From Focus on the Family's news magazine, Citizenlink:
September 18, 2012
CL: “This is the anniversary of the Department of Defense using our military to promote a very radical social agenda,” said Col. Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty. “It’s not a time to celebrate. It’s a time to mourn.”
ME: There’s a difference between “religious liberty” and Christian supremacy -- anti-gay or otherwise.
CL: "…threats to our troops’ freedom are mounting."
Some of the negative consequences of the repeal, according to Chaplain Alliance, include:
--A male service member sexually harassing another male service member at an officer-training school [through text messages, emails, phone calls and in-person confrontations]. The harassed service member reported the incident, but superiors took no action."
ME: For the sake of context, and I’m not just getting this from the article, over the years I’ve learned that following is the norm:
CNN: “Service members who report being sexually assaulted by a commanding officer or military colleague do so at their own peril. They face ridicule, demotion, investigation that includes a review of their sexual history and even involuntary discharge.”
CL: --A chaplain threatened with early retirement, then reassigned, because he expressed concerns about the repeal.
ME: Now, really. Just because he “expressed concerns?”
CL: --Same-sex ceremonies have been held at military chapels — including one in Louisiana, where the state constitution defines marriage as one-man and one-woman.
ME: What they “forget” to mention, is that same-sex ceremonies can and do take place on military bases in states where gay marriage is legal.
CL: “Compounding the outrage, service members are not free to speak out about these matters,” Crews said. “This ensures that distrust in the ranks will increase and morale will decrease as the number of silenced victims grows.”
ME: Yes, just like “speaking out” about how your fellow service members are niggers or kikes or wetbacks would “…ensure that distrust in the ranks will increase and morale will decrease…” So called “victims” like that shouldn’t just be silenced, they should be kicked out.
CL: “If passed, H.R. 3828 would protect members of the Armed Forces who hold religious or moral convictions concerning “the appropriate and inappropriate expression of human sexuality” from discrimination or punishment for beliefs.”
ME: But service members are already protected from the “appropriate and inappropriate ‘expression’ of human sexuality.”
CNN: "If you serve in the U.S. military and you rape or sexually assault a fellow service member … you have an estimated 86.5% chance of keeping your crime a secret and a 92% chance of avoiding a court-martial.
These disturbing statistics illustrate … an ongoing epidemic of rape and sexual assault in the military that … amounted to
19,000 incidents just in 2010."
ME: So I guess it all comes down to whether or not one’s deeply held religious beliefs view rape and sexual assault to be an “appropriate” or “inappropriate” expression of human sexuality” in need of protection.
CL: “The bill is awaiting action in both the House and the Senate.”
ME: Clearly the bill is meant to encourage the expression of anti-gay bigotry as a means of drumming up support to re-enact DADT, and ultimately, to institute a law the banning any service member deemed to be gay.
It’s discriminatory, malicious, redundant, but most of all, anti-American.
Here is the entire CARL article (PDF) that FOTF via Citizenlink quoted this tripe from. There’s a few in there that surprisingly didn’t make the list, and predictably, not one footnote to be found.