His “we” doesn’t include me.
Of gays,marijuana laws and Perriello
It is clear that open homosexuality in our military will bring a reproach to our fighting force. It is also well-known that the homosexual movement has a far-reaching agenda and we are only aiding them in achieving their perverted goals by approving them for active military duty.
Clear to who? Riiiiiiight.
“Brother” Chad Branch is the pastor at Victory Baptist Church. How quaint.
The Reverend’s letter to the editor could have focused on only ONE of these controversial issues, so that the small-minded of us can keep up.
Is homosexuality a “movement”?
There’s a great scene from the TV show The West Wing where the black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is asked if he thinks gays in the military would be disruptive, and he says something to the effect of “I do. The problem with that is that what they were saying to me 50 years ago. Blacks shouldn’t serve with Whites. It would disrupt the unit. You know what? It did disrupt the unit. The unit got over it. The unit changed.”
The “Reverend” might not like change, but something like 70% of the country thinks gay Arabic translators shouldn’t be dismissed in a time of war. Count me among them.
It is OK that you disagree with the Reverend, Bruce.
I am sure he does just fine without you agreeing.
😉
Chris, discrimination and rules based on skin color is vastly different from rules and discrimination based on behavior choices. the military routinely and as a part of its mission sets rules to control behavior in their ranks.
In all fairness….there is no comparison in the “black’s cannot serve with whites” and this issue.
tarheel: all Biblical dictates aside, is homosexuality something that is preventable/decidable?
if it is a condition over which the individual has no control, then we, as a society gets to decide what we want to do about it. Do we want to put gays in prison like people with other uncontrollable issues: like pedophiles? This seems unjustified.
I don’t know the answer here. I guess I’m just stirring the pot.
but I think homophobia is the movement, not homosexuality.
Tarheel, only people obsessed with sex and that of others would think that homosexuals would need to be “controlled” while in the military. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell doesn’t discriminate based on behavior, it discriminates based on identity. Ban behavior all you want, but DADT prevents patriots from serving, it discriminates against men and women in the military, and, IMHO, weakens national security when, for example, Arabic translators are dismissed because they refused to lie (another military behavioral ban) when faced with rumors and anonymous e-mails to superiors. Time, public opinion, and what’s right are all on my side on this one.
The Bible says what it says, and is clear on the topic…no need to discuss that, as God’s word stands forever.
Practically;
Rules regarding infidelity are also rules that discriminate based on identity…by your definition. Adultery is against the rules of the military…hey people want to have sex…who is the military to say they cannot?
Not everyone who opposes the homosexual agenda is homophobic, Kelly….unless you are willing to say that all who oppose affirmative action are racist.
Do you support affirmative action, if not you are racist.
You would have to call Hurt is a racist, as he opposes quotas and much of affirmative action….
name calling is unprofitable. On both sides.
tarheel: i asked whether those who are homosexual make a conscious choice or is that determined by some DNA/inside force. I don’t know.
I think all sexual decisions are made by choice, except rape (which is not really even sexual).
*decisions should read behaviors
All sexual decisions are choices, but I don’t know a single gay/lesbian that would submit themselves to society’s condemnation if they had a choice in the matter. There’s more and more evidence that orientation is at least partially genetically determined – some mix of nature and nurture, and that blend is different for every person.
Saying “I am gay” is not a behavior. I don’t think most would even call it a sin. But it gets you kicked out. Do you think saying “I’m sexually attracted to women other than my wife” should get you kicked out?
Robin, It depends on whether they act on the adulterous attraction. I am pretty sure that acting on that will get you booted. Under DADT, only homosexual behavior that is deemed to be disruptive legally provokes the question “are you gay”, right? Just as the act of adultry provkes that question, no?
Happyfeet, that’s just not the case. Anonymous emails, rumors, harassment and personal correspondence during off-duty time has led to dismissals. Besides, the comparison to adultery is weak because according to the UCMJ, for adultery to be a crime, the particular circumstances of the case must be shown to be “prejudicial to good order and discipline,” or “of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.” In addition to these “elements of proof,” adultery is extremely difficult to prove. Prosecution must prove sexual intercourse, which usually means a confession or photos. “The mere fact that two people are living together is not sufficient to prove sexual intercourse.”
Compare that with DADT, where it is not that sexual practices must take place within the barracks or even outside in the world, it is merely the orientation of an individual (however chaste) that can cause his/her dismissal.