So, Fox News today has an AP story stating that Secretary Gates is set to publish the ‘study’ of how ending the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy would affect the military.
“The document totaled about 370 pages and is divided into two sections, the newspaper said. The first section explores whether repealing "don't ask, don't tell" would harm unit readiness or morale. The second part of the report presents a plan for ending enforcement of the ban. It is not meant to serve as the military's official instruction manual on the issue but could be used if military leaders agreed.”
The AP story claims that 70 percent of respondents to a ‘random’ survey said that the effects of repeal “would be positive, mixed or nonexistent.”
This entire story is so biased, and uninformed I do not know where to start.
1. What does the AP prove when it says 70% of respondents have an opinion other than negative? Does that imply that 30% (a vastly higher percentage than the homosexual activists pushing this abomination) have the opinion that it would have negative effects?
2. From what this story implies, this survey (which I did not receive) did not ask service members or their families their opinion on the matter, just how would the affects be. This is a deliberate push-poll technique and can in no way accurately reflect the opinions of the force! How would you reply to a very senior DOD official when he asks you what the “effects” would be for lifting the ban (this is what actually DID happen)? You would reply honestly what these effects would be. We, in the military are used receiving missions that are complicated, risky, and difficult, and find ways to accomplish them. This survey reflects that attitude, not the actual opinion of serving alongside openly homosexuals.
3. The way the ‘survey’ group conducted their survey was in this very method. I participated in one. Every one of the answers to the actual and real concerns of how the dropping of this policy brought non-answers from the panel. For example, the panel asked the participants for their concerns over “how” dropping this policy would affect their lives, jobs, careers, etc. Every time a concerned Scout master or one concerned over Military Chaplains asked a specific, “how” question, he was deflected with a “well, we cannot comment specifically on exactly how your installation/commander will handle… blah, blah, blah.” In other words, they told us senior NCOs and officers to receive the orders and execute, and to hell with the consequences.
4. Gates and Mullen have both been championing this since Obama dropped the bombshell in his State of the Union address. I believe it is because of pressure from the administration. However, it reflects very unprincipled leadership in my opinion. If they cannot from their position of responsibility and authority make clear the real and true opinion of the services to the Commander in Chief, then they are simply ‘yes men’ going along with this ridiculous social experimentation with our national defense. I’m appalled by their lack of conviction and the underhanded method in which they conducted this ‘survey’ group. Kudos to the service chiefs for standing up on principle on this one (especially to the two Commandants of the Marine Corps who made very clear their thoughts).
This abomination cannot stand. Do not let the media or the Office of the Secretary of Defense deliberately misinform you of the opinion of the military on this matter. It is being manipulated and coerced from us the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen.
This entire article is premised upon a lie and a deliberate fabrication. Please pray for principled, Godly leaders to take a principled, Godly stand on this matter, and let God handle the consequences.
Separation of church and state is in the constitution. This is a human rights issue, not a spiritual/religious one. You have only expressed your opinion on this matter and it is obviously strictly influenced by your belief in God. I understand that for those that do believe in God that it is all-encompassing in that person's life. You mention that you are a Christian. The only time that I remember Jesus getting angry at sinners was when they defiled God's temple. He knew about the many differences in the way people lived, even contrary to what he taught, but he never got hateful and angry and attempted to stop anyone from making decisions. To me, thats what being Christ-like is. On another note, I learned long ago that you can't change the way a person operates or thinks, but you can influence them. I respect your belief in God, you as a human being, and especially as a soldier (thank you for your willingness and strength). I just hope that you can see that there is many people out there that have several ways of thinking. This comment was by no means an attempt to insult you or anyone else. God bless
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, thanks for the respectful nature of your commentary. It's always refreshing to hear.
ReplyDeleteSecond: The overall intent of the commentary herein was to highlight the disingenuous nature the DoD conducted this 'survey.' It was a far cry from how the media presented it. It was (from PERSONAL experience) presented to servicemen as a statement of FACT and HOW we are going to deal with it. It was "this is what is HAPPENING, how will it affect you." It was in no, manner, shape, or form a questionnaire to present ones views on the subject and whether or not this is a positive thing.
Second: 'Separation' of church from state is a myth that has been perpetuated by those that wish to destroy the concept of God and the moral foundations of this country. What the First Amendment prohibits is Congress passing a "law respecting an establishment of religion". The actual original intent of this phrase was to directly prohibited Congress from interfering with already "established" state religions amongst several of the first 13 states. The "separation of church and state" is a radically liberal interpretation of a phrase that has nothing to do with the original intent of the document. A very scholarly article written on the subject is here: http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.com/articles.aspx?article=1485
Third: You are right, Christ in no way practiced anger or hatred towards any of the countless sinners around them. However, he never once condoned sin, nor sanctioned it, nor tolerated it. Many point to Christ's saving of the woman who was caught in adultery from being stoned to death as evidence of His cool, modern, Buddy-Jesus persona. What people don't think about is that He said to the woman shortly thereafter, "Go and SIN no more." What Christ showed was mercy for sin, not toleration of it. He came not just to die and pay the penalty of our sin, He died to free us from the power of sin. He does so because He HATES sin.
Lastly: The militant homosexual agenda is not about equal rights. They already have equal rights. (They can marry someone from the opposite sex anytime they wish!!!) What they are after is a complete acceptance of their lifestyle. This is not about all gays. Most do what they do with no problems, no issues, no pushing it in people's faces at all. In fact the majority (and if someone can find the source on this I'd be very grateful) of homosexuals in the military do not wish to practice this openly. This is all about imposing a lifestyle upon the sole remaining traditionally moral institution of the country. I may not go so far, but others believe it is intentional to destroy the very foundations of our military.
So thank you for your comments and allowing me to respond.
But by the grace of God be I,
-Josh