Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > March > 14 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USWhen reporters ask, don’t tell
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Two prominent Marines are holed up, battling an onslaught of media and interest group criticism over remarks that offended them. One Marine, former U.S. Sen. Zell Miller, declared at a fund-raiser in Macon recently that many of the nation’s problems with the military manpower shortage and Social Security were brought about by abortion. Aborting 45 million babies denied the country the workers, soldiers and Social Security tax payers the country needed, he said.
But the real brouhaha was launched by the chairman of the military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, Peter Pace, a Marine General. What he said in an interview with the Chicago Tribune has been widely reported by now. “I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts,”said Pace. “I do not believe that the armed forces of the United States are well served by saying through our policies that it’s OK to be immoral in any way.” He also threw adultery into that category and noted that the military does not tolerate it when, as with homosexuality, it becomes public.
Actually, the Pace story should be over by now. He acknowledged, as did his superiors, that he should have stuck to defense of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy and kept his personal opinions largely to himself. But alas, the story is not likely to go away for awhile because these days agenda-groups sit poised ready to use any marketing opportunity to advance their interests, as has been the case with organizations like the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which opposes the nation’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
Hold tight, General. Marine Zell is bringing reinforcements.
Comments
By time for the truth
March 14, 2007 1:45 PM | Link to this
General Pace is absolutely correct poofs and queers in the military are wholly unacceptable … bringing to mind the old essentially factual joke about the homosexual French Army soldier who would never leave his buddies behind!!
By time for the truth
March 14, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this
General Pace is absolutely correct poofs and queers in the military are wholly unacceptable … bringing to mind the old essentially factual joke about the homosexual French Army soldier who would never leave his buddies’ behind!!
By Barbara
March 14, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
I applaud leaders who are willing to take a stand on issues that have caused a moral decay in our society. If only there were more who were willing to risk the public wrath in order to stand up for their beliefs (and the beliefs held by many others).
By Redneck Convert
March 14, 2007 1:55 PM | Link to this
Well, all I got to say is it is a good thing the gays wasn’t let in to the military back when I served. We didn’t have no private showers back in them days. A gay man coulda looked at my body and lusted after me without me even knowing it. I coulda been used in somebodys mind all the time. Kinda like a stripper.
I got a call from the Revrend Bubba Scoggins down at the Church of Holiness last nite. He says he got a good letter from the Revrend Jim Bob Buice down at the state prison in Jackson. The Revrend Jim Bob says he is getting along good thanks to a cell mate named Bubba. Bubba looks after him while hes doing his time for being caught nekkid while trying to rescue that nekkid boy in the bushes. He says he gets lots of cigarettes and extra food but his butt is kinda sore. I guess from piles or something.
Old Zell hit the nail on the head. If we had all them boys and girls that was aborted we could send them all to Iraq to fight with the Sunnys and S**ts. Maybe then we wouldn’t need to send back boys that have brain injurys and ain’t fit to fight like we do now. Soon as the babys come out we could put them in uniforms and ship them on over with little guns lite enough for them to carry. If they got kilt we could save a lot of tax money by putting 2 or 3 in one coffin. Course, it would be bad for the coffin bizness. It would also cut down on Those People cause they are the ones that has all the illegal babys.
I was sorry to see yesterday that TFTT wants me dead and my beer truck too. That’s a person with mind troubles for you. My poor old beer truck never done nothing to him but he wants it kilt too.
I was telling my buddy Jim Earl last nite this Thompson guy is going to be the next president cause hes got jbmlaw behind him. Everybody in the country knows jbmlaw and if he puts his weight behind the guy hes as good as elected. Leastwise thats what jbmlaw says.
By getalife
March 14, 2007 1:55 PM | Link to this
Of course, it is all the aborted babies fault.
zig zag zell’s comment is ignorant like “devil broom”.
Geez.
By time for the truth
March 14, 2007 2:01 PM | Link to this
I am real happy to see that inbred rednekkk takes witty amusing banter on a let’s endlessly sneer at the worthless lefties blog so seriously!! Makes you almost want to thank Allaaaaaaaaargh for generously allowing congenital moronic RACIST scum like inbred access to an 8th grade education!!
By jbmlaw
March 14, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this
Good afternoon all. Heaven help us if our country now requires “sensitivity” in our military commanders. In all fairness I have never known a homosexual who was not a pretty good fellow, and I think they could be helpful to our military. Having said that, I am also glad to see someone/anyone in the public eye who is willing to talk honestly. I suspect Gen. Pace’s comments were cleverly structured to stimulate enlistments, at least for the Marines. My guess is it will work.
As to Gov. Zell’s observations, I respectfully disagree. Realistically, those babies that were executed from 1973-1988 mostly were not the aborted children of conservatives or patriots, so their potential contributions to military preparedness and to the workforce were de minimis anyway.
Always interesting, Camille Paglia’s latest survey of the world is published at http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/03/14/coulter/?source=whitelist Our most conservative friends – e.g., Tom Tancredo supporters – may wish to avoid Paglia.
