Skip to main content

OMG, they're undermining our freedom right now!
This seems like a great way to commemorate 9/11:
U.S. Senators Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) on Tuesday introduced the Military Religious Freedom Act.  The Wicker-Inhofe legislation explicitly outlines how the Defense of Marriage Act should be applied to the Department of Defense.

Specifically, the bill would (1) prevent military chaplains from being forced to perform a marriage ceremony if the chaplain objects for reasons of conscience and (2) prohibit marriage or marriage-like ceremonies at military facilities that are not a union between one man and one woman.      

This bill is obviously super important. As we all know, the military has now been brought to a dead standstill because President Obama is forcing military chaplains—who apparently believe in loving thy neighbor unless thy neighbor is gay, in which case, thy neighbor can just go burn in hell—to perform "marriage or marriage-like ceremonies." And except for how none of that is true, it's totally true! Which is why this bill is super important.

The idea that members of the military need to be protected from the gays because otherwise they won't be able to fight wars and protect our freedom isn't new. In fact, for the members of Congress who think The Gay is so icky that they need to spend a lot of time sitting around thinking about The Gay, this type of legislation is something of an obsession.

Which is why Republicans are willing to take time out of their busy not-doing-much-except-thinking-about-abortion schedules to think about The Gay, which is obviously a huge sacrifice for them, since they think it is just so icky and freedom-undermining that they sort of can't stop thinking about it.

(Via)

Originally posted to Kaili Joy Gray on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:36 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tipped and rec'ed (8+ / 0-)

    The radical Republican party is the party of oppression, fear, loathing and above all more money and power for the people who robbed us.

    by a2nite on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:38:43 AM PDT

  •  I think the military needs to protect all freedoms (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thomask, gfv6800

    ...among its personnel. Starting with pacifism, another tendency, if you will, that I don't subscribe to and have little empathetic understanding of but consider perfectly respectable, like homosexuality and Christianity.

    Romney '12: Berlusconi without the sex and alcohol!

    by Rich in PA on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:40:41 AM PDT

  •  This is what is so stupid (8+ / 0-)

    (1) prevent military chaplains from being forced to perform a marriage ceremony if the chaplain objects for reasons of conscience and

    Nothing wrong with that as it stands by itself - as doing so would be a 1st Amendment violation.

    But why ban something that's already covered(1st Amendment) that's not actually happening?

    It's like the anti-sharia laws being passed in states that have no issues with sharia law.

    Idiot grandstanding.

    Power-Worshipping Fascist

    by campionrules on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:40:51 AM PDT

    •  I have to disagree with the first point (13+ / 0-)

      Normally I WOULD agree with that, as I wouldn't want to force a religous leader (Minister, Rabbi, Imam, Priest, etc) to perform a ceremony that goes against their beliefs

      EXCEPT, as a MILITARY Chaplain, they have a duty to minister to ALL faiths within their base/community/etc.  As such there are times when a Catholic priest may have to minister to a Jew, Muslim or Wiccian. Or a Imam may need to tend to the spiritual needs of a Wiccian, Christian or Jew. As such (s)he has to set aside his/her beliefs to tend to the religous beliefs of all those within his assigned area.

      This is nothing new and to now make an exception for marriage within the LGBT community is just pandering to bigots!

      Never underestimate stupid. Stupid is how reTHUGlicans win!

      by Mannie on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:48:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They may have a duty to 'minister' - that is (5+ / 0-)

        provide religious guidance or comfort to those of all faiths.

        What they cannot be forced to do is violate their own faith's religious guidelines when it comes to providing specific religious acts - in this case, marriage.

        Forcing a chaplain to perform a marriage that violates his own doctrine and would be considered a invalid form of marriage in the view of his own religion would be a violation of the chaplain's 1st Amendment right from interference from governmental control.

        It's a moot point since it doesn't happen anyways and the military would never do it precisely because of the issue I raised.

