Gays In Military

[kujo]

Ah yes, the Socrates Religious Quote from the Founding Fathers Dump. It's like the vernal equinox.

[PhuturePriest]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1338502941' post='2438948']
And officially sanctioning sexual perversion certainly does nothing to evangelize "awaken the love of the true and the good." I think that this is a symptom of much greater problems in our government and society, but the erosion of moral standards, in the military or anything else, is not something that should be supported and applauded by Catholics.


While the U.S. is a "secular state" in the sense that it does not have any official tax-supported established national church (per the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment), it was certainly not founded as a radical secularist state in the modern sense that all considerations of moral principles are to be excluded from the law. [i]That[/i] notion would be utterly alien to all of the American founding fathers, who whether they were theologically orthodox Christians or not, were unanimous regarding the importance of morality and virtue to a free republic. The idea that American law ought to be devoid of any and all moral principle only started becoming commonplace in this country in the late 20th century.

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." ~ John Adams

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim tribute to patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness -- these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. . . . reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles." ~ George Washington

"Laws without morals are in vain." ~ Benjamin Franklin

"No government can continue good but under the control of the people; and . . . . their minds are to be informed by education what is right and what wrong; to be encouraged in habits of virtue and to be deterred from those of vice . . . . These are the inculcations necessary to render the people a sure basis for the structure and order of government." ~ Thomas Jefferson

"To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea." ~ James Madison

"The diminution of public virtue is usually attended with that of public happiness, and the public liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals." ~ Samuel Adams

"No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people, but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles." ~ George Mason

"Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is divine. . . . Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other." ~ James Wilson (signer of the Declaration of Independence and Supreme Court Justice)

(To use just a very few of countless examples)

As rules banning homosexual sodomy from the US armed forces had been in place since the Revolutionary War (and were never publicly opposed until very recent times), it's nonsensical to act as though continuing a ban on active homosexuality in the military would be some kind of dangerous radical "theocratic" break from America's founding principles.

I think the currently popular, yet entirely nonsensical, idea that American law must have nothing to whatever with morality is one of the falsest, stupidest, yet most pernicious ones today, with implications going far beyond the "gay rights" issues. It's a shame that so many Catholics seem to have fallen for that claptrap.
[/quote]

I've been closely monitoring who and what I give props to so as to not run out, but this was prop-worthy.

Edited May 31, 2012 by FuturePriest387

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1338445699' post='2438564']
Dunno if there's gonna be [color=#282828]more to this post, but I appreciate the charity in it. I was being sincere in stating that sub[/color][color=#282828]mission to the Church is the defining struggle of [/color][color=#282828]my faith walk up til this point. I don't often get vulnerable on Phat[/color][color=#282828]mass--or anywhere else, for that [/color][color=#282828]matter. But when it's [/color][color=#282828]met with prudence and care, I take note and give phishy props.[/color]
[/quote]

Yes, there should have been more to that post. I'm not sure how exactly it was lost. I was going to give an example of how the Church is a stumbling block like Christ (1 Corinthians 1:23) by noting an example given by Bishop Sheen, who's quote I cannot now find. But his point was do not think it would be any easier if we lived during Christ's earthly life to except His truth, than it is to except the Church now when she teaches His truth. I was then going to state something very close to the passage from Matt 11:29 which USAirways posted in reply to me.

As well as mention my own struggles. In some way or more ways than one every Catholic struggles with the faith brother Kujo, even I. One of the greatest would be the duty, which belongs to every Catholic, to defend the Faith to the best of one's ability. I've always attempted to make these words by Archbishop Sheen a moto or rule.