Dr. Sowell supports Mr. Newt. I would vote for Newt, or Mitt, or even Rudy, but I’ll stay with Fred Thompson for now, hoping he will get in the race. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2007/03/14/isnewtgingrich_back
By getalife
March 14, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this
Cynthia Tucker has a blog up for Sunday liqour sales
By Curious Observer
March 14, 2007 2:37 PM | Link to this
I don’t know what else anyone would expect General Pace to say. He is the product of a totally homophobic culture. I know that when I was on active duty in the Marine Corps we were taught that the lowest form of life was a homosexual. Forget that “Hate the sin, but love the sinner” BS. There was no distinguishing the person from the act.
General Pace entered the Corps at a time when that view was still prevalent. And now he’s expected to apologize to gays for repeating what he’s been taught most of his military career?
Let’s remember that the military was forced to accept gays under the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. And while I no longer adopt his attitude toward homosexuals and the military, I understand where he’s coming from. Those who’ve never stood in an open shower area with twenty other naked men or sat on one commode among eight with absolutely no privacy barriers need to understand that not everybody has lived a tolerant, pampered life.
By jm
March 14, 2007 2:37 PM | Link to this
Maybe old Zig Zag is on to something, since economics (cannot afford the child) is cited as the reason for the abortion about 25% of the time (that alone is a sad commentary on our society) and military recruiters tend to draw heavily from rural (often poor) areas of the country.
Of course, when military service is ridiculed as in the cases of Sen. Kerry, former Vice President Gore (and what the heck, former Vice President Quayle) and President Bush (he was in the Guard, what he did there …), why would anyone even consider going into the military.
As for General Pace’s comments, since the army has resorted to call ups, lowering admission standards, extending enlistments to maintain troop levels, not to mention blatant abuse of National Guard troops in terms of deployments, he is in no position to be dismissing capable individuals willing to serve. Contrary to what some people might believe, there is no connection between sexual orientation and patriotism.
By Brian Curtis
March 14, 2007 2:49 PM | Link to this
Zell’s comments were—of course—inane and meaningless.
But Pace has directly insulted the thousands of active-duty soldiers who are gay, and are still doing their jobs despite the (gasp!) immorality of it all. Never a smart move for a commander.
I can’t wait to hear from the support-the-troops crowd that there’s now a special exception: “We don’t have to support the gay ones… their service and sacrifice doesn’t count.” C’mon, Religious Reich zealots, you know you wanna! Condemn those gay soldiers already!
By CJ
March 14, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this
I know a gay man who said that if he could take a pill to be straight, he would. A lesbian made it clear to me that she didn’t choose her sexual orientation and would not have chosen to be gay if given the choice.
Gay or straight, we can’t choose our sexual orientation any more than we can choose our skin color. It’s disgraceful that the Jim Wooten’s and Peter Pace’s of the world gleefully fight to maintain a culture that labels some as inferior or immoral for characteristics entirely outside their control.
Jim’s correct about interest groups criticizing Pace. They include average citizens like me, not affiliated with any organization, who are interested in giving homosexuals and homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexuals and heterosexual couples –- no employment discrimination for sexual orientation, legal recognition of marriages, access to spousal benefits for married couples, the honor of being able to serve openly in our armed forces. It’s time.
By Barbara
March 14, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this
CJ, so I guess if someone is born with the desire to molest young children we should accept that too???? Or what about those people who are born with the desire to have sex with animals? They should be excused too, huh? If we go by what you are saying then we should just excuse anyone who is born with the desire to do anything they want; right?
People can be friends with people of the same gender without having sex with them. You can even love someone of the same gender without having sex with them. The offending act is the intentional sexual promiscuity between two people of the same gender. There are plenty of straight men and women out there, in married relationships, that are tempted to have sex with someone other than their husband or wife, but they resist, because it is wrong. It is morally wrong to have sex with someone of the same gender. Humans have the capacity not to act on every un-natural desire. That is what separates us from animals.
By deegee
March 14, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this
If Zell keeps that up people are going to be talking about him the way they talk about Jimmy Carter and Ted Turner. Maybe they already do…
By harold
March 14, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this
if somebody is stupid enough to join the military voluntarily harold doesnt care so much what happens to them after that
can we buy beer and wine in grocery stores on sundays yet????
By Junior
March 14, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this
I wonder why Jim didn’t come to the defense of U.S. sailor John Kerry when he was “battling on onslaught of media and interest group criticism” over a botched joke??? Where was he when Republicans ran advertisements of U.S. soldier Max Cleland’s likeness along with those of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden? I know Wooten used to be in the Army. So, why does he defend marines against “onslaughts” of criticism, but leave soldiers and sailors to fend for themselves?
In fact, we all know that Jim and his fellow Republican apologists only honor the military services of those who share their political point of view and deliberately seek to dishonor the services of those who don’t.
By Barbara
March 14, 2007 3:12 PM | Link to this
CJ, that’s just an excuse. I guess we should also excuse people who molest young children because that’s their orientation too? And how about people who were born with the desire to have sex with animals? Should they be excused too, because they were “born that way”? The difference is that humans have the ability to walk away from temptation and immoral behavior. That’s what makes us different than animals.
