On Pace with the Gays

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Peter Pace, said in an interview that homosexuality was immoral. Of course, all the gay groups have gotten their panties in a wad. How dare the top military guy say what he thinks the military should do and how dare this man decide what is immoral. Leaving aside the generality that nothing is immoral to the gays and the liberal left, we would have to ask what allows society in general to decide what is immoral. If we said that adults having sex with children was immoral there would be no huge uproar from most people, except the sick perverts who are committing the acts. If we said it was immoral to murder someone there would be no outcry to “take it back.” The only time liberals cry immoral is when the murderer is put to death for his crime.

But homosexuals are a special breed. They have imposed themselves upon the rest of society and are trying to make the 90% of the population that is not gay accept the acts of the other 10%. Our laws are founded in Judeo-Christian laws and the most widely accepted book on morality is the Bible. I will admit that not all religions accept the Bible as authority but this country was founded on the principles in that book and it is still the basis for our laws. The Bible lays out very clearly that God intended for a man and a woman to share a life as one. The Old Testament calls homosexuality an abomination and the punishment for it is death. The Ten Commandments are God’s law and in them he says to honor thy father and mother. He did not say father and father or mother and mother. If he wanted it any other way he might have said honor your parents.

I am tired of people trying to tell me what I should feel is right. I am tired of the homosexuals trying to impose their will upon others. The military had a rule against homosexuality and Clinton changed that to don’t ask, don’t tell. This allowed gays to serve so long as they did not express their sexuality. This is not good enough for them so they are again trying to impose themselves upon an institution. General Pace was well within his right to say that homosexuality is immoral. He was brought up that way and his religious beliefs tell him that. For those who say that religion has no place you would do well to remember that we end our oaths with “so help me God.” Title 10 United States Code, section 502 does not make that phrase optional. Therefore God is invoked in the oath that General Pace and any other military member took. Asked about the situation Pace gave his honest answer and he is being excoriated.

I wonder, for the sake of argument, how it would have been if a different question had been asked. Suppose they asked him if a rapist should be allowed in the service and he said no because it is immoral to rape someone. How about if they asked if a child molester should be allowed in the military and his answer was no because that act is immoral. If rapists and child molesters made a stink and called Pace a bigot, do you think anyone would come to their defense? If no one came to their defense would that mean we agree with his assessment? If they made the stink should we call him on the carpet for it or should we respect his opinion as the highest ranking person in the military?

Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia took issue with what Pace said. Warner said that he disagrees that homosexuality is immoral. I guess when it comes to what men and women do in their own bedrooms Warner and the other amoral jackasses in Congress take issue with those who express views that are firmly rooted in their religious beliefs. So I have to wonder why it is that all these pompous asses were so upset with Mark Foley and his dirty messages. Jordan Edmund was nearly 18 when Foley sent the messages and there was no sexual contact between them. Why was everyone so upset that Foley was contacting this page and alluding to homosexual behavior and yet they are upset that Pace does not agree with homosexual behavior? Why did Congress drum a gay Congressman out of its membership but screams for gays to be in the military? I don’t want to hear any comments about the page being a child, he was a few weeks shy of 18 and could have enlisted in the service where, if the Congress and the gays get their way, he could have engaged in sexual behavior/

Homosexuality is immoral and it is an abomination. I really do not care if the gay community likes that or not because it is the way I see it and I will not change that point of view. Homosexuality is also not good for the good order and discipline of the service. There are people who would argue that gays are in the military right now and that is true but no one (or few) know who they are. If they were openly gay there would be problems. I think General Pace was absolutely correct and he should not back down from his opinion at all. If the gays do not like it, too bad.

The great societies of the past eventually failed. The Roman Empire, the Greeks, all of them fell by the wayside. One thing they had in common was a lot of immoral behavior and a large part of that behavior was homosexuality. The acceptance of homosexuality and the idea that this behavior is normal will lead us down the same path to destruction.

If homosexuality is so normal, why do they need special treatment? Why is AIDS so much more prevalent in that community? Why is everyone in society expected to accept them and their point of view but contrary opinions belong to bigots? Ninety percent of the population is not homosexual. It would appear that the majority rules and even if that is hard to understand, just look at nature and learn. The sex organs of a man and a woman were meant to fit together. No such provision exists for men or women exclusively.

