Gays In The Military

[BryanM27]

Please excuse me if this is an old topic, but with ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ coming under fire I thought now might be a good time to see where people stand on the issue and why they stand there. If your reasoning is religious based, I would appreciate if anyone can quote scripture or a message from the Church supporting their belief.

I’ll chime in with my reasons, even if someone else has already posted something similar.

First of all the United States is founded on the belief that all men are created equal. Therefore, all who are endowed with the “unalienable rights” of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” have the responsibilty to defend them and should be allowed to do so without fear of reprisal for any reason.

Secondly, I will cite a sentence from Paragraph 2358 of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church.

They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

To say to someone that they have to be ashamed of who they are is contrary to what the Church teaches, and more importantly to what Christ teaches. We should accept these people with the respect that they deserve, and part of that means that they should be allowed to serve their country with honor.

I will also add that paragraphs 2357-2359 of CCC deal with homosexualtiy in detail. According to these paragraphs, we as Catholics are called to support them while they carry their cross. The Church admits that we do not fully understand the psychological genesis of homosexuality. It teaches that homosexuals are called to be chaste, and the rest of us are called to aid them in their quest to do God’s will and to stay away from sin.

Again, just because they have this condition does not mean they should not be allowed to serve their country.

 

[BryanM27]

You guessed my guilty secret! Darn!

It’s not cowardice as such, it’s worse than that. A disdain for all things patriotic. An attitude that the military is ipso facto bad, bigoted, ignorant and evil. “Duty, Honor, Country” means nothing to them.

Yes, I blame “liberals”, “progressives” or what-have-you, especially in academe, for their constant denigration of the military, so much so that many going into West Point are home-schooled Flat-Earth Young Earth Creationists, well versed in the King James Bible, but with woeful ignorance about the world in general. I think this is most unhealthy for the Republic.

I think also that the US armed forces, and the officer corps in particular, will have an uncomfortably large proportion of Dominionists in the next 20 years. Those who put God’s Law above Man’s, and if given the choice between defending the Bible or the Constitution, will defend the former, and destroy the latter.

I place the blame not on them. I place it squarely on the shoulders of those who prefer politically correct moral purity, sanctimony, over practical measures to help. The same kind of attitude that let the Fascist regimes grow in the 1930s, with effects we’re all aware of. Having a POTUS that is openly contemptuous of the Military doesn’t help either. It’s no accident that the callsign of the Secretary of State’s helo was “Broomstick One” either.

Too many on the Left are like those wanting to eat meat - but contemptuous of butchers for killing animals. Hypocrites.

I’ll get off my soapbox now. Sorry, this is a sore point with me.:banghead:

I’ll continue your soapbox for a moment…

As a former NROTC Midshipman at a liberal University of Minnesota, I must say that I completely agree with the assesment of Capt. Nathan Fick, USMC (Ret.). ROTC units do not “militarize” the campus as the liberals claim in an effort to get them removed. In fact, having ROTC on more campuses will liberalize the military in a positive way.

Notice it is always the left that screams the loudest no matter what. It’s either “Oh my God! Why are so many dying in testing and training? We need to scrap that weapons system!” Or,“OMG, we’ve been attacked! Save us military! Please save us!” Which soon becomes “OMG! Too many people are dying! We shouldn’t be at war.”

 

[Zoe_Brain]

I’ll continue your soapbox for a moment…

As a former NROTC Midshipman at a liberal University of Minnesota, I must say that I completely agree with the assesment of Capt. Nathan Fick, USMC (Ret.). ROTC units do not “militarize” the campus as the liberals claim in an effort to get them removed. In fact, having ROTC on more campuses will liberalize the military in a positive way.

Notice it is always the left that screams the loudest no matter what. It’s either “Oh my God! Why are so many dying in testing and training? We need to scrap that weapons system!” Or,“OMG, we’ve been attacked! Save us military! Please save us!” Which soon becomes “OMG! Too many people are dying! We shouldn’t be at war.”

As somone who has taught at the Australian Defence Force Academy - Concur.

