Army: Those serving who oppose the gay agenda are no longer welcome
Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick
Next week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is expected to begin floor debate on a defense authorization bill that would repeal the Clinton-era "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and allow homosexuals to serve openly in the armed forces. Last month, a top military official offered a glimpse of how the military might look should the new policy take effect: Those serving who oppose the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) agenda are no longer welcome.
Those were the views of Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, the Army's deputy chief of staff in charge of personnel matters who spoke about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" before several hundred troops at the European Command headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany. "Unfortunately, we have a minority of service members who are still racists and bigoted and you will never be able to get rid of all of them," Lt. Gen. Bostick said. "But these people opposing this new...
If the military in any nation is for defense; then, as a Christian, I believe that a war must be just. I do not believe our nation is qualified according to Scripture for a just war. It does not qualify to fight a just war, related to the American Revolution and its fruits. The constitution tore down the carved work of our Reformation and attempted to undo all that our brethren in the British Isles achieved by its denial of Christ. It has for many years rewarded evil for good to Christ's little flock and leaves evil doers unpunished. Necessity requires political dissent if one is to be faithful to Christ.
It would be disastrous for this nation to remove those who drink up the flood of error Satan has spewed, but it would be a mercy to the individuals if God separatred them from unlawful vows and wicked men.
None of the below posters claim to believe Arminian theology, nor is it relevant if they did, for even Arminians admit sodomy is a sin (e.g., Henry VIII mentioned below, not to mention the RCC itself).
Neil wrote: But that's evidence derived by empirical methods, which are subjective & thus inherently fallacious, even more so when psychology is involved because of the risk of deception. This is why Operations Research is just as much in flux as other "scientific" disciplines. Better to heed "Sola Scriptura" & stand on that ground.
But Sola Scriptura is subjective in the Arminian theology and most of the churches are Arminian.
EMPIRICAL:â€“adjective 1. derived from or guided by experience or experiment. 2. depending upon experience or observation alone, without using scientific method or theory, esp. as in medicine. 3. provable or verifiable by experience or experiment. (Dicty.com)
But that's evidence derived by empirical methods, which are subjective & thus inherently fallacious, even more so when psychology is involved because of the risk of deception. This is why Operations Research is just as much in flux as other "scientific" disciplines.
Better to heed "Sola Scriptura" & stand on that ground.
Neil wrote: All I'm saying is, however sinful sodomy may be, it is not necessarily disruptive of operational efficiency
The military by definition has to operate efficiently as a group. If there is prejudice between elements within the group (eg hate or favoritism) then operational efficiency can be compromised.
Quote. "The Humphrey-Studds study presents a chilling view of the influence of homosexuals on the military. The same degree of rebellion and disruption depicted in the Humphrey-Studds study fills the surveys FRI received. In fact, the two sets of reports are opposite sides of the same coin: the very activities that homosexuals regarded as entertaining were experienced as distressing and disruptive by those who had served." U/q.
No objection to any of that, but how many RN captains, who had considerable autonomy, actually enforced this while at sea? We'll probably never know.
All I'm saying is, however sinful sodomy may be, it is not necessarily disruptive of operational efficiency. A man's ability to operate a gun (for example) is not necessarily contingent on his personal morals. Conservatives enter a blind alley when they make empirical, pragmatic arguments in denouncing a particular sin.
Neil wrote: the Royal Navy, at least, had plenty of that going on below decks during the World Wars (source: bio of Wm. Golding). Perhaps this is why "rum, sodomy, & the lash" were supposed to be the only traditions of the RN (attributed to Winston Churchill)?
Homosexuals a security risk? Possibly, but the ancient Greeks encouraged pederasty among their soldiers. And the Royal Navy, at least, had plenty of that going on below decks during the World Wars (source: bio of Wm. Golding). Perhaps this is why "rum, sodomy, & the lash" were supposed to be the only traditions of the RN (attributed to Winston Churchill)?
But no, at this point I would not encourage young men to serve since it is now a blatant tool of gov't social engineering, foreign & domestic, quite apart from its depraved mores, heterosexual or otherwise.
"Mind Your Own Business" is an adage long forgotten by our country's policymakers. BTW, our country was only isolationist during the '30s with respect to Europe, not Asia. Why did China deserve our support, & why our hypocrisy over Japanese colonialism?
No longer welcome? Really? That means that about 90% of our soldiers should leave. Is that alright with you, Lt. General?
When I served in the military back in the 70's the idea of homosexuals in the ranks was not even debatable. It wasn't even considered. My brother now serves. He has told me that the idea of sodomites in the military is still rejected. In fact, I won't mention what most of the troops think about it.
Besides being as ungodly as it can be, homosexuals in the military are a big security risk. Sexual favors for information remains a reality as it has throughout history.
"you're always going to have those that oppose this on moral and religious grounds just like you still have racists today."
moral and religious grounds??? God said... Lev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. And... Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator....."