Gay sex immoral says US general

#76
#76
Sex with multiple partners, adultery, lying, cheating, stealing, sex out of wedlock, etc is immoral as well. But yet politicians in DC who do this on a daily basis and are reelected to office get a pass. Why is that?
 
#80
#80
allvol123 said:
You are correct. But none of that makes what the general said to be incorrect.
Click to expand...
It matters not whether the CJCS was correct or incorrect. He was speaking out of his lane. He made statements that did not need to be made. It was reckless and negligent of the current situation the military faces with regard to the American public.
 
#81
#81
He has a right to speak his mind. Have plenty of respect for that. People don't like his opinion, fine, get over it.
 
#82
#82
And now when the military needs complete focus on military matters, he has personally brought the military leadership directly into the political arena. Another distraction, this time self-inflicted, is not what the military needs.
 
#83
#83
He does have the right to speak his mind and to accept the consequences of doing so. He is the CJCS, therefore subject to military laws and regulations, not civilian laws and regulations. He is not permitted to attach his name to political statements.
 
#84
#84
allvol123 said:
He has a right to speak his mind. Have plenty of respect for that. People don't like his opinion, fine, get over it.
Click to expand...

People in the military do not have a right to speak their mind. They can say what they want but there is a policy of consequences. Freedoms such as speech that we enjoy are limited in the military. And again, it is not his place to make statements like this. If others at lower levels are reprimanded for policy statements and political speeches, he should be restrained from this as well.
 
#85
#85
Well then I have learned something I did not know. I didn't know military personnel were restricted on expressing their personal beliefs.
 
#86
#86
I agree with you UT, but here's a question/thought not directly to you just everyone in general.

It seems to me that in our society that it is ok for gay people like Ellen, Rosie O'Donnell, John Amechi and plenty of others to defend gay rights push a gay lifestyle in all of our faces. But when a person speaks against that lifestyle they are accused of being racist or discriminatory or close minded by the people who claim to be open minded. It is argued that the gov't can't or shouldn't legislate what happens in a persons bedroom but hasn't the gay community brought it to the public forum? With gay parades, gay pride day at places like Disney World and tv shows showing that lifestyle hasn't it moved from the bedroom to the outside world?
 
#87
#87
TherealUT may be able to shed more light but yes speech is restricted. Let therealUT say what would happen if he put his uniform on and in front of a camera/the public he made the same statement.
 
#88
#88
JZ, if Robert Gates made this then there would be no issue on whether Pace should have made this. Gates is not in uniform and can set policy. Yes there still would have been outrage, as would with ANY major issue, but there would be less concern and less detriment to the Armed Forces had Gates made this rather than Pace.
 
#89
#89
I'm with you CS I guess I was just talking in general terms and not specifically about this case.
 
#90
#90
JZVOL said:
I agree with you UT, but here's a question/thought not directly to you just everyone in general.

It seems to me that in our society that it is ok for gay people like Ellen, Rosie O'Donnell, John Amechi and plenty of others to defend gay rights push a gay lifestyle in all of our faces. But when a person speaks against that lifestyle they are accused of being racist or discriminatory or close minded by the people who claim to be open minded. It is argued that the gov't can't or shouldn't legislate what happens in a persons bedroom but hasn't the gay community brought it to the public forum? With gay parades, gay pride day at places like Disney World and tv shows showing that lifestyle hasn't it moved from the bedroom to the outside world?
Click to expand...
I will answer this by section.

First, Ellen, Rosie, etc. do not wield extraordinary government/military power. They are free to say what they want. Also, the privately owned media is free to report it and comment on it however they feel appropriate.

Second, most people who speak out against the homosexual lifestyle speak out against allowing them certain priviledges or rights. These priviledges and/or rights that some want to deny them range from government recognized marriages to heaven.

Finally, Disney can do what it wants on its own private property. TV producers are going to continue to put out a product that sells. The show Ellen, which was a sitcom originally marketed to families, went off the air when Ellen came out of the closet. Will & Grace was always marketed to young adults (a generation that is much more open minded on the topic of sexuality.)

The bottom line is this:
You can rule your family how you choose. I do not condone the homosexual lifestyle, however, I know that plenty do not condone my appreciation for fine alcohol and cigars. I am not going to stand by and watch some take their rights away, because one day someone could very well move to take mine away.

Does the government recognize my marriage, between my wife and I? Yes. Do I care that they recognize it? No. I care that the Catholic Church recognizes my marriage. If the government came out tomorrow and said they are not going to recognize marriage anymore, that they will leave it up to private institutions, I would be overjoyed!
 
#91
#91
CSpindizzy said:
TherealUT may be able to shed more light but yes speech is restricted. Let therealUT say what would happen if he put his uniform on and in front of a camera/the public he made the same statement.
Click to expand...
Let's just say that it would be the last time I put my uniform on...
 
#92
#92
UT I basically agree with most of what you said. I did say though I wasn't specifically talking about this case, just a more general observation. For example when Amechi came out he was considered brave and so on but if they had of also had an opposing view point(not Tim Hardaway) that person would be considered close minded, racist or being discriminatory. Also Amechi didn't come out to liberate himself but he did it to make money, which is fine, but most of these people who publicly come out do it to make money or get attention not because they are so liberated after the fact.

I DO AGREE the officer should have just kept his mouth shut because no good can come from those comments.
 
#93
#93
therealUT said:
Let's just say that it would be the last time I put my uniform on...
Click to expand...


So what is the reasoning for this?

I assume to prohibit military personnel from questioning superiors or strategies publicly? (Or what?)

Also, how far does it go? If the general says he doesn't like cheesbrugers because he is against slaughtering animals for food, is that a problem?
 
#94
#94
I have zero military background or knowledge on how they do business so this is just an opinion that could be very wrong.

TO ME when a person freely joins the military they become "property"of the US. The military shouldn't and I say shouldn't be a political institution but should serve the interests of the country. Therefore to me you then give up your civilian rights you shouldn't speak out on political or social topics because that will cause division among the troops.

Again no military background so I could be very wrong.
 
#96
#96
You are actually more right than you think, JZVOL. War is an instrument of policy, therefore, militaries are tools of policy makers. Militaries do not set policy, nor should they.
 
#97
#97
MyBloodRunnethOrange said:
The point is that you cannot make an argument that homosexuality is immoral without the biblical texts that prohibit it. There is no other reason why anyone should conclude that a personal act between two consenting adults, which causes harm to no one would be immoral.
Click to expand...
And where do you base your moral stands, or do you, just like all of the other non-biblical moral relativists, not believe in absolutes? That's a real easy way to approach the world. I couldn't care less about homosexuality, but a lot of that morality stuff is to be found in all forms of religion.
 
#98
#98
the "immorality" of homosexuality is also expressed in authoritarian, secular political movements like communism, nazism, socialism and fascism.

Homosexuals were persecuted mercilessly under Stalin. Their so-called "deviant" lifestyle was viewed as harmful to the state.
 
#99
#99
allvol123 said:
So what is the reasoning for this?

I assume to prohibit military personnel from questioning superiors or strategies publicly? (Or what?)

Also, how far does it go? If the general says he doesn't like cheesbrugers because he is against slaughtering animals for food, is that a problem?
Click to expand...
Military personnel should not use their position to discuss matters of public policy.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top