• Bigot/Army Lieutenant asks to be relieved of duty because of gays in the military
    103 replies, posted
[quote] WND Exclusive THE GAYING OF AMERICA Officer won't sign order for troop indoctrination Asks to be relieved of command over repeal of 'gay' ban in military Posted: December 24, 2010 7:40 pm Eastern By Brian Fitzpatrick © 2010 WorldNetDaily WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama (C) signs legislation repealing military policy law, while former Marine Staff Sgt. Eric Alva (2nd-L), former U.S. Navy Commander Zoe Dunning (L), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) (2nd-R) and Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) (R) stand nearby during a ceremony December 22, 2010 in Washington, DC. President Obama signed into law a bill repealing the don't ask, don't tell law against gays serving openly in the military. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images) President Obama's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is already damaging the U.S. military. An Army lieutenant colonel has asked to be relieved of command rather than order his troops to go through pro-homosexual indoctrination following the repeal of the policy, which required homosexuals to keep silent about their sexual preference. Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo "behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality. The soldier sent the following letter to his commanding officer: Subject: Request for Relief from Command due to Personal Moral Conflict with New Homosexual Policy 1. I respectfully request to be relieved of Command of XXX Squadron, XXX Cavalry prior to new policy implementation subsequent to the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." My personal religious beliefs and moral convictions do not permit me to treat homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, compatible with military service, any more than adultery, illicit drug use, or criminal activity. I believe this lifestyle runs counter to good order and discipline in military units, and I refuse to sacrifice my belief system, protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, in order to fall in line with the command policy that will logically follow. This new policy will undoubtedly include mandatory sensitivity training as well as same-sex partner inclusion in Family Readiness Group activities and integration into the full spectrum of other military benefits, as well as a whole new category of discrimination standards and investigative procedures. I will not, as a commander, put my signature on a training schedule or other document recognizing or legitimizing any of these things that contradict my personal beliefs. 2. I would like to remain in the XXX Army National Guard until I am eligible for retirement (at 20 years and 0 days), which would be in the late summer of 2012, but on grounds of my religious beliefs, I will not attend sensitivity or behavior modification training consequential to this policy change, even if it means disciplinary action. I regret that I cannot continue to serve in the military further, but feel that my efforts would be insincere because my heart will no longer be in it." (Story continues below) "I will not be the person who forces this training on my soldiers," the officer, whose identity was being protected, told WND. He plans to go on the record as soon as he discusses his request with his chain of command. The officer said he's aware of other officers who intend to resign their commissions. "These people want to serve. I want to serve. I love my job, but I can't do this job once they begin to implement this policy," he told WND. Under the terms of the DADT repeal, the armed forces will not be permitted to allow open homosexuality in the service until the president, secretary of defense and head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can certify that terminating DADT will not impair military readiness. During the transition period that will precede certification, the military plans to require servicemen to attend mandatory training sessions intended to change their attitudes toward homosexuality. "Very few soldiers are fine with open homosexuals in the service," said the officer. "I cannot believe the numbers jibe with what was published in the previous survey," referring to a study commissioned by the Pentagon to assess whether the military could safely repeal DADT. "I did not give up my constitutional rights and freedom of religion when I joined the military. I don't believe in subjecting myself to all of the behavior modification and sensitivity training. They're going to try to push the position that this is an acceptable lifestyle." Beyond concerns about violating his own conscience and the beliefs of his soldiers, the officer predicts several additional adverse consequences to repealing the military's ban on open homosexuality. "I don't believe the steps they're taking allow a commander to maintain good order and discipline in a military unit," the officer told WND. "DADT was a compromise to allow homosexuals to serve as long as they kept it to themselves. Now they'll be able to throw their lifestyle in everybody's face and commanders won't be able to do anything about it." The officer also predicted problems with retention and recruitment: "I think it might not have an immediate, huge impact, but as enlistments expire you'll get people who vote with their feet and leave the service, and I don't believe the recruiting effort is going to offset the amount of people that leave. The military historically attracts a more conservative group of people who have certain principles and beliefs and swear an oath to the Constitution." As previously reported by WND, some experts predict as many as a quarter of Americans in military service will resign or leave earlier than planned because of the advent of open homosexuality. Nearly half of the Marine Corps respondents to the Pentagon survey said they would consider leaving the service earlier than planned. The officer also predicted growing security problems as homosexuals become more prevalent in the service. "One of the Army values is selfless service. Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier, who may be called upon to give his or her life in the nation's defense. When you start trying to attract people who are so self-centered that they put living their lifestyle out in the open above the needs of their country and national defense, then you have a really dangerous combination. That's when you get instances like PFC Bradley Manning, who is a homosexual. Because of his personal beliefs and bitterness toward the military he decided to leak 150,000 sensitive wires that have done irreparable damage to our nation." Manning, an openly gay soldier, reportedly sent many thousands of sensitive documents to the Wikileaks website out of anger over the military's ban on open homosexuality.[/quote] [url]http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=243213[/url] I thought this was pretty funny, just the histrionics about how it's "infringing on their constitutional rights" and freedom of religion and all, and the talk about some sensitivity training/"indoctrination" which i've never even heard of before. I say good riddance if it's even true, one less jackass in the armed forces. I also love the little bit near the end tying the whipping boy of Wikileaks into this, and making it out that the cables got released because he's gay. Oh WND... e: Oh man I missed this bit: [quote]"One of the Army values is selfless service. Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier, who may be called upon to give his or her life in the nation's defense. When you start trying to attract people who are so self-centered that they put living their lifestyle out in the open above the needs of their country and national defense, then you have a really dangerous combination.[/quote] It's astonishing how little self awareness these people would need to be able to say something like that seriously.
Picture of the article author: :bahgawd: Seriously, I can imagine one of those lunatic televangelists shouting at their secretary as they try to turn their babble into something comprehensible. On topic; good riddance. Comparing homosexuality to criminal activity and adultery? Fuck off, you twat.
Why must people think homosexuality is so bad? What's all this stuff about it leading to crime, bestiality, polygamy etc.? Bigotry at its finest.
Hey, what the fuck is wrong with adultery? Sure you may disagree with it but it's hardly your choice. And this is a good thing, can only hope the rest of the bigots either storm out of the army in a fit of homophobic rage, or that they stay in the army and realise gays are the exact same as they are they just prefer to stick their dick in a different hole from them.
[QUOTE=Kolmala;27134668]Why must people think homosexuality is so bad? What's all this stuff about it leading to crime, bestiality, polygamy etc.? Bigotry at its finest.[/QUOTE] The man probably grew up in a setting where homosexuality wasn't okey for some reason. It doesn't say how old he is, but I doubt it's very possible to change his opinion on the matter.
Do these guys expect the gays to have sex while in a gunfight, because I can't see why else they would be deemed any less of a soldier.
[QUOTE=bravehat;27134714]Hey, what the fuck is wrong with adultery? Sure you may disagree with it but it's hardly your choice. And this is a good thing, can only hope the rest of the bigots either storm out of the army in a fit of homophobic rage, or that they stay in the army and realise gays are the exact same as they are they just prefer to stick their dick in a different hole from them.[/QUOTE]Not necessarily that it's bad; but that equating homosexuality with cheating on one's partner, or that homosexuality leads to a greater chance of that, is a dumb thing to say.
[QUOTE=Kolmala;27134668]Why must people think homosexuality is so bad? What's all this stuff about it leading to crime, bestiality, polygamy etc.? Bigotry at its finest.[/QUOTE] Well obviously if you legalize relationships between two loving, consenting adults, you have to legalize dog fucking next. Duh.
its his own decision really, he should be allowed to leave, but he shouldn't be given an honorable discharge
How the [i]fuck[/i] can a person be this fucking stupid?
"The Gaying of America" good god WND is such trash [editline]1st January 2011[/editline] and it's fucking bizarro how they're refusing to go through "Behavior Modification" to make them accept homosexuals, but the entire basis of US military training is to modify the behavior of new recruits to remove their inhibition to kill.
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27134921]"The Gaying of America" good god WND is such trash [editline]1st January 2011[/editline] and it's fucking bizarro how they're refusing to go through "Behavior Modification" to make them accept homosexuals, but the entire basis of US military training is to modify the behavior of new recruits to remove their inhibition to kill.[/QUOTE] Calling WND trash is actually giving it a compliment IMO...its about as good as a source as those magazines on the rack at the grocery store.