By LMAO
March 14, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this
“…he also threw adultery into the category.”
Really? You mean adultery has a “don’t ask don’t tell” provision? A soldier can’t divorce? A divorced soldier can’t join? A man can’t enlist if he ever had a mistress?
How about an adulterer with 3 divorces? Can Newt become the Commander in chief or is he disqualified? How about Rudy? Do these immoral people get waivers?
Are gays even more of an enemy than fighting the “islamo-facist terrorists”? Isn’t our “freedom” at stake? Freedom?
By Jack
March 14, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this
Hey Junior, Max sold himself out to the unions. That is why he lost. Get over it.
By Gus
March 14, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this
Barbara compares consenting gay adults with child molestors and bestiality. If she can’t tell the difference, then God help her.
By Captain Freedom
March 14, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this
The Captain arrives to sadly, decry the slippery relativism expressed by his dear friend Barbara, when she writes “then we should just excuse anyone who is born with the desire to do anything they want”.
How wrong you are, B my dearest…for if that were true, then you and I would be entwined under in the shade of a tropical tree, a well-muscled cabana boy applying sunscreen to my back while you gaze on adoringly. But that would by an affront to Mrs Freedom and Mr Barbara, to whom we have pledged our respective troth. So no, we deny our love that dare not speak its name. And so should those Nancy boys and carpet cleaners who know nothing of suffering and self-denial.
People who have sex with dogs (known colloquially and “doing the Santorum”) or box turtles (“getting the Cornyn”) make a mockery of those of us who cannot even express affection for those we see across a crowded room at Starbucks. I must be satisfied with gazing at you from afar, as you get your double-skim mocha latte, as you shop for groceries, and use the ATM, and have your nails done, and as you close your garage door with an insouciant flick of the finger, your lovely ankle descending from the doorway of your powerful and iversized SUV, made all the more compelling by your petite and delicate frame.
pause
I’m back.
Oh, yeah, I’m with the noble jbmlaw. Fred Thompson for President. Anything to get him off of Law and Order.
By Junior
March 14, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this
Hey Jack, You changed the subject. That’s why you’re an idiot. Get over it.
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
March 14, 2007 3:28 PM | Link to this
Hi Jim,
One quick comment then I’m off to Vegas for the weekend. You know, gamblin’ and drinkin’ and all those other godless vices. I’m sure there won’t be any Republicans out there.
Anywho, aside from Zell’s ridiculous remarks about abortion, I agree with your premise. Things do get blown out of proportion by the media.
But, aren’t the media just a function of capitalism? Aren’t they just givin’ us what we want? Sensational stuff? Crazy comments by people of some authority? T and A? Britney, Paris and politicians with feet in their mouths?
Sure they are. It’s how they make money. By attracting attention. By going to the lowest common denominator.
But funny thing is, you never seem to mind when the media and the GOP jump all over Democrats when they flub. But you and your compadres get pretty flustered when the reverse happens to you.
Why is that?
And btw, that comment by Zell. Crazy. I used to like him, but he’s crazy. The man is crazy.
The us armed forces are struggling for enlistees for two reasons: 1. the pay sucks and the job market is working. 2. your buddy gw is sending them to an unecessarily stressful and risky job in a godforsaken place for no apparent reason.
Abortion has nothing to do with it.
If a democrat said that, you’d be on it like a politician on a bribe.
By LMAO
March 14, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this
Barbara’s comments are typical. Remember a few years back John Smoltz was using the same arguments?
Well guess what happened? Smoltzie gave himself one of those waivers that are so common among “moral” right wing christians. He got divorced.
Yep, Smoltz must of been carrying one of those “get out of sin for free” cards. If you call yourself a moral Christian anything can be forgiven. What a wonderful fantasy!!!
Of course we’ll just pretend that Jesus didn’t call divorce an abomination. We’ll just pretend he said it about gays instead.
By Clay
March 14, 2007 3:36 PM | Link to this
Barbara at 3:12,
I’ll tell you what makes us different from the animals. The ability to reason — at least I used to think so until I read your post.
By Captain Freedom
March 14, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
LMAO,
Yours is a cheap shot. Smoltzie has a wicked fastball and is a terrific competitor who glorifies God every time he wins a game. Conversely, he brings shame upon the Lord whenever he loses. His divorce was in service to his Mission.
Most likely, his strumpet of a wife (and I saw the pictures of her, and they just SCREAM S - E - X -XXX) was tempting his Godly manliness to fornicate without the intention to procreate, which as we know is not only sinful…it also weakens the man’s legs to waste his seed, and Smoltz needs those legs to glorify God through his fastball.
If you were not such a heathen waste of protoplasm, you stinky liberal pantywaist bedwetter, you would know this.
By Redneck Convert
March 14, 2007 3:52 PM | Link to this
I can’t stand this librul making my hero John Smoltz look bad. Smoltzie was going to start a good Christian school where they would play Holy Baseball and Holy Football. If they was losing they was going to fall on their knees and pray hard for a win.
Besides, Mrs. Smoltz was getting on in years and everybody got to trade for a new model oncet in a while. You don’t drive the same car you bought ten years ago do you? So just shut up your librul mouth.
