RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: What does conservative columnist Cal Thomas see as America's biggest threat? Take a guess. » Correcting NOM's fallacious fear graphic » Gee, Bryan, can't understand why federal courts are rejecting you gay = incest view » Former NOM sr. associate admits shift: Moving away from intellectual arguments, focusing on spiritual » Prop 8 defense attorney now planning lesbian daughter's wedding » If you can't afford your event, NOM, perhaps you should just cancel » A hill of beans: 'Ex-gay'-defending legal firm selling coffee to fund discriminatory endeavors » Anti-gay talker Steve Deace lets LGBT movement know: we're about to sue churches, apparently » Audio: Bored on an apparently too factual weekday, Richard Land pushes 'gays are sexually abused' lie » It seems when you equate gay folk with those who sleep with animals, it sticks; funny how that works  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

05/24/2011

Retired. chaplains: But what about our right to say gays are 'immoral and unsafe'?

by Jeremy Hooper

A group of retired chaplains and supportive people of conservative faith (eighteen folks in total) have sent a letter to the armed forces' Chaplain Chiefs, with the one undaunted goal of halting Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal. Here's just some of the reasoning:

Chaplains

So once again, we have people of conservative faith putting their own personal reluctance before the fair application of civil law. Putting their own version of "religious freedom" before the freedoms of those chaplains who do wish to honor gay love. Putting their own desires to tell people that gayness is "immoral and unsafe" before America's supposed goal of freedom and fairness under the law. And as per usual: Playing the victim, even though they are the ones seeking the "right" to fight certain human beings' benign normalcy.

The truth, of course, is that nobody will be forced into anything. Religious leaders are always free to deny a ceremony to any kind of couple for any number of reasons. Religious leaders are also free to preach in accordance with their views. And so on and so forth. Unless the goal is interference or something worse (like outright harassment), then DADT repeal brings no greater burden onto any chaplain. We on the side of repeal certainly don't want that for them. But the problem is that they don't care what we are actually saying or seeking: Derailing with unfounded (or even explicitly disproven) fears is the 'mo-resisting M.O.

But what we don't understand: Shouldn't more transparency actually be a good thing for their mission? I mean we know the goal on their end is to "save" gay souls. And we know that gay people have been part of our armed forces for eons. So in the interest of work ease alone, shouldn't these kids welcome a military reality where gay people are more easily identifiable? I mean, isn't that the reason why anti-gay protestors stand outside of nightclubs and pride parades rather than grocery stores -- so that the quota is easier to meet?

*READ THE FULL LETTER:

Ret. Conserv. Chaplains Letter

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails