What do I think?
I think the “religious” should get their stinking beliefs out of ALL government areas.
Or, should America become the new Uganda?

The law should be repealed, the sooner the better…as it serves no purpose except as an excuse to get perfectly good men and women out of the military….or forces them to continually hide their sexuality for the entire time they serve this country.

I think banning anyone from Military Service, due to religious belief, or sexual orientation is NOT the right thing to do … rather I would be much more concerned about allowing psychological misfits, who just *want to kill something* of bully under troops.. into the military….. thee people are a true threat to our Security, certainly not people of any Religious or Spiritual Path, or one that has a gender preference different than our own.
Just my 2 cents…

I agree… repeal it. I have been Air Force for 10.5 years… i served in Iraq AND Afghanistan many times with gay and lesbian people… they have performed admirably, i am proud to have served with them, i’d do it again in a minute.

Of course Israel allows homosexuals. They have compulsory military obligations, and anyone who wouldn’t want to join could just claim homosexuality. They also don’t have as big of an “Out Loud & Proud Crusade” mentality that gays have in America, and it is that mentality that will ultimately divide our military between those who are there to serve America, and those who are there to serve the gay agenda.

So, IOW, KatelnCleveland, appease the scaredy-cat bigots so as not “force” them to serrve with the homos.
Such bullcrap.
How come heterosexuals can be out loud and proud every stinkin’ day?
And finally, what the heck is this “gay agenda” thing? I’ve been gay all my life and I don’t know what it is.
Is there such a thing as the heterosexual agenda (apart from continuing discrimination against gay citizens, that is)?

The military’s job is not to be fair or to reflect society it is to fight and win wars. As long as there is a need for a military, any policy should be vetted by the questions “will this help the military win? Will this save the lives of U.S. soldiers and sailors?” If the answers to these questions are no, or maybe then the policy should be abandoned. If the answer is yes then it should be implemented. There is too much zealotry on both sides here.

By title and definition this “law” promotes ignorance; that is to ignore what is evident. Anything that promotes ignorance in an industry that uses significant weaponry and promotes violence is foolish and an invitation to disaster. The military is too mighty to allow any form of ignorance. Therefore this “law” is a violation of everything we expect in the military and works to defeat its purpose. If the military leaders cannot deal with this as well as control any lesser personnel who cannot deal with it, then they should not be leaders. A leader is expected to know with whom they are working, of what they are capable, and how best to use the resources and people at hand to accomplish their mission. If they are blind to one thing they may be blind to others. That is not somone I want wielding weapons and waging war.

Re: Grumpy Old Person
You cannot serve yourself and serve America in the military at the same time. Allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military will create a divisive social environment where one person is trying to do his duty, and the other is trying to fight everything because he perceives himself as being treated different because he is gay.

I’m sorry, that was me. It auto-filled my e-mail, so I assumed it had put the same name in, as well.

Awwweee… it’s terrible that the poor white racist in the military are FORCED to serve with those horrible negro people… my heart goes out to them… i have no idea how they even function… i hate that these stink’n rotten liberals are forcing this dangerous social experiment on our clean white young racist boys, i mean really, just imagine… it’s bad enough that they have to fight a war, now they have to be professional enough to serve with the negros too? It’s TOO MUCH! When will these negro agenda be satisfied? Why is this acceptance being forced down out throats?!
You cannot serve yourself and serve America in the military at the same time. Allowing blacks to openly serve in the military will create a divisive social environment where one person is trying to do his duty, and the other is trying to fight everything because he perceives himself as being treated different because he is black.

Kate… it’s been my experience that when gay people and straight people alike are professional and resepectful of each other… there isn’t a problem with this.
It is NEVER ok to sacrifice our humanity to bigotry and prejudice. It is ALWAYS right to sacrifice prejudice to humanity.
The gay people i serve with are “gay” in the same way you are straight, behind closed doors two or three times a week if you are lucky.
They aren’t asking to wear pink boas every time they leave the barracks, they are just asking to not be fired if someone finds out who they love. They want the world to not care about who they are sleeping with in the same way that the world doesn’t care who you and i are sleeping with.
They don’t bring thier sexual lives to work with them no more (actually much less) than the next person does. They aren’t throwing it in anyones faces, they just want the same protection (couldn’t care less) that you and i have.
If someone has a problem with just knowing… that’s too bad. I don’t like the fact that people are vegetarians, but guess what… i don’t have the option to care… and no one should.

There are at least 13,ooo, highly educated gay troops that have been kicked out of their Armed Forces positions that have said they would come back and serve the United States of America in battles or wherever they are sent, if DADT is repealed with full rights, that heterosexual troops have. Who are the mature people here, after they have been treated as they have; the Armed Force Officers who are turning into pretzels trying to keep them out, or the Republican Congressmen who are humming about refusing to sign a bill with DADT on it, even if the Pentagon needs it and are waiting for it to pass? It’s got to be the Gay troops.

KateinCleveland: Gays will cause a divisive social environment? Guess that means women shouldn’t serve either. Doesn’t that cause a divisive social environment?

“You cannot serve yourself and serve America in the military at the same time.”
KateInCleveland,
How are gays that serve in the military “serving [themselves]“? At least how are they serving themselves anymore than betterosexuals are “serving [themselves]“? (Heck, what does that even mean?)
Those 13,000+ well-qualified, expensively trained personnel were serving America. And there’ve been plenty of betterosexual soldiers, sailors, etc. who have attested to the fact that the gay soldiers served well, and that for them it was not an issue.
“Allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military will create a divisive social environment” based in fact.
“where one person is trying to do his duty, and the other is trying to fight everything because he perceives himself as being treated different because he is gay.”
Um, you don’t seem to understand – our struggle is to be treated EQUALLY. If that happens (as it should) then the gay person won’t perceive him/herself as being treated differently.
Sorry, but your delusions don’t help the discussion at all. They have nothing to do with reality.
Try again, but DO BETTER. (Shouldn’t be hard for a betterosexual ;{O)

Nicole,
I don’t know how to contact you, nor where to make the following suggestion appropriately, so I’m doing it here in hopes that you read it and respond.
On one of Rod Dreher’s threads, he recently posted this comment:
“I want to note an important cultural milestone, and I mean that non-snarkily: for the first time in Gallup’s polling, a clear majority of Americans find homosexual relations to be morally acceptable — 52 percent to 43 percent.”
Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/roddreher/2010/05/tide-turns-in-gay-culture-war-battle.html#ixzz0p8dXuXFE
I agree that this is “an important cultural milestone”, but he won’t open the comments box for anyone to discuss it. I would ideally like to see this brought up as a news item here on Beliefnet, but again, don’t know where to post such a request.
Your BeliefBeat column is subtitled “religion news” and so maybe you could start a discussion thread about this major cultural change in America.
Thanks in advance for your consideration.

Truth Be Told — Thanks for the suggestions. I mentioned the poll in my previous post, about the American Christian influence on Uganda’s anti-gay legislation:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/beliefbeat/2010/05/american-evangelical-influence-uganda-anti-gay-bill.html
I’ll keep this in mind for future reference, too.

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that we are all equal before God and Duty and that through exclusion our strength is limited in every aspect of life?????

Good question, Eva S.

Eva,
That’s an excellent question.
I think the answer, at least partially, lies in the idolatry of conservative American Christians who have elevated a ‘literal’ interpretation of the Bible to their god and their definition of loving God to mean hating everyone who doesn’t hew to the Republican line (especially gays).
Rod Dreher won’t permit comments for the same reason he allows racists free reign – he knows he can’t justify his hatred of gays on a true Christian basis.

Panthera,
You know very well it isn’t a “literal interpretation”. It’s a selective one. The conservative American “Christians” would never insist on putting their disobedient children to death, not the victims of incest. Many eat shellfish. Many cACs have women preachers and Sunday School teachers. Many don’t own slaves. Nor would they all deny communion to the disabled.
All of these things are in “The Bible” (TM) and the cACs will give you excuse after excuse as to why they don’t follow certain parts of it. Let’s be perfectly frank here – they simply hate gay people. They literally want us dead.
Think I’m kidding? Check THIS out:
“GOP-linked punk rock ministry says executing gays is ‘moral’”
Source (one of MANY):
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102×4397180
CAPTCHA: “weepings trade”

I just read that link, GOP. And while I don’t believe that killing those who engage in same-sex relations is moral, the Bible is pretty clear that “God” commanded it in Leviticus 20:13.
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
I don’t see how gay-friendly Christians can write that off and worship the “God” who commanded it be written down. And I don’t see how “real” Christians can ignore this verse while reciting Leviticus 18:22 (“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”) any chance they get.
On the issue at hand: I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. The conservative Christians don’t have a problem with LGBT people serving and dying in the military. They just have a problem with having to acknowledge that these folks are more than the stereotype they cling to, and nothing like the Sodomite mob from the story of Lot.

Hey, Grumpy Old Person,
I couldn’t agree with you more.
They hate us.
And they twist and pervert Christianity to justify their hatred.
Double plus bad – they call their hatred ‘love’.
It’s always been this way – women, Negroes, Jews, homosexuals and transgender.
A point very worth noting, by the by, the nastiest attacks on me I have ever experienced on the internet were when defending the inclusion of “T” in our alphabet soup. And those attacks came from other gays.
Sad. Very, very disheartening.

Panthera: “A point very worth noting, by the by, the nastiest attacks on me I have ever experienced on the internet were when defending the inclusion of ‘T’ in our alphabet soup. And those attacks came from other gays.”
Hmm…yet the last time I talked to you, I remember you being pretty defensive against including bisexuals into the mix. So how are you any better?

I wonder if a Zorastrian soldier would seek spiritual advice or comfort from a Baptist Chaplain?
Or, if a Buddhist soldier would go see a Pentecostal Chaplain?
Are Muslim soldiers even allowed to hear what a New Church of Ted Haggartian Chaplain might ‘believe’?
Can Taoists trust a Presbyterian Chaplain to speak Zeus’s “truth”?
And won’t somebody think of the Jains?
Is a puzzlement.

Since Kate, the coward of Cleveland can’t/won’t answer, let me remind the other insecure betterosexuals that these countries disagree with you:
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bermuda
Brazil
Canada
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
The Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Peru
Philippines
Romania
Russia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
United Kingdom
Uruguay
They ALL allow gays to serve in their military. Romania, Slovenia, Uruguay, Estonia for pete’s sake – ALL have more equality and human rights provisions than the Home of the Friggin’ “Brave” (TM, all rights reserved).
I.E. Kate, get a clue.

Lots of specialists say that loan help a lot of people to live the way they want, because they can feel free to buy needed stuff. Furthermore, different banks offer term loan for all people.