        Power-Worshipping Fascist

        by campionrules on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:58:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What's the general rule for chaplains? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          elmo, Mannie, ahumbleopinion

          There must be a rule covering this already. Consider: a divorced Catholic needs to get an annulment from the Catholic Church of his or her first marriage before he or she can remarry. Suppose a Catholic priest who's a military chaplain is called upon to marry two non-Catholic service members, one or both of whom are divorced? (And who obviously don't have annulments from the Catholic Church.)

          What's the current rule? Does the priest have to perform the wedding?

          I suspect there are similar marriage restrictions imposed by other faiths. Do those faiths' military chaplains have to perform military weddings that don't meet the requirements of their faith?

          Whatever the current rule is, it should cover same-sex marriages. Or else it should be changed not just for same-sex marriages, but for all marriages that don't meet the requirements of the chaplain's sponsoring faith.

          "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

          by HeyMikey on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:05:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Wrong (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TheMeansAreTheEnd

          A Non-Christian minister giving last rites to a Catholic WOULD violate their own doctrine (ie A Rabbi who only beleives in ONE G-d, would be violating his faith by absolving the Catholic in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost)  I could list other examples of violating ones faith in ministering to those of other faiths.

          This all comes down to making excuses for bigots plain and simple.

          Never underestimate stupid. Stupid is how reTHUGlicans win!

          by Mannie on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:07:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They wouldn't do that (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            HeyMikey, Imhotepsings, campionrules

            Firstly, they wouldn't even know how. They would provide whatever comfort they could, and pray with the person, which any minister of any faith would be able to do.

          •  What's the current rule? (0+ / 0-)

            Surely we Kossacks cannot be the first people to have stumbled upon these questions. Surely they have been hashed out by the military for, oh, about 200+ years now.

            I suspect the real sticky questions are of sacraments used by multiple faiths (marriage, baptism) than of those used by just one faith (last rites, confession to/forgiveness from the priest). But the military must have dealt with these sticky questions long, long before now.

            What's the current rule? I'm not saying that's where the analysis should end. I'm saying that's where it should start.

            "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

            by HeyMikey on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:33:26 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              HeyMikey

              "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

              by high uintas on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:36:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks, but that doesn't give the answer. (0+ / 0-)

                From that wiki link:

                The mission of the Chaplain Corps is:

                PROVIDE religious ministry and support to those of our own faith.

                FACILITATE for all religious beliefs.

                CARE for all Marines, Sailors and their family and friends.

                ADVISE commanders to ensure the free exercise of religion...

                The guiding principles are:

                We are faithful to our individual religious traditions and practices.

                We respect the right of others to hold spiritual beliefs and religious practices different from our own

                We cooperate and collaborate in ministry.

                The marriage question pits some of those values against others. The wiki article doesn't give any examples of how similar conflicts are already handled.

                "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

                by HeyMikey on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:44:54 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  This is specious (0+ / 0-)

          They would HAVE to "violate" their own religious tenants in order to effectively supply pastoral care.  

          Religious folks have used religion to justify all manner of despicable attitudes and behavior including racial discrimination.  

          At some point, we have to learn to get along.

          --Mr. President, you have to earn my vote every day. Not take it for granted. --

          by chipoliwog on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 12:26:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  "Minister to" in the field, sure... (0+ / 0-)

        ...because in the field is a situation where the only clergyperson available is one's military chaplain. If chaplains didn't want to minister to (counsel, comfort, etc.) people of all faiths in the field, they shouldn't have signed on.

        A wedding, though, generally has a little more planning behind it; one would think that when getting married, a couple would be able to get a chaplain who didn't have any potential crises of conflict as regards marrying them.

        Are Roman Catholic chaplains currently being "forced" to preside over the marriages of divorcées?

        "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

        by JamesGG on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:49:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And a lot of times - the fuckers won't take no for (0+ / 0-)

        an answer.

