General: March 2007 Archives

Sen. Hillary Clinton sidestepped a question about whether she thinks homosexuality is immoral Wednesday, less than two weeks after telling gay-rights activists she was “proud” to stand by their side.

Clinton was asked the question by ABC News, in the wake of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Peter Pace’s controversial comment that he believed homosexual acts were immoral.

“Well, I’m going to leave that to others to conclude,” she said. (source)

I don’t know... with friends like this... I’m trying to like Hillary. Really, I am. I’m trying to shed the baggage I have with her (her shrillness, her hair, her wardrobe... yes, I know, I’m very superficial), and really give her a chance. It’s just that every time she opens her mouth, I want to change stations. I don’t feel like she’s genuine in what she’s saying.

If Hillary Clinton can’t come to a quick conclusion about whether our community is “moral” or “immoral”, how will she do as President when an even bigger decision is asked of her? Yet, she side stepped this issue by leaving it for “others to conclude”.

And it’s rather strange, because she has stated that if she is elected President, that gays “would always have an open door to the White House”, and that she “supports gay adoption and wants gays to be able to serve openly in the military”. She concluded, “I want you to know this is exactly the kind of partnership we will have when I am president.” It’s a partnership, by the way, that does not support marriage equality for gay couples. I suppose I’m asking too much of any Presidential candidate in this day and age to come out as be open about equality. I suppose it’s the sense of fairness in me that I’d like others to have. But, I know that’s not reality.

Hillary, how are you going to have this close wonderful relationship with gays if you have to pause and think about if we are immoral or not, then finally let others conclude if we are immoral or not? Hell, if I want that kind of indecisiveness, I suppose I could vote for the next George W. Bush, whoever that turns out to be.

To be fair, Barack Obama did the same thing. It’s not as if these issues are new. You would think that they would have an answer ready. The question was asked in light of General Pace stating that he feels gay people are immoral. I’m not a single issue voter. This doesn’t make or break it for me for these two candidates. But it does cause me concern. If they can’t make up their minds about the morality of our community without having to stop and think about it, how much of an “an open door to the White House” can we honestly expect?

She, and Barack Obama want our votes, but are they just courting us like George W. Bush did with the gay marriage issue with conservative voters? I believe that they are. We have to look beyond our own selfish interests though (a new concept in Washington), and try to look at what is good for the country (also a new concept in Washington).

All of this moral stuff aside (Gen. Pace, Hillary, Obama, et. al.), I believe morality is a game played by religious people who put themselves in a position to judge others, and that judgment is based in religion. Wouldn’t it be refreshing if a candidate actually did believe in the separation of religion from the state and simply stated, “The statement or decision of the morality of a group of law abiding, tax paying citizens is not relevant to public discourse or decisions. All citizens should be treated with equality under the law.”?

Think that will ever happen?

I read this great article from former Republican senator (1979 to 1997) Alan Simpson from Wyoming concerning the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy in the military. This goes along with what was said by Gen. Pace yesterday. I can’t believe the fallout Gen. Pace’s comments are receiving.

My thinking shifted when I read that the military was firing translators because they are gay. According to the Government Accountability Office, more than 300 language experts have been fired under “don’t ask, don’t tell,” including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. This when even Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recently acknowledged the nation’s “foreign language deficit” and how much our government needs Farsi and Arabic speakers. Is there a “straight” way to translate Arabic? Is there a “gay” Farsi? My God, we’d better start talking sense before it is too late. We need every able-bodied, smart patriot to help us win this war. [...]

Since 1993, I have had the rich satisfaction of knowing and working with many openly gay and lesbian Americans, and I have come to realize that “gay” is an artificial category when it comes to measuring a man or woman’s on-the-job performance or commitment to shared goals. It says little about the person. Our differences and prejudices pale next to our historic challenge. Gen. Pace is entitled, like anyone, to his personal opinion, even if it is completely out of the mainstream of American thinking. But he should know better than to assert this opinion as the basis for policy of a military that represents and serves an entire nation. Let us end “don’t ask, don’t tell.” This policy has become a serious detriment to the readiness of America’s forces as they attempt to accomplish what is arguably the most challenging mission in our long and cherished history. (source)