The repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell seems to have picked up a bit of momentum recently, but it’s about to slam face first into the immovable object that is Tony Perkins. No, not the bisexual actor — the president of the Family Research Council, an organization co-founded by “reparative therapy” expert George Rekers (presumably the Council researches Family Rates for rentboys, so it’s kind of like Priceline.com if you’re looking to get Dad a “long-stroke” massage specialist for Fathers Day).
Unlike so many religious conservatives who base their opposition on a tendentious reading of scripture, Mr. Perkins is not a full-time clergyman, but a failed politician, and so his concerns about lifting DADT are entirely secular. In brief, he argues that if gays and lesbians (or “homosexuals” as he inevitably calls them, because use of the word “gay” requires “scare quotes” and his Shift finger is getting tired, and also because lesbians apparently don’t exist) are allowed to serve openly in the military, then chaplains won’t be able to thunderously denounce members of their flock based on a tendentious reading of scripture.
But what really makes Mr. Perkins the perfect and irrefutable exponent of the Those Who Serve, Serve Best Secretly faction, is his own military record. No chickenhawk he, as the Editor of CNN’s Belief Blog notes, Mr. Perkins is “a Marine veteran,” and therefore has the training, the experience, and above all, the same hard-won moral authority as Charles Whitman and Lee Harvey Oswald.
My Take: Ending ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ would undermine religious liberty
Some people think allowing open homosexuality in the military means nothing more than opening a door that was previously closed.
Yes, the closet door, specifically. And while you’re in there, would you see if you can find my other ski boot?
It means much more than that. It would mean simultaneously ushering out the back door anyone who disapproves of homosexual conduct
Had this been a Townhall column, that sentence would have ended with “(pun intended)” so — thanks, nameless CNN editor!
whether because of legitimate privacy and health concerns or because of moral or religious convictions.
Yes, if the most important thing to you is privacy, you should definitely join the Service. But I think the “health concerns” are overblown, since military medics demonstrated their ability to swiftly quarantine at-risk populations in 1976, when they contained an outbreak of Cooties at West Point.
This outcome is almost inevitable, because pro-homosexual activists have made it clear that merely lifting the “ban” on openly homosexual military personnel will not satisfy them.
They are also demanding the military sponsor “Mojito Mondays.”
The stand-alone bills that have been introduced to overturn the 1993 law, such as S. 3065, call explicitly for:
“Revision of all equal opportunity and human relations regulations, directives, and instructions to add sexual orientation nondiscrimination to the Department of Defense Equal Opportunity policy and to related human relations training programs.”
While not in the defense authorization bill amendment approved by the House of Representatives and a Senate committee last week…
“…I thought I would pull it out of my ass anyway, because my Thai anal beads are still soaking in dishwashing liquid.”
…this goal will undoubtedly be accomplished administratively as part of the “necessary policies and regulations” mandated by that amendment.
This means that all 1.4 million members of the U.S. military will be subject to sensitivity training intended to indoctrinate them into the myths of the homosexual movement: that people are born “gay” and cannot change and that homosexual conduct does no harm to the individual or to society.
What’s more harmful, being gay, or being persecuted for being gay? Some people might say it’s the latter, which would only force society to slap them again while weeping into its beer and screaming, “Why do you make me hurt you?!“
Anyone who points to the mountain of evidence to the contrary
“…I had it around here somewhere…Honey! I’m trying to make a point about the gays — have you seen my mountain?”
- or merely expresses the personal conviction that sex should be reserved for marriage between one man and one woman – runs the risk of receiving a negative performance evaluation for failing to support the military’s “equal opportunity policy” regarding “sexual orientation.”
There should be some sort of affirmative action program for bigots, to help them break through the glasshole ceiling.
For no other offense than believing what all the great monotheistic religions have believed for all of history
…that each of the others is WRONG and should be KILLED!
some service members will be denied promotion, will be forced out of the service altogether, or will simply choose not to reenlist.
But they’ll find positions waiting for them in the Minutemen, or Michigan Militia.
Other citizens will choose not to join the military in the first place. The numbers lost will dwarf the numbers gained by opening the ranks to practicing homosexuals.
