General Peter Pace is Right

UPDATE: Ummm, never mind....

Gen. Pace may urge U.S. troop cut in Iraq

I commend this Pace for trying, but he is still a bigot. But let’s not turn this into a gay-basher bashing party.

According to Reuters, he is “expected to contend that keeping significantly more than 100,000 troops in Iraq through next year would severely strain the military and compromise its ability to respond to other threats.”

I agree 100%. By mid-2008, we should have our forces drawn down to approximately 100,000 soldiers. And we should continue to reduce the number of troops.

By leaving more than 100,000 troops in Iraq past 2008 would be dangerous. The military would be horrible condition, and the ability of the U.S. to respond to other threats would be diminished.

Not that it matters. If any Democratic presidential candidate other than Joe Biden were elected, at least some troops would be pulled out.

It’s all good in the neighborhood, with Democrats

Barack Obama's Position on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

BONUS ADDITION to Gays in the Military Series:

The Obama campaign is the fourth campaign to respond to the question “What is your position on the “Don't ask, don't tell” policy? Should gays be allowed to serve openly in the military?”

Here is his response:


Thank you for contacting Senator Barack Obama and Obama for America with your thoughts on gay rights. We appreciate hearing from you.

Senator Obama supports economic, social, and legal rights for gays and lesbians. He supports full civil unions, expanding hate crimes statutes, fighting discrimination at work and in housing and other places of public accommodation, and wants to increase adoption rights. He opposes any Constitutional ban on gay marriage, opposes the Defense of Marriage Act, and opposes the current “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military, which weakens us in a time of global challenges.

Barack is a global leader in the fight against AIDS. He traveled to Kenya and took a public HIV test to encourage testing and reduce the stigma of the disease. In late 2006, Barack Obama worked to reauthorize the Ryan White CARE Act, one of the largest sources of federal funds for primary health care and support services for patients with HIV/AIDS.

Senator Obama has consistently supported gay rights, and will continue to work for an open, tolerant society where people of all sexual orientations are protected and their contributions are valued. Thank you again for writing.


Sincerely,

Obama for America

Mike Huckabee's Position on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

BONUS ADDITION to Gays in the Military Series:

The Huckabee campaign is the third campaign to respond to the question “What is your position on the “Don't ask, don't tell” policy? Should gays be allowed to serve openly in the military?”
Here is his response:


Thank you for writing me to ask about my position on this policy. I discussed this briefly along with other candidates in the debate, and I am happy to explain my position to you. I believe this policy works, and I don't think now is the time to change it, because our military commanders tell us it serves it's purpose in preventing the disturbances that occur when it is not adhered to. No member of our armed forces is allowed to behave or display personal characteristics in a way that complicates or interferes with unit function and unity. If our commanders say that this policy improves overall force performance by minimizing disturbances at the unit level then we should not change it, especially not in the middle of a war.

Thank you again for your question and for your interest in my campaign. I hope you will visit my website, www.explorehuckabee.com, to learn more about where I stand on this and other important issues.

Sincerely,

Mike Huckabee

Mike Gravels Position on Don't Ask, Don't Tell

BONUS ADDITION to Gays in the Military Series:

The Gravel campaign is the second campaign to respond to the question “What is your position on the “Don't ask, don't tell” policy? Should gays be allowed to serve openly in the military?”

Here is his response:

The senator's position is that "Don't ask, don't tell" is unconstitutional as it limits the rights of gay americans. The senator supports gays in the military



Gays in the Military Series:

Mike Gravels Position on Don't Ask, Don't Tell
John Edwards Position on Don't Ask, Don't Tell
Presidential Candidates Views On "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
6 Reasons Gays Should Be Allowed In The Military
[POLL] Should Gays Be Allowed in the Military

Rudy on Abortion; Mitt on Everything

The Cafferty File, part of The Situation Room on CNN, poses a question every hour The Situation Room is on. This is today's 5:00 question, and Thoughts on the World's response.
------------------------------------------------------------
How much of a problem is it for Rudy Giuliani that he contributed to Planned Parenthood and at the same time says he opposes abortion?

Eventually the primaries in the Bible Belt may take him down, but if they get him, they’ll get Romney first. Mitt may well be a charismatic leader, but he’s an opportunist. Giuliani’s position only “evolved” on a single issue, while Romney’s position literally flip-flopped.

John Edwards Position on Don't Ask, Don't Tell

BONUS ADDITION to Gays in the Military Series:

The Edwards campaign is the first campaign to respond to the question “What is your position on the “Don't ask, don't tell” policy? Should gays be allowed in the military?”

Here is his response:

Dear Simmons,

Thank you for contacting the campaign about Senator Edwards' stance on “Don't ask, don't tell.” Edwards believes that our military ought to treat all service members equally and in a way that promotes national security, without regard to their sexual orientation.

Thanks again for your question.

Sincerely,

The Edwards Team


Gays in the Military Series:

John Edwards Position on Don't Ask, Don't Tell
Presidential Candidates Views On "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
6 Reasons Gays Should Be Allowed In The Military
[POLL] Should Gays Be Allowed in the Military

Presidential Candidates Views On "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

This is the final post (#3) in a series.

Sorry this post took so long. It was meant to contain e-mails back from the top 6 presidential candidates, but none have responded. Instead, this post will rely on public information.

Democrats

Hillary Rodham Clinton has not expressed her opinion of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy (instituted during her husband’s presidency) outright, but has conveyed some distaste for it. When asked in an ABC interview on her position, she responded by saying “I'm going to leave that for others to conclude.” But she later clarified her stance, saying, “I do not think homosexuality is immoral.”

Barack Obama made comments that sounded suspiciously like Clinton’s. When asked if he thought homosexuality was immoral (around the time General Pace’s comments), he replied “I think traditionally the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman has restricted his public comments to military matters. That's probably a good tradition to follow.” Just like Hillary, he explained his comments. His spokesman later said he disagrees with Pace.

John Edwards has been one of the clearest candidates, if not the clearest, on his position on “don’t ask, don’t tell”. A press release at his website explains his position. He strongly believes that the don’t ask policy is hindering our military, and that the policy should be repealed.

Republicans

Rudy Giuliani does not believe in discrimination against gays, but has no problem leaving the current policy the same. “I think the policy that we have right now, we should leave alone,” Giuliani said. “We are in a time of war.”

John McCain believes the military’s policy towards gays is “working” and that “it’s logical to leave this issue alone.” He claims some military leaders have told him the policy is working and shouldn’t be changed.

Mitt Romney, just like Giuliani and McCain, considers “don’t ask, don’t tell” acceptable. Once a supporter of gays, his believes have changed. Rudy Giuliani and John McCain both believe we are at war and the situation shouldn’t be changed, and coincidentally, Romney does not wish to change the status quo.

6 