"There is no subject on which the average mind is so much confused as the subject of tolerance.... Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to principles. Intolerance applies only to principles, but never to persons."
-- Archbishop Fulton Sheen

It is a struggle to keep this rule at times, and I have indeed fallen from it, as you may well recall, but more often than not I have not. The struggle I find most difficult to bare is when I do keep to this rule and the Catholic duty to promote and protect the hard teachings of the Church, I am like other Christians who do so, like Christ during His earthly life, become the subject of the hate, or bitterness of the world. It can be rather... well lonely not fitting in with rest of what appears to be the majority. I cannot describe how hard it is upon my soul to be thought a cold hearted hater and proud Pharisee because I do not bend to worldly notions and false principles. I can do nothing about it save offer it up to God in prayer, and lovely praying for every soul that I have encountered in such discussions as if they were a family member.

There are other areas with which I struggle with as well. But the point of all of that is that I know what it is like for you to struggle with the faith, the Church and Christ. You have been in my prayers for quite some time now, and I will continue to pray that you find with the help of God some way to meet and master as much as possible the struggles you face in our fallen world.

God Bless!

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1338484794' post='2438714']
You can stand for whatever you want. But just because you do it in the name of "traditional moral standards" doesn't change the facts of the society we live in. The emergence of things like gay marriage and "gay rights" is not about the morality wars that conservatives like to wage. It's about a democratic, technocratic, industrialist society that has been in progress for centuries. Conservatives want to preserve the good old days, but capitalism, democracy, industry, free markets...these things don't care about the good old days, and in fact, their maturation inevitably demolishes the good old days. That's the modernization that has made America into the empire that conservatives love so much.

The same conservatives who will defend the atomic bomb in one breath will rally against the repeal of don't ask don't tell in another breath. It never occurs to them that these are both examples of unnatural modernity. The conservative conception of what's unnatural is fixated on morality warfare. But the microwaves in our houses are unnatural. Unless we get the root of the problem, which is the principles on which modernity is based (and I mean modernity broadly, not merely the last 100 years), then excuse me if I don't join conservatives in their chants of "God save the Tsar!" all for the sake of the good old days.

That's not to say I am for or against the repeal of don't ask don't tell. I just think that the whole debate is a symptom of a larger problem, and obsessing over the symptom is like trying to cure gangrene by cleaning your foot with soap and water.

Ironically, even though you accuse me of defeatism before the so-called "Inevitable March of History," my point is just the opposite...that the only way out is to disentangle ourselves from the march of modern history. But conservatives don't want to go there, because they believe in the liberal-democratic order that has given rise to America as we know it...they just want it to be a liberal-democratic order with no gays visible in the armed forces.
[/quote]
Sorry, but I can't quite follow exactly what you're trying to say here. Though I don't think your sweeping generalizations about "conservatives" are entirely accurate (though I doubtless am guilty of doing the same thing regarding "liberals" - it's a laziness we're all prone to). I consider myself quite conservative, yet have doubts concerning the mass-bombings of civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki (under a Democrat commander-in-chief, incidentally). (Though this action was certainly understandable, given the Japanese absolute refusal to surrender under any circumstances. However, I think military targets could have been used instead, and it would still put the fear of the Lord in the Japs). Also, plenty of "paleo-cons" are strongly opposed to the idea of an international American empire (see Pat Buchanan).

I agree that the whole "gays in the military" issue is just a symptom of much larger problems in our society, and the wholesale abandonment of moral principles. I just don't think that any lowering of moral standards is a good thing which should be supported by Christians.

As for the rest of it, I'm not sure exactly what you're advocating. I think there is some confusion caused by the traditional term "unnatural vice" to refer to sodomy. This term means that it is contrary to natural purpose of the sexual act, not "unnatural" in the sense of artificial.

Microwaves, cars, and cellphones are all "unnatural" in that (quite different) sense of the word, as are wearing clothes and glasses, building houses, and agriculture. Yet none of these things are immoral in themselves, and I think you can support moral principles without being some kind of neo-Luddite. Likewise with the free market and such. Technology and civilization are part of what makes us human and separates us from the animals. The alternative is to live like the monkeys in the trees, which I don't regard as a desirable goal for humanity.

