[an-uh-muhs] - noun. 1. strong dislike or enmity; hostile attitude; animosity.
Yesterday, the Foundation for Moral Law submitted an amicus brief in Log Cabin Republicans vs. United States of America, aka the Don't Ask, Don't Tell trial (1).
Here are some excerpts from the brief.
Warning: These are not rational arguments. These excerpts are not compatible with any coherent set of brain states. They exhibit animus, and thus are not suitable for children and other sentient beings with functioning logic circuits.
Proceed at your own risk.
Wherein the Foundation makes it opening salvo
The Foundation believes the presence of homosexuals in the armed forces will weaken the armed forces' ability to defend this nation by admitting into the armed forces people who engage in conduct that is both immoral and unhealthy, and that the armed forces budget and resources will be strained by having to pay for and treat the many unhealthy conditions that arise out of the homosexual lifestyle... ((this)) constitutes much more than a rational basis for banning homosexuals from the military.
Wherein the Foundation speculates on the emotions of dead people
The Constitution contains no express protection of homosexual conduct, and the Framers of the Bill of Rights and of the Fourteenth Amendment would be shocked to see their provisions twisted for that purpose.
Wherein the Foundation hypothesizes that Congress might one day find homosexuals suitable as canon fodder
In the future, Congress and the President may want to change the policy again sometime in the future, by reinstituting the policy; or by effecting a total ban on homosexuals in the armed forces as was the policy before 1993; or by adopting a different policy such as allowing homosexuals to serve in some capacities but not in others. Should future circumstances so require, Congress and the President should be free to reinstate the ban on homosexuals in the military or enact another policy, based upon the needs of the armed forces and the nation's defense.
Wherein the Foundation suggests that our code of laws might be improved
... homosexual acts were capital offenses under the Theodosian Code (IX.7.6) and under the Justinianf Code (IX.9.31).
((In 1533)) ... Parliament under Henry VIII classified buggery (by now a euphemism for same-sex activity, bestiality, and anal intercourse) as a felony. Penalties included death, losses of goods, and loss of lands.
Sir Edward Coke ... called homosexuality "detestable, and abominable sin, amongst Christians not to be named, committed by carnal knowledge against the ordinance of the Creator, and order of nature, bym ankind with mankind, or with brute beast, or by womankind with brute beast."
Wherein the Foundation assumes what it is trying to prove
...the extent to which they have been "subjected to discrimination" is evidence that there has never been a legal or constitutional right to engage in homosexual conduct...
...they are by no means "politically powerless," for they exert political influence far out of proportion to their numbers
Wherein the Foundation decides to shout, then go for the ultimate putdown: "radical"
BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT RECOGNIZE A RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT, MILITARY POLICY CONCERNING HOMOSEXUALS SHOULD BE ANALYZED ACCORDING TO, AT MOST, A RATIONAL BASIS STANDARD.
Lawrence v. Texas represents a radical departure from common law and historic precedent.
Wherein the Foundation fails at math
At the time the 10 U.S.C. § 654 and its implementing regulations were adopted in 1993, compelling evidence existed that admitting homosexuals into the military would have serious health consequences for military personnel... The evidence establishes that homosexuals are far more likely than the general population to contract and spread a wide variety of diseases. The exact degree of disproportionality depends upon the percentage of the population that is homosexual.
Wherein the Foundation fails at statistics
In a study of ninety-three homosexuals, Dr. Jonathan W.M. Gold, M.D., found that65.5 percent had had gonorrhea, 52.5 percent had had hepatitis, 49.5 percent hadhad ameobiasis, 40.8 percent had had venereal warts, 39.7 percent had had phthirispubis, 36.7 percent had had syphilis, 26.8 percent had had nonspecific urethritis, 22.9 percent had had genital herpes simplex, 16.1 percent had had shingellosis, 10.7 percent had had giardiasis, 10.7 percent had had nonspecific proctitis, and 6.4 percent had had scabies.
Wherein the Foundation fails at combinatorics
because homosexuals frequently have sexual relations with bisexuals, and bisexuals with heterosexuals, and heterosexuals with other heterosexuals, homosexual practices endanger the community as a whole.
Wherein the Foundation fails at analysis
This court-created right to engage in homosexual conduct is not found in the Constitution and therefore should be analyzed, if at all, only according to a lower-tier rational basis standard.
Wherein we learn the source of these arguments inanities, and rejoice to see that Hari Seldon is not a member.
Roy S. Moore
Benjamin D. DuPre
John A. Eidsmoe
Foundation for Moral Law
A bit about the author...
This content should come as no surprise... when you consider the source. Former Judge Roy Moore. Yes, that Roy Moore.
Roy Stewart Moore (born February 11, 1947) is an American jurist, Republican politician noted for his refusal, as the elected Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the state courthouse despite orders to do so from a federal judge.
in February 2002, Chief Justice Moore issued an opinion which expressed his belief that the State should rightfully use its powers to punish homosexual behavior.
... Homosexual behavior is a ground for divorce, an act of sexual misconduct punishable as a crime in Alabama, a crime against nature, an inherent evil, and an act so heinous that it defies one's ability to describe it.
... in a column dated December 13, 2006, Moore claimed that Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the first Muslim to have been elected to the United States House of Representatives in the 2006 election should be barred from sitting in Congress because in his view, a Muslim could not honestly take the oath of office.
One final thing about Roy Moore. He has had many awards, including
1997 Bill of Rights Award
Somewhere, deep in the recesses of a Philadephia library, a US Constitution is shedding a tear.
=
=
=
=
(1) The trial does indeed continue. Despite Congressional actions designed to eventually repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell statute, it currently remains on the books, violating the constitutional rights of military personnel. Even once the law takes effect, there will be no protections against arbitrary dismissals such as are enacted in law and military regulations for minorities and women. These are the likely reasons the Ninth Circuit Appeals judges decided to reject the Government's petition to dismiss the case.