[RonF]

From another source, we have another quote from Mr. Lambert:

"Teaching boys to mistrust and reject nonbelievers makes a mockery of the true moral values of Scouts," Lambert wrote in a letter to the organization. "I, personally, have not imposed my beliefs on other Scouts and ask only to be given the same consideration in return.

Mr. Lambert, and many, many other people, seem to not understand that you can teach your child that other peoples' beliefs and actions are wrong without teaching them to hate or abuse such people. Certainly many people have used such beliefs to fuel and justify hate and abuse, but that is a separate issue, and not the inevitable, or even the usual, outcome.

The BSA has an appeals process when a member's registration is revoked. Mr. Lambert is following it, as is his right.

[RonF]

Oh, one I left out.

In his letter of appeal to the Scouts' national office, Lambert said the reason for his dismissal was "un-Scout-like and un-American" and that "morals come from more than a belief in God."

The BSA has never said that morals come only from a belief in God. What they are saying is that while a belief is God is not sufficient to have morals, such a belief is necessary.

[TrappedInLiberalHell]

"Legally, (the Scouts) have a right to discriminate," Lambert said at a presentation on the issue yesterday. "Morally, they don't. That's what I'm fighting. They can't teach good citizenship and practice bad citizenship."

I would hope they have a moral right to discriminate, otherwise they would be forced to accept pedophiles, bullies, serial killers, etc. He is muddying his issue. Being a nonbeliever is not equivalent to being morally different or deficient (though some people use their atheism to justify immorality). I am agnostic, and try very hard to uphold ethical behavior in my daily life. It gives me peace of mind, even when things aren't going so well for me.

What he could, and perhaps should be arguing, is that the Boy Scouts would be in no way diminished by inclusion of nonbelievers IF they demonstrate the qualities of service, respect, and ethical behavior that they associate with believers. He'd probably have better luck if he weren't so adversarial about it. Though his above statement at least acknowledges that he understands the Scouts are on firm legal ground.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[NC Conservative]

I'd like them to realize it is the moral thing to do."

If there is no God how can their be morals?

[RAT Patrol]

So, why can't I be a member of the AMA even though I am not a doctor? They must hate me.

I want to be head of the NAACP too. And I'd like to join the NEA so I can vote against all their liberal policies even though I am not a teacher.

Hey! I'm a 41 year old female and the Boy Scouts won't let ME join. Maybe I can sue.

[dead]

Atheist expects Boy Scouts to change

They're praying for it.

[Steve_Seattle]

About 25 years ago I had occasion to visit one of the local YWCA's in Seattle. I was surprised to see that it had been taken over by militant feminists and atheists who used the facility to promote left-wing political causes such as legalized abortion and "gay rights." There was no longer anything even remotely Christian about the YWCA. Anyone who thinks that the Scouts' positions on atheism and homosexuality are unimportant side-issues should consider the fate of that YWCA. There is no such thing as "neutrality" on moral issues, and if the Scouts abandon their principles, however silly those principles may seem to outsiders, they will be replaced by other principles, and those principles would make the founders roll over in their graves. The organization will be utterly transformed.

[Consort]

The Boy Scouts are cutting their own throats. They are shortsighted and self destructive. Stupid good people are..........stupid.

[judgeandjury]

"Legally, (the Scouts) have a right to discriminate," Lambert said at a presentation on the issue yesterday. "Morally, they don't.

That's kind of like saying that I legally have the right to live in a big expensive mansion, but morally I don't.

[Britton J Wingfield]

I'm am agnostic and a former Scout. I wouldn't expect them to change to accommodate me if I decided to get back into scouting. They have their critera and the right to associate with like-minded people. This guy should join some other organization that doesn't have a theological component, or start his own. Christians have done so with groups like the Royal Rangers, and both sides were happy.

OR, he could have just kept his trap shut in the first place.

[hsmomx3]

They always expect others to change for them. Why the heck can't these people start their own groups?

[MEGoody]

My 'public opinion' of Mr. Lambert - he is a liar and a fraud. After all, he pledged innumerable times to do his duty to God.

[Bommer]

"Legally, (the Scouts) have a right to discriminate," Lambert said at a presentation on the issue yesterday. "Morally, they don't. That's what I'm fighting. They can't teach good citizenship and practice bad citizenship."

What about lying? What about reciting an oath to swear duty to God? How can a liar be morally straight?

On my honor, I will do my best, To do my duty to God,and my country and to obey the Scout Law. To help other people at all times. To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[Terriergal]

"I, personally, have not imposed my beliefs on other Scouts and ask only to be given the same consideration in return.

Umm... but... isn't that exactly what he's doing?

[nmh]

All we have here is a disgruntled scout, who knew up front that the B.S.A. didn't suit him and be wants to change the organization to suit his agenda.

I give the G.S.A. nothing. I donate heavily to the B.S.A.. I discriminate when it comes to where my money goes.

[ZULU]

Why don't these people go off and start their own groups, like The Godless Scouts of America" or the "Pansy Boys", and leave this oranization alone??

Persoanlly I'm sick and tired of fags and atheists using the shield of public tolerance as a battering ram for public endorsement.

[happygrl]

BUMP!

[lavaroise]

There has to be a line drawn with respect to homosexuality somewhere, just as anyone will draw the line with behaviors, something homosexuals do so crudely and cruely in the first place in their evil organizations. Atheists should be the ones most appalled by homosexuality, a deviant racist secular behavior in the first place, based on sexual preferences and stereotypes, not on behaviors. The inability to figure that man and woman are truly one and thus truly equal when in union is the type of thing an Atheist should seek out.

That said, from a religious point of view, I am sure Christians and boyscouts would be the first ones to help a homosexual in need or sick ... not the thing that homos would do necessarily to other homos or other "traditional" people (homosexuality is a human tradition that has been abolished by Judeo-Christianity, after all) ... After all, it is not the Boy Scout's goal to dump the baby with the bathwater, and that is why true charity and goodness is not synonymous with accepting homosexuals in one's midst as responsible equals, the stance of homosexual leaders as guides is much worse than their behaviors in fact.

[Tailgunner Joe]

"There is not god but Castro,
and Chavez is his prophet."