Edited May 31, 2012 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1338503299' post='2438950']
Ah yes, the Socrates Religious Quote from the Founding Fathers Dump. It's like the vernal equinox.
[/quote]
As are the perennial "we are a Secular Democracy, and therefore as good Americans, we must keep morality out of the law lest we become a horrible theocracy" posts.

Sorry, but that garbage is just too easy and fun to refute.

[kujo]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1338491288' post='2438821']
What about people who don't believe in heaven? Even they can sense and give value to good or bad in the present without awaiting a 'better' afterlife. It's also part of the social nature of humans that the majority aren't purely narccisistic, we recognize the benefits of a community.

There is no ultimate definition of what's right or wrong that can be applied to every situation. Heck, Catholics can't agree on the morality of abortion, bathing suits, holding hands, or the death penalty. Even the Catechism will remind you to be obedienct to your own conscience. The friction is in all religions, philosphies, and socities. There is always a tension of protecting the individual and protecting the group. There isn't a perfect societal philosophy that falls betwen the 'Borgs of Star Trek and the anarchy of the Lord of the Flies. Most people will go along with the majority, as long as it's personally peaceful. Many think deeply enough to have morals and ethics that guide their behavior and associate with like minded people. A few are so sure they're correct, whether due to hubris or belief in the codified behavior of a group (religion, philosopy), they feel committed to guide/manipulate/cajole others to agree or behave accordingly.
Nevertheless, a community does have the right and power to establish guidelines for behaviors as a group as it tries to balance what's best for the individual vs the group.
[/quote]

First off, props for the nerd references. Not [color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]much of a Star Trek guy, but I a[/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]m a pretty huge LOTR dude.[/size][/font][/color]

[color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]Secondly, the phrase "everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die," was [/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]meant to convey the idea that everyone has a pretty good idea of what they believe is right, but seldo[/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]m are they so convicted so as to [/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]make the sacrifices necessary to achieve [/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]those goals. [/size][/font][/color]

[kujo]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1338507728' post='2438983']
As are the perennial "we are a Secular Democracy, and therefore as good Americans, we must keep morality out of the law lest we become a horrible theocracy" posts.

Sorry, but that garbage is just too easy and fun to refute.
[/quote]

Never said we [color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]must keep [/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]morality out of the law. What I did say, or what I [/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]mean to say, is that there will always be a divergence of belief about what constitutes [/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]morality. Catholics have a fairly different idea of what [/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]moral behavior is than, say, an atheist. The box has the sa[/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica][size=3]me label, but the contents are different. That's what debates and discussions are for.[/size][/font][/color]

[qfnol31]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1338507895' post='2438984']
Secondly, the phrase "everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die," was meant to convey the idea that everyone has a pretty good idea of what they believe is right, but seldom are they so convicted so as to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve those goals.
[/quote]What I wanted to point out here is that you seem to believe that all people have some sort of common idea of morality. Do good. Would you agree with that?

How do you feel about ideas like "don't steal" or "don't murder?"

[kujo]

[quote name='qfnol31' timestamp='1338508146' post='2438988']
What I wanted to point out here is that you seem to believe that all people have some sort of common idea of morality. Do good. Would you agree with that?

How do you feel about ideas like "don't steal" or "don't murder?"
[/quote]

I see where you're going with this, and I appreciate the effort. But truthfully, you're not going to get me to say that codifying moral principles like protection against theft or murder into laws is on the same plane of existence as preventing 2 gay dudes from getting married. I believe that there is an enormous difference between these infractions against the inherent right to safety and property, and the asinine attempts to block a civil ceremony between individuals, with the idea that the government would be somehow promoting the "common good."