And I’ve cried my share of tears when former students are KIA. I don’t remember them as Lt X or Cdr Y. I remember them as 18 year old midshipmen you see. Just boys - or girls.

Back on topic… all the arguments I see about cohesion and morale are exactly the same arguments that were trotted out against desegregation.

There was no armed force anywhere in the world more homophobic or conservative than the Australian Army. But it took us all of 3 months to adjust, and now it’s a non-issue. And remember - one third of the Australian population is Catholic, it’s the largest single denomination.

 

[WatchingMedia]

“Temptation”, “Inclination” are not the same as “Patriotism” or “Following orders”.

Any gay currently in the Military is still under the “Don’t tell” rule for a little while longer. If they are “active” Military and ‘told’, they are disobeying orders.

Since this is a Catholic blog site, for the Church’s teaching on homosexuality and homosexual acts, see the CCC, 2nd Edition. 2357 -2359

 

[Zoe_Brain]

Any gay currently in the Military is still under the “Don’t tell” rule for a little while longer.

The absolute earliest that discharges can cease is the middle of 2011. It’s likely that it will be 2024. It could take longer.

1. The Defence Bill will have to pass without the promised presidential veto, due to the F-35 engine issue. If the F-35 second engine provision is in, DADT repeal is effectively dead until after November, where it’s likely a Republican majority would have to vote in favour.
2. The study, due for completion in December, must be finished. (After the election, when the Democrats will probably lose their majority).
3. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the SECDEF, and the President must then all sign off on certificates that say
   a) That the report has been completed, and they’ve read and understood it.
   b) Every single rule and regulation for repeal is complete and in place, ready for promulgation.
   c) That there will be no effect on retention, morale or cohesion from these rules.

There is no time limit for this process, it may take months, years, even decades, depending on how quickly the Pentagon moves. The formulation of the rules and regulations cannot start until the report is complete.

1. The (likely Republican majority) Congress then has 60 days in which to re-consider the bill, after the last of these certificates has been signed.
2. Implementation of the regulations in a manageable way will then take some additional time, at least 5-10 years according to the SecDef.

And finally… it’s not impossible that with the repeal of DADT, the situation will revert to that of 1992, with a blanket ban on Gays in the military. This is allowable under the legislation under consideration.

The POTUS has had it in his power since the day of his inauguration to issue a “stop loss” executive order though, which would effectively prevent discharges. He has not done so, and shows no inclination to ever do so.

The repeal of DADT - if and when - emphatically does not mean that Gays will be allowed to serve in the military, openly or otherwise. This is a common misconception.

 

[Lypher]

This will radically change the social fabric of the Military family. No longer will many of the more conservative families show up at home comings… No longer will conservatives show up to the Balls. These will be events for those active homosexuals to take over the spot light and show their love for each other the same as Madonna and Brittany Spears.

Some will say it won’t happen, but in the back of every minds they know that it will. I have already informed my chain of command that once this comes into effect I will be finished with the Wardroom. My wifes volunteer efforts will be over as we will not publicly associate with homosexuals on a volunteer social level. I will respect their right to practice what they believe in. They will come out of the closet and like all other more Orthodox Christians we will be forced into the closet…

Truly silencing of the lambs…

 

[Publisher]

[BIBLEDRB]Leviticus 18:22[/BIBLEDRB]

[BIBLEDRB]Leviticus 20:13[/BIBLEDRB]

[BIBLEDRB]1 Corinthians 6:9-10[/BIBLEDRB]

[BIBLEDRB]Romans 1:26-27[/BIBLEDRB]

homosexuality is condemned, but it doesn’t say “no military service”

since it is condemned though, i can’t support it

Would you cite all the verses that deal with drunkedness, adultery, fornication, etc…would you exclude those who fall into the above catagories as well? They are much more prevelant in the military than gay people. If you wouldn’t exclude them…why not?

Gay men and women HAVE ALWAYS been in the military…and many serve with distinction. Yes, if serving in the military is open to straight people…it should be open to gay people…however I would counsel ALL to refrain from military service.

 

[hosemonkey]

however I would counsel ALL to refrain from military service.

