AIDS, then get off the public tit and cover your medical
> expenses for your fuck up yourself.
>
> >-- cary
There is no difference in the sexual acts that homosexuals do and the
sex acts that heterosexuals do. In fact, any sex act that that
homosexuals do, heterosexuals do in far greater numbers.
What's more, only a minuscule percentage of homosexuals have HIV in
this country. (on the order of 1/4%) And the fact that, in the past,
more homosexuals have gotten HIV than heterosexuals each year is no
reason to discriminate against them. In fact, trying to make that a
reason to do so only slows the research to find a cure or vaccine for
the disease and shows yourself to be irrational and homophobic.
Mark Sebree
Cary Kittrell
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 18:03:37 -0400, Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >the ONLY reason for discriminating against homosexuals
> >and/or atheists is a religious one).
>
> There are so few atheist that there exclusion is of little consequence
> and of no concern to the average US citizen.
Quite true, given that the average U.S. citizen also has little
concern about the Constitution.
> Of course with regards to
> you statement about homosexuals, that is totally false.When it come to
> homosexuals Discrimination most often can and should be based on the
> fact that they are a health hazard and should in effect be
> quarantined.
Teen agers represent a far greater health hazard, on a wide variety
of fronts.
Quarantine all teenagers. Today.
-- cary
Sanders Kaufman
news:5h2vh31hoql2etvhu...@4ax.com...
> Of course you wrong because your reason for discriminating against BSA
> is their willingness to stand up against political correctness and
> pressure from perverted promiscuous special interest groups such as
> atheist and homosexuals.
You honestly think the Boy Scouts are *against* political correctness?!!
Hahahahahahaha!
Next thing you know - you'll be referring to our vegetable-pickers as
"terrorists".
Cary Kittrell
Well said! And not to be picky or anything, but there are
a couple of teensy, perhaps overly pedantic niggles you might
want to clean up:
1) my health insurance is private
2) I do not engage in unsafe homosexual sex
3) I do not engage in safe homosexual sex
4) I do not engage in homosexual sex of any description.
4) I DO not engage in safe heterosexual sex -- you know,
blood tests, honesty, that sort of thing
Other than that -- oh, and that pesky Constitutional issue, forgot
to mention that one -- other than that, you're spot-on.
-- cary
Al Klein
>On 23 Oct 2007 06:23:24 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>J Young <youngi...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
>>
>>That's another lie.
>>
>>Moral people bash pedophile priests.
>>You defend pedophile priests.
>>
>>That's how we know that you're not moral.
>>
>>>http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>>>
>>>Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
>>>homosexuals
>>
>>And atheists.
>>
>>If the Boy Scouts want to be private organization free to discriminate
>>against certain people then they should be treated like any other
>>private organization and be require to pay market rate for rent.
>
>Of course you wrong because your reason for discriminating against BSA
NO ONE is discriminating against them. ALL private organizations are
required to pay the market rate for rent, not just the Boy Scouts.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"The study of geology is ok-But not when it contradicts what is laid
out in the Bible that the earth is more than 10,000 years old."
- Doug Lee, Creationist
Robert
But the BSA being a religious group of bigots, discriminating against
atheist and homosexuals has nothing to do with it? I will have nothing
to do with any group that discriminates against, any class of people.
The BSA is no different from the KKK.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Ben Kaufman
<SNIP>
> Homosexuals get free and very expensive treatment for AIDS that they
>acquired as a result of their promiscuous sexual life style[1} at the
>expense of the tax payers. Which dollar do you think is better spent.
>The one that supports BSA or the one that rewards homosexual sexual
>promiscuity?
Uh, you better try re-reading that citation you keep posting a little more
carefully this time. Male-male sex AIDs victims are 54% of all people who
received a diagnosis of AIDS.
<SNIP>
> * Since the beginning of the epidemic, an estimated 517,992
>MSM (452,111 MSM and 65,881 MSM who inject drugs) had received a
>diagnosis of AIDS, accounting for 68% of male adults and adolescents
>who received a diagnosis of AIDS and 54% of all people who received a <---------
>diagnosis of AIDS.
>
<SNIP>
Ray Fischer
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>J Young <youngi...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests
>>
>>That's another lie.
>>
>>Moral people bash pedophile priests.
>>You defend pedophile priests.
>>
>>That's how we know that you're not moral.
>>
>>>http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>>>
>>>Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
>>>homosexuals
>>
>>And atheists.
