<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8216;Don&#8217;t Ask, Don&#8217;t Tell&#8217; Telling of Congressional Priorities</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frcblog.com/2007/03/dont-ask-dont-tell-telling-of-congressional-priorities/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/03/dont-ask-dont-tell-telling-of-congressional-priorities/</link>
	<description>The Blog of Family Research Council</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 06:28:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy M.</title>
		<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/03/dont-ask-dont-tell-telling-of-congressional-priorities/comment-page-1/#comment-160</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy M.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:10:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=117#comment-160</guid>
		<description>&quot;Don&#039;t ask, Don&#039;t Tell&quot; should be repealed. The only reason this was put in was to promote homophobia and bigotry. If we cannot co-exist as humans, how do we expect our race to thrive?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Don&#8217;t ask, Don&#8217;t Tell&#8221; should be repealed. The only reason this was put in was to promote homophobia and bigotry. If we cannot co-exist as humans, how do we expect our race to thrive?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Suricou Raven</title>
		<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/03/dont-ask-dont-tell-telling-of-congressional-priorities/comment-page-1/#comment-159</link>
		<dc:creator>Suricou Raven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2007 03:03:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=117#comment-159</guid>
		<description>Patrick 1 - 0 Perkins

Perkins arguments usually look good at first glance, but never stand up to serious criticism.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Patrick 1 &#8211; 0 Perkins</p>
<p>Perkins arguments usually look good at first glance, but never stand up to serious criticism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/03/dont-ask-dont-tell-telling-of-congressional-priorities/comment-page-1/#comment-158</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2007 01:03:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=117#comment-158</guid>
		<description>If ten thousand refuse to join because gays are allowed to openly serve, then I say the military could do quite nicely without those ten thousand.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If ten thousand refuse to join because gays are allowed to openly serve, then I say the military could do quite nicely without those ten thousand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick (gryph)</title>
		<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/03/dont-ask-dont-tell-telling-of-congressional-priorities/comment-page-1/#comment-157</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick (gryph)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2007 22:54:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=117#comment-157</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;em&gt;You may not have asked, but I&#039;ll tell you any way. Yesterday, Rep. Marty Meehan (D-MA) reintroduced legislation that would not only repeal the military&#039;s &quot;Don&#039;t Ask, Don&#039;t Tell&quot; policy but also the 200-year-old law that bans homosexuals from openly serving in the military. Citing opinion polls....,

As a veteran of the Marine Corps I can say that the defense of our country should not be sacrificed for the promotion of a political agenda.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

First off, Meehan has introduced that legislation every session of Congress for the last 4-5 years. So its not exactly a new thing that the Demonic Democrats are coming up with. But of course, that fact wouldn&#039;t fit the writer&#039;s &quot;political agenda&quot;.

Factual correction. There never was a 200-year old ban on gays serving in the military. That didn&#039;t happen until Clinton and Don&#039;t ask, Don&#039;t tell came along. It was an administrative policy only, and it dated from the latter part of WWII.

He&#039;s probably thinking of laws against sodomy. Because you know, a sexual act in his mind is the same thing to him as actual gay and lesbian human beings and fellow Americans standing right in front of him.

But as you well know, the definition of &quot;Sodomy&quot; tends to be in the eye of the holder. Currently in fact, according to the military definition of Sodomy in the UCMJ, a husband and wife having oral sex in the privacy of their own home are committing sodomy, and can be sent to jail for it. And yes, it does happen. Like DADT, its just another vehicle to punish someone you don&#039;t approve of.

And this &quot;Veteran Marine&quot; doesn&#039;t mention the guy that was standing next to Meehan when he introduced the proposed law yesterday, namely SSgt. Eric Alva, USMC. You know, the guy that got his foot blown off in Iraq for his country? The guy that as a fellow Marine, should be treated by this &quot;Veteran Marine&quot; as his brother? Not ignored and treated as human garbage to be thrown out?

Did you know that SSgt. Alva&#039;s middle name is &quot;Fidelis&quot;? Named after his father, who served in Viet Nam. Does the &quot;Veteran Marine&quot; remember what that word is supposed to stand for?