And why?

 

[BryanM27]

And why?

I’m guessing it has something to do with his beliefs as a Quaker. To my knowledge, and Publisher please correct me if I’m wrong, Quakers are staunch passivists.

 

[hosemonkey]

I’m guessing it has something to do with his beliefs as a Quaker. To my knowledge, and Publisher please correct me if I’m wrong, Quakers are staunch passivists.

Which points up the fact that it’s OK with him and those like him for people like me and my comrades to put our butts on the line so people like him have the privilege of staying home where it is safe and warm and be Quakers. No problem, we’ve got your backs, but I don’t want to hear a lot of whining about how the military handles it’s business. If the military decides that it is bad to have open homos in the ranks, then the civilians need to keep their noses out of it. If you don’t play the game, then you can’t make the rules. If you think that the military is a job like any other, you are dead wrong. The job of the Armed Forces is the give and take of death and destruction, full stop. Life and death. It ain’t to learn a trade or see foreign countries, It means breaking things and killing people. You must trust your comrades implicitly. The introduction of distractions like homosexuals and women infinitely complicate the equation. Leave well enough alone.

 

[headjw]

I am concerned about the second and third order effects of repealing DADT. I believe homosexual behavior is immoral and it is not consistent with the Judeo-Christian beliefs this country was founded on. I can serve with someone living in this “alternate lifestyle”, but it’s more than letting gays serve their country, this is a social and moral issue, not one of civil rights – otherwise, why would religious groups be given exemptions on related gay marriage issues. If DADT is repealed, how will their partners be treated? Will they be provided the same base housing and benefits as married couples? The Government through the Def of Marriage Act defines marriage as a legal union exclusively between one man and one woman. Congress should not have even passed a provisionary bill until the DoD analysis was complete. I fear this socially charged issue will disrupt the order and discipline required when the military openly condones something society as a whole (separate debate) finds immoral.

 

[Zoe_Brain]

Which points up the fact that it’s OK with him and those like him for people like me and my comrades to put our butts on the line so people like him have the privilege of staying home where it is safe and warm and be Quakers.

We disagree on the Gays issue. Women in the military too. But apart from that - yes, concur.

 

[Lypher]

I fear this socially charged issue will disrupt the order and discipline required when the military openly condones something society as a whole (separate debate) finds immoral.

I wonder how a Chaplain will be able to preach on the Sin of Homosexuality? I would believe that this is a Civil law passing judgment on religious law. Since the invention of hate crime laws will a commissioned Priest be charge with a hate crime if he preaches that Homosexuality is immoral and a sin? Will the Catholic Church have to pull its Chaplains from military service or accept secular law? Is this not the same as all the other forms of attacks on the Church? From abortions at Catholic hospitals to paying for health care for “Partners”

I believe that the days of Chaplains tending wounded servicemen may come to an end. It is VERY sad that the few may have this effect on the religious majority.

What a total morale SHAME…

 

[hosemonkey]

I wonder how a Chaplain will be able to preach on the Sin of Homosexuality? I would believe that this is a Civil law passing judgment on religious law. Since the invention of hate crime laws will a commissioned Priest be charge with a hate crime if he preaches that Homosexuality is immoral and a sin? Will the Catholic Church have to pull its Chaplains from military service or accept secular law? Is this not the same as all the other forms of attacks on the Church? From abortions at Catholic hospitals to paying for health care for “Partners”

I believe that the days of Chaplains tending wounded servicemen may come to an end. It is VERY sad that the few may have this effect on the religious majority.

What a total morale SHAME…

Agreed! Merely another facet of the rot that is overtaking our country, aided and abetted by the extreme liberal agenda enthusiastically propounded by our Clown-in Chief. i would be willing to bet that no one has really thought out the possible effects of accepting open homos into the military. The religious issue, the issue of handling wounded individuals who may be HIV-positive or infected with AIDS etc. Do we house homos separately or just throw everybody into the mix? Do we give homo’s partners dependent’s benefits? Think about it, you’ll be the ones paying the bills, and our servicepeople will be paying with their lives.