[QUOTE=bravehat;27134714] And this is a good thing, can only hope the rest of the bigots either storm out of the army in a fit of homophobic rage, or that they stay in the army and realise gays are the exact same as they are they just prefer to stick their dick in a different hole from them.[/QUOTE] I agree, our armed forces would be a better organization without them.
Pro-homosexual [I]indoctrination[/I]? What? EDIT: Some other great stories from this site. "Why the Left loves tyrants and terorrists" "Evil emperor behind attacks on America" "Hawaii guv suddenly 'mum' on Obama birth certificate" Sounds like some great journalism.
[QUOTE=goon165;27135034]I agree, our armed forces would be a better organization without them.[/QUOTE] Nah, your armed forces would, the British armed forces have had this law in place for about 10 - 20 years ago, pretty much everyone went, "Meh, cool, if they fight they fight who cares who they fuck" Why the fuck was that rated dumb, there was a law or act passed that said that gays didn't have to hide their sexuality in the British armed forces, everyone collectively shrugged and said "cool" and just carried on with their business.
[QUOTE=bravehat;27135069]Nah, your armed forces would, the British armed forces have had this law in place for about 10 - 20 years ago, pretty much everyone went, "Meh, cool, if they fight they fight who cares who they fuck"[/QUOTE]Damn near every NATO country and former Warsaw Pact country allow homosexuals to serve, and every single prediction of "oh, the soldiers will leave in droves!" or "it reduces combat effectiveness" and other such utter tripe have all been bullshit.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;27134802]Not necessarily that it's bad; but that equating homosexuality with cheating on one's partner, or that homosexuality leads to a greater chance of that, is a dumb thing to say.[/QUOTE] Nah I just mean that the guy implied that they were all crimes against humanity worthy of having every part of your body meticulously pounded by a meat tenderiser. I can't understand half the shit homophobes come out with, like how being gay somehow leads to infidelity, bestiality and the like. Fucking weird shit man, real fucking weird.
Why can't us liberals get sources comparable to this We could have articles like TEA PARTY PROMOTES WHITE SUPREMACY MCCAIN BORN IN PANAMA, NOT AMERICA BUSH DOESN'T ACTUALLY WIN ELECTION, GORE DOES Oh wait these are all true
[QUOTE=Zeke129;27135550]Why can't us liberals get sources comparable to this We could have articles like TEA PARTY PROMOTES WHITE SUPREMACY MCCAIN BORN IN PANAMA, NOT AMERICA BUSH DOESN'T ACTUALLY WIN ELECTION, GORE DOES Oh wait these are all true[/QUOTE] Because Liberals have to be quiet and nice. [editline]1st January 2011[/editline] Also, fucking cookies.
Technically even though Gore had more votes, Bush won only because of America's retarded election system.
[QUOTE=biodude94566;27135622]Because Liberals have to be quiet and nice. [editline]1st January 2011[/editline] Also, fucking cookies.[/QUOTE] This is why two Facepunchers should not share a computer.
"pro-homosexual indoctrination" This guy is a fucking loon, the military is better off without him.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;27135550]Why can't us liberals get sources comparable to this[/QUOTE] because we are supposed to be the liberals we can always throw it into their face the fact that they defend being assholes to people and we defend being nice to people
ok :byewhore:
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;27135631]Technically even though Gore had more votes, Bush won only because of America's retarded election system.[/QUOTE] I would rather have an electoral college than having to build unstable coalitions like in all those European governments. If more states functioned like Maine and Nebraska, dividing up the electoral votes between the candidates, it would work a lot better but that's for the states to decide. States' rights lol what a joke.
I wish i had a job
[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;27134414]XXX Squadron[/quote]Incoming gay porn movie.[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;27134414]"I did not give up my constitutional rights and freedom of religion when I joined the military.[/QUOTE]Homosexuals give up their rights under DADT, they get discharged if anyone finds out. Somehow gay people being around violates his rights? The courts must get pretty fucking busy when he walks past a gay pride parade.
World Net Daily is the US equivalent of The Daily Mail
[QUOTE=Ridge;27137381]World Net Daily is the US equivalent of The Daily Mail[/QUOTE] I thought that was fox news.
[quote]Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo [highlight]"behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality[/highlight].[/quote] Didn't know that existed. Thought the military actually would not have some sort of way to counter act with stuff like this. Interesting!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.