So one of (or the owner of) blogs4Brownback throws me a comment in response to my harsh doling of Senator Brownback:
Funny, but you don’t actually seem to understand what Sam Brownback actually said. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if you’re reading [Don’t] Think Progress and think it somehow represents truth, you’ve got to dig a little deeper.
Check out Anatomy of a Smear at Blogs 4 Brownback and see if you don’t agree that TP is something unpleasant when it sticks to your shoe.
By no means do I actually think that ThinkProgress is an unbiased site. I mean, it’s obvious it’s a Progressive-leaning website. Just as blog4Brownback isn’t an unbiased site (hello, kettle, this is pot, over). However, I was trying to find something to link that basically echoed the general sentiment of what he appeared to have said (since it was public).
So I took the bait and looked at Senator Brownback’s letter and this is the main focus of his statement:
“As the highest ranking military officer in the United States Armed Forces, he is duty-bound to support the policies of the United States – support which he reiterated in a statement yesterday. But we should not expect someone as qualified, accomplished and articulate as General Pace to lack personal views on important moral issues. In fact, we should expect that anyone entrusted with such great responsibility will have strong moral views. We should be concerned if they do not have strong convictions on key issues.”
I agree. We shouldn’t expect General Pace to be a robot who doesn’t have any strong personal opinions/ideas. And he should be able to exercise his freedom of speech as a citizen in a manner that does not confer any more power over other citizens. However, since morality is subjective and not objective (such as you can prove it scientifically and/or without bias) opinion, leaders of military forces should not be swayed to make statements or judgements based on personal opinions of morality. Lawful and tactical are good principles for a General, just to name two.
I would have been okay with him saying that it is presently illegal to be openly gay in the military and the present “don’t ask don’t tell” policy has worked so far so why change it. Or if he had expressed his personal biased opinion not in uniform but as a normal everyday member of the military and a citizen of the country. But he didn’t say or do that. He implied that he’s using his position of power as General to make a statement that enforces his religious belief, and that the rest of the world should bow to his “superior rank” and validate his opinion.
The reason you don’t want high-ranking officials to use the morality view when making decisions is this: Morality is subjective to the cultural and distinctive beliefs of society. Generals of Saddam’s army, for example, did not think it was immoral to kill other people for their religious differences. Certain African rulers think they are morally correct to oppress and restrict the freedoms of their people. Some European and Asian countries think it is within normal moral boundaries for children of any age to be subjected to sexual imagery and nudity. However, none of those morals apply to a large group of Americans.
And therein lies the rub. The wanton use of the word morality to prove that you are right and the opposition is wrong does not work. There are no universal positions of morality in the world – morality varies from culture to culture, generation to generation, religion to religion. Morality is really just an opinion of actions based on personal and cultural beliefs. There is no brain science involved, no concrete “this is how it is” research.
And that’s why I think that Brownback, or any other Senator (including my favorite Chuck Hagel) or person in power who carelessly uses personal opinions of morality to guide their actions when dealing with emerging and resident cultures that don’t mesh with their own beliefs, to be idiots.
It was rather funny “ha ha ha” hypocritical of this cross-bearnig guy to go out of his way to find “BROWNBACK IS DUMB” blog entries and tout a pro-Brownback website, which implies that ThinkProgress is somehow more biased than this blog basically created to worship Senator Brownback. Comical, to say the least.
EDIT: It appears that the Psycheout person and I have some sort of understanding now, so I retract any sort of implication that I think he’s a total moron. He actually showed some intelligence, compared to other commentors. Kudos to being civil.
I agree 100%.
It should be looked at in a reversed situation. If the growing Muslim community managed to dominate our Congress, these kinds of remarks and decisions made by our leaders set a precedent for those of Islamic faith to declare Chirstian values “immoral,” for example.
Do we really want to set these precedents in our government? Giving people of power the right to steer our country by personal opinion? Or do we want to maintain they represent the constituent of Americans in their area of legislature? I believe that we still want to have the right to rule by majority, not the oligarthy.
You may have heard of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice).
Certain homosexual acts are considered immoral, similar to adultery, and are not tolerated by the military. General Pace was citing official policy. It’s not a subject for discussion, and opinion, subjective or otherwise, plays no part. It’s clearly a cut-and-dried matter of military regulations.
You may be interested in this DOD document.
If you don’t like the policy, work to change it.
Note that Peter Pace is a General, and not a diplomat. Perhaps it was un-PC to matter of fact state official policy of the armed forces, but he did nothing wrong. Life in the military is much different from civilian life. When you sign up for duty you forfeit certain rights. And you must conform to the UCMJ. This is simply a fact.
Thanks for the link and for reading my post and responding to it. I think it’s important in a free country for people with differing views to be able to have a civilized discussion on the issues of the day. God bless America!
Psycheout, Blogs 4 Brownback
[...] even after reading my post, some people just don’t get it. So I’ll take a little time out of following the latest Brownback [...]
Dude, I served in the military – in the AIR FORCE in 1995 to 1999 at Offutt AFB in the 55th Wing/Operational Support Squadron to be exact – I know what the Uniform Code of Military Justice is.
