Gen. Pace is the man!

[postmortemIA]

"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts," Pace said.

Brave soldier!

Text

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

You're serious?

 

[postmortemIA]

Yeah, man not afraid to speak his mind, evne on high position that he is. Of course, I fully share his opinion.

 

[bamacre]

Pfft, should have kept his mouth shut.

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
Brave soldier!

There is a thin line that separates braveness and stupidity. Guess which side he traveled to?

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

I understand the reasons or keeping gays out of the military... and I think they are legitimate. But I see nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality. Consenting adults can do what they like.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Brave man and he needs to be more vocal!!!:thumbsup:

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I understand the reasons or keeping gays out of the military... and I think they are legitimate. But I see nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality. Consenting adults can do what they like.

They can't do something that destabilizes and undermines their country, which this might be the case.

 

[First]

What's funny (in a sad way) here is that 50 or 60 years from now, asinine comments like these will be viewed the same as the hate speech perpetrated against blacks just 50-60 years ago. Just as many young Americans today look back in shock and disgust that public officials openly admitted to having prejudices against particular races, young Americans will look back at this dying breed of bigotry in similar disgust 50 to 60 years from. Hooray for progress.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I understand the reasons or keeping gays out of the military... and I think they are legitimate. But I see nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality. Consenting adults can do what they like.

They can't do something that destabilizes and undermines their country, which this might be the case.

Tell everyone exactly how..

Not your emotional BS.. but logically ..

How homosexuality destabilizes a country

How homosexuality undermines a country .. << Whatever the F that means :laugh:

Is this a Christchinn Country.. Pardner?

Was them Christians killing all the Native Americans

Was them Christians who was murderin them black peoples

Go get em ...

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
What's funny (in a sad way) here is that 50 or 60 years from now, asinine comments like these will be viewed the same as the hate speech perpetrated against blacks just 50-60 years ago. Just as many young Americans today look back in shock and disgust that public officials openly admitted to having prejudices against particular races, young Americans will look back at this dying breed of bigotry in similar disgust 50 to 60 years from. Hooray for progress.

These are the same guys who used to talk about takin Negroes for a drag and Lynchin em and tar and featherin them just for lukin at a white girl

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
What's funny (in a sad way) here is that 50 or 60 years from now, asinine comments like these will be viewed the same as the hate speech perpetrated against blacks just 50-60 years ago. Just as many young Americans today look back in shock and disgust that public officials openly admitted to having prejudices against particular races, young Americans will look back at this dying breed of bigotry in similar disgust 50 to 60 years from. Hooray for progress.

Maybe, but because gay bonding is limited to current generation only (unlike blacks when they pass the info thru generations), they might become marginalized if cut-throat population growth continues.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I understand the reasons or keeping gays out of the military... and I think they are legitimate. But I see nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality. Consenting adults can do what they like.

They can't do something that destabilizes and undermines their country, which this might be the case.

Tell everyone exactly how..

Not your emotional BS.. but logically ..

How homosexuality destabilizes a country

How homosexuality undermines a country .. << Whatever the F that means :laugh:

Is this a Christchinn Country.. Pardner?

Was them Christians killing all the Native Americans

Was them Christians who was murderin them black peoples

Go get em ...

Ohhhh... You had to go there didn't you? It's not enough for the OP to bash gays... now this has to be a gay-bashing, christian-hating thread? FYI... Bah

Nevermind... I'm outta here

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I understand the reasons or keeping gays out of the military... and I think they are legitimate. But I see nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality. Consenting adults can do what they like.

They can't do something that destabilizes and undermines their country, which this might be the case.

Tell everyone exactly how..

Not your emotional BS.. but logically ..

How homosexuality destabilizes a country

How homosexuality undermines a country .. << Whatever the F that means :laugh:

Is this a Christchinn Country.. Pardner?

Was them Christians killing all the Native Americans

Was them Christians who was murderin them black peoples

Go get em ...

Ohhhh... You had to go there didn't you? It's not enough for the OP to bash gays... now this has to be a gay-bashing, christian-hating thread? FYI... Bah

Nevermind... I'm outta here

I know I get too emotional... I just cannot understand where any of these dudes get off on how the great Morals of our country... come on.. we need to face our past and learn to get along with everyone

I am sure that gays must cause some problems in the military.. but I do wonder how many of them join just because they are big perverts versus those who care about all their countrymen and want to protect their great nation.. while people like th OP slander them and talk ****** about them

 

[dahunan]

^^BTW, the reason I brought up Christians.. is because when the OP said "underming the morals of the country" it seemed obvious to me that he/she was coming from the RELIGIOUS MORALS standpoint AND .. TOO MANY Christians think this country belongs to them.. and that their doctrine should rule our courts, schools, military < lol< etc..

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I understand the reasons or keeping gays out of the military... and I think they are legitimate. But I see nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality. Consenting adults can do what they like.

They can't do something that destabilizes and undermines their country, which this might be the case.

Tell everyone exactly how..

Not your emotional BS.. but logically ..

How homosexuality destabilizes a country

How homosexuality undermines a country .. << Whatever the F that means :laugh:

Is this a Christchinn Country.. Pardner?

Was them Christians killing all the Native Americans

Was them Christians who was murderin them black peoples

Go get em ...

simply, in one sentence: they are dead end of the evolution.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I understand the reasons or keeping gays out of the military... and I think they are legitimate. But I see nothing inherently immoral about homosexuality. Consenting adults can do what they like.