By Jeff
March 14, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this
Y’all,
Let’s remember that this is the same US Military that can give you a Big Chicken Dinner (Bad Conduct Discharge) if you get too far into debt. Excluding gays because homosexuality is immoral is perfectly acceptable when you look at just how strict the UCMJ really can be in ALL areas of life.
By time for the truth
March 14, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this
all praise due to Allaaaaaargh for General Pace’s valiant comments regarding effete poofs in the military. The glorious opining by our illustrious general shall serve well to emphatically prohibit the leftist wankers L\Cpl. Syphillis and imbred rednekkk from enlisting!!
One wonders why these two pathetic feckpigs don’t sod off to VT or Assachusetts where they can disgustingly proclaim their love and dedication to one another in an ever so affectionate and erudite manner of course!!SMIRK
By time for the truth
March 14, 2007 4:00 PM | Link to this
all praise due to Allaaaaaargh for General Pace’s valiant comments regarding effete poofs in the military. The glorious opining by our illustrious general shall serve well to emphatically prohibit the leftist wankers L\Cpl. Syphillis and imbred rednekkk from enlisting!!
One wonders why these two pathetic feckpigs don’t sod off to VT or Assachusetts where they can disgustingly proclaim their love and dedication to one another in an ever so affectionate and erudite manner of course!!SMIRK
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this
TFTT,
Doom won’t be here for long. If that btch getalife shows up, tell him I said his mother overdosed on hyena cm.
By LMAO
March 14, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this
You can get discharged for being in debt? How many times has that happened in the last 4 years?
You can JOIN the army now despite moral lapses such as aggravated assault, burglary, and robbery.
The number of waivers granted to Army recruits with criminal backgrounds has grown about 65 percent in the last three years, increasing to 8,129 in 2006 from 4,918 in 2003, Department of Defense records show.
Ya, sure they will. Sure they will kick you out for a bad debt. If it was only aggravated assault you would be in the clear.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this
TFTT,
Doom won’t be here for long. If that btch getalife shows up, tell him I said his mother overdosed on hyena cm.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 4:10 PM | Link to this
LMAO,
Did you say discharge? You inappropriate choice of words leaves Doom thinking whether his 6 o clock glory hole appointment is worth it. Damn you LMAO!!!
By RC
March 14, 2007 4:11 PM | Link to this
How does having a moral issue with something make you a phobic? Do you even know the definition of a phobia?
Phobia: a persistent, irrational fear of a specific object, activity, or situation that leads to a compelling desire to avoid it
I think homosexuality is immoral. I also think murder is immoral. Does that make me irrational? No, it does not.
If liberals can’t criminalize behaviors and beliefs that contradict their own, then they try to make any such disagreements the product of a diseased mind.
Stalin and Hitler would be proud.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 4:12 PM | Link to this
LMAO,
That was not Doom at 4:10. I don’t even know you.
By LMAO
March 14, 2007 4:14 PM | Link to this
Johnny Recruit: You mean I can’t enlist because I have an outstanding debt?
Army Recruiter: Thats right. I suggest you rob a gas station, then pay off the debt. We’ll get you in real quick after that.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this
RC,
Doom completely agrees with you, which is the reason why I use the glory hole method. You can’t be a homo if you can’t see your partner. Not only is Doom powerful, but he is also a genius!
By K-Squared
March 14, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this
RC wrote, “If liberals can’t criminalize behaviors and beliefs that contradict their own, then they try to make any such disagreements the product of a diseased mind.”
That’s interesting because it’s liberals who are trying to de-criminalize behaviors (sodomy is illegal in many states and can get you kicked out of the military) and it’s “Right Thinkers” who are comparing homosexual acts to those of persons with “diseased minds” (child molestation and beastiality).
In short, RC is full of $hit.
By The F*ggot who is impersonating Doom
March 14, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this
I wish I had the courage to face Doom. I’m really not stupid enough to think that people actually believe that’s him, but the truth is, I’m lonely.
You see, I already spend my life in the closet so that’s how I blog: in the closet. Ever since my homosexual desires evolved into bestiality I’ve had trouble making and keeping friends. No one wants to hang out with someone who smells like dog’s a$$. So in order to compensate for that inconvenience, I have to covertly attack people such as Doom like the b*tch I am.
Anyway, goodbye for know, my neighbor’s cat and pig are outside the front door and I promised to set aside some time for a our weekly threesome today.
Thanks and sorry for the trouble Doom.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 4:38 PM | Link to this
getaf*inglife,
Doom must apologize.
Please don’t jack my name anymore.
You are the king of blogging.
Doom is in awe of your love handles.
By Keyboard Warrior
March 14, 2007 4:46 PM | Link to this
Barbara wrote, “I applaud leaders who are willing to take a stand on issues that have caused a moral decay in our society.”
I’m willing to take a stand on issues that have caused moral decay in our society — the hatred and bigotry of people like Barbara. Somebody needs to stand up to these hypocrites and bullies who glorify serial adulterers like Gingrich and Gulliani while comparing gays to child molesters and cow “pokes”.
You can applaud now.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this
You just told on yourself f*ckface. Doom wins.
