-Berthold Brecht -
One of the things that annoys me about morality mongers is the idiosyncratic definition of the immoral act. My personal viewpoint is pragmatic. I place deeds on the measuring stick of morality according to the results; according to the effects of the acts and that because I see morality in human terms. Something is immoral because it produces an injustice. If it doesn't, it isn't.
I think we all have a natural sense that something might be immoral because to do something, to say something, might harm someone else who doesn't merit the harm, but it is the business of religion to subvert it, twist it and control it. This is where sin comes in and this is where religion makes us immoral. Nietzsche once said that anything done out of love is beyond good and evil, but of course he was a refugee from Christianity and hence a sinner. Sin is not dependent on pragmatic concerns; it consists of doing something you're told not to do, or more accurately something that someone tells you an invisible entity who cannot be addressed directly once told someone else who wrote it down. Even to question it is a sin. The gods of the Bible tell us to kill. I think it's immoral and evil, but it's not a sin.
So when General Peter Pace, whose military expertise I'm not in a position to judge, tells us as so many of my parochial school friends have done, that homosexuality is "just wrong" or "just immoral" I have to assume that his sense of right and wrong has been surgically removed and replaced with blind obedience to blind authority. He can no longer distinguish between morals and sin.
"My upbringing is such that I believe there are certain things, certain types of conduct, that are immoral. ... I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts,"
Oh, don't ask why. You're entitled to your opinion General, but I wish you'd keep it to yourself. You see, I don't give a shit about your upbringing or all the things it may have taught you are "just immoral." I certainly don't recall you, our government or your godforsaken Church being appointed to condone or not to condone the acts of anyone that do not harm anyone else; harm the innocent the way your smug, altar boy bigotry harms innocent people.
More at The Reaction
8 comments:
The same people who advocate colonialization, torture, theft, abuse, rape, pillage have the audacity to lecture everyone else on morality. The arrogance on the junta never ceases.
Give a crap or not... The truth is the truth...
An AOL News poll showed nearly 271,000 votes as of 1:45pm EDT. The margin is two to one in favor of SUPPORT for General Pace's comments regarding gays in the military.
How do you feel about Pace's comments?
Agree 65% (~176,000)
Disagree 33%
Not sure 3%
Total Votes: 270,644
I applaud General Peter Pace for taking the correct stand on this matter. His comments are right on target. There is NO REASON for him to apologize to anyone. His personal beliefs are his own and NO ONE need apologize for their personal beliefs. While I agree that he should be loving and respectful in his statements and (more importantly) actions, being forced to accept and celebrate the choice of homosexual behavior is NOT something anyone should be confronted with -- military or civilian.
These gay advocacy groups need to sit down and shut up! There is NOTHING "outrageous" or "insensitive" in what General Pace said in the interview. I listened to part of his comments. He was soft-spoken and respectful, but also firm in his resolve. Pace answered one question with a very straightforward and truthful answer, "The US Military’s mission fundamentally rests on the trust, confidence, cooperation amongst its members, and the homosexual lifestyle does not comport with that kind of trust and confidence and therefore is not supported within the US military. I’ll leave it at that."
Homosexuality *is* an immoral act. It is NOT natural, normal or moral. The lifestyle choice is rife with promiscuity, predatorship and infidelity -- all matters that point to trust, confidence and cooperation. General Pace should be applauded for standing his ground and speaking the truth.
I, personally, plan to be active in the fight against these homosexual advocacy groups as they seek to villainize General Pace. Here's hoping you will join the fight as well. It's high time conservatives (especially Christians) stand up for our beliefs and convictions.
Nice form letter, but you miss my point which had mostly to do with the fact that this is a free country. You seem to hate that idea.
What is moral is not to be determined by nature or by what you think is natural, else wild animals would be moral creatures and it would be immoral to cook your food or cure your diseases. (it won't be easy)
Morality is not found by taking a poll or else Caesar Augustus, Stalin, Vlad the Impaler and every slave holder in the American South would have been moral men. Whether or not you believe Jesus died for a piece of shit like you, he didn't die to give you the power to judge others, nor does our government. Nor does morality itself give you powers beyond your obviously limited power of persuasion, not to speak of comprehension.
