Another " don't ask, don't tell" thread

[Fastbreak]

In a nutshell, I share the Catholic Church's position to "hate the sin, not the sinner".

 

Honestly, if you want to discuss the religious aspect, I feel that would be better in another thread. This has nothing to do with religious beliefs.

 

If you'd like to discuss any of the issues raised in Ms. Darrah's account here, I'm happy to do that.

Permit me to comment on the Catholic Church's stance as I believe it ties into this discussion, and I will be happy to leave it at that in this thread if you so choose.

 

I am not able to separate my church views from my social views. They are intertwined. They make up the worldview with which I interpret and form opinions on everything. To do otherwise seems kind of Jekyll and Hyde to me.

 

Although I am not Catholic, I too share the position of "hating the sin while loving the sinner." If we reserve our love only for the "sinless" I don't believe there is a human on this earth we truly could love. Furthermore, if as Jesus stated, we are truly going to be judged by the same measure with which we judge others... I know that I for one need to be very merciful. In this regard, my position on this matter has nothing to do with being mean-spirited, judgmental, harsh or unloving. It has everything to do in fact; with pursuing what I believe is ultimately the most loving path.

 

It appears by your comments above that you consider the act of homosexuality a sin... as do I. (If I am over reaching here please correct me.) This does not mean that it is our job to judge and condemn homosexuals anymore than it is our duty to do this with other sinners, (everyone) but the clear basis is, the Bible and the Church consider the act of homosexuality to be a sin of sexual immorality on the same level as fornication or adultery.

 

When Jesus was presented with the woman caught in the act of adultery by a crowd preparing to stone her to death for her sin… He first calmed the self-righteous and angry mob by stating, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." This totally shifted the emotion and perspective of the scene. One by one, from the eldest down the accusers dropped their stones and departed. Then, left alone with the accused, Jesus asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She replied, "No one, sir." Jesus responded, "Then neither do I condemn you, Go now and leave your life of sin."

 

This to me is the paradigm of how we are to handle sin. He loved her. He forgave her. He instructed her to cease her sinful behavior. He did not legitimize her irresistible draw to act out her sexuality in immoral and potentially destructive ways.

 

The clear course of action for us as believers is to accept individuals trapped in the sin of homosexuality as God's creation, love them, and help them resist and overcome their urge to continue to sin in this manner. There is hope and life and joy apart from their carnal desires. They may be forgiven. They may be redeemed. They may live incredibly blessed lives; just as anyone guilty of any other sin is able to receive from God, through Jesus Christ. We are not however, instructed by the Bible or the Church to encourage the continuation of sinful actions as acceptable lifestyles.

 

Like the Church, I see no logical reason to "justify a sin" by approving it as an "acceptable lifestyle”. If indeed the God of the Bible is real, and His Word is true… the least “loving” thing we could do for anyone trapped in sin is to encourage it by “legalizing” or “legitimizing” it.

 

As regards our military… “Don’t ask, don’t tell” may be the most neutral compromise between social and spiritual possible. Lifting “Don’t ask, don’t tell” and enforcing homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle is not only the wrong course of action IMO, but it might actually be construed as “establishing” as valid, a belief system 180 degrees out of phase with the longstanding traditional religious convictions of many service personnel. I won’t pretend to be smart enough to connect all the dots on this, and I may be reaching, but it seems plausible to me that some intrepid jurist could make a case along these lines.

 

Regardless, I cannot in good conscience justify legitimizing a lifestyle clearly based upon what I believe is a sinful behavior.

 

As heartwrenching as Ms. Darrah's account may be... ( I mean that in all sincerity ) the Catholic Church would (as I understand their position) suggest to her that she is not merely some evolved animal trapped with preprogrammed urges that cannot be resisted, but a unique and special creation of God able to overcome her condition. I agree. :thumb:

[Clyde]

The military is the one area that, IMO, every action that is permitted should add some sort of benefit to the military as a whole. If removing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is going to benefit the military in a positive manner in terms of effectiveness or efficiency, then by all means do away with it. If not, there is no reason to change it. I still have not heard from one person how getting rid of the policy will impact the military in a positive manner....Anyone?

 

Gays are in the military.

 

Soldiers often know which of their fellow soldiers is gay.

 

Is there something about the said gay saying it out loud that causes a problem that isn't already there?

[Clyde]

Should Muslim soldiers be allowed to proclaim their religious beliefs?

[ladiesbballcoach]

Not sure if this is relevant but a former student of mine is serving in Afghanstan. In the process of going over there and being oriented to the situation she would be entering, she was told the greatest threat of her being raped would be by a fellow US servicemen.

 

That shocked me.

[rockmom]

Not sure if this is relevant but a former student of mine is serving in Afghanstan. In the process of going over there and being oriented to the situation she would be entering, she was told the greatest threat of her being raped would be by a fellow US servicemen.

 

That shocked me.

 

It's true. 60 Minutes did a great segment on that last year.

 

Yet, the greatest fear it seems, is that a heterosexual man may be looked at by a gay man in a shower, or have to share a barracks with them.

[MJAlltheWay24]

Should Muslim soldiers be allowed to proclaim their religious beliefs?

 

I kinda feel like that's a whole different thread...but that's just me. But I do think that would create some interesting dialogue as well.

[MJAlltheWay24]

Not sure if this is relevant but a former student of mine is serving in Afghanstan. In the process of going over there and being oriented to the situation she would be entering, she was told the greatest threat of her being raped would be by a fellow US servicemen.