I can assure you that the many honorable and outstanding gay and lesbian Marines I know, do indeed remember what it means. They live by it. And Mr. Tony &quot;Veteran Marine&quot; Perkins, they would treat even &lt;em&gt;you&lt;/em&gt; as brother. Too bad you have forgotten the meaning of Semper Fi. Or maybe you are just ignoring it in pursuit of a &quot;political agenda&quot;. So much for lasting Corps values.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/jul2003/pr072803a.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/jul2003/pr072803a.html&lt;/a&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><em>You may not have asked, but I&#8217;ll tell you any way. Yesterday, Rep. Marty Meehan (D-MA) reintroduced legislation that would not only repeal the military&#8217;s &#8220;Don&#8217;t Ask, Don&#8217;t Tell&#8221; policy but also the 200-year-old law that bans homosexuals from openly serving in the military. Citing opinion polls&#8230;.,</p>
<p>As a veteran of the Marine Corps I can say that the defense of our country should not be sacrificed for the promotion of a political agenda.</em></p></blockquote>
<p>First off, Meehan has introduced that legislation every session of Congress for the last 4-5 years. So its not exactly a new thing that the Demonic Democrats are coming up with. But of course, that fact wouldn&#8217;t fit the writer&#8217;s &#8220;political agenda&#8221;.</p>
<p>Factual correction. There never was a 200-year old ban on gays serving in the military. That didn&#8217;t happen until Clinton and Don&#8217;t ask, Don&#8217;t tell came along. It was an administrative policy only, and it dated from the latter part of WWII.</p>
<p>He&#8217;s probably thinking of laws against sodomy. Because you know, a sexual act in his mind is the same thing to him as actual gay and lesbian human beings and fellow Americans standing right in front of him.</p>
<p>But as you well know, the definition of &#8220;Sodomy&#8221; tends to be in the eye of the holder. Currently in fact, according to the military definition of Sodomy in the UCMJ, a husband and wife having oral sex in the privacy of their own home are committing sodomy, and can be sent to jail for it. And yes, it does happen. Like DADT, its just another vehicle to punish someone you don&#8217;t approve of.</p>
<p>And this &#8220;Veteran Marine&#8221; doesn&#8217;t mention the guy that was standing next to Meehan when he introduced the proposed law yesterday, namely SSgt. Eric Alva, USMC. You know, the guy that got his foot blown off in Iraq for his country? The guy that as a fellow Marine, should be treated by this &#8220;Veteran Marine&#8221; as his brother? Not ignored and treated as human garbage to be thrown out?</p>
<p>Did you know that SSgt. Alva&#8217;s middle name is &#8220;Fidelis&#8221;? Named after his father, who served in Viet Nam. Does the &#8220;Veteran Marine&#8221; remember what that word is supposed to stand for?</p>
<p>I can assure you that the many honorable and outstanding gay and lesbian Marines I know, do indeed remember what it means. They live by it. And Mr. Tony &#8220;Veteran Marine&#8221; Perkins, they would treat even <em>you</em> as brother. Too bad you have forgotten the meaning of Semper Fi. Or maybe you are just ignoring it in pursuit of a &#8220;political agenda&#8221;. So much for lasting Corps values.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/jul2003/pr072803a.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.defendamerica.mil/profiles/jul2003/pr072803a.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Suricou Raven</title>
		<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/03/dont-ask-dont-tell-telling-of-congressional-priorities/comment-page-1/#comment-156</link>
		<dc:creator>Suricou Raven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:05:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=117#comment-156</guid>
		<description>Your argument is that homosexuals should not be allowed in the military because those already in support the ban. But you have not addressed the issue of why they support the ban.

How, exactly, is allowing homosexuals to serve in the various armed forces going to lessen their ability to defend the country, or to fight outside it? I do not think &#039;But the soldiers dont like them!&#039; is a good enough reason.

As for your last paragraph... do you actually think that tens of thousands of people will refuse to join the army if it ceases to be a straights-only club? I know a lot of people still hold the old &#039;gays are icky&#039; view, but how many are so scared they will refuse to even share an employer with homosexuals? Besides, you are in America - a country famed for the level of patriotism of its citizens. If they want to serve their country, then they wont let a little thing like this stop them.

Try finding some arguments a bit better than the appeal to popularity.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your argument is that homosexuals should not be allowed in the military because those already in support the ban. But you have not addressed the issue of why they support the ban.</p>
<p>How, exactly, is allowing homosexuals to serve in the various armed forces going to lessen their ability to defend the country, or to fight outside it? I do not think &#8216;But the soldiers dont like them!&#8217; is a good enough reason.</p>
<p>As for your last paragraph&#8230; do you actually think that tens of thousands of people will refuse to join the army if it ceases to be a straights-only club? I know a lot of people still hold the old &#8216;gays are icky&#8217; view, but how many are so scared they will refuse to even share an employer with homosexuals? Besides, you are in America &#8211; a country famed for the level of patriotism of its citizens. If they want to serve their country, then they wont let a little thing like this stop them.</p>
<p>Try finding some arguments a bit better than the appeal to popularity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