I did not claim Pace was outrageous as you said in your form letter (how many people did you send it to?) I claim that he has no moral authority to lecture on morality much less the enforcement of his religious tenets - and indeed he has not.
Your bullshit argument about trust is just that: bullshit. It's the same one they used to segregate the military and I hate to tell you, but Gays, Blacks, atheists, and gay, black atheists fought and died to make you free to spew your sick freedom-hating venom all over the sacred soil of our country.
The morality of an act derives from its effect on others, a notion dear to the Founding Fathers, if not to subversive Evangelists.
If homosexuals affect you so strongly, you're probably gay. If you see it as a choice, you're definitely gay.
In either case, you're also a self-important, self-righteous twit off on an egotistic crusade in order to give meaning to your meaningless and miserable existence. Soon may it end.
Sure, you have a right to stand up for your opinions and so do I, but whether you stand up, bend over or squat down and blow them all out your ass, you don't have the right to enforce your anti-American pseudo-Christian superstitions on American citizens.
Jesus forbids it, The constitution forbids it and fortunately that document also allows us to keep and bear the arms the citizenry needs as long as there are enemies of freedom like you on the loose.
By the way, I can't wait for you to meet the 72 gay bikers God has ordained for you in hell. That's my belief.
II
If by the Junta, you mean the evangelical insurgents, audacity is too mild a word. I'm not sure there is a word to fit the arrogance, but never forget then when they talk about family values and morality, they are talking about tyranny over private consensual behavior. don't forget that they had even more power in the last century than they do today and the fruits of that power were segregation, male suffrage, laws about what "race" you could marry into, where you could live and with whom, where you could live according to what church you belonged to. There were morality laws that told you where you could eat, where you could sit, where you could stay and traditional values that allowed cops (and others) to beat the hell out of you ad libidum
It's the same bastards of God we see here, same values, same attitude. Same insistence that majorities can dominate minorities and that God wants it that way.
I have little to add Capt, but this makes me laugh:
"The US Military’s mission fundamentally rests on the trust, confidence, cooperation amongst its members, and the homosexual lifestyle does not comport with that kind of trust and confidence..."
As you point out, there are gays serving in the military right now... always have been. Some even openly. I'd like to know how "being gay" subverts trust, cooperation, etc. anymore than being black, Jewish or a Jain does.
People can believe what they want -- but some beliefs are simply stupid and based on ignorance or bad (no) data. It's the job of those who think to criticize those who don't and call them on their bull-shit beliefs.
Excellent post, Capt! I don't think I go so far as to imply that General Pace advocates any of the behaviors that Intelligent Insurgent implies in comment 1, but under his watch, the military has introduced waivers to allow enlistment of persons convicted of all sorts of misdemeanors and felonies, like burlary, grand theft, drug crimes, not to mention allowing persons who are mentally borderline. So, yes, he's entitled to a personal opinion, but when he's speaking of his moral convictions as regards military policy, while serving as the Chairman of the JCS, don't we have the right to know his views on accepting this other category of "troops" as well? I think we know the answer. I wonder what "Charlie's" view is, vis a vis allowing convicted felons to now serve, only because otherwise recruiting efforts would fall far short of where they are now? Even better, what about allowing "slow" or mentally challenged persons to enlist and serve in a war zone. Does that question have a moral side to it? Just a thought...
P.S. I have a confession to make. Even in the age of Broadband, I still cannot give up my AOL account. That said, I read the daily reader polls (and answer them, sometimes) so I know how ridiculous the results often are. It's amusing, really, but have you, or anyone for that matter, ever seen anyone cite AOL polls previously to back up a point, any point? I thought not.
Oh I love the smell of a shitstorm in the evening!
Pace had to back down today and I just hope old Charlie doesn't get so mad that he goes out and beats hell out of some poor bastard to prove that he's a real man.
Post a Comment