gftChris Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Well Steve showered with his master, so clearly YOU'RE WRONG! I wasn't trying to say anyone was right or wrong - I may disagree with either the argument or the way it's presented, but that's not the point, I'm just trying to give my views, since I do have some exposure to this kind of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 I gave a real world example, you can believe it or not, Renfield. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 I gave a real world example, you can believe it or not, Renfield. WSS Not sure who that's aimed at... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 I wasn't trying to say anyone was right or wrong - I may disagree with either the argument or the way it's presented, but that's not the point, I'm just trying to give my views, since I do have some exposure to this kind of thing. Don't worry about Woody, Chris. He lives to get dog treats from Heck. I probably feel the same way you do. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Not sure who that's aimed at... That was aimed at the wood man, Chris. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Heck threw woody a bone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Oh yes, how dare I agree with someone that isn't you guys... Point is he posted his thought out answer, with his more relevant real world connection, and now we're waiting to hear from others on here why there incorrect as well. If I came on here and started spewing all of the anti Obama/liberal hate speech you see on here I'd have Cal calling me "wise for my age" and shit like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 There is perhaps nothing more comical on this board than listening to the 7-8 Republicans post untold amounts of bullshit, never call each other on it, even though it's almost always nonsense, but then when Woody and I agree that's somehow strange. You guys are hysterically blind to your own partisanship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 And Steve, the question was this. Of course, I don't expect you to admit that your scenario and fears are based on a false premise, but it's always helpful to point it out anyway - that you're incapable of admitting you're wrong. You can't even stipulate the basic facts, like "Scoutmasters do not get naked and shower with the Scouts." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 And thanks for the story, Chris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Also, now that you know your main fear, the showering with the Scouts, is not a valid reason on which to base your opinion that we shouldn't have gay Scoutsmasters, what other reason(s) are you giving to oppose allowing gay men to be Scoutmasters? You didn't answer that one either. You tried to take us into one of your old "I'm the smartest guy at this bar full of losers" discussions about whether pedophilia is an arbitrary human construct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 again with the smartest guy in a bar full of losers. Great work (I hope that's not the one you got the award for) But I'm happy to be the smartest guy in a room full of, well people like you. you guys brought up the pedofile aspect. my point was having adults who are sexually attracted to their younger charges.as in a case of a man and cheerleaders 14 15 16 17 years oldI think that anyone would or should understand. and whether that adult actually gets butt naked with the kids or just observes in cases of you know safety and all...... maybe I should have phrased it as in a gay priest watching 14 and 15 year old boys so you anti religious assholes could blow a gasket over that.but I don't expect you to do anymore then make shit up or feign (or simply demonstrate) ignorance. and since that situation would probably at least be somewhat troubling to most parents I put you in the lunatic fringe left. Understand? I know it's really simple enough for you to understand but... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 By the way if this is your question I have no objections to homosexuals as scoutmasters. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 Yes, Steve, everyone is wowed by your brilliance. I don't know know whether it's the lousy grammar or points that go nowhere or the logical fallacies you routinely employ, or the inability to see any amount of complexity, but it sure stands out. But yes, I have enjoyed the years of you calling me humorless while taking calls from people who want to employ me to write their stand up, their monologue jokes, the comedy portion of their speeches, their live TV appearances. I mean, when I say you're wrong all the time you're literally wrong all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 5, 2013 Report Share Posted June 5, 2013 And this isn't even the Scoutmasters. This is just "no gay kids in Scouting." http://news.yahoo.com/churches-split-scouts-welcoming-gay-youth-192048337.html Lovely people, just doing God's work, which is discriminating against gay kids. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Yes, Steve, everyone is wowed by your brilliance. I don't know know whether it's the lousy grammar or points that go nowhere or the logical fallacies you routinely employ, or the inability to see any amount of complexity, but it sure stands out. But yes, I have enjoyed the years of you calling me humorless while taking calls from people who want to employ me to write their stand up, their monologue jokes, the comedy portion of their speeches, their live TV appearances. I mean, when I say you're wrong all the time you're literally wrong all the time. Don't get me wrong heck. I have no doubt you are top writer.Your style of writing is professional and clear even here on the board. but, like many talented and amusing people, take for instance Barbra Streisand and Al Franken you mostly come off as angry and bitter. I give you the benefit of the doubt that its just here in the political vacuum that triggers the dour persona. One thing I actually can't figure out exactly is whether it's your ideology or the fact you can't stand being contradicted. Seems like you'll take the opposite side of an argument just because it's the opposite side sometimes. But you do tend to form at the mouth over the most innocuous tthings. So either you are writing in character or you are a lunatic. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 I don't think its that he can't stand someone with an opposite opinion. I think its that he gets frustrated by trying to debate someone that argues in circles, moves all over the place and generally does little to support their side or even give straight answers to questions without asking a dozen of their own. I mean that would frustrate anyone. I also think its funny you think he comes off as angry and bitter, especially with some of the other posters on here (I don't think you're bitter though Steve). Really the last days of posts on here have been hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 And this isn't even the Scoutmasters. This is just "no gay kids in Scouting." http://news.yahoo.com/churches-split-scouts-welcoming-gay-youth-192048337.html Lovely people, just doing God's work, which is discriminating against gay kids. Right? Remember where Jesus hated on queers and moslems? me too. In related news, this isn't the onion http://www.thedailydolt.com/2013/06/01/vatican-bishop-mario-toso-intolerance-in-the-name-of-tolerance/ The Vatican's Secretariat of State tweeted: Intolerance against Christians, especially in the name of “tolerance”, should be condemned publicly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Woody without me being snarky let me say that I would think that each of the posters on the board has their own thing. I understand that he might yell at me because he's angry at Cal or die hard. And I know sometimes I give him crap for something that Rachel madow or some other left wing loon says. ( Even though he most often agrees) Still I don't think I avoid answering a straight question, did you have one? