Gays in military: Do allies' experiences matter?

[Barbkw]

“I don’t know and as you’re not God you don’t know either. That’s a classic big stick to beat your opponent argument you are pulling there if there was ever one.”

I do know, and you should as well.

God gave you a conscience so that you could form it in His likeless.

He also gave us papal authority and the teaching magisterium.

The Catholic Archbishop in charge of Military Chaplains said that DADT should not be repealed.

 

[Brendan]

Unfortunately, that will not happen. The Proverbial “genie” has been let out of the Bottle. If you were to suggest that NOW you would have the ACLU, GLAAD, and most of the Media breathing down your neck, basically implying that You and the Military were advocating Hatred and Discrimination. So no, those days are gone, unfortunately.

So we quit attempting to compromise, since we only see where it leads.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

Unfortunately, that will not happen. The Proverbial “genie” has been let out of the Bottle. If you were to suggest that NOW you would have the ACLU, GLAAD, and most of the Media breathing down your neck, basically implying that You and the Military were advocating Hatred and Discrimination. So no, those days are gone, unfortunately.

Well IT IS discrimination . . . and so is DADT.

But people are discriminated against all the time. One can’t serve it he or she is handicapped, have certain personality disorders, have certain medical conditions, are married or have a child when they try to enlist (though I think that’s waivable), are too fat, too tall, too short, etc.

People throw the word “discrimination” around as if it’s a bad thing . . . be in more cases than not, discrimination is perfectly acceptable. And that statement applies to the civilian workplace also.

Pax,
OA

 

[Barbkw]

Discrimination is another word for discernment. And yes, we must discern and discriminate against immoral acts that weaken society.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

I don’t personally see it as insensitive. It’s actually a very good point you’re making. That is why Opponents of Repealing DADT talk about Morale and Cohesion being affected by the decision to repeal it.

Of course opponents also cited Morale and Unit Cohesion/Esprit de Corps as the primary objections to integrating women into our fighting foces. And to some extent that same argument was used to fight against the integration of minorities.

So Morale and Cohesion can’t be the beginning and end of the argument. Truely, I think the argument has to be that homosexuality is incompatible with the core values of the military. And the opponents need to make that argument and rest on it.

And then the government will decide if the problems associated with integrating openly-serving homosexuals out weigh the perceived benefits, which include everything from a larger pool of military candidates to less quantifiable issues of “fairness.”

It’s an issue that very many people are exercised about . . . but in reality it’s not a complex issue.

Pax,
OA

 

[TMC]

Good for you Jharek, throw to the wayside all Christian objections to normalizing the sexual acts of noncelibate same sex attracted persons.

How happy do you imagine that God is with you right now?

This comment is both uncharitable and hypocritical. The military provides free contraception to all service members, single and married - thus promoting both contraception and fornication. Is failing to oppose that policy un-Christian? The military provides legal assistance to those seeking divorce - is failing to oppose that poilcy un-Christian? The military has Wiccan and Hindu chaplains - is failing to oppose that policy un-Christian? Unless you are prepared to call all those that fail to oppose all of these policies un-Christian, then how can you call those that oppose DADT un-Christian?

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

Some interesting posts:
Ok we all have our opinions on this but I have noticed that people forget the root of the military.

The purpose of the military is to kill the enemy period.

It’s about the mission and the mission comes first—fact!

The mission is to kill the enemy until they surrender—fact!

From my experience homosexuals can kill the enemy just as good as heterosexuals—fact!

When you are side by side with a fellow trooper you’ll defend that trooper with your life and that trooper will do same for you—you don’t care about their sexually. The bottom line is you complete the mission and the mission is killing the enemy.

When that first round zings by your head you don’t care about; think tanks, lowered life expectancy, government, morals, and trust me it depends on the fire-fight you don’t even think about God—because it’s so fast.

All you think about is those troopers on each side of you, your team, your crew, your squad—that’s what’s it about baby.

The closest thing to the military is Law Enforcement Officers in the United States and homosexuals have been putting their lives on the line for years in Police Departments all over this country and a lot are veterans—fact!

If homosexuals have the guts to put their lives on the line for ours and theirs freedom—HOOAH!

This I posted on another thread some months ago:
As I stated on other threads I have no agenda I am stating from my experience of over twenty years as a dogface. From Private to Senior Non-Commission Officer I have serve with homosexuals in the United States Army to most of us it was not a big deal.
In over twenty years in the military I never got a complaint from one my soldiers about homosexual soldiers.

The problem I have with DADT is it is a security problem for closet homosexuals. During the Cold War that’s who the Soviets tried to recruit spy for us or we will notify your superiors.

When it comes to being a Professional Soldier in the United States Armed Forces it’s all about integrity the American government is asking these people to give up their honesty.

It is against United States Military Ethics to have these soldiers live a lie.