 

[Zoe_Brain]

I wonder how a Chaplain will be able to preach on the Sin of Homosexuality? .

The way that Rabbis preach on the sin of eating pork, I should imagine.

 

[Lypher]

The way that Rabbis preach on the sin of eating pork, I should imagine.

Pigs are not protected by HATE speech laws. Chaplains will have to me muzzled.

Once secular approval for homosexuality has been codified, which this is, the next target may be some other current perversion that the extreme relativists want to make mainstream. Pretty sad really…

 

[portarica]

I wonder how a Chaplain will be able to preach on the Sin of Homosexuality? I would believe that this is a Civil law passing judgment on religious law. Since the invention of hate crime laws will a commissioned Priest be charge with a hate crime if he preaches that Homosexuality is immoral and a sin? Will the Catholic Church have to pull its Chaplains from military service or accept secular law? Is this not the same as all the other forms of attacks on the Church? From abortions at Catholic hospitals to paying for health care for “Partners”

I believe that the days of Chaplains tending wounded servicemen may come to an end. It is VERY sad that the few may have this effect on the religious majority.

What a total morale SHAME…

Do they have to stop preaching about the moderate use of alcohol or from engaging in premarital sex? Doesn’t the military still send soldiers on R&R to “blow off steam”?

And why would the chaplains be telling wounded soldiers about the perceived ills of homosexuality?

This is like a priest telling a faithfully married couple that gay marriage would weaken their marriage. It doesn’t make sense.

Peace

 

[Lypher]

Do they have to stop preaching about the moderate use of alcohol or from engaging in premarital sex? Doesn’t the military still send soldiers on R&R to “blow off steam”?

And why would the chaplains be telling wounded soldiers about the perceived ills of homosexuality?

This is like a priest telling a faithfully married couple that gay marriage would weaken their marriage. It doesn’t make sense.

Peace

I am not trying to argue if it is right or wrong from your “Relativistic” perspective, but from the teachings of the Catholic Church.

milarch.org/index/news-app/story.81/title.archbishop-broglio-s-statement-on-proposed-legislation

The above link is from Archbishop Timothy Broglio and he is concerned about what this legislation will mean for the services. Last year Washington D.C. passed laws requiring employers to cover partners, so the Catholic Church was forced to drop coverage on its employee’s.

I can tell you that once the rules are in place all personnel will be required to “Suck-It-Up” regardless of their beliefs.

I do not believe that many Conservative Christians will choose to live or associate with practicing homosexual couples, or at least not happily and not for long. If the goal of the military is to enforce social equality then fine. If the goal of the military is to protect the country then this is likely a mistake.

You asked “Why would the chaplains be telling wounded soldiers about the perceived ills of homosexuality?” Do you not understand that our Chaplains also tend our families on bases? They are charged to form the consciences of our youth. Since the chapels are on base this law will likely require chaplains to not talk about this sin… and if it does this, then this action will force the church to leave. It will be the FIRST time in the history of our country that we will not go to war with Chaplains and I will agree that they will need to stay away.

Our country will have changed… we will no longer have a military with Priest bringing the Gospel and its comfort to war with our soldiers. If that is what the country wants then I guess that is what it will have, and it shall reap the fruits that it will sow.

I don’t know but for me it seems the farther our country has moved away from God the more issues we seem to be having…Maybe people with your values are right, but I would prefer to have my priest teach my children Catholic values, not some watered down state mandated version of some new age faith.

Take care,

Lypher

 

[Zoe_Brain]

Pigs are not protected by HATE speech laws.

Neither are Gays.

 

[Lypher]

Neither are Gays.

In the military these “Hate” laws are taken to an extreme that you cannot imagine. Stating that homosexuality is a disorder and a sin will likely be punished in the future. I do not see how the chain of command will be able to enforce this law without doing so.

I do not believe that it is proper or Christian to mistreat someone with an illness such as homosexuality or alcoholism, however I believe that it should be the parents that get to instruct their children these values.

In the end the military will be WORSE off if this happens…oh well…it is what it is. Some people will need to walk away from these careers.