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

7 Responses to “On Pace with the Gays”

  1. TexasFred says:

    And Gen. Pace is right too, and so far he is sticking to his guns…

  2. Gen. Pace calls homosexuality immoral

    The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Monday he considers homosexuality to be immoral and t…

  3. tim says:

    You are willing to tell our troops, gay or not, that they are immoral? While they are on the battle field fighting for you?! You are going to hell little puppy because if anything God hates hypocrites.

  4. Big Dog says:

    So Tim,
    What you are saying is that it is OK and not immoral for people to disobey the word of God?

    I can say that homosexual behavior is immoral because it is, no matter who is engaged in it. That is not a hypocrite. A hypocrite would be a homosexual saying these things.

    I understand that command of the English language is not a strong suit for some.

  5. Schatzee says:

    For Tim’s benefit (and anyone curious) I have included in this comment a definition of hypocrite. I think Pace is well within his rights — rights that he serves his country to protect — have an opinion regarding homosexuality and express it freely as he did. I was glad to see he did not apologize for the statement as he should not be shamed into denying his beliefs and/or religion by anyone.

    This type of behavior is becoming more and more prevalent – a minority trying to force acceptance of their “beliefs” onto everyone as a “right.”

    And I would have to say that someone who claims that no one has a right to determine whose behavior is or is not moral certainly should not be claiming to determine who is or is not headed to hell, now should he???

    HYPOCRITE
    1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
    2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

  6. Brian McCarty says:

    You refer to the Bible to jutify your belief that homosexuality is immoral. Thing is, the Bible also requires the death penalty for disrespectful children, forbids the eating of meat cooked rare, and obligates the man who rapes a virgin to buy fer from her father and marry her. Where is your support for these Biblical rules? Or do you just cherry pick Bible quotes to justify your bigotries?

    You say that people on the left think nothing is immoral-prove it. I am on the left and I think rape and child molesters are VERY immoral and I fail to see what they have in common with consenting adults in same sex relationships. I consider you grouping gays with child molesters and rapists to be immoral.

    Please educate us as to “the problems” the British and Israeli armies are experiencing because they allow gays to serve openly and alongside heterosexual soldiers.

    Please explain how homosexulaity is not “normal”. I’d love to hear your explanation that no doubt does not take science, history and logic into account.

    You call homosexuality an “abomination”. Why? Cause the Bible tells you so? the Bible also calls eating shrimp an abomination–you agree I assume?

    Are you sexually confused yourself? The bigest bigots like you usually are.

  7. Big Dog says:

    I do not recall saying that the British or the Israelis had problems. I don’t know and I do not care. I care about our military. In Britain they still have a lot of racial prejudice against blacks, do you want to bring that back here?

    Up until DSM IV came out homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder. That was changed to appease the gay groups who protested about being called abnormal. It is not natural and it is a methodology that prevents the re-population of the species. That is the history or the classification of it. The logic was hit upon. Logic dictates that in order for a species to propagate then 2 of the species must reproduce. T same sex couples can not do that. Therefore if this happened, logically, the species would cease to exist. Also, logically, two opposites can not be normal. If one thing is considered normal then an opposite thing would be abnormal. It is normal for a man and a woman to enter a relationship and reproduce, therefore it must be abnormal for the opposite to happen. If this is not clear enough I am sorry for you.

    I say it is an abomination because the Bible says so. Though Biblical dietary restrictions in the OT do not apply to Christians it does not matter because those burdens were lifted in the NT “What God has made clean you must not call profane). Homosexuality was still called wrong in the NT so God did not make it clean.

    So yes, Christians may eat shrimp or any other shellfish.

    The left in general believes in anything goes. Don’t get stupid and point your self as some exception because you believe two things to be immoral though if someone disagreed with you should you be excoriated for that opinion as Pace was?

    There are people in both parties that have contrary beliefs or beliefs that are not 100% one way or the other. Liberals as a group believe that anything goes. You know, like killing an unborn child. NOW THAT IS IMMORAL but libs fight for it tooth and nail.

    As for the bigoted comment and my sexuality. I have no doubts or questions about my own. I am a flaming heterosexual and have been married more than a quarter of a century to the same woman and I have two children.

    I just believe that I have a right to express my opinion based upon my experience and beliefs. I also believe that homosexuality is abnormal, immoral, and incompatible with military service. That does not make me a bigot. I think that being a child molester makes a person ineligible to be a day care provider and as I understand your position, you would agree. Are we both bigots because we will not let child molesters have certain (but not all) jobs?