By Shar
March 14, 2007 5:02 PM | Link to this
When I was 12 my family lived in New York City, where my dad taught law at NYU. One weekend each month, West Point cadets would get leave and stream into the City, where they would run amok - turning over cars, assaulting men and women, getting drunk and vomiting in the street, relieving themselves in public, and on and on. The police would do nothing, as these were our fine military boys who worked hard up at the Point and would someday serve our country bravely. This was the 60’s, and Greenwich Village was full of hippies, bikers, con artists, crazies, every kind of person you can imagine. We ALL looked out for the West Pointers.
One leave weekend, I took the family terrier and went out to get some milk that my mother needed. I rounded a corner and came upon a group of five cadets, already drunk. They threw me into a doorway, slapped me, ripped my shirt off, kicked and beat my dog when he tried to protect me. Their hands were everywhere. Two policemen were across the street watching. I was terrified.
Two gay men broke through the animals that had me. They took ineffectual swings at the cadets and screamed at me to run. To my shame, I picked up my bleeding dog and did just that. As I went back around the corner I looked back to see both of them being beaten. In all my years of growing up in NYC, those West Pointers were the only people I ever had to actually run from.
Barbara, child molesters are preying on someone else. Having sex with other consenting, caring adults is not wrong - forcing yourself on someone else is. The inability of the military to understand that is what led to Tailhook, to the pattern of rape and suppression of the victims at the Air Force Academy, to the arrogant, lawless cadets that were permitted to prey upon people like me because the military system taught them to use violence against others and they were unable to distinguish between enemies and everyone else. Maybe having openly gay men in the military would actually discourage those who believe that women who resist are a legitimate target for force (the murdered Iraqi 14 year old, the rash of spousal murders by returning soldiers). You can bet that gay naval cadets would not have instigated Tailhook or raped female Air Force cadets, and those two gay men were the only people willing to save a terrified and battered 12 year old that day.
Are all military people bad? NO. Are all gay people immoral? NO. Do I feel that gay people, male or female, are capable of ably, courageously protecting me? My experience proved that to me. Decay in our society stems from the ills that we do to each other - lies, neglect, oppression, and on and on. Not from love responsibly expressed between two consenting adults. That is what constitutes the foundation of our society. The only sexual orientation that is ANY of my business is my own and my husband’s. The only reason that anyone else’s would become germane is if they tried to impose their sexuality on me or others, including unwilling bunkmates male or female. Then they break the law. Responsible, able, law abiding citizens who want to defend their country should not only be allowed to do so, their service should be honored. I certainly honor those two guys who defied the crowd, took on almost impossible odds and fought for me.
By GodHatesTrash
March 14, 2007 5:07 PM | Link to this
The moral decay of our society is evidenced by the conception of the King of the Hillbillies - Zell “Snuffy Smith” Miller. His cousin/mother was raped by his father/grandfather. The moral depravity was compounded when no one had enough common sense to get an abortion or drown the infant Zell.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 5:19 PM | Link to this
The discharge comment by LMAO won’t deter the all-powerful Doom! I WILL go to my glory-hole appointment in Piedmont Park at 6 pm. Doom will finally have the roll of keymaster and will conquer all!
By Captain Freedom
March 14, 2007 5:20 PM | Link to this
In all seriousness, people should not pick on Zell. Watching a person succumb to senile dementia is not pretty, no matter who it is.
By Lord Doom
March 14, 2007 5:28 PM | Link to this
Only 30 minutes until Doom’s long awaited glory hole appointment. In just a half hour Doom will be the keymaster. All hail Doom!
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
March 14, 2007 5:39 PM | Link to this
Shar, thank you for telling your story.
You know, I never thought poofs like realisp, and shemales like Lady markanus and tfttommy could make it in the military, but I guess they would fit right in with the hyenas and jackals that attacked you.
So, guys, join up! You have the morals of gang rapists, and there is safety in being in the dogpack. Go boys - do your duty.
By Michael Silly Savage
March 14, 2007 5:53 PM | Link to this
Captain, if someone suckcums, is that a bad thing?
Thank you for your service. Like Andi and Markus, I love our men in uniform. I kneel before you.
By Jackie
March 14, 2007 5:58 PM | Link to this
When the Viet Nam conflict was going on and there was a draft no one was denied entry into the military and being sent to Viet Nam because of their sexual orientation. This foolishness about being in a foxhole with someone who is gay causes moral problems is pure BS. When you are being shot at, your first responsibility is to protect your position, i.e., yourself. Your gay fellow soldier does the same. When the battle is over, everyone tries to determine if he/she is in one piece so that they can continue to the next day. This rhetoric is pure BS, plain and simple.
By Barbara
March 14, 2007 5:58 PM | Link to this
Homosexuality is wrong. I never said I hated anyone for it. But it’s wrong. You can keep trying to make yourselves feel better by saying I’m the hater. Go ahead. Make yourselves feel better while I resort to honesty.
By Barbara's Donut Bumper
March 14, 2007 6:01 PM | Link to this
You never mentioned it being wrong at all when we were on that “camping trip” together. I can’t quit you Barbara!
