A good pastor can explain to you why we no longer need follow most of the rituals from the Old Testament. I won’t go into detail here because few here really want to know. Suffice to say we live under a new covenant because Jesus died for our sins; no more sacrifice is needed.

“I don’t find that the Chairman of the Joint Chifs has any place commenting on whether anything is immoral. He is a trained military officer, who is committed to following the law of the land, inspite of his personal views. To make such a comment is hypocritical, inappropriate and illogical. How can he logically say, without impuning his own veracity, that he truly supports a law that protects people he considers “immoral”. I find that very hypocritical.”

I believe you will find that most military leaders like Pace believe morality has a very big place in the military. He came of age in a time when homosexuality was commonly rejected. You can’t blame him for that. You can, however, question whether a different policy should exist today. Many people still believe that homosexuality is morally wrong, but have no desire for our government to try to police it. Don’t ask, don’t tell isn’t hypocritical. It allows for gays to serve if they choose. It just keeps the acknowledgement that our society is divided on whether homosexuallity is wrong or not.

“Hmmmm…..I don’t recall Gen Pace commenting on the morality of the Abu Grahib incident…..or the lack of medical treatment for the soldiers, sailors and airmen that have been sent into battle and have been seriously injured. I think Gen. Pace’s priorities are a bit out-of-line.”

Once again, he wasn’t addressing these issues at the time. We have no idea what his opinions are on these issues because he wasn’t addressing these issues.

Hmmmm…..I don’t recall Gen Pace commenting on the morality of the Abu Grahib incident…..or the lack of medical treatment for the soldiers, sailors and airmen that have been sent into battle and have been seriously injured. I think Gen. Pace’s priorities are a bit out-of-line.

How can Gen Pace morally or logically agree with the policy of allowing “Moral Waivers” to qualify people to enter the military. Maybe the solution is to include gays under THIS policy.

So tongue-in-cheek representations escape you ay? “Only by pointing out spelling errors makes you persuasive :)”

“Is a person bigoted to disagree with a necrophiliac’s view of morality? How about disagreeing with a murderer?”

Since when is necrophelia a mutual agreement between two people? And why would it be a failing general’s place to voice his opinion regardless?

Surely you’re not equivocating homosexuality and sex with the dead? Equating murder with homosexuality now? Why would you need to demonize people to make yourself feel superior?

Bottom line, the dear general needs to focus on winning that war, not dictating his morality on anyone else, especially in the work place. Preach to his own kids.

“Modus Poens does not work in your case. Southpaws, sportsfans and heretics are not the same as homosexuals, and regardless of your intent, you cannot make a valid comparison.”

Ah but they are all dealt with in the same book of the Bible. If you’re going to condemn homosexuality because God declares it wrong in the OT, then you should be consistent and follow the rest of the rules in the very same book, don’t you think? That’s the point. I wasn’t really comparing them. If you just pick the rules you like then you are a Cafeteria Christian.

“Go ask mommy to change your diaper”

Oh you bring out the big philosophy words but then turn and commit one of the best known fallacies: an ad hom – c’mon suzie – you can do better. What – did you show up for the first class but slept through the rest at community college? I mean really, is that the best you could do?

This is neither a discussion nor a debate. Follow the rule, the whole rule, and nothing but the rule of God or you burn in Hell! Hate gays with Jesus but at least be consistent; hate football and hate those who do not sacrifice animals as it commands in Lev. :)

And if you don’t like tongue-in-cheek postings, then, I’m sorry; it’s your problem :) Lighten up.

In an interview in yesterday’s Chicago Tribune, General Peter Pace, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that homosexuality is immoral and gays should not be allowed to serve openly in the military.
I believe homosexual acts between tw…

Only though correct spelling can you feign intelligence.

Is a person bigoted to disagree with a necrophiliac’s view of morality? How about disagreeing with a murderer?

Modus Poens does not work in your case. Southpaws, sportsfans and heretics are not the same as homosexuals, and regardless of your intent, you cannot make a valid comparison.

Go ask mommy to change your diaper.

Once again, deviant behavior is just as prevalent, probably more so, among lefties. How about trying to stick to the issue for a change.

“Left-handers shouldn’t be allowed to serve in the military. For centries in many many cultures, left-handedness is a sign of evil, sinister-intent, and general immorality. We can’t morally allow those immoral left-handed bastards to serve in the military, because the general said so and we all know the general is the absolute authority over morality.

Next, we’ll get to all those football players and football game watchers -they’re not allowed to serve in the military either. It says right in the bible not to touch pig skin (same book as the gay comment) yet football games continue weekly during some parts of the year. So these groups should be outlawed from serving…it’s clearly spoken about by the Lord in the Bible!

