Homosexuals In The Armed Services

[kujo]

[quote name='Truthseeker777' post='1219554' date='Mar 25 2007, 09:40 PM']The problem i think you as a God fearing Christian in a dangerous battle situation might have is protection.
Say you are in a humvee and you have a practising homosexual next to you. Is the armour of God there or not?I know from expeiriance just sharing a house with non-believers made it possible for all kinds of "evil" to enter the house.Like anything in life the devil needs an reason for intruding and being with an homosexual is an open door for the devil and is definetely a kink in your armour. God detest homosexuals and they are demon infested because of their despicable sins and actions. Being in a battle situation with such an individual must be a very "unsafe" feeling. Just because the "society" feel that gays are "nice" people does not mean God's word have changed. Many new bible translations are gay friendly and have taken out the word 'sodomite'. We as Christians must not hate these people but must stand up against their sins!!!! It only takes one rotten apple.[/quote]

I don't really know what to make of your post. On own hand, I would agree that our society has become too permissive of sin, to the point where it is encouraged rather than detested. However, I don't think that allowing a person to serve his/her country as an AMERICAN who happens to be a homosexual does anything but give us one more soldier. I would concede that we would want to be careful so as to make sure that a homosexual subculture does not occur, I simply don't agree with excluding them outright.

And I also applaud your views on these new "translations" of the Bible. It's amazing how some of these Evangelicals who are so "into" the Bible would stoop so low as to change around the Word of God (case in point: "The Word" translation....which makes me want to vomit Rev 3:16 style).

[Socrates]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1219057' date='Mar 24 2007, 09:35 PM']Actually if you read the article that I linked to earlier, it has the stats you're looking for
While it certainly is not the only or even the largest cause of people being separated, it is a cause. Just because there are other reasons people leave the military doesn't mean this one can't be addressed.

And I hear what you're saying, I really do, and I understand that you have a great respect and honor for the military, which is great. But in the conversations I have had with people who are in the military now, the reality does not match up with the ideal (it rarely does). If you think that there is not already a "gay subculture" in the military, you are grossly mistaken. Every one of the service people I know in the military knows gay and lesbian service members. The subculture is there, and people know about it. And, since homosexuality is not a new thing, I am certain that there have been homosexuals in the armed forces in the past -- especially since several of the wars we've fought involved a draft.

And I don't think that education or aptitude are considerations that should be tossed aside lightly. I still think that the main purpose here is to do the job. Simply because a person is gay or lesbian does not mean that they cannot acquit themselves on the field of battle, and do so honorably. All the generals you mentioned -- is it their sexual orientation that made them honorable, or the actions they took in service to their country? And I am certain that some of these war heroes were adulterers or philanderers -- should their proclivities serve to strip them of their honor? I don't believe so.

Homosexuality is immoral. I am not arguing that in the least. But I don't think that a person's sexual orientation means they are less deserving of respect and honor.[/quote]
Look, I've known plenty of people in the military myself, and I am not under any illusion that the military is any bastion of sexual morality. And of course, the reality of any institution rarely lives up to its stated ideals. However, is that reason to abandon the ideals altogether? Of course people can and do break the military's rules against homosexuality (and other things as well), but the fact that people break the rules does not mean the rules should be done away with altogether. It does not mean that the military should end it's time-honored rules against homosexuality. Should we now end rules against anything whatsoever simply because some people disregard them? That would be the logical conclusion of your line of reasoning. It is similar to the arguments of people who say that while abortion may be killing innocent human beings, the law should do nothing against it, because after all, plenty of women would get illegal abortions. (I believe abortion to be a more serious issue, btw, but you follow my argument.)
And while there may be an existing "gay" subculture in the military, this does not mean that is a good thing, and the problem would likely become much worse if homosexual activity were openly allowed and condoned.

And are you suggesting that the military's code against adultery should be done away with as well? (And the men I mentioned were epitomes of morality and honor, not adulterers and philanderers, btw.) And are you suggesting that all the military leaders who maintained the code against sodomy and adultery didn't know what they were doing?
Should we likewise do away with other standards of honor and morality as well (such as rules against lying and stealing), so long as the soldiers are effective battlefield killers?

If we are simply to abandon any standards of morality because there are people not following them, we quickly wind up with complete nihilism.

And if a segment of society is at least trying to maintain [i]some[/i] ideals and standards of honor and morality, why are so many Catholics here so quick to oppose that??

That just boggles the mind, and is quite frankly very depressing.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[b]why not also the immorality of abortion?[/b] How does someone having an abortion have to do with this thread?

[Socrates]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1219308' date='Mar 25 2007, 01:50 PM']However, again if you deny them the rights to fight for this great country, then you also should deny them citizenship because that is what our troops are fighting for, for the rights that we have in this country, even the right to be gay.

