Gays In The Military

[Shin]

All,

As an Officer in the Military I would enforce these beliefs, which I do not agree with, and it would hurt all people of faith. This is just a plain fact of life. You would have to accept this behavior of leave. Their would be NO middle ground because any negative comments or discrimination by members or family would be considered hate speech. I mean ANY.

And that is exactly it. The military enforcing gay immorality - enforcing, through -force-. The next step for a society where it is altogether enforced, not just through fines, punishment, lawsuits, harrassment and oppression – but force.

Steps towards it have already begun. When it is in place… it will be the military’s dogma. All will be required to profess that homosexual behavior is acceptable behavior. Those who oppose it will be the ones being kicked out.

The Catholics kicked out, the Sodomites in charge.

In other words, we will have a pro-gay, anti-Christ military.

Our entire society will have it through military force enforced.

Promoting an abominable sin and life… The Church hierarchy lately has dropped the ball on this, but the overall teachings of the Faith never change and do not. This is abominable. It is to be resisted one hundred percent. People need to recover their sense of sin and how abominable it is, and how it must never allowed to become socially acceptable.

There is something -wrong- with you if you -do not react instinctively against this sin-.

Saying you tolerate this behavior is saying you accept it, saying it is morally acceptable. It is not. And it is at the very bottom, the worst of sins.

You’re not merciful giving people a break about this, pressing society to let it be. You’re part of the problem and culpable for it before God.

 

[elts1956]

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 didn’t vote because none of the questions really went along with my line of thinking. I am sure the military has many gays, lesbians in uniform. How the rescinding of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” will lessen tensions among gays and straights is greatly questionable. At least, to me. I think there are going to be many fires resulting from this forced and open acceptance. by straights, of folks who are openly gay being accepted in the military. There will be many military tribunals, I fear.

I suppose I should make this a bit clearer. There are already gays/lesbian in the armed services. BUT this rescinding of the don’t ask don’t tell policy is another example of bo saying up yours to Christian ethics.

 

[Shin]

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 26, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - An analysis of publicly available documents indicates that homosexuals in the military are three times more likely to commit sexual assaults than heterosexuals, relative to their numbers, announced the Family Research Council Wednesday.

The release comes on the heels of news that Democrat U.S. senators on the Armed Services Committee seek to attach a repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” rule banning open homosexuals from the military to an essential defense spending bill. Although Pentagon officials had begun a year-long review of the possible repercussions of repealing the ban, homosexual activists hope to squeeze the controversial overturn through before November elections - when several Democrats are expected to lose their seats - before the results of the Pentagon study are in.

The FRC analysis released Wednesday demonstrates one of the main causes of alarm for supporters of the ban: a review of the “case synopses” of all 1,643 reports of sexual assault reported by the four branches of the military for Fiscal Year 2009 (October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009) found that over eight percent (8.2%) of all military sexual assault cases were homosexual in nature. Yet homosexual activist groups themselves have stated that less than three percent of Americans (2.8% of men and 1.4% of women) are homosexual or bisexual.

The analysis, conducted by Senior Fellow for Policy Studies Peter Sprigg, was based on the Pentagon’s own annual report on sexual assault in the military for Fiscal Year 2009, and on published decisions from military courts of appeals over the last decade and a half.

Full Article: lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10052613.html

I’ll note for those who read the earlier links I posted, they included the personal testimony of a woman in the military sexually assaulted by lesbians and unable to speak out about it because the presumption would have been in the favor of the assaulters and against her.

Further quoting:

“If open homosexuality is permitted in the military, these numbers will only increase,” Sprigg warned. “The numbers of homosexuals in the military would grow, the threat of discharge for homosexual conduct would be eliminated, and protected class status for homosexuals would make victims hesitant to report assaults and make commanders hesitant to punish them for fear of appearing ‘homophobic.’”