>>
>>If the Boy Scouts want to be private organization free to discriminate
>>against certain people then they should be treated like any other
>>private organization and be require to pay market rate for rent.
>
>Of course you wrong because your reason for discriminating against BSA
Being treated like everybody else is not discrimination, bigot.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Sanders Kaufman
news:iokvh39i45r30q9e5...@4ax.com...
> But the BSA being a religious group of bigots, discriminating against
> atheist and homosexuals has nothing to do with it? I will have nothing
> to do with any group that discriminates against, any class of people.
Ditto.
I was a scouter from the time I was 11 until well into my 20's.
I lived the life, talked the walk, and was a merit-badge hog.
After I was too old to be a scout, I became a scoutmaster.
Now - to hell with the BSA.
I don't like fags, either - but that's no excuse to leave a confused kid out
in the cold.
Indeed - who MORE than a fag needs to be taught to live according to the
Scout Law?
It's organizational suicide.
It's as stupid as if Christians were to say they would only preach to other
Christians.
While most of us might appreciate it - it's a lousy way to spread the Woid.
don...@umich.edu
pay rent on is one that they built with their money? The only thing
they were paying $1.00 a year for was the land lease. Boy Scout money
built the building, if they have to vacate I say tear it down before
letting the city have it, since they never owned the building in the
first place. Tear it down and rebuild in a place where the scouts can
own the land, screw the city.
On Oct 22, 11:55 pm, J Young <younginsig...@aol.com> wrote:
> It's a crying shame that the same liberals who bash gay priests take
> the opposite view when it comes to gay Boy Scout leaders. Neither
> should be working with underage boys.
>
> http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/10/philadelphia_punishes_boy_scou.php
>
> Philadelphia punishes Boy Scouts for 'discriminating' against
> homosexuals
>
> A pro-family activist devoted to countering the homosexual agenda says
> the United States has clearly reached the depths of depravity when a
> major U.S. city can decide to financially punish the Boy Scouts of
> America because they refuse to allow homosexuals into their group.
>
> The Cradle of Liberty Council of the Boy Scouts of America, which
> serves about 64,000 scouts in Philadelphia and its suburbs, has been
> paying $1 a year rent for its downtown office. But recently the city
> decided that the Scouts must pay the fair market rent of $200,000 a
> year to remain in that city-owned location because the group
> "discriminates" against homosexuals.
>
> Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality,
> says, "Clearly they have no problem discriminating against this
> wholesome program even as they pander to homosexual activists. I think
> it's a sad day for America when cities court homosexual activists
> promoting deviant sexuality, while they punish wholesome groups like
> the Boy Scouts."
>
> Meanwhile the Cradle of Liberty Council says it will ask the city
> solicitor for details on the appraisals that yielded the $200,000
> figure. A spokesman said the higher rent money would have to come from
> programs, like the creation of 30 new Cub Scout packs or the ability
> to send 800 needy kids to a summer camp.
>
> In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Scouts have a First
> Amendment right to bar homosexuals from membership.
Al Klein
>Did anybody seem to notice that the building they are going to have to
>pay rent on is one that they built with their money?
I seem to have missed that part.
> The only thing they were paying $1.00 a year for was the land lease.
And the fair market rent for that land is how much?
>Boy Scout money
>built the building, if they have to vacate I say tear it down before
>letting the city have it, since they never owned the building in the
>first place. Tear it down and rebuild in a place where the scouts can
>own the land, screw the city.
Never happen. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain>
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"What has 'theology' ever said that is of the smallest use to anybody? When
has 'theology' ever said anything that is demonstrably true and is not
obvious? What makes you think that 'theology' is a subject at all?"
- Richard Dawkins
Brian E. Clark
@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, said...
> Did anybody seem to notice that the building they are going to have to
> pay rent on is one that they built with their money?
Do you have a cite for that claim?
> The only thing they were paying $1.00 a year for was the
> land lease.
According to every account I have read, the city owns
(and has owned) the building.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
Ray Fischer
>Did anybody seem to notice that the building they are going to have to
>pay rent on is one that they built with their money?
About 80 years ago.
> The only thing
>they were paying $1.00 a year for was the land lease.
Untrue. The building is the property of Philadelphia
> Boy Scout money
>built the building, if they have to vacate I say tear it down before
>letting the city have it, since they never owned the building in the
>first place.
The city owns the building now.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net