        There were many a time I had to tell my unit's chaplain that not only did I not believe the voices that he heard in his head, but that in my opinion, he was just a lazy freeloader.

  •  If our military men and women... (7+ / 0-)

    can defend our country with their lives, they should be able to marry a baboon if that's what makes them happy.  Really, we, as a nation, should be bending over backward to make these soldiers lives happier once they get home, not using them as a political pawn to address problems that don't exist.

    And if these poor, fragile military chaplins with their delicate sensibilities can't handle a non-existant problem like this, well then, they can find another occupation.

    Ask Osama Bin Laden if he's better off than he was 4 years ago

    by SuzieQ4624 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:41:19 AM PDT

    •  That's right up there with pharmacists (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      boofdah, Pluto

      refusing to fill prescriptions for the morning after pill, or just regular contraceptives. Those pills might just jump up and bite you. Pills are pills, dammit!

      Your left is my right---Mort Sahl

      by HappyinNM on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:57:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Um, well ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Imhotepsings
      If our military men and women can defend our country with their lives, they should be able to marry a baboon if that's what makes them happy.

      That's the sort of post that gets Rick Santorum very excited.

      Really, we, as a nation, should be bending over backward to make these soldiers lives happier once they get home, not using them as a political pawn to address problems that don't exist.
      Now, that's more to the point.

      "The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another." ~ George Bancroft (1800-1891)

      by JBL55 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:16:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  i don't see why: (0+ / 0-)
        That's the sort of post that gets Rick Santorum very excited.
        He gives baboons everywhere hope that one day they can marry, too.


        A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. -- Groucho Marx

        by Pluto on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:26:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And he also.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pluto
          He gives baboons everywhere hope that one day
          run for President, on a platform straight out of the 1800's.  If it's so simple a caveman can do (Santorum), then baboons should be a shoe in for the Republican nominee.

          Ask Osama Bin Laden if he's better off than he was 4 years ago

          by SuzieQ4624 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:34:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  By "excited" I mean "happy" (0+ / 0-)

          Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum probably wets himself when he finds "corroboration" on left wing blogs that the real intent of marriage equality is to allow interspecies unions.

          "The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another." ~ George Bancroft (1800-1891)

          by JBL55 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:01:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  gay weddings or weddings (0+ / 0-)

      I would think that the happy couple might have a congregation they call their own. And the pastor/minister of their church/hall/longhouse might not be a bigot. Maybe the high muckety muck is looking forward to officiating.
      Personally marriage is an institution and I don't care to be institutionalized. But more happiness and peace to all who happen to find the love of their life.

      A danger foreseen is half avoided.

      by ncheyenne on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:41:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is one of those big Job Creation (16+ / 0-)

    bills we've been hearing about, right?

  •  Job creation (5+ / 0-)

    How many jobs will the "Allow Military Chaplains to Be Homophobes" Act create?

  •  Not that there's anything IMPORTANT (8+ / 0-)

    they could be working on...

  •  GOP- please protect USA from Military Cooties /nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    spooks51, Pluto

    Don't roof rack me bro', Now the brown's comin' down; Präsidentenelf-maßschach; "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) "Ensanguining the skies...Falls the remorseful day".政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:44:34 AM PDT

  •  If there is (9+ / 0-)

    a meaner, more petty member of the Senate than James Inhofe I've yet to learn about it. He exists in a right-wing sphere of his own. A true wingnut's wingnut.

  •  Pretty obvious... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pistolSO, skrekk, Pluto, earicicle

    ..to see what is happening here:

    Wicker & Inhofe are 2 Tea Party nutbags who sense an election approachiing.  (Wicker is up for re-election in Nov.  Don't know about Inhofe).

    Anyway, the Chik-Fil-A crowd is growing restless over Romney's ensuing defeat, so they demand to to pandered to.

    So Wicker & Inhofe take a piece of paper, fill it with homophobia parlance & the word "freedom" and...bam.

    Election season pandering mission accomplished.