By Barbara
March 15, 2007 8:44 AM | Link to this
Good morning Shar. I shot off a quick post late yesterday, mainly in response to the posters from earlier in the day, and my response really did not do justice as a reply to your thoughtful and courteous post. I would like to respond to you more comprehensively.
I understand your experience at 12 and how that could have shaped your opinion of homosexuals, but I respectfully submit to you that one experience does not mean that all homosexual men are chivalrous, and it also doesn’t mean that all military men are rapists. You are stereotyping too, when you state that the military teaches all soldiers to take what they want by force. That is not at all true.
But as for the subject at hand, which is the act of homosexuality, here is the reason I believe it is wrong. God created man in his image. He gave man a rule book to live by (the bible). In the rule book, God spells out certain things that man is not supposed to do. Homosexuality is one of those things. When mankind decides that he will do what he wants, instead of what God has directed, then man is saying that he places his own self over God. It is in our nature to do this, and we are all sinners. One of my biggest sins is holding grudges and not being able to forgive.
All of mankind struggle with sins of all types. None of us are perfect. There was only one perfect man, and we crucified him…… and we continue to do so every day that we sin. But when mankind continues to act in ways that are offensive to God, with callous disregard for the commands that God has given us, then he is committing an act of willful disobedience. That is homosexuality. We are to hold each other accountable in this world. We should love and support each other, but we should also be honest with each other. If we don’t help our brothers and sisters stay on the right path then we are not doing any more than helping to condemn them.
By DebbieDoRight
March 15, 2007 9:16 AM | Link to this
Wow Zell Miller said that?!? Well, if THAT doesn’t prove that he’s insane, nothing does!!
As for gays in the military, who cares? If someone is brave enough to serve in the military, be they gay or straight, it should be looked upon as a tribute of love for their country. Weapons can be fired by both straight and gay people; they have no agenda.
By DebbieDoRight
March 15, 2007 9:18 AM | Link to this
Wow Zell Miller said that?!? Well, if THAT doesn’t prove that he’s insane, nothing does!!
As for gays in the military, who cares? If someone is brave enough to serve in the military, be they gay or straight, it should be looked upon as a tribute of love for their country. Weapons can be fired by both straight and gay people; they have no agenda.
By DebbieDoRight
March 15, 2007 9:29 AM | Link to this
But when mankind continues to act in ways that are offensive to God, with callous disregard for the commands that God has given us, then he is committing an act of willful disobedience. That is homosexuality. We are to hold each other accountable in this world.
I thought there was a passage in the bible that said “Judge ye not, lest ye be judged”. Why not let GOD be the decider or “account holder” if you will, of a person’s morality and just worry about your own?
By DebbieDoRight
March 15, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this
But when mankind continues to act in ways that are offensive to God, with callous disregard for the commands that God has given us, then he is committing an act of willful disobedience. That is homosexuality. We are to hold each other accountable in this world.
I thought there was a passage in the bible that said “Judge ye not, lest ye be judged”. Why not let GOD be the decider or “account holder” if you will, of a person’s morality and just worry about your own?
By Barbara
March 15, 2007 9:34 AM | Link to this
Debbie, the problem with just worrying about my own, is that I have children that I am responsible for teaching. I must teach my children that it is wrong, and therefore I must be willing to say that it is wrong. You see, we are not here just for ourselves. Again, that is selfishness. We must be willing to step out for God…. And we suffer the consequences of folks who call us names and try to tear us down. But at the end of this day, I have not turned my back on what God entrusted to me, which is raising my children with the correct understanding of right and wrong, and showing them I believe it by being willing to say it, regardless of the consequences.
By LMAO
March 15, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this
Going off to war and killing people in an unprovoked war = MORAL and GODLY
Going off to war and killing people in an unprovoked war as a homosexual = IMMORAL and SINFUL.
Does that about sum it up Barbara?
By Shar
March 15, 2007 10:06 AM | Link to this
Barbara@8:44: Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response. Yes, you are quite right - the experience was formative, not just the attack but the ‘pass’ routinely given to the cadets as ‘boys being boys’ as well as the larger environment of Greenwich Village, having the entire spectrum of races, sexualities, ethnicities, stations of life and points of view. With so many differences living cheek by jowl, an individual’s public behavior - their respect for one another, compassion, sense of honor - was much more important to social operations than were their private, consensual choices.
Your Biblical points are well taken and clearly heartfelt. I fully respect your right to hold them, but I stumble over a couple of things - one, the inherent conflict with the Golden Rule and two, the rationale for having your personal religious convictions drive public, secular policy. The concept of the Golden Rule is fundamental to every major world religion, and it is one of the most difficult things to truly achieve. Like you, I have a lamentable tendancy to get frustrated with people who don’t do what I think is right instead of forgiving and respecting, and the dangers of that mode of thinking, when carried out on a political stage, are clear. Intense belief in the justness of one’s own point of view cuts off debate and can lead to the use of force in making dissenters (those who are ‘less enlightened’ or ‘heathen’ and therefore justifiable targets for correction) comply. God, Jesus, Muhammad, Confucius and Buddha all commanded a version of the Rule, and we’ve gotten in nothing but trouble by disobeying that command.
