Please note that there are approximately 60,000 gay people serving in the US military. General Pace is literally calling all of them "immoral"."I believe that homosexual acts between 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."
Then, the leading Democratic contenders, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama, come out with mealy-mouthed, weak responses.
Clinton was asked the question by ABC News, in the wake of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Peter Pace's controversial comment that he believed homosexual acts were immoral. "Well, I'm going to leave that to others to conclude," she said. Articleand
Obama did not directly answer on Wednesday when asked if same-sex relationships were immoral, Newsday reported. ArticleAargh. What timid, lame responses displaying a complete lack of leadership. Both have belatedly issued strong statements against General Pace's comments. Is this because they honestly came to stronger conclusions or because they were getting hammered in the press?
At that point, not surprisingly, Kansas Senator Sam Brownback decided he'd rather pander to his far Right base than be smart or compassionate. From a letter to President Bush:
"General Pace's recent remarks do not deserve the criticism they have received," the letter said. "In fact, we applaud General Pace for maintaining a personal commitment to moral principles."Let's say it again: there are approximately 60,000 gay US servicemen and women. Many of them are currently in Iraq risking their lives every day.
Aren't General Pace and Sam Brownback "Support the Troops" kinds of guys?
How does calling tens of thousands of American troops "immoral" support them in any way?
2 comments:
Just wondering where you got that 60,000 figure from.
I completely agree that, if their liberal bona fides are to be believed, all the Democratic contenders for President should have issued swift and unquestionable condemnations of General Pace's comments.
However, I fail to see how you can on the one hand condemn Se. Brownback for "pandering to his far Right base", and on the other hand condemn Obama and Hillary for not pandering to their own far Left base. It strikes me as somewhat inconsistent. Pandering is pandering.
General Pace's choice to voice his own personal opinions about the morality of homosexuality was perhaps unfortunate, but it is certainly his right to hold such personal views. The fact that he does, and yet still supports the established policy regarding homosexuals in the military, demonstrates that he is able to separate his obligations as a soldier from his personal beliefs.
I only wish some politicians would take that example; we need a little more keep-religion-in-the-church in this country.
Joe,
Interesting. Got me thinking. I don't think I'm criticizing Clinton and Obama for the same thing as Brownback.
As far as Clinton and Obama, what I am criticizing is their failure to stand up for their own convictions. I don't think condemning these comments would have been "pandering" to the left because I'm fairly sure that both candidates are previously on the record in support of gay rights. They were just being wimps by not condemning the comments.
With regards to Brownback, clearly, he's expressing his own convictions. My complaint is that by expressing his agreement, he may have stupidly hurt his candidacy among everyone but the far right. Sometimes silence is the more politic course. But then again, I want Brownback to go down in flames so maybe his impolitic comments are a good thing.
I supervise around 10 people at work. If I started making announcements about their "immorality", I may be expressing my opinion, which is my right, but it's not a good thing to do as a manager. General Pace is subject to the same considerations.
The 60,000 number (actually it's 65,000) is in the Alan Simpson editorial below.
Post a Comment