    FOX News = where David Axelrod spends his every Sunday morning legitimizing the illegitimate.

    by wyvern on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:49:34 AM PDT

  •  This'd Make a Good Stewart or Colbert Bit (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cishart, CitizenOfEarth

    if there weren't a week's worth of even better material being created by Romney & the right every single day.

    I really think some days the writing team sits down completely dropjawed at the prospects of winnowing it all down to a show.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:50:30 AM PDT

  •  Aren't there BUDGETS (10+ / 0-)

    that need to be passed? I swear it is really creepy how sex obsessed some of these old white men are. ARGH!

    The Spice must Flow!

    by Texdude50 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:52:00 AM PDT

  •  I don't know how they do it. (4+ / 0-)

    These GOP sentinels of liberty, with so many threats from so many directions. Think about it,

    there's Teh Gay,
    and icky abortion,
    and (plugging my ears so I can't hear myself say it) vaginas (even ickier, shudder)
    and illegal immigrants,
    and trade unions (communists!)
    and keeping god on our coins and in the pledge,
    and all those pesky minorities and young people who can't be counted on to vote, ahem the right way.

    There just aren't enough hours in the day.

    Public policy based upon superstition is never a good idea.

    by gerard w on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:56:15 AM PDT

  •  So the chaplain could refuse to marry (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, SoCaliana

    two people, a man and a woman, if they were mixed race or of some religion that he disapproved of?

  •  I think this applies (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf, high uintas

    Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

    by democracy inaction on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:11:50 AM PDT

  •  The GOP is full of overgrown adolescents (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf, CitizenOfEarth

    They are obsessed with sex.  In order to mask this unhealthy obsession, they try to clamp down on their fantasies by punishing women and gay people from having it.

    "My dear friends, your vote is precious, almost sacred. It is the most powerful nonviolent tool we have to create a more perfect union." ---Representative John Lewis

    by SottoVoce on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:13:35 AM PDT

  •  It's a sign of Desparation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto

    Seeing RobMe slipping in the polls, Repubs are doing this to stir up the all important Gay Haters voting block. Homophobes is one leg of the three legged Voting Stool: Homophobes, Bible Thumpers and Racists. And yes, "stool" has a double meaning in that sentence.

    "It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth." - Morpheus

    by CitizenOfEarth on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:29:55 AM PDT

  •  Exactly where in this repeal (0+ / 0-)

    is any religious institution or clergyman REQUIRED to perform a marriage?  If I have my facts right, no religious institution or clergyman is REQUIRED to perform any marriage, regardless of the gender of the applicants.  They have the freedom to decline to marry anyone for almost any reason, which is called religious freedom in my dim mind.  No one, and I mean no one, in the marriage equality conversation is calling for religious sacraments to be performed against the will of religious institutions.

    Note to the haters:  matrimony is a sacrament, which you are entitled to bestow upon anyone you deem fit.  Marriage is a civil institution, open to all, that is granted by the government.  AND NO ONE ELSE...

    When do I get to vote on your marriage?

    by jarhead5536 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:40:05 AM PDT

  •  This is dangerous language (0+ / 0-)

    that makes the inclusion of the second kind of redundant

    1) prevent military chaplains from being forced to perform a marriage ceremony if the chaplain objects for reasons of conscience
    Any chaplain could refuse, on reasons of conscience, to marry gays.  They could also refuse interracial or inter-religious marriages.  

    But then...the conservative goal is to add enough oil to make all slopes slippery.

    But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have laid my dreams under your feet; tread softly, because you tread on my dreams. – Yeats

    by Bill O Rights on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:09:38 AM PDT

  •  Wiil they still (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    exMnLiberal

    allow us to make porn videos in the barracks and showers, though?
    ;)

    Why do the winguts think about (and probably get more gay sex) than I do?

  •  The whole issue is dead. (0+ / 0-)

    No one cares except the fanatical. History is just too much a juggernaut. This will be buried in progress, which will bury them.