Do I agree with their lifestyle? Nope. However they have always been serving in our military and still do so let them serve. As I said; to me it’s more of a security problem than a moral problem.
Also my brothers and sisters you need to look at some of the U.S. Military leadership ethics and traits:

*Ethics are principles or standards that guide professionals to do the moral or right thing. *

*There are the four elements of the professional army ethics: *

Loyalty, Duty, Selfless service, and Integrity.

These are the character traits of a leader:

Bearing, Courage, Decisiveness, Endurance, Initiative, Maturity, Will, Candor, Competence, Commitment, Self-discipline, Flexibility, Confidence, Integrity, Justice, Tact, Coolness, Improvement, Assertiveness, Empathy/compassion Sense of humor, Creativity, Humility.

When these people put on Bars or Chevrons they have given oaths and just by being dishonest on whom they are; they are breaking that oath. They are being forced to break it. What’s the saying you can’t serve two masters?

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

HOOAH!

 

[Brendan]

Some interesting posts:
Ok we all have our opinions on this but I have noticed that people forget the root of the military.

The purpose of the military is to kill the enemy period.

It’s about the mission and the mission comes first—fact!

The mission is to kill the enemy until they surrender—fact!

From my experience homosexuals can kill the enemy just as good as heterosexuals—fact!

Sarge, the mission of the military is all of the above, but you must agree that it must be done in line with Catholic moral teachings. The Army cannot conduct itself in ways that are reprehensible to Christ. That would be winning the battle, but losing the ultimate war.Not a good military strategy

( and actually, the mission is to remove the enemy’s will to fight, that’s what Shock and Awe are for )

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

Sarge, the mission of the military is all of the above, but you must agree that it must be done in line with Catholic moral teachings. The Army cannot conduct itself in ways that are reprehensible to Christ. That would be winning the battle, but losing the ultimate war.Not a good military strategy

( and actually, the mission is to remove the enemy’s will to fight, that’s what Shock and Awe are for )

Well Brendan, the people of the U.S. Armed Forces gives an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; not Catholic morality.

When the U.S. Army use to truck prostitutes in camp and run massage parlors on military bases nobody complained about Christian morality not even the Chaplains.

As for shock and awe that’s cool but the United States has not won a war since WWII because our government restricts the military from killing the enemy.

An example is Sadr City I would have called in an air strike and made a parking lot out of it—I know our guys were restricted from doing that so more of our soldiers got killed that is unacceptable to me.

DADT is going to go away and as others said on this thread and other threads on these boards I think it’s going to be the biggest yawn we will never here.

It’s not going to a big deal because they are already serving and usually heterosexuals know who they are. From my experience nobody really cared as long as the trooper carried out the mission.

 

[HollyDolly]

Your right,it never was. There have always been gays in the US military,and the subject of DADT has come up before, even years ago.My late father died in 1996 and served 33 years in the US Airforce,1942-1975.Some time in the 1980s or 90s the subject was raised in the newspaper and my dad mentioned the subject.He said that as far as he and most of the men were concerned,as long as the gays did their job,kept their hands to themselves and stuck to their own kind,they didn’t care nor did they bother them.
And yes the military has done some things as stanmaxkolbe has said, not just the US,but other countries too.Also your right stanmaxkolbe, this will become a non issue.

And for some posters who think Catholic armies or soldiers can do no wrong,just look at the Sack of Rome in the 16th century,and the Massacre at Beziers in France,when both catholics and cathars took refuge from the forces of Simon de Monfort and others in the cathedral.One of the Catholic leaders was asked,How do we tell them apart,Cathar from Catholic?, to which the reply came, “kill them all,God will sort them out…” And that’s what happend men women and children were killed.Read up on history, we catholics haven’t been so moral and high minded in dealing with our own kind,much the less others.

 

[Barbkw]

Accepting homosexual acts in the military is a “yawn”? Wake up and smell the coffee, the homosexuals of the 1970s are not the homosexuals of 2010.

Explain away for us, the Bradley Mannings and the militant type of homosexuality that America is most familiar with - both within our state courts and in our public education system.

That is the homosexuality that Catholic and Protestant chaplains will have to deal with.

The homosexuals who wear their sexuality - because they believe that sodomy is something every American should be proud of. Homosexuals who place their aberrant sexual needs above the good of the country and the society.

While only 10% of the U.S. population, (at the highest count) homosexuals are dictating their aberrant behavior onto the military, onto public education, onto the courts, onto religion, onto Christian adoption agencies, onto public foster care, and onto families.

“Military Homosexual Scandal Tied to WikiLeaks Treason”

"In the scandal involving the theft and release of classified military information that could cost the lives of U.S. military personnel, the British Telegraph newspaper is reporting that the American soldier at the center of the scandal was “openly homosexual” and apparently held a grudge against the U.S. because of the military’s anti-gay policy.

In another bizarre twist, reliable reports suggest that Private First Class Bradley Manning, the U.S. Army Intelligence analyst accused of leaking the classified information to the WikiLeaks.org website, was not only a homosexual but was considering a sex change. Manning was arrested at the end of May and is being detained by U.S. authorities."