That’s why it’s important to discriminate against minorities — it doesn’t affect your bottom line as much. Thanks, Free Market!
This pro-homosexual political correctness has already begun to infect the military.
When Tony’s right, he’s .
As an ordained minister and a Marine Corps veteran, I was invited to speak at a prayer event at Andrews Air Force Base earlier this year. I had every intention of delivering a spiritual message, not a political one.
But the invitation was withdrawn after I criticized President Barack Obama’s call to open the military to homosexuality in his State of the Union address. The base chaplain told me they had received some complaints – about a dozen. I pointed out that orchestrating a handful of calls was a simple task for homosexual activist groups.
They studied Telephone Use under Saul Alinsky and Lady Gaga.
If I was blacklisted merely for supporting existing law, what will happen to those who oppose the new, politically correct law?
They might have to conceal their true selves and live a lie in order to get along with the majority. Oh Irony, you are indeed a cruel, jackbooted mistress. Do you take Discover Card?
Those most likely to suffer are military chaplains. While some in the ranks will simply choose not to exercise their First Amendment rights in order to preserve their careers, this is not an option for chaplains. Their ministry is to proclaim the moral and theological teachings of their faith.
Chaplains who don’t get up on a table in the mess hall on Shrimp Scampi night and rant about the sanctity of Old Testament dietary laws can be charged with malfeasance.
But under the new regulations, will they be free to preach from the entire Bible?
Even the really goofy parts?
“And if you take a homo’s balls in your hand and squeeze real hard, he won’t be able to enter the Tabernacle!”
Or will they be forced to excise the many passages declaring homosexual conduct to be a sin?
It should be stressed at least as much as that part about collecting the foreskins of your dead enemies (this is the part about fighting Muslims that’s really frustrating and unsatisfying).
In their counseling role, military chaplains assist all service members who come to them, even if they are of other faith traditions.
But if you’re of another sexual orientation, then kindly roast in Hell. It’s one thing to worship a heathen god, but if you don’t venerate the Vaj, a chaplain is legally obliged to stone you to death.
But if a homosexual seeks counseling regarding his personal relationships, will the chaplain be free to recommend therapy to overcome homosexual attractions? Or will he be forced to affirm a lifestyle that his faith condemns?
This is a complex issue and we should probably consult an expert. You have Dr. Reker’s phone number, don’t you, Tony?
While chaplains are members of the military, they must be “endorsed” by a sponsoring religious body. Denominations that are unequivocal in holding to a biblical standard of sexual morality may stop endorsing military chaplains rather than allow them to compromise their principles.
What? Fewer inflexible, sanctimonious scolds in combat areas? The men will be so disappointed.
This may result in a chaplain corps that has plenty of Unitarian ministers and homosexual Episcopal priests, but a shortage of clergy to minister to the largest religious groups in America, such as Roman Catholics (whose catechism declares that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered”)
And who better to speak with authority on matters of sexuality morality than the Vatican. But even before priestly pedophila became common knowledge, the laity had adopted a pick-and-choose approach to dogma — or haven’t you spent much time lately pushing your plate past the stream trays of American Catholicism?
or Southern Baptists (whose Baptist Faith and Message declares that “Christians should oppose racism, every form of greed, selfishness, and vice, and all forms of sexual immorality, including adultery, homosexuality, and pornography”).
Interestingly, the areas where Southern Baptism flourishes are also the states which produce the most racism and divorce, and consume the most pornography. So once again, kudos for observing the dictum, “write what you know.”
It was religious liberty that drew the Pilgrims to America and it is religious liberty that leads off our Bill of Rights.
Actually, it was religious fanaticism that drew them to America, and a major purpose of the First Amendment was to protect the country from people like the Pilgrims.
But overturning the American military’s centuries-old ban on homosexual conduct, codified in a 1993 law
How can we overturn it now? The law dates to 1993, it’s an ancient tradition! We might as well give up our flint adzes, or slavery!
would mean placing sexual libertinism – a destructive left-wing social dogma found nowhere in the Constitution – above religious liberty, our nation’s first freedom.
Remember, equal rights for gays means fewer and inferior rights rights for you, because Liberty is a zero-sum game.