 

[Holly3278]

Yes, I would allow homosexuals in the military if were up to me. However, I would also require that they be chaste (which means being celibate for homosexuals) and anyone who was discovered to be committing the sin of sodomy would be immediately given a dishonorable discharge. Also, the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy would be strictly enforced.

 

[Zatzat]

Yes, I would allow homosexuals in the military if were up to me. However, I would also require that they be chaste (which means being celibate for homosexuals) and anyone who was discovered to be committing the sin of sodomy would be immediately given a dishonorable discharge. Also, the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy would be strictly enforced.

Please, tell me that you’d also enforce chaste military laws for heterosexual soldiers who masturbate, frequent brothels, have one night stands and consume copious amounts of pornography while on tour!

I suspect that there’d be very few soldiers in the U.S. Military…

Imagine that…you give them permission to kill, but you want to prohibit them from having sex.

 

[Zatzat]

Should we only have openly gay service if the straight men are allowed to shower with the women? That would be attraction equality, would it not? What’s to stop a gay man from staring at a straight man in the shower once the ban is lifted? Do we need to declare a new crime: visual rape? Why should jollies be legislated for some and not others? When will this heterosexual oppression end? This will be a mockery. Time to invest in a shower stall company. It’s long overdue for all public and military showers.

YOu want to prohibit homosexuals from combat arms because one of them might get turned on in the shower?

YOu do realize that homosexuals openly serve in the armed forces in Canada and many other Western Nations without a problem.

 

[Brendan]

Homosexuals are banned from serving in the U.S, military because someone might get turned on in the shower?

Funny how that isn’t an issue in Canada.

Perhaps you didn’t read my posts. I clearly stated that the level of restraint was immaterial.

The issue is forcing someone to undress in front of someone who, in general, is sexually attracted to them.

Even the Canadian military doesn’t make women shower with men. And the reason is very simple. Sexual modesty. It doesn’t matter what level of restrait is shown by the men, women are still not asked to shower with them. It would make the women feel very uncomforable and few would enlist if they knew they had to do that.

And no one would chide the women for feeling ‘heterophobic’ for doing so, correct?

Why not extend the same courtesy to men.

 

[Brendan]

YOu do realize that homosexuals openly serve in the armed forces in Canada and many other Western Nations without a problem.

That is also immaterial. There are militaries in the world advocate LOTS of immoral things, that doesn’t mean that our military should emulate them.

 

[Zatzat]

That is also immaterial. There are militaries in the world advocate LOTS of immoral things, that doesn’t mean that our military should emulate them.

You’ll give your soldiers the Ok to kill on your behalf and on behalf of the State…but you won’t condone their having homosexual relations in their private life?

What does a soldiers same sex attraction have to do with his/her ability and proficiency at killing other human beings in a theater of war?

 

[Zatzat]

Perhaps you didn’t read my posts. I clearly stated that the level of restraint was immaterial.

The issue is forcing someone to undress in front of someone who, in general, is sexually attracted to them.

Even the Canadian military doesn’t make women shower with men. And the reason is very simple. Sexual modesty. It doesn’t matter what level of restrait is shown by the men, women are still not asked to shower with them. It would make the women feel very uncomforable and few would enlist if they knew they had to do that.

And no one would chide the women for feeling ‘heterophobic’ for doing so, correct?

Why not extend the same courtesy to men.

Like I say, it’s not an issue in Canada and evidently, it’s only an issue if you want to make it an issue.

 

[Zatzat]

That is also immaterial. There are militaries in the world advocate LOTS of immoral things, that doesn’t mean that our military should emulate them.

Being a homosexual isn’t immoral, or so your Church teaches. Why do you say that homosexuals are immoral?

 

[Brendan]

Being a homosexual isn’t immoral, or so your Church teaches. Why do you say that homosexuals are immoral?

Where exactly did I say that being homosexual was, by itself, immoral?

Rather, I addressed my comments to the issue of sexual immodesty.

Forcing someone to undress infront of a person who might find them sexually attractive is an offence against the Virtue of Modesty.