People who are totally and absolutely destructive, both toward themselves and to society.

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

“Military Homosexual Scandal Tied to WikiLeaks Treason”

"In the scandal involving the theft and release of classified military information that could cost the lives of U.S. military personnel, the British Telegraph newspaper is reporting that the American soldier at the center of the scandal was “openly homosexual” and apparently held a grudge against the U.S. because of the military’s anti-gay policy.

In another bizarre twist, reliable reports suggest that Private First Class Bradley Manning, the U.S. Army Intelligence analyst accused of leaking the classified information to the WikiLeaks.org website, was not only a homosexual but was considering a sex change. Manning was arrested at the end of May and is being detained by U.S. authorities."

People who are totally and absolutely destructive, both toward themselves and to society.

I think you should read the entire thread this has been brought up.

 

[NE_Catholic]

this thread is CRAZY.

You have to ask yourself, what kind of gay man joins the military? RuPaul? Certainly not. Is said gay man going to try to “hook” up with straight guys? NO. Just end the DADT and keep the present moral code and there will be no problems. I’m sure if some Marine wears his dress blues sans pants to a Gay Pride Parade he’ll get a BCD.

 

[Bluegoat]

Maybe those who notice a lot of “obvious” homosexuals are noticing them because they are obvious?

There are people who have leaked information, and even committed treason, because they believed in all kinds of things. Most people who believe in the same things don’t ever leak information or commit treason.

Homosexuals are already in the military, and people already know it, and know who they are. It makes no difference if people know it officially or not.

The only thing I can see such a silly policy doing is creating a security risk.

 

[rapunzel77]

Accepting homosexual acts in the military is a “yawn”? Wake up and smell the coffee, the homosexuals of the 1970s are not the homosexuals of 2010.

Explain away for us, the Bradley Mannings and the militant type of homosexuality that America is most familiar with - both within our state courts and in our public education system.

That is the homosexuality that Catholic and Protestant chaplains will have to deal with.

The homosexuals who wear their sexuality - because they believe that sodomy is something every American should be proud of. Homosexuals who place their aberrant sexual needs above the good of the country and the society.

While only 10% of the U.S. population, (at the highest count) homosexuals are dictating their aberrant behavior onto the military, onto public education, onto the courts, onto religion, onto Christian adoption agencies, onto public foster care, and onto families.

“Military Homosexual Scandal Tied to WikiLeaks Treason”

"In the scandal involving the theft and release of classified military information that could cost the lives of U.S. military personnel, the British Telegraph newspaper is reporting that the American soldier at the center of the scandal was “openly homosexual” and apparently held a grudge against the U.S. because of the military’s anti-gay policy.

In another bizarre twist, reliable reports suggest that Private First Class Bradley Manning, the U.S. Army Intelligence analyst accused of leaking the classified information to the WikiLeaks.org website, was not only a homosexual but was considering a sex change. Manning was arrested at the end of May and is being detained by U.S. authorities."

People who are totally and absolutely destructive, both toward themselves and to society.

This is exactly what I was trying to say in earlier posts but perhaps I didn’t express it as well as I should have.

 

[Barbkw]

“*You have to ask yourself, what kind of gay man joins the military? RuPaul? Certainly not. Is said gay man going to try to “hook” up with straight guys? NO. Just end the DADT and keep the present moral code and there will be no problems. I’m sure if some Marine wears his dress blues sans pants to a Gay Pride Parade he’ll get a BCD. *”

Knock knock, anyone home?

Bradley Manning is a “mentally” transgendered homosexual. ** He joined the military.** He believes himself to be a female.

The Catholic Archbishop of Military Chaplians said that DADT should not be overturned.

What the hell is wrong with you people?

 

[NE_Catholic]

“*You have to ask yourself, what kind of gay man joins the military? RuPaul? Certainly not. Is said gay man going to try to “hook” up with straight guys? NO. Just end the DADT and keep the present moral code and there will be no problems. I’m sure if some Marine wears his dress blues sans pants to a Gay Pride Parade he’ll get a BCD. *”

Knock knock, anyone home?

Bradley Manning is a “mentally” transgendered homosexual. ** He joined the military.** He believes himself to be a female.

The Catholic Archbishop of Military Chaplians said that DADT should not be overturned.

What the hell is wrong with you people?

His superiors should have reported him for psychological problems. How the $%#@ did he get a clearance??? This is a failure of the chain of command not DADT.

 

[Barbkw]

Starting to see a larger problem?

 

[NE_Catholic]

Starting to see a larger problem?

the problem was not with his “sexuality” but with his superiors. I am assuming he also needed a clearance. As one who had a Clearance, something went wrong with securing his. He is evidently mentally unstable and should not have been put in the postion he was in. I’m sure others around him knew of his unstableness. This is very similiar to the Ft. Hood shooter.