You also say that the Bible spells out specific rules for the conduct of life. Your choice to believe in their supremacy and to follow those precepts is yours alone. People who don’t believe in literal Bible interpretation (among whom I count myself) or those who don’t believe in the Bible at all are not subject to your beliefs. In America, thankfully, your right to hold those beliefs is as inalienable as another’s right not to. That is the crux of the rationale for the seperation of church and state. You are welcome to believe that homosexuality is wrong, and to choose not to practice it, but you are not empowered to force that belief on others. Using the power of the state to discriminate against homosexuals on the basis of religious convictions is contrary to America’s founding and uniting principals of “liberty and justice for all” and the supremacy of the rule of law. Experiential data from those military groups that welcome openly gay members does not reveal a loss of unit cohesion or any dereliction attributable to sexual preference. I therefore see no moral or practical objection to opening the services to openly gay men and women who are willing and able to serve their country, and I honor their desire to do so.
Thanks again for your earlier thoughtful post.
By Barbara
March 15, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this
Shar, your points are reasonable and well-thought out (as well as civil, which is a refreshing find on this blog…..) But I disagree with you on several points. Before I get into that, however, I must say that throwing Confucius in caused me quite the belly-laugh….. (Big grin!)
In the military, mainly in basic training, but also in encampments during war-times, all of the soldiers of the same sex take showers together. We wouldn’t allow men and women to shower together because a) we don’t want to make the subject of leering feel uncomfortable while vulneralbe and fully exposed in the shower; and b) that’s not the place for sexual activity, so the best way to avoid it is not to make it a temptation by putting folks of the opposite sex together.
Enter the homosexual into the picture. They are attracted to the same sex, so they could very well be checking out the other guys in the shower. Plus, if there is a like feeling from another shower participant, it could get rather steamy (and I’m not talking about hot water….) That’s not the place for it, and it’s not right to subject others to that kind of show either.
You may suggest then, that the military set up separate shower facilities for homosexuals. That’s not practical, and not cost efficient. Plus, if homosexuals now get their own showers, what about the men or women who are a little self-conscious and want their own showers? It can really get out of hand.
I think it’s important for me to tell you, too, that I support the “Don’t ask - don’t tell” policy. I’m fine with homosexuals in the military as long as they keep it to themselves and don’t do anything promiscuous in the general areas, such as showers, barracks, etc. I would not be uncomfortable in the shower if I didn’t know my shower-mates were enjoying the scenery…..
On to your comment about “liberty and justice for all”. I don’t think that our country, or our military are denying liberty or justice to homosexuals because they are not allowed in the military. When I was in the military I wanted to pursue a job in the bomb squad, but they told me that was a “red horse” field; men only. As a young female, that sort of made me mad, but I didn’t fight it; I just chose another field - electronics. It turned out to be a great choice for me. Some of the rules that are made for the military are for the protection, safety, or comfort of the masses. It’s not fair to the masses when we cater to the minority over something that many folks take very personally.
And a final thought on the Golden Rule, which I believe is “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. (We agree on that, right?) I would want my fellow brothers and sisters to hold me accountable when I stray from the path of right-living. And believe me, I do …… a lot. And fortunately for me I have a husband who doesn’t hesitate to point out my errors (ha-ha). But seriously, my friends do tell me that my thinking on a particular topic is wrong, or that my actions on a particular issue were wrong. That is true love for fellow man. As many good points as you make, you’re just not going to convince me that we shouldn’t try to steer our brothers and sisters back to the right track.
I am very much enjoying this conversation with you. Thanks for remaining civil.
LMAO, I know you are capable of civilized debate too. You and I had one last week. And you made some really good points in your arguements. Don’t stoop to angry words. I would love to hear your side, but I shut down when I’m hit with comments like those in your last post. Then we get nothing accomplished.
By LMAO
March 15, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this
These are the countries that allow gays to openly serve in the militay.
Argentina, Australia, Austria,The Bahamas, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, United Kingdom.
These are the countries that don’t allow gays to serve openly. (Russia does allow gays to serve during times of war.)
Brazil, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, North Korea, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United States of America, Venezuela, Yemen.
That’s some great company we are in!…Egypt, Iran, Syria, Yemen! All theology driven governments. Then we have Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea to boot!
I wonder how morale is in those countries that allow gays to serve. Must not be terrible because I haven’t heard of a country reverse their policy. I just can’t see Israel doing anything that would harm their military.
I wonder what is more important, having a man see another man naked or winning a war.
By JohnF
March 15, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this
Barbara, your ignorance of homosexuals is staggering. Contrary to your impression we are not all sex crazed maniacs that can’t distinguish non-sexual situations from others. I’m gay, I belong to a mostly gay gym…but guess what, there is no leering in the showers, no wild orgies, in fact most of us would find that quite tacky.
But you don’t need to worry about me corrupting the troops. The thought of putting my life on the line for people like you turns my stomach.
By JohnF
March 15, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this
One last thing. In some cultures (Feudal Japan, Greece, even Persia (now Iran))…homosexual relations were actually encouraged because those bonds between warriors were so strong that they were much more likely to die for each other.