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Gee Imagine that sight condemning the Vatican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Well, I know you guys just spent a couple of pages going around in circles about scout masters showering with kids... Oh, and lol @ religion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Well, I know you guys just spent a couple of pages going around in circles about scout masters showering with kids... Oh, and lol @ religion that's a question? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 So it seems now you've admitted they don't shower with the kids, without admitting you were wrong. I'll take it. But now they're being "supervised in the shower by a gay teacher." And you imagine you might work in a job where you supervise cheerleaders showering. This is cracking me up. Again, these situations are never permitted, and are not my concerns. You'd get fired and possibly arrested for doing what you describe. So you can stop freaking out about the showering, man. They don't need to take a shower to be molested. But I can see that you find the prospect of a gay person anywhere near a child who might have to take a shower frightening. Got it. I do not. You're basically saying that gay people are not fit to ever be in a role of parental responsibility. But they are parents, teachers, coaches, Scout leaders, etc. They perform these functions just fine. In the same way I wouldn't care when a man who coaches a girls soccer team takes them on a trip to a tournament, I don't get automatically mad if a gay Scout leader takes his troop into the woods. I think it's normal for any parent to worry about what happens to their children when they're not there, and in the care of someone else. But this idea you have, which you keep posting, equating homosexuality with pedophilia, and gays with NAMBLA members, to me is just ignorance. Again, I'd worry more about the nominally heterosexual man who keeps his sexual issues to himself and hasn't come to terms with his sexuality than the openly gay man who has. The former strikes me as potentially dangerous. The latter does not. There's nothing specific about homosexuality that makes them more dangerous to me than heterosexuals. Worrying about pedophila in Scouting is an obvious concern. It's a concern with coaches, teachers, just about anyone you leave your kids with. That's what you do as a parent - you shit yourself with worry on a daily basis. And after all this you still purposely misrepresent the point. The point is not molestation. the point is not pedophilia. the point is that someone might be looking at young teens in a lustful manner. A heterosexual man looking at 14 - 16 year old nude girls. Or a gay adult looking at the same age group young man. I can't tell if you think that would be a valid parental concern. It seems as if you do but you just can't say so. But I shouldn't have even repeated it since it's been said time and time again. I guess you'll spin it some other way once more. But I think anyone else would understand even if you wont. WSS WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 that's a question? WSS I suppose the question he's referring to is the one along the lines of "given that there are procedures in place that would prevent any adults showering with any children, and assuming those procedures are effective, do you have any remaining objections to homosexuals being allowed in the scouting movement at any level?" I'm not sure there was ever an answer to that question, though I may have skimmed over it, admittedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 By the way if this is your question I have no objections to homosexuals as scoutmasters. WSS Chris this is my exact quote, cut and pasted. I don't know why its so confusing. Let me know if I can zero in any more clearly. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 Chris this is my exact quote, cut and pasted. I don't know why its so confusing. Let me know if I can zero in any more clearly. WSS Didn't see that. Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 no problem sir. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 I suppose in an ideal world we'd get a response to the same question from the other guys who were against the policy on here as well, but that may be wishful thinking I think the point is, it's impossible to stop a man having lustful thoughts about a nubile 16 year old girl. You could see her in a bar, think she's 21, take her home and then get arrested for it, if you're a bit naive like that. But then again, you see so many 16 year old singers, actresses etc whose sexuality is exploited for the sake of sales - think Selena Gomes, Miley Cyrus, Hilary Duff etc. If that's the problem people have - regardless of the genders involved - then I suppose we should shut down any establishment where the two groups of people could come together, including scouts, guides, peewee sports teams, schools etc. If the problem is specifically that they don't want a *man* to be eyeing up a *boy* rather than a girl, then we're back on to the homophobia business again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 that's a question? WSS I'm Ron Burgundy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted June 6, 2013 Report Share Posted June 6, 2013 One thing I actually can't figure out exactly is whether it's your ideology or the fact you can't stand being contradicted. Seems like you'll take the opposite side of an argument just because it's the opposite side sometimes. But you do tend to form at the mouth over the most innocuous tthings. So either you are writing in character or you are a lunatic. WSS Ah, and back to the black and white world. Of course, I'm neither writing in character or a lunatic, but apparently you find anything to the left of center difficult to process, or to even accept that it exists, and this type of framing helps you. Trust me, I get it. It's been years of this. I get it. But you can't be serious. This is more classic up-is-downism from you. All I've done in this thread is argued that gay Scoutleaders pose no specific threat to Scouts and should be allowed, and that your fears are unfounded and are no rational argument against gay Scoutmasters. Because that's what the thread is discussing. You've taken it on 10 different tangents, from your showering false premise, to never admitting that Scoutsmasters don't actually shower with the kids, to pedophilia and "non-practicing pedophilia", then a side about different cultures and sexual norms, and there's Vapor saying this is the dumbest thread in recent history, and Woody telling you to stop talking in circles and avoiding questions, and me asking you to stop talking in circles and avoiding questions, and Vapor wondering what it is you're on about, to more of your suggestions about the threat that gay Scoutmasters pose, all so you can then say ..."I have no objections to homosexuals as scoutmasters." And then you actually type this to me: "Seems like you'll take the opposite side of an argument just because it's the opposite side sometimes." Hahahaha! Come on, man. Are you serious? You can't be serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.