Gay UK Soldiers to Get Married Quarters

[Ovedya]

If a person says they plan to do something if they get elected, and then drop the issue when the election is over, their integrity is blown, their word can not be trusted.

If you believe that any high level politician fulfills every one of his campaign promises then, I'm sorry, but you are pretty gullible.

"Politicians in government should be changed regularly, like diapers, for the same reason."

~ Richard Davies (c. 1505-1581)

Welsh Biblical scholar, bishop of St. David

[hmh]

To me it's also an integrity issue.

One advantage of being neither a liberal of a conservative is that one is able to look at each side objectively.

If a person says they plan to do something if they get elected, and then drop the issue when the election is over,  their integrity is blown,  their word can not be trusted.

I don't believe that the Rep party would ever get rid of abortion or handle the gay isssue.  Why would you do something to cause you to lose the very issues that get you elected?

BTW  the Air Force has not banned prayer, only set new guidelines.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167541,00.html

DENVER — The Air Force (search) released new guidelines for religious tolerance Monday that discourage public prayer at official functions and urge commanders to be sensitive about personal expressions of religious faith.

The document directs chaplains to "respect the rights of others to their own religious beliefs, including the right to hold no beliefs." But some who have criticized the academy questioned whether needed changes will really be implemented.

The guidelines, which apply to the entire Air Force, were drawn up after allegations that evangelical Christians wield so much influence at the Air Force Academy (search) in Colorado Springs that anti-Semitism and other forms of religious harassment have become pervasive.

An Air Force task force concluded that some students and staff at the school have the perception that the academy favors evangelical Christians and is intolerant of those who do not share their faith.

Rob Boston, spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State (search), and Abraham Foxman, head of the New York-based Anti-Defamation League (search), both said the big question now is how the rules will be implemented.

The guidelines "say all the right things," Foxman said. "They address all the issues that were raised as problems at the Air Force Academy. The major question is, how will be they become a reality? A lot of the people implementing this are the people who violated it."

Mikey Weinstein, an academy graduate who says his sons have been the target of anti-Semitic slurs at the school, said the new guidelines fail to control evangelical zealots.

"The Air Force's official policy remains that the Air Force reserves the right to evangelize anyone in the Air Force that it determines to be unchurched," Weinstein said in an interview from his home in Albuquerque, N.M.

The guidelines do not ban public prayer outright and say short, nonsectarian prayers may be included in special ceremonies or events, but only to lend a sense of solemnity and not to promote specific beliefs.

Nor do they bar personal discussions of religion, including discussions between commanders and subordinates. They caution Air Force members "to be sensitive to the potential that personal expressions may appear to be official expressions."

The guidelines state that members of the Air Force "will not officially endorse or establish religion, either one specific religion, or the idea of religion over non-religion."

They also say that "abuse or disrespect" of Air Force members based on their religious beliefs, or lack of such beliefs, is unacceptable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When I was at my reserve unit (Air Force) this past weekend, we were told point blank "Prayer has been banned at all formations and official functions as to not offend other religions." What is being told and what is being enforced may not always appear to be the same in the military.

[Joy in the Journey]

So tax dollars can be spent on gay "rights", but we can't pray, teach creation or make any mention of God at tax payer expense ? "They" can push "their" values on us and make us pay...but when Christians try to spread the Gospel, we are told it's unconstitutional and "do it with private funding"

Just sad

~ Tim

[apothanein kerdos]

What happened to the constitutional amendment that bans gay marriage Bush was for before the election?

MMMmmmmm ... Election over,  we hear no more about amendment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

States are handling it themselves so for Bush, or any president, to make it a federal issue would supercede state's rights.

The whole argument that republicans would never get rid of homosexuality or abortion or that the democrats would never get rid of poverty or reform welfare to help the lower class is because it keeps them in power is flawed. If they fixed these problems they would then be known as the party that solved a major crisis...which would swing moderate voters for generations to come. So it really doesn't hold any weight (it was proven in the Civil War when the republicans actually got rid of slavery and for many years after republicans controled everything. From 1865, basically the end of the Civil War and emancipation of blacks, to 1885 a Republican was in the White House (the only exception is Andrew Johnson who was a "democrat" but was not elected to the white house but instead took it via the death of Abe). This means that because the republicans took control of a problem, they enjoyed 20 years of power...all because they solved a problem. To prove the point even further is that from 1865 to 1913 there was only one...count it one...elected democrat put in office. Post Civil War to 1913, a democrat (Grover) only served 8 years....that means the republicans, in all reality, enjoyed 40 years of power...all because they fixed a problem. So that argument is out the window.

I saw all of that to say this, you don't pass a constitutional amendment overnight and at the moment there is no need for one because states are handling the issue themselves. There is no need for it at the federal level at this moment. There was before Bush was elected because no state had passed any amendments to their constitutions banning gay marriages, states weren't addressing the issue. At the moment states addressed it though, it became a state right, thus the federal government has to have a hands off approach.

It's basic political law and history people, come on.

[Joy in the Journey]

What happened to the constitutional amendment that bans gay marriage Bush was for before the election?

MMMmmmmm ... Election over,

[hmh]

What happened to the constitutional amendment that bans gay marriage Bush was for before the election?

MMMmmmmm ... Election over,

[Joy in the Journey]

Note to all:  This is in the UK, not the US.  At least not yet anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmmm...okay- I guess that makes more sense then ? The original poster of this thread didn't state that; I assumed it was in the U.S.

Nevertheless; it still saddens me seeing I'm both a U.K. and a U.S. citizen ( an Englishman first- American second ).

Love in Christ,

Tim

[apothanein kerdos]

So this is only applicable in some States then ? Some bases allow it and some don't depending on the state they live in ? I thought the U.S. Military was Federally controlled ? How does this work out to be a State issue when the Military is on a Federal level of control/accountability

As pointed out, the original article was dealing with the UK military whilst I was dealing with the US population in general.

It wouldn't suprise me, however, to see this allowed in the US military within the next ten years.

[Constant]

Well I know that if someone in the Marines were to announce that they were a homosexual, the Marine Corps would discharge them but discharge them for a different reason. I personally feel that if you are doing a great job as a Warrior then your sexual prefernce shouldn't matter when there is a job to be done. Are they going to forget how to fire a rifle now that we all know they are gay? Probally not. As far as prayer being banned, that is just stupid. I witness to alot of my Marines at work and out of work. My higher ranks get in on it at times too. I have never been told I can't. But, the rules I suppose are different at times for the different branches.

Oorah I guess.

[RustyAngeL]

Well I know that if someone in the Narines were to announce that they were a homosexual, the Marine Corps would discharge them but discharge them for a different reason.  I personally feel that if you are doing a great job as a Warrior then your sexual prefernce shouldn't matter when there is a job to be done.  Are they going to forget how to fire a rifle now that we all know they are gay?  Probally not.  As far as prayer being banned, that is just stupid.  I witness to alot of my Marines at work and out of work.  My higher ranks get in on it at times too.  I have never been told I can't.  But, the rules I suppose are different at times for the different branches.

Oorah I guess.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with some of what you say Allison, but it has been my experience that gays are not happy just doing their job, they love to talk about their lifestyle. They are proud of their lifestyle. If they are gay and in the military they had better keep quiet about it. You don't hear us straights talking about our sex life al the time and trying to get on the six o clock news. Just a thought.