Bush Supports Gay Rights... sort of

As much as I've criticized the conservative anti-homosexual groups in some of my other writings I have to give credit to President Bush in appointing General Peter Pace. If anyone is sure to work hard at keeping homosexuals out of the military its him. I have to applaud our country's efforts since 1994 to throw out close to 10,000 able bodied soldiers for their sexual orientation. Just think that by continuing this policy President Bush not only sacrifices more upstanding, moral, straight soldiers in the Iraq war but is willing to bite the bullet and accept lower numbers of troops than necessary to complete our mission there. He could easily have used thousands more to get the job done. By continuing this policy President Bush is doing an excellent job to support gay rights by saving hundreds of homosexuals who may have died had they actually been sent to fight for this country in Iraq. Its wonderful to know that even in these times conservatives do their best to save the lives of citizens in America's minority groups.

If the above paragraph doesn't sound ridiculous to you for a variety of reasons then there is something seriously wrong with you. If you are a conservative who hates gays then logically you should support them serving in the military on the front lines. Not only would their deaths help save the moral straight soldiers in Iraq but would help to keep control of a worsening situation in that destabilized country.

On the other hand if you support the rights of homosexuals to not be penalized for their orientation then you should support their sacrifice for the benefit of this country that allows them such freedom of choice.

Really, its absurd that during wartime our country does not use every able bodied soldier who has volunteered to server his or her country. Removing soldiers from the ranks for things that don't conflict with their ability to fight is retarded. Sun Tzu would be rolling in his grave at the idiocy of it. As for my personal opinion I don't think giving homosexuals a disproportionate number of dangerous assignments so they die in combat is fair either but thats just another problem to overcome in gaining some much deserved acceptance and respect for homosexuals. Seriously, as long as the guy or gal isn't grabbing you constantly you shouldn't give a crap if you have to bunk with them.

No longer having 10,000 more soldiers that you could have used is just another thing that adds up to how to lose a war. Maybe President Bush will think about it when chaos breaks out in the green zone sometime.

Source

Why be Concerned by Homosexual Marriage?

I've always wondered why so many people get so worked up over homosexual marriage. Every time I've asked someone who is against it why they have their position I never get a satisfactory response. The best answer I have received is that marriage is something that is between a man and a woman. This answer is completely unsatisfactory in defending the argument because their position is reduced to arguing over the definition of a word. I have no problem with calling homosexual marriage civil unions for the sake of progress towards decency since the whole purpose of homosexuals being allowed to marry is for them to have the same legal rights contained in the legal definition of marriage as heterosexual couples. It is exceptionally cruel to deny someone’s partner the right to be beside his partner's deathbed just because they are not legally married. In many instances homosexual couples have been together just as long or longer than many married couples. Yet we as individuals, a society, and country do this to people. Homosexual marriage will end this cruelty to people. Denying someone basic decencies such as this over the use of a word makes one a representative of evil. My best clue to a better reason for the position against homosexual marriage is that it is religiously offensive to them. It is conceivably possible that those with this position see homosexual marriage as an offense against God. However, this does not adequately explain why one should oppose homosexual couples having the same legal rights in their unions as heterosexual couples. The rights in question are legal rights not religious ones. The act of marriage that could be construed as offensive is homosexuals performing the marriage ceremony with the Bible and everything. Denying homosexuals legal rights does not stop them from performing this ceremony since they have done it without getting marriage licenses for years. Under the constitution of this country it is unconstitutional to stop homosexuals from taking part in a marriage ceremony with their partners because such a ceremony falls under the jurisdiction of religion and freedom to worship as one sees fit is a cornerstone of this country. All denying homosexuals the legal rights under marriage does is punish people who haven't caused anyone harm. Those seeking to deny homosexuals the right freedom of religion are no better than the clerics in the Arab world who tell their followers to go out and burn stuff because they won't allow freedom of speech when it has to do with their prophet. The advent of homosexual marriage in no way changes anyone's marriage or makes anyone's marriage less strong in the eyes of God or the law. I suggest to all those who are against homosexual marriage that you should go home and spend some quality time with your spouse and children instead of trying to make people who are different suffer. Maybe then the divorce rate wouldn't be so high.