Reza[/quote]
There is no "right" to commit sodomy - not in the natural moral law of God, nor in the U.S. Constitution.

The American Founding Fathers would have been horrified at the suggestion that they were fighting for a "right to be gay."

(Even Thomas Jefferson, that great champion of "liberty," recommended that sodomites be punished by the state with castration.)

The American military code forbade homosexuality from the beginning, so treating homosexuality in the military as a basic American freedom is ignorant and false.

[Socrates]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1219575' date='Mar 25 2007, 08:04 PM'][b]why not also the immorality of abortion?[/b] How does someone having an abortion have to do with this thread?[/quote]
Abortion should be banned too, for that matter. I was making a comparison. If you can't follow it, start another thread on abortion.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1219575' date='Mar 25 2007, 08:04 PM'][b]why not also the immorality of abortion?[/b] How does someone having an abortion have to do with this thread?[/quote]

Because both are immoral grave sins, that is what it has to do with this topic. If one is allowed, both is only fair.

[kujo]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1219632' date='Mar 25 2007, 11:28 PM']Because both are immoral grave sins, that is what it has to do with this topic. If one is allowed, both is only fair.[/quote]

Well, one could argue that the circumstances surrounding the two are different--one is a violent act while the other, at least on the surface, has is a victimless. Thus, they would not be on level ground.

Edited March 26, 2007 by kujo

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='kujo' post='1219543' date='Mar 25 2007, 07:20 PM']Then we ARE creating an army based on Catholic morals?

I thought this was the country of the free... [/quote]


I don't understand your point here, murder is immoral so it is banned, homosexuality is immoral so it is banned in the armed forces. And both are gravely wicked. The argument you use sounds very secular to me, I do not mean to offend but Pro-abort's use the same line of argument when it comes to abortion, "Oh your trying to put your Catholic morals on me."


And we're not "creating" an army based on morals, its an already existing army with morals against immoral sin, ie sodomy. Rather the question should be, why should we create an army based on anti-catholic immorality?

[kujo]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1219645' date='Mar 25 2007, 11:39 PM']I don't understand your point here, murder is immoral so it is banned, homosexuality is immoral so it is banned in the armed forces. And both are gravely wicked. The argument you use sounds very secular to me, I do not mean to offend but Pro-abort's use the same line of argument when it comes to abortion, "Oh your trying to put your Catholic morals on me."
And we're not "creating" an army based on morals, its an already existing army with morals against immoral sin, ie sodomy. Rather the question should be, why should we create an army based on anti-catholic immorality?[/quote]

Once again, I agree that homosexuality is immoral; however, there are no safety issues involved in it. Banning or allowing homosexuals will not affect the safety of the other servicemen and women. However, abortions are an offense on human life and are immoral because of it.

And some arguments are valid in some circumstances and not in others. Case in point, my argument here. It does not hold any water in arguing for abortion "rights." I do feel that it applies here.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='kujo' post='1219641' date='Mar 25 2007, 09:35 PM']Well, one could argue that the circumstances surrounding the two are different--one is a violent act while the other, at least on the surface, has no victim. Thus, they would not be on level ground.[/quote]


They are both gravely immoral sins, banned by God. Thus, they are mighty close to being on the same level ground. And both have real victims, but only one has a innocent victim. And two consenting adults is the lamest accuse man has ever used to commit grave sin.

[kujo]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1219655' date='Mar 25 2007, 11:46 PM']They are both gravely immoral sins, banned by God. Thus, they are mighty close to being on the same level ground. And both have real victims, but only one has a innocent victim. And two consenting adults is the lamest accuse man has ever used to commit grave sin.[/quote]

Again, I agree with you here. I am so glad to be in accord with you, my brother.

I just don't think that the United States armed services should be concerned with this matter.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='kujo' post='1219654' date='Mar 25 2007, 09:46 PM']Once again, I agree that homosexuality is immoral; however, there are no safety issues involved in it. Banning or allowing homosexuals will not affect the safety of the other servicemen and women. However, abortions are an offense on human life and are immoral because of it.[/quote]


But abortions will not greatly affect the safety of other servicemen and women either. It will kill a child but it would not endanger the servicemen and women. Abortion and Homosexuality are offenses on human life and are gravely immoral. And there are safety issues involved with homosexuality as well, sexual deceases such as AIDS, among others afflict homosexuals at much higher number than heterosexuals. Which would unlike abortion directly effect servicemen and women.

[quote name='kujo' post='1219654' date='Mar 25 2007, 09:46 PM']And some arguments are valid in some circumstances and not in others. Case in point, my argument here. It does not hold any water in arguing for abortion "rights." I do feel that it applies here.[/quote]


Homosexuality and Abortion are gravely immoral, they both are against Catholic and natural morality. If we can not banned one from of gravely immoral sin, there is little reason to ban the another form of gravely immoral sin.