Offences against Virtue are, by defintion, immorality.

 

[Brendan]

You’ll give your soldiers the Ok to kill on your behalf and on behalf of the State…but you won’t condone their having homosexual relations in their private life?

Personally no. (And I was there, as a tank officer)

What does a soldiers same sex attraction have to do with his/her ability and proficiency at killing other human beings in a theater of war?

See my previous post on unit readiness for a tank unit. If there was a known homosexual in my unit, and his fellow tank crew indicated that they would be uncomfortable with the close living condidtions, he would get transferred out of my unit, as unit cohesion is more important than any individual crewmember.

A tank crew has to operate as a unit, and if the presence of one crew member negatively impacted that, he was gone, no questions asked, even by regimental command.

 

[Shin]

Where exactly did I say that being homosexual was, by itself, immoral?

Rather, I addressed my comments to the issue of sexual immodesty.

Forcing someone to undress infront of a person who might find them sexually attractive is an offence against the Virtue of Modesty.

Offences against Virtue are, by defintion, immorality.

I like your emphasis on this point Brendan, you’re making it very clear. The people who understand it interiorly through the natural law can learn a good deal of derivative conclusions.

 

[Fayle]

From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_military_service

“Most Western military forces have now removed policies excluding sexual minority members; of the 26 countries that participate militarily in NATO, more than 20 permit open lesbians, gays, or bisexuals to serve; of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, three (United Kingdom, France, and Russia) do so.”

Works fine in these countries, why should it be any different here?

 

[Brendan]

I like your emphasis on this point Brendan, you’re making it very clear. The people who understand it interiorly through the natural law can learn a good deal of derivative conclusions.

Thanks,

It should be pretty obvious to anyone that if you won’t ask a woman to get changed in front of a man, that the same right extents to men getting changed in front of homosexuals. Anything less is sexism.

 

[Lycorth]

It seems as if much of the support for gays in the military seems to emanate from the opinion that no one should be offended by homosexuality, that no one should feel uncomfortable around it or those who embrace it.

Being offended by homosexuality is far better than accepting it, because it does less to condone homosexuality to others; accepting it tells gays it’s OK to practice homosexuality, which we as Catholics (or any Christian) should never do.

That’s part of why there should not be a policy supporting gays in the military. If you are gay and want to serve, do so and keep your homosexual affliction strictly to yourself. If you can’t tolerate that, find some other way to serve your country; gays make up a tiny minority of the population and as such are not needed to fill the ranks of the armed forces. It’s not as if the military will shrivel to nothing if homosexuals are forbidden from service.

That, and it does only harm to gays to send them any message that it’s OK to embrace homosexuality.

 

[Shin]

You’re welcome. Yes, the above, thank you.

**Nine Ways of Being An Accessory to Another’s Sin
**
1.By Counsel
2.By Command
3.By Consent
4.By Concealment
5.By Defense of Evil Done
6.By Partaking
7.By Provocation
8.By Praise
9.By Silence

 

[Zatzat]

From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_military_service

“Most Western military forces have now removed policies excluding sexual minority members; of the 26 countries that participate militarily in NATO, more than 20 permit open lesbians, gays, or bisexuals to serve; of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, three (United Kingdom, France, and Russia) do so.”

Works fine in these countries, why should it be any different here?

Great question, indeed.

 

[Zatzat]

Personally no. (And I was there, as a tank officer)

See my previous post on unit readiness for a tank unit. If there was a known homosexual in my unit, and his fellow tank crew indicated that they would be uncomfortable with the close living condidtions, he would get transferred out of my unit, as unit cohesion is more important than any individual crewmember.

A tank crew has to operate as a unit, and if the presence of one crew member negatively impacted that, he was gone, no questions asked, even by regimental command.

Sure would be easy to get rid of a tank commander…or anyone for that matter. What an odd policy…boo hoo I don’t like that guy, no questions asked he’s gone???