Though despite tedious Pace, DADT will still surely fall
"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts...," ... "I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is okay to be immoral in any way."
"Thou shalt not kill"
The above is a Biblical condemnation that, unlike those dealing with homosexuality, is fairly straightforward and less open to interpretation, yet one that folks like Gen. Pace somehow seem to have a much easier time reconciling with their actions.
The above is a concept that all-too-often surrounds the stones that are so frequently cast at us by our opposition.
The above is the substance that we are forced to either swallow or emit from our mouths upon the moment that comments like Gen. Pace's grace our ears.
Top general calls homosexuality 'immoral' [Chicago Tribune]
Well done, General, you just insulted all the openly gay soldiers from other countries supporting the US in Iraq. Outstanding. Moron.
Posted by: John C | Mar 13, 2007 12:16:47 AM
The concept of separating people for whatever reason is so freaking stupid and harmful to the children of our future. His personal beliefs on sexuality and religion are irrelivent. He should keep his mouth shut.
Posted by: Sir Cumstance | Mar 13, 2007 12:02:30 PM
As an active member of the military, I have to agree with Gen Pace's personal opinion on two levels.
One - Would you want someone of the opposite sex showering, using the restroom, and sleeping with you every day while deployed? Sexual urges are high in the deployed atmosphere, and I can only imagine what tensions openly homosexuals would bring. We might as well go ahead and have men and women showering, changing, and sleeping next to one another now, if we want to allow homosexuals in the military. There is no way to adapt facilities for homosexuals without simply combining the bathrooms and showers, and completely remove all comfort and privacy.
Two - No matter your religion, or lack thereof, all rational people can see that the purpose of the human being is to reproduce; whether that reproduction is to lead more people to whatever god, or to enhance the survival of your species. Any time a person would willingly engage in a lifestyle that encourages non-reproductive relationships, I would consider that IMMORAL.
Posted by: mike | Mar 13, 2007 12:56:25 PM
(QUOTE FROM ARTICLE)
"Right now there are men and women that are in the battle lines, that are in the trenches, they're serving their country," Vizcaino said. "Their sexual orientation has nothing to do with their capability to serve in the U.S. military."
So if that's the case, then "SHUT THE HELL UP!!" Do your job, mind your own business, and keep your pie hole shut about who, or what your poking, or stroking. No one needs to know "YOUR PRIVATE" business. That's why the call it "PRIVATE LIFE." But Noooo! You feel the need to stick your sexual appetites in everyone's face. "Demanding" that society "accept" ever more aberrant sexual behavior. That is so disrespectful to the sensibilities, and deeply held beliefs of most of the American people.
Homosexuals would have a lot more support if they minded their on business, and didn't stick their sexuality in everyone's face. And stop with the heterosexuals are putting their sexuality in your face. Well Duhhhh! Get over it!! That's the foundation of "every" society since there were two sexes.
And as to the Mosaic Laws in the Old Testament. The ignorance of the Bible is all to apparant. After Jesus became the sacrifice for sin, we are no longer under the law, but grace. And if you don't know what that means, look it up. As I said the ignorance is appalling. But running off at the mouth without knowing anything about the Bible is fits the objective of, "the ends justifies the means"
If live, and let live is not good enough for anyone, then it's clear there's an agenda going on from the homosexual community.
And all this stuff about "rights" that gays say they don't have. Give me break!! Marriage is a privilege, "not" a right! Just like I don't meet the criteria for affirmative action, welfare, wick, government loans and so on. Homosexuals do not meet the criteria for marriage.
So lets see, if gay marriage becomes accepted across the country, then I guess I need to sue all these agencies that refuse to cater to me. Homosexuals want "special" rights. End of story!
Posted by: nativerhod | Mar 13, 2007 1:27:38 PM
If there's one thing we've learned from years of dealing with the so-called "culture war," it's that the words "keep your pie hole shut" are rarely to be followed by pro-gay sentiment, and that the definitive words "End of story!" are rarely to be preceded by reason. Thanks, nativerhod, for once again demonstrating this.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Mar 13, 2007 1:39:14 PM
Thank you, General Pace!!, for saying what the majority of Americans feel, but are bullied by the media and gay rights groups into not saying out loud for fear of being labeled, sued, chastised for their beliefs. Sounds like discrimination. Go door to door and you will find a different America than the gay rights group say is there. Take special interest politics (gay rights) out of the media mix and you'll find people with their morals in the right place.
Incidentally, why is sexually orientation such an issue anyway? It is a private issue that should stay private. I don't flaunt my sexual orientation and then expect special considerations because of it.
Posted by: JP | Mar 13, 2007 1:46:01 PM
I wonder if the General would his wife's hair if she were to pray with her head uncovered, as Paul has said should happen?
I wonder if he feels that sons who do not respect their parents should be stoned in front of the gates of the city as it states in Leviticus?
He's wrapping bigotry into morality. I think it's immoral to deny another rights simply because I have an opinion contrary to how they live.
Posted by: ptboa | Mar 13, 2007 2:12:48 PM
Nativerhod said "And as to the Mosaic Laws in the Old Testament. The ignorance of the Bible is all to apparant. After Jesus became the sacrifice for sin, we are no longer under the law, but grace. And if you don't know what that means, look it up. As I said the ignorance is appalling. But running off at the mouth without knowing anything about the Bible is fits the objective of, "the ends justifies the means"
Nativerhod, you're the one ignorant about the bible - you are still under levitcal law, Jesus said so himself in Mathew 5:17-18
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
Posted by: Randi Schimnosky | Mar 13, 2007 5:30:16 PMcomments powered by Disqus