[qfnol31]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1338508050' post='2438987']
Never said we must keep morality out of the law. What I did say, or what I mean to say, is that there will always be a divergence of belief about what constitutes morality. Catholics have a fairly different idea of what moral behavior is than, say, an atheist. The box has the same label, but the contents are different. That's what debates and discussions are for.
[/quote]I think part of Socrates' point is that you seem reluctant to admit of any convergence between what Catholics might say and what might be best/true. Without possibility of convergence, any debate is in fact pointless. (This is only because you equate Catholic politics and a theocracy too easily, when there is much more distinction present in the Catholic position.)

Close parentheses.

Edited May 31, 2012 by qfnol31

[qfnol31]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1338508386' post='2438990']


I see where you're going with this, and I appreciate the effort. But truthfully, you're not going to get me to say that codifying moral principles like protection against theft or murder into laws is on the same plane of existence as preventing 2 gay dudes from getting married. I believe that there is an enormous difference between these infractions against the inherent right to safety and property, and the asinine attempts to block a civil ceremony between individuals, with the idea that the government would be somehow promoting the "common good."
[/quote]Actually I figured that you probably wouldn't let me take it that far, but implicit in your posts recently is a lack of a recognition of common morality as even a possibility.

It makes it easier for me to know where you stand on issues.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1338444729' post='2438555']
If I follow, you're saying that the way in which we are to evangelize and "awaken the love of the true and the good" is to ban gays from the military.
Weird....didn't seem to work for the first 200 years of the US![/quote]


No my brother that is not what I am saying.


[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1338444729' post='2438555']
It would be fantastic if every individual in the US became a Christian and decided to enact laws reflecting that fact, including banning homosexuals from military service, teaching, and other roles deemed unsuitable. [/quote]

That would be more in line with what I am trying to portray, though not completely. And it is in fact possible. Nothing is impossible with God! If Pagan Rome, which allowed and approved of many more wicked and deplorable [u]acts[/u] than does the United States now, could be converted to a Christian society so to can any nation. But this cannot and will not happen if we are derelict in our duty.

The christians of the United States have already proven they can positively effect this nation with doing their duty for the social Kingship of Christ. The vast majority of those that fought against slavery where Christians, not secularist. The same is true for the Civil Rights movement, and today the Pro-life Movement.

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1338444729' post='2438555']
The fact is that the US isn't a Christian nation. It's a secular state with a set of laws that reflect [i]that[/i]
[/quote]

That depends on how one understands the word nation. As a people, the nation, the United States is a Christian nation, because the majority of her people are Christian, and have been since her founding. Also the state may not officially establish a religion but it has been greatly influenced by Christian spirituality, thought and morals. Much of American law and governmental foundation is based on Judeo-Christian values. Those that deny that are mistaken, or are intellectually or historically dishonest.

But even if we were to except that the United States is not a Christian nation, this does not give us a loophole out of our Catholic duty to infuse the Christian spirit into the mentality and mores, laws and structures of the communities in which we live. This would even be so if our nation was officially an atheist one, or a muslim one, or whatever. Our duty to the social Kingship of Christ would still be our duty which we must obey.

Edited May 31, 2012 by KnightofChrist

[qfnol31]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1338500532' post='2438931']

Interesting. According to that, only 39% of people who self-identify as Catholic oppose gay marriage.
Also interesting to see the trend according to level of education.

I also wonder if their wording of marriage had an impact...I too would state that I was opposed to gay marriage.

In any case, this was the survey I had in mind:
[url="http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx"]http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx[/url]

But this is all beside the issue at hand, which is pretty much just about DADT.
[/quote]The support and opposition is about equal among Catholics.

I am in the minority among people with a graduate degree. Oh well.

There is also the possibility of using these statistics to say that the military should be a reflection of the common understanding of morality. Furthermore, the federal government has yet to recognize homosexual unions, so why permit behavior that is directed to something not even recognized by the state?

[Laudate_Dominum]

I concur with whatever Aloysius has to say.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1338511587' post='2439019']
I concur with whatever Aloysius has to say.
[/quote]I think you chose the one person who has not weighed in on this point so far.