Darkside Rainbow

I write the worst puns for titles sometimes.

Gen. Pace Repeats Claim ‘Homosexuality Is Immoral’ - 365gay.com

(Washington) Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, caused a stir at a Senate hearing Wednesday when he said he believes homosexual activity is immoral and should not be condoned by the military.

[...] “Are there wonderful Americans who happen to be homosexual serving in the military? Yes, [...] We need to be very precise then, about what I said wearing my stars and being very conscious of it,” he added. “And that is, very simply, that we should respect those who want to serve the nation but not through the law of the land, condone activity that, in my upbringing, is counter to God’s law.” [...] Pace said he would be supportive of efforts to revisit the Pentagon’s policy so long as it didn’t violate his belief that sex should be restricted to a married heterosexual couple.

“I would be very willing and able and supportive” to changes to the policy “to continue to allow the homosexual community to contribute to the nation without condoning what I believe to be activity - whether it to be heterosexual or homosexual - that in my upbringing is not right,” Pace said.

Anyone want to take this one before I get started? Can I see a show of hands? No? All right then, here I go.

My gut reaction to this was angry, disgusted, and rather inflammatory. I had to stop myself, take a step back, and try to see some good in these statements. So I’m going to give you that now, in the interests of being fair and balanced.

To be fair: Pace believes any sex before marriage to be immoral; he’s not discriminating, he’s just old-fashioned to the point of being Amish. I can understand and accept that; some people just don’t like the way times have progressed in terms of sexual openness, and if you don’t want to condone others’ sexual freedom, that’s your choice…as long as you don’t try to restrict it.

Another point of fairness, albeit a lesser one: the implication from this speech is that Pace doesn’t openly condemn homosexuals and acknowledges our right to exist without being branded demonspawn…as long as we aren’t actually engaging in gay sex. Not…the best approach to it, but at the very least it’s better than “You were born gay through biological circumstances beyond your control, and no matter what you do, you’re going to HAY-ULL!” (Accent and emphasis mine.)

With that out of the way…

Are you out of your @*$#%! mind?!

I won’t even go into the immorality thing; I’d be here for days ranting on about things that were considered immoral in the days of the Bible, but that are fine now. Shaving is considered immoral by some who adhere to the Bible strictly, so what’re you going to do about all those clean-cut soldier boys sinning with their nice, smooth skin?

No…instead I’m going to address this idea of allowing the homosexual community to serve without condoning our activity. The basic idea is that hey, it’s okay to be gay as long as you’re willing to sacrifice your life to protect and serve a country that doesn’t do much to protect you - that, in fact, openly condemns who you are, and will scorn you if you openly proclaim yourself. Just another facet of “Don’t ask, don’t tell”.

I don’t think so.

I’m sick of this; I really am. You know, I almost went into the military. Yeah, that’s right, in my testosterone-fueled boys’ daydreams, I wanted to be a Marine. Some of that came from watching too much Space: Above and Beyond, and a lot of it was youthful naivete about being a warrior, but I did want very much to serve this country. I even met with a recruiter, but two things prevented me: my health, and the fact that I am openly gay, yes I do want to have a life and liasons with another man, and no, I’m not going to go into hiding or wholly reject my lifestyle over something that should be a non-issue as far as relevance to military service.

If we’re expected to serve this country equally, then this country should serve us equally. There’s no compromise there, no loophole. That’s simply the way it stands. Don’t feed us little scraps from the table and expect us to be grateful that we got anything at all; that’s not slow progress, that’s downright insulting.

Don’t get me wrong; if I felt that America was directly threatened enough to require my enlistment, I’d go if they’d take me, and if I had to deal with “don’t ask, don’t tell” I would - grudgingly - put up with it for the sake of protecting my home. But on a day-to-day basis, as a matter of policy in a time in which our nation is not in serious danger and there’s no need to discuss theoretical ideals of “what if you were directly threatened”, the current state of affairs is reprehensible, it’s dehumanizing, and it’s downright wrong. And what if I was directly threatened? I’d still feel a lot better going into combat knowing that in earlier times, my nation protected me and my freedoms in the same way that I’m expected to protect it and its freedoms.

So tell me: why should we fight for you when you won’t fight for us?

general peter pace, gays in the military, gay servicemembers, anti-gay discrimination, don’t ask don’t tell