By Barbara
March 15, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this
Thank you John, for making my point that not all homosexuals are chivalrous. And just to note, I put my life on the line for you when it was my time to serve, and I’d do it again. To each his own. Yeah, I’m the hater…….
By LMAO
March 15, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this
Come on Barbara, haven’t you encouraged TFTT many times in the past? Then you play the “civilized debate” card when you get some of it back? You started a lot of this when you compared the acceptance of homosexuality to animal sex.
By Jeff
March 15, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this
JohnF:
Gays can’t marry. Sex outside of marraige is adultery. Adultery is immoral. The military discourages/ prohibits ALL immoral behavior. End of discussion.
By LMAO
March 15, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this
So “End of Discussion Jeff”, do single straight soldiers on leave ever have sex? Since when was that discouraged?
Do they allow you in the military if you have ever been divorced?
You can rob a gas station and still get in the miltary. Aggravated Assault??? No problem. Burglary, Yep, you can still enlist.
Please End of Discussion Jeff, explain how those things are moral. I’ll wait for your answer.
By Barbara
March 15, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
LMAO, if you read all of my past posts, then you’ll also remember the one where I did tell TFTT that he goes too far sometimes. That is not my style, but his. He’s a big boy and can say what he wants. You may remember too, that he doesn’t agree with me on religious matters, but he has never attacked me. Why? Because I have never attacked him…..
As for homosexuality and animal sex, I do put them in the same category. It is the category of people gratifying themselves sexually in a way that goes against God’s teachings. When God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, he did not just destroy those who had sex with animals. He did not just destroy the fornicators, or the child molesters. He declared all of those, and homosexuality to be wrong and immoral. You may not agree with me, but in my opinion, they are all wrong and immoral.
By Shar
March 15, 2007 1:11 PM | Link to this
Thank you, Barbara, and the same right back to you. For some posters, and seemingly on this blog in particular, their anger eclipses their message, and becomes their primary communication rather than the point of view they are espousing. It doesn’t leave much room for an open mind or a change of opinion.
To your points: the shower argument reminds me strongly of the excuse that used to justify keeping women out of the executive suite, that our hormonal tides would wash us out on a sea of irrational hysteria every month and we therefore could not be trusted. Not every gay person, or for that matter every straight person, is swept by sexual cravings when in the company of naked people (have you ever been in the open dressing rooms at Loehmann’s? No gay woman has ever lost her composure in there!) any more than every woman bobs like a cork on her hormonal sea. I would be willing to bet big money that you, like I, have felt hormonally crummy more than a time or two, but that those around us have not been aware of it because we did not act upon it. Public and private behavior are two different things, and most of us (gay or straight) know that sexual attraction is reserved for consenting adults in private circumstances. If naked bodies of the gender of attraction were impossible to resist, most gynecologists would be EXHAUSTED!
I have to think that the shower issue has been addressed by the countries that LMAO listed. We can and should learn from their experience in what works, and implement it.
My mention of Confucious, and the others, was to point out that the greatest of spiritual thinkers agree and mandate that the Golden Rule (or “ethical reciprocity”) be followed. Where I disagree with you is on ‘steering our brothers and sisters back on the right track’. I struggle to find that track every day. Who am I to say that mine’s right, much less right for any one else? As an aunt of a former heroin addict and the sister-in-law of an alcoholic, I can firmly say that there is no point in steering anyone who is not willing to be steered. You support and love and then steer like heck if and when someone asks for direction.
Being held accountable, as the Bible commands, differs from trying to correct other people’s behavior. An example: My mother-in-law was raised by her grandparents in rural Alabama, and is a socially conservative woman. Her grandson, my nephew, has become engaged to a lovely half-Phillipina woman who has a half-black daughter from a previous marriage. My mother-in-law cannot accept it. She deeply believes that the woman is immoral, that her child is a travesty and humiliation, and when we tried to have family events at her home she was hideously cold and stiff to all three of them. She is alone in her feelings and is devastated that the rest of the family disagrees with her. I explained to her that she is entitled to believe anything she wants to and have anyone in - or out - of her home that she chooses, but she cannot make those choices for anyone else. We have stopped having family events with her and, sadly, her opinions and behavior have caused irreparable harm to my own children’s view of their grandmother. She is being held accountable, paying the price of her beliefs, but no one can or should tell her that she is not entitled to hold them.
You’re right, I do think that the military was wrong not to let you specialize as you chose, as long as you were able to do the work. I myself wanted to be in the NHL when I was growing up, and while I would have liked to consider myself the tragic victim of discrimination honor compells me to admit that I can’t skate and check and shoot like the men. I appreciate your service and I’m glad that you liked electronics, but you might have been even happier and more productive in the bomb squad. I believe that you should have had a chance to find out, particularly as that group operates on tax money that is collected whether you are male, female, gay, straight, etc. Liberty and justice indeed.
I’m off for the day - enjoy yours!
By Barbara
March 15, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this
Shar, I hope you’re off to do something fun! I look forward to debating other items with you in the future. Until then, my friend…..