It’s unlawful, not immoral. There’s a difference. The UCMJ does not use the word IMMORAL when discussing homosexuality. It does state the incompatibility of such actions. It does outline the procedure set up by the chain of command to deal with suspected and proven homosexual behavior that is deemed illegal by the military. But nowhere does it use the world IMMORAL.
The use of the word IMMORAL in this situation bears religious connotation. It is subjective, and not objective. General Pace’s use of the word and the further support of government officials in the use of the word does not prove that homosexual behavior on the whole is wrong. It only proves that they believe it is wrong. This goes along the same line with Senators equating Muslim with the word Terrorist. Being Muslim does not make someone a terrorist no matter how immoral you believe Islamic faith to be. That’s a two-edged sword that’s going to come back and chop off your Conservative hands some day.
Stop using the words IMMORAL and ILLEGAL interchangably.
I agree with Jonathan – it does set a precedence for future abuse of moral ideaology in the government. Intolerance of cultures, religious differences and ideas only perpetuates itself. If in twenty years a largely anti-Conservative, anti-Christian group gets power in government, there is the precedent created by Christian Conservatives of today to be intolerant of Christian, Conservative values in the future. Meaning they could very well tell you that you are wrong and set political machinery into motion that would oppress and harm people like you.
Brownback should know better. He does know how politics and political/legal precendence works. But the short term always wins out over the long term, because a majority of people don’t think of how they shape the future for upcoming generations. They only think of their own souls.
I know! Let’s get rid of the filibuster. After all, the dems are the good party AND they’re technically the majority right now, right? Let’s help them get stuff done!
mcclaud, I applaud you for your service. Even though you do look look a little like KAAAAAHHHHNNN and even more like Ricardo Montalban. LOL. j/k.
You are right that the word “immoral” is not used in the UCMJ, nor is it found in the document I referenced.
Under Separations:
Therefore it is not a matter of opinion and cannot be left to the commander’s discretion if a violation has been shown to have occurred.
I shall correct my post to use the word “unlawful.” I would appreciate you bringing any clarifications over to our comment section.
Again, thank you for your service. Where do we find such men (and women)?
Regardless of General Pace’s choice of words, it’s a matter of regulations. It’s not a question of oppression. Do what you can do to change the UCMJ if you disagree with it. It’s the American way.
Cheers!
– Psycheout
kennyj, although your comment is completely removed from the subject at hand and qualifies as a non sequitur I’d like to remind you that the “nuclear option” regarding the fillibuster would have only applied to judicial nominations. It was never used.
Please explain how this applies to the current topic. Because, frankly, I’m puzzled.
Thank you. My main point is if you are going to be a person in any sort of position of power, you should really chose your choice of words more carefully. I’m not saying “Change the UCMJ” as much as maybe he and Brownback should point out the legal issues of changing the “Dont’ Ask, Don’t Tell,” policy, instead of going “OMG IMMORAL” in uniform in front of the press, who love to eat you for dinner for these comments.
I would have also had no problem if Pace said “immoral” while wearing a suit and tie and not being all up-in-your-face top general in uniform. I mean, that’s his personal opinion. Save those things for casual conversation or like moments where you don’t have to show some representation of the entirety of the US (which includes people on both sides and in the middle of the fence). Bad bad choice of words. No matter how articulate, you look like an idiot when you do that.
Brownback should probably not have given the appearance he was in total support. Also bad bad bad initial wording. Stop using politic vocabulary and use phrases and words that can’t be translated incorrectly.
However, I doubt they will ever completely understand the reason the public goes wonky when they use terms that confer personal religious opinions, so until they do, they are still idiotic in that respect.
KennyJ –
OH NOES NOT THE FILLABUSTER ASGFOINGOSDNGSDG!!!!
Man, with all this hullabaloo about homosexuality, I wonder if General Pace is the pitcher or the catcher with his boyfriend.
Editor: APPROVED FOR SURE COMICAL AND FLAMMABLE CONTENT.
“But the short term always wins out over the long term, because a majority of people don’t think of how they shape the future for upcoming generations.”
My comment was referring to the sentiment expressed here – a precedent that empowers you in some way in the short term can be used to your detriment later on.
Could also be broken down in a number of other ways. “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.” “The pendulum always swings back.” “Humble yourself and you shall be lifted up; lift yourself up, and you shall be humbled.”
My comment was also a jab at both what I considered to be a lack of foresight in contemplating this maneuver, as well as sheer arrogance as the Republican Party was known to do the exact same thing when they held minority status.
Kenny -
Indeed.
Republican in 2005: “GET RID OF FILLABUSTER”
Republican in 2007: “WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO FILLABUSTER”
Best reversal of fortunes example ever.
mcclaud, I was with you until this bit:
“OH NOES NOT THE FILLABUSTER ASGFOINGOSDNGSDG!!!!”
I’m not familiar with that particular acronym.
Pysche -
It’s hard to explain.
It’s an AIM thing – the random hitting of keys at the end of a sentence to express pain, anguish or a lost of sanity.
Like going “OMG WTF FDSKJAKGH!” Not an acronymn. Think of Arnold Schwartnegger doing that crazy noise when he’s in pain.
Howard Dean Scream.
Oh yeah, I love that scene from Predator when Arnold screams like Howard Dean. Totally cool. I read you!
I appreciate the update. I think civility in debate is a feature, not a bug.