They can't do something that destabilizes and undermines their country, which this might be the case.

Tell everyone exactly how..

Not your emotional BS.. but logically ..

How homosexuality destabilizes a country

How homosexuality undermines a country .. << Whatever the F that means :laugh:

Is this a Christchinn Country.. Pardner?

Was them Christians killing all the Native Americans

Was them Christians who was murderin them black peoples

Go get em ...

simply, in one sentence: they are dead end of the evolution.

And in your reply above this one you talk about OVER-Population

Got any better reasons

 

[postmortemIA]

that argument is satisfactory, I don't need better one. Unless gay scientists figure out how to make 'gayism' hereditary, gays are going to remain marginal force.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
that argument is satisfactory, I don't need better one. Unless gay scientists figure out how to make 'gayism' hereditary, gays are going to remain marginal force.

Are you sure you aren't a troll? This is the stupidest thread I've seen in a long time. (and that's saying a LOT for here) News flash for you my friend, there are lots... and lots.... and lots of gay people in the military. I know a bunch of them.

Anyways, if you knew anything about the scientific work being done on homosexuality it seems extremely likely that it is substantially genetic/hereditary. See here. And here.



Note: considering the avenues available today for fertilization by other then normal means, it's pretty obvious that gay people can still procreate relatively easily if they so choose. Mary Cheney style.

 

[Craig234]

The OP is an ignorant bigot. I mean that in the best sense of the phrase - he knows not his own evil.

I should write up a homosexuality 101 FAQ to cover this sort of thread, but homosexuality is not immoral, Pace is also an ignorant bigot, and let's look at the OP's argument: that it's an evolutionary dead end.

1. Thousand of animal species also have a percent of the animals born gay. Evolution and nature have some reason for it.

2. If gays are immoral because of being an evolutionary dead end, then so are those who are born impotent or who are made impotent through treatment of problems - and those who choose not to have children are just making a choice, they are behaving immorally.

We need to get rid of the ignorant bigotry in our society and treat people born gay morally for a change - as equal human beings, and let them marry and have all other equal rights.

 

[Gaard]

The OP is just another troll wannabe. Wait until next summer, this place will be full of them. PJ will seem like a sane man.

BTW - From reading his recent posts, JEDIYoda has become a laughable troll in his own right. Has he always been like this?

 

[SuperFungus]

Originally posted by: Craig234
The OP is an ignorant bigot. I mean that in the best sense of the phrase - he knows not his own evil.

I should write up a homosexuality 101 FAQ to cover this sort of thread, but homosexuality is not immoral, Pace is also an ignorant bigot, and let's look at the OP's argument: that it's an evolutionary dead end.

1. Thousand of animal species also have a percent of the animals born gay. Evolution and nature have some reason for it.

2. If gays are immoral because of being an evolutionary dead end, then so are those who are born impotent or who are made impotent through treatment of problems - and those who choose not to have children are just making a choice, they are behaving immorally.

We need to get rid of the ignorant bigotry in our society and treat people born gay morally for a change - as equal human beings, and let them marry and have all other equal rights.

Does calling a same sex union something other than a "marriage" really dehumanize gays? I think that they are certainly entitled to thier rights, but thier romantic relationships are fundamentally different from conventional, heterosexual relationships; recognizing that in the nomenclature associated with these relationships shouldn't be so offensive, should it? Especially if heterosexual couples feel slighted when thier relationships are called the same as homosexual relationships. Gays are entitled to thier rights, but the ability to call whatever you want a marriage is not a right afforded anyone.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts," Pace said.

Brave soldier!

Text

This sounds like bigotry to me.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: SuperFungus

Originally posted by: Craig234
The OP is an ignorant bigot. I mean that in the best sense of the phrase - he knows not his own evil.

I should write up a homosexuality 101 FAQ to cover this sort of thread, but homosexuality is not immoral, Pace is also an ignorant bigot, and let's look at the OP's argument: that it's an evolutionary dead end.

1. Thousand of animal species also have a percent of the animals born gay. Evolution and nature have some reason for it.

2. If gays are immoral because of being an evolutionary dead end, then so are those who are born impotent or who are made impotent through treatment of problems - and those who choose not to have children are just making a choice, they are behaving immorally.

We need to get rid of the ignorant bigotry in our society and treat people born gay morally for a change - as equal human beings, and let them marry and have all other equal rights.

Does calling a same sex union something other than a "marriage" really dehumanize gays? I think that they are certainly entitled to thier rights, but thier romantic relationships are fundamentally different from conventional, heterosexual relationships; recognizing that in the nomenclature associated with these relationships shouldn't be so offensive, should it? Especially if heterosexual couples feel slighted when thier relationships are called the same as homosexual relationships. Gays are entitled to thier rights, but the ability to call whatever you want a marriage is not a right afforded anyone.

to make such a distinction would be relegating gay couples to second class status.

 

[SuperFungus]

how so? Please explain. The difference between the reationship of a brother and a step brother is similarly expressed in the nomenclature for each. Does this relegate one to second class status?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: SuperFungus
how so? Please explain. The difference between the reationship of a brother and a step brother is similarly expressed in the nomenclature for each. Does this relegate one to second class status?

Traditionally? Yes. There is less expectation of a brotherly relationship between step-siblings. This is why step siblings who are close tend to refer to each other as simply 'brother' or 'sister'.

Edit - it is also the reason that generations of disgruntled step-children have said things like 'You are not my mother' to their step-mother.