    Fuck Big Brother...from now on, WE'RE watching.

    by franklyn on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:10:24 PM PDT

  •  Military Religious Freedom Act (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    richardak, mainely49, terabthia2

    so that certain soldiers cannot have the same freedom that is granted to other soldiers.  I love the way that the Right uses language.  I wonder if they know that 1984 and Animal Farm were warnings, not instruction manuals.

  •  I just saw a team of Navy Seals being chased (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    exMnLiberal, mainely49, terabthia2, MaikeH

    down the street by the cast of Glee, so I totally get what they're talking about.

  •  What do the Log Cabin Self Loathers have to say? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    exMnLiberal

    Repubs started up the car, hit the throttle and sent it over the cliff, and now they're complaining that the black guy hasn't fixed it fast enough.

    by Bush Bites on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:15:36 PM PDT

  •  these guys must own a pizza parlor. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terabthia2
  •  Such morons. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terabthia2

    How many times are they going to pass this?

    They keep bringing it up, because it's such a issue of vital importance to America.

    1. The DOD already has policy that chaplains can refuse to marry gays. It's there, it's done.

    2. Doesn't barring gays from using military facilities violate THEIR religious freedom? What about Episcopal, Unitarian, Jews and other religions that DO bless same sex unions? Why should they be barred from being able to practice their faith the same as others?

    Supporter: "Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!" Adlai Stevenson: "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"

    by Scott Wooledge on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:21:07 PM PDT

  •  Are there statistics available... (0+ / 0-)

    regarding the percentage of GOP sponsored bills in the House and Senate that have featured aspects of the "Family Values" agenda (ie. hatred of gays, hatred of women and reproductive rights) that have been tabled since the 2010 election?

    I'm guessing that 90% of their bills contain this kind of shit.

    Mitt Romney treats people like things. And he treats things - corporations - like people.

    by richardak on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:21:36 PM PDT

  •  These bozos up for election? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terabthia2

    Or are they just throwing out something that has no chance of passing to give congressional homophobes something to brag about voting for/to complain Obama and evil democrats are blocking, or both?

    It's not like the country has anything important going on right now, is it?

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:25:13 PM PDT

  •  I am very happy to have witnessed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terabthia2

    such a change in attitudes towards gays and such a rapid increase in gay rights over the past 5 or 10 years. The only disappointing thing is that the homophobes who lost out were never adequately punished in my opinion. In my ideal world they not only have to live with having gay married couples and gay teachers and soldiers, but also would undergo some sort of suffering for all the pain they caused.

  •  Ive always found it interesting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mainely49

    that so much of the time, the republicans will give bills these sorts of names. What kind of political party has to lie about its own positions?

    On the other hand, their voters may know the leaders are lying, and are fine with it. It would totally explain why they think we're always lying: Because they always are.

    Now what's going on? Not only is this the wrong defendant, but he's brought his whole entourage along! Kids these days, think they can just do whatever they want. Oh well, moving on...

    by kamrom on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:30:52 PM PDT

  •  the Party of Hatred.... (0+ / 0-)

    trying desperately to fire up a dwindling base of angry white male bigots.

    Mitt Romney treats people like things. And he treats things - corporations - like people.

    by richardak on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:33:15 PM PDT

  •  utterly crazy - now- at the risk of snark.... (0+ / 0-)

    a) there are no atheists in foxholes

    b) there are some homosexuals in foxholes.

    c) there always have been, whether we have DOMA, DADT, or - anything.

    d) I suspect that the homosexuals actually in the foxhole will be too busy trying to not be killed, to worry about marrying their battle buddy. even as a dying wish!

    e) therefore, the chaplain ought not be asked to marry two guys even if one of them is dying from wounds inflicted in battle..... and besides the foxhole is too small for two guys plus the chaplain.

    f) everything else is probably not an "emergency" and I suspect damn few of the troops want to bother the Southern Baptist guy. (even though the southern baptist guy is probably deep in the closet.) I'd say - "go with Unitarian!"

    ergo cogito sum - what's the problem!