Next would be all those heretic bastards who are NOT sacrificing and mutilating animals as God instructs us to do in the same exact book with the gay comment. These heretics should never be allowed to serve either. Anyone not doing God’s will such as mutilating these animal corpses should not only not be allowed to serve, they should be rounded up and executed!”

And this contributes to the discussion how? I don’t remember foolish, sarcasm being one of the rules of good debate.

Next, we’ll get to all those football players and football game watchers -they’re not allowed to serve in the military either. It says right in the bible not to touch pig skin (same book as the gay comment) yet football games continue weekly during some parts of the year. So these groups should be outlawed from serving…it’s clearly spoken about by the Lord in the Bible!

Next would be all those heretic bastards who are NOT sacrificing and mutilating animals as God instructs us to do in the same exact book with the gay comment. These heretics should never be allowed to serve either. Anyone not doing God’s will such as mutilating these animal corpses should not only not be allowed to serve, they should be rounded up and executed!

Praise Jesus!

Jesus didn’t want a woman stoned for her sin. He didn’t deny her sin, he forgave it and told her to go and sin no more.

“Does this mean, then, that it is not adultery if one of the military members sleeps with other military members husbands”?? Just trying to get square on your thinking General.”

That is adultery also. The General didn’t realize he had to be sure to list every single possible combination that constitues adultery in order to use the word. Of course, most people don’t address every possible definition of every word we use everytime we speak.

“Personally, I do believe Gen.Pace is gay. Always have thought it. ”

I’ve never seen any evidence that he is gay. However, if he was, and didn’t act upon it, he hasn’t commited the sin. He would only need forgiveness for unclean thoughts.

“Calling someone immoral is bearing a grudge, isn’t it?”

No it isn’t. He isn’t speaking about something someone did once and continuing to hold it against them. He is referring to ongoing, repeated behavior.

“Gen Pace would probably not find this behavior immoral.

“Israel has recalled its ambassador to El Salvador after police found him on the streets of the capital blind drunk and wearing nothing but bondage gear, a foreign ministry official said on Monday.”

I believe he would find that behavior immoral.

“1) I wonder if killing people who have not harmed us is immoral?
2) Are illegal wars immoral?
3) Collateral damage immoral ?
4) Holding people for years wihtout trial immoral?
5) Torture Immoral?
6) Kidnapping people from one country and sending them off to other countries to be interrogated by torture immoral?
7) Lying to the people of a country to get them into an endless war Immoral?
8) War profiteering Immoral?”

Just because progressives continously say the war is illegal doesn’t make it so. There is nothing illegal in the way this war started. There is a difference between lying about a situation and having been given incorrect information. Also, there is the little fact that we know Iraq previously had WMD and never proved, before the threat of invasion, that they had gotten rid of them. Of course, they got rid of many of them years ago by using them on the Kurds, their own people, by the way. Would you release prisoners taken in battle so they could try again to kill more of our troops? Should those being detained, who were members of Hussein’s killing squads, not be held until the Iraqi’s can deal with them? Let the mass murders go back into their society, is that what you are saying? Easy for you to say living here in a country where your freedoms are protected by a constitution backed up by a strong military and local police. Iraq also has a constitution, but I doubt that the INNOCENT people there feel very free or safe. And it isn’t our people killing the INNOCENT Iraqi’s by the way. At least some of the people involved in torture have been convicted, though some here apparently don’t want any punished until all are punished. Does that also apply to murderers, child molestors and thieves in the U.S.? Don’t punish any of them until we catch everyone of them?

“But they don’t mind when male soldiers force female soldiers to have sex. That’s ok.”

No it isn’t ok, but he wasn’t addressing that issue in this case. He wasn’t addressing every single possible problem in the military, only one issue.

“Oh please, that’s such a st*pid old strawman.”

It’s interesting that S-P’s use the strawman label so often when most of the threads on this site are filled with comments that don’t address the issue (see above examples).

I believe adultery is immoral, but I don’t believe gays should be excluded from the military. I believe anyone should be allowed to serve as long as their sexual behavior isn’t a problem for the service. Anyone whose behavior, sexual and otherwise, is disruptive to the service should be subject to discharge without all the garbage that is involved with firing a trouble maker in other areas of government and the private sector.

It’s just rather moronic to have a warpig general dictate his version of morality. Maybe the sissy should try to, oh I don’t know, run this war rather than dictate morality. Maybe he should have been a priest.