The Pentagon’s top general is under fire today for calling homosexuality immoral, likening it to adultery.
In a recent interview, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace said "I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts. I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way."
Pace went on to say he supports the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military if they keep their sexual orientation private.
Gay advocacy groups are now demanding an apology from Pace. They say his comments are “outrageous, insensitive and disrespectful to the 65,000 lesbian and gay troops now serving in our armed forces". Pace says he will not apologize for his remarks. http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/13/gays.military/index.html
What do you think about Pace’s comments? Do you support the military’s “don’t ask don’t tell policy?” Why or why not?


Comments: 13
Visit 911truth.ning.com
Pace's words aren't necessarily tied to the overall graft and corruption. However, the point of view he expresses is inconsistent with a modern pluralistic Republic. Perhaps Pace is expressing what he considers his true moral outlook. If that's the fact (rather than just pandering for political manipulation), Pace needs to be replaced.
There's a huge gap between someone who shows up for morning inspection in makeup and fuzzy pink slippers, or who lisps his way through a conversation, and an ordinary guy or woman who just wants to do their job and go home. Believe it or not, more gays fall into the second category than the first.
General Pace was off base because he was expressing personal bigotry in an official capacity which is unacceptable.
Top general seeks to calm homosexuality row
How about no more "buck passing" or "finger pointing " period ! It seems like we are playing a self-indulgent party game in which we sit on a perch and wait for someone in the media to throw out an "issue" that we can slam someone for, destroy them, and then go back on our perch and wait for the next victim.
The statement "Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace " made came from a guy in charge of group whose purpose is to do actual fighting and killing if necessary in order to defend this country. Was his statement wrong ?
My opinion is that gays can probably be just as good in the military as any straight person can be. But, if you read the meaning behind Pace's statement, what he was saying was that sexual behavior in the military by anyone is not a good thing.
I don't think the armed forces condone any type of sexual behavior, whether it is homosexual or straight. Would we be satisfied if a policy were put into place that allowed both gays and straights to serve openly, but penalized either of them that engaged in sexual behavior while on duty ? Or would we resist that because it would deprive us of something to jump on from our perch when we were bored and needed something to destroy ?
If gays and straights were allowed to serve equally, and both were equally penalized for sexual misconduct would we be happy ? I would be.