    ;-)

    PS - it's the economy, stupid!

    "I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she (Christina Taylor-Greene) imagined it." President Obama

    by guavaboy on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:37:20 PM PDT

    •  let me clarify (0+ / 0-)

      I am trying to wrap my brain around the stupidity of these two US senators.....

      WTF?

      "I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she (Christina Taylor-Greene) imagined it." President Obama

      by guavaboy on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 06:42:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  "forced to perform a marriage ceremony" (0+ / 0-)

    Since the tide has turned somewhat and the "gayz R icky" thing isn't proving quite as effective in quashing marriage equality measures at least in some areas, this seems to be the next stop for GOPers/bigots. "Religious freedom." Now, I'm admittedly no expert on laws or statutes dealing with the conscience of clergy, including military chaplains, but this shadowy "concern" that two gay men (I say men because that seems to be their hangup), who I'm sure in their minds would be the cruelest stereotypes you can imagine, would show up at a church or base chapel and "force" the chaplain to marry them or else, seems wildly outside the realm of possibility and of legality.

    But of course, that's what they feed on. Take an issue and milk the fear, consequences and humanity be damned.

  •  There are fewer more repulsive pieces of shit... (0+ / 0-)

    ...that exist anywhere than the RPOS that is James Inhofe. The man is a craven, hate-filled, lie-filled, dangerous, uninformed rogue. He hates gays and he hates the earth.

    He really tests my vow of trying to never hate another person. He would destroy the beauty of the earth for the glory of his unscientific ego and he would force his theocratic brand of pseudoChristianity on everyone else... You know, the hate-filled Jesus of Big Oil and Big Guns and Big Polluters and big fat polluting megachurches that house obesely biogted Oklahomans.

    Fuck him and the brainwashed masses across the sagebrush plains of Oklahoma who voted for this asshole and enabled the obstruction of doing something about climate change.

    "If you're looking for somebody with George W. Bush's economic policy, Dick Cheney's foreign policy, and Rick Santorum's social policy, then Mitt Romney's your man." -- James Carville

    by terabthia2 on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 08:57:24 PM PDT

  •  We're not that interesting... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MaikeH

    ...anymore. Military or not, inclined to marry or not, we're just not that interesting any more. Some of us got married 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago, without license, without pause, regardless of what authorities thought they could require. We were married then. We're still married. No one before us said we couldn't marry if we agreed to it. It's been true all along.

    We've been denied benefits. That's the main thing. If I die before my partner he's not going to get the same social security benefit entitled heterosexual married widows get. That's the only thing I care about any more. I paid into a system that said your spouse gets half of your benefits when you die. What was the reason for that?

    The reason for that is that when you lose your lifelong partner, the rest of the country cares. The rest of the country cares enough that they'll throw in half of your remaining social security insurance fund to your partner-in-life, just half, a couple of extra hundred bucks a month, to help them manage through the rest of their years, without the person they loved the most. When they passed social security there were a lot of folks that never got much of a chance to establish themselves, to build up financial assets, who were looking forward to slowing down, and maybe getting sick, and eventually dying, without much hope for leaving anything behind for their wives or children. Social Security was meant to give those guys, our great-great-grandfathers and great-grandfathers, our grandfathers and fathers a little peace-of-mind.

    I'm 55 so I suppose it's easier to imagine what it's like to be 70 or 80 and whether sooner-or-later dying. But gay or not, we all go eventually. If I go first, before my guy does, it'd be nice to know that he'd get the same fair share of my Social Security that hetero survivors get. I pay the same; my surviving partner should get the same.

    He served on an aircraft carrier during the end of the Viet Nam war and the fall of Cambodia. And even if he didn't, he ended up marrying me. He deserves his fair share of my social security if I die first, just like any other widow.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site