 

That shocked me.

 

 

Yet, the greatest fear it seems, is that a heterosexual man may be looked at by a gay man in a shower, or have to share a barracks with them.

 

Or to be killed?

 

Of coarse a U.S. female solider's greatest threat of being raped is by a U.S. male...when is she around anyone else? I hate to say that, but it seems kinda like commen sense to me.

 

That's like saying, my greatest threat of being in a plane crash, is when I'm on a plane. I

[rockmom]

Or to be killed?

 

Of coarse a U.S. female solider's greatest threat of being raped is by a U.S. male...when is she around anyone else? I hate to say that, but it seems kinda like commen sense to me.

 

That's like saying, my greatest threat of being in a plane crash, is when I'm on a plane. I

 

 

I was speaking only to the related don't ask, don't tell issues. I would say you are correct in what the OVERALL greatest fear is. Sorry I wasn't clear.

[MJAlltheWay24]

I was speaking only to the related don't ask, don't tell issues. I would say you are correct in what the OVERALL greatest fear is. Sorry I wasn't clear.

 

Oh okay, my apologies.

 

I just feel like keeping the "don't ask, don't tell policy" keeps homosexuals safer, to be honest with you. I have never been in the military, so I don't know, but I would imagine, because of movies, that opening that door, opens a lot more harassment to the individual, unfortunately.

[UKMustangFan]

Gays are in the military.

 

Soldiers often know which of their fellow soldiers is gay.

 

Is there something about the said gay saying it out loud that causes a problem that isn't already there?

 

As I've asked numerous times, and you've danced around answering quite nicely, what is the benefit to the military of doing so?

 

Would it hurt anything? I have no idea, as I've never served, but even if the answer to that is no, if it doesn't add any benefit, the military isn't the place for it IMO.

[Clyde]

I kinda feel like that's a whole different thread...but that's just me. But I do think that would create some interesting dialogue as well.

 

I think its relevant to this thread because my understanding is that the majority think that straight soldiers would not be comfortable with a homosexual having their back or seeing them in the shower.

 

I'd bet there is a decent faction of soldiers that are not comfortable or do not trust the Muslim Americans serving next to them.

 

If this is all about the majority of soldiers feeling comfortable with their fellow soldiers I'd say its completely relevant.

[MJAlltheWay24]

I think its relevant to this thread because my understanding is that the majority think that straight soldiers would not be comfortable with a homosexual having their back or seeing them in the shower.

 

I'd bet there is a decent faction of soldiers that are not comfortable or do not trust the Muslim Americans serving next to them.

 

If this is all about the majority of soldiers feeling comfortable with their fellow soldiers I'd say its completely relevant.

 

Oh, it is definitely relevent and like I said would create good dialogue. I just didn't want to turn this away from talking about the change of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Definitely relevent.

[Clyde]

As I've asked numerous times, and you've danced around answering quite nicely, what is the benefit to the military of doing so?

 

Would it hurt anything? I have no idea, as I've never served, but even if the answer to that is no, if it doesn't add any benefit, the military isn't the place for it IMO.

 

I guess it depends on your view of what the military allows.

 

Some have said "hey, the military does allow gays to serve but they're just not allowed to come out." Is that really "allowing?"

 

So the benefit IMO would be that they allow all citizens of the country to serve their country - not just those that are in the majority when it comes to sexual orientation. They would also benefit by not looking like they still think its 1917 when it comes to valuing its citizens. This debate over gays is probably the same argument some had then regarding blacks serving.

 

So far the only argument I've seen against doing what seems to be the right thing is that some may have their religious beliefs offended. Some are uncomfortable. We can take many segments of society and exclude them from serving if we use that simple criteria.

[UKMustangFan]

I guess it depends on your view of what the military allows.

 

Some have said "hey, the military does allow gays to serve but they're just not allowed to come out." Is that really "allowing?"

 

So the benefit IMO would be that they allow all citizens of the country to serve their country - not just those that are in the majority when it comes to sexual orientation. They would also benefit by not looking like they still think its 1917 when it comes to valuing its citizens. This debate over gays is probably the same argument some had then regarding blacks serving.

 

So far the only argument I've seen against doing what seems to be the right thing is that some may have their religious beliefs offended. Some are uncomfortable. We can take many segments of society and exclude them from serving if we use that simple criteria.

 

Thank you for answering.

 

I feel the bolded is a definite reach, as anyone CAN serve presently.

 

In terms of the 1917 comment, I would venture that if the military allowed openly homosexual citizens to serve, the amount of harassment towards those citizens would increase drastically. That's simply a guess on my part, nothing more. It's sad, but IMO it's reality. One could argue that this policy could serve as protection for homosexual members of the military.

[Clyde]

Thank you for answering.

 

I feel the bolded is a definite reach, as anyone CAN serve presently.

 

In terms of the 1917 comment, I would venture that if the military allowed openly homosexual citizens to serve, the amount of harassment towards those citizens would increase drastically. That's simply a guess on my part, nothing more. It's sad, but IMO it's reality. One could argue that this policy could serve as protection for homosexual members of the military.

 

Anyone CAN serve but only the majority/accepted can be open and honest. Again, it doesn't change the fact that the soldiers already know that certain individuals are gay. There is no element of surprise upon the straight men and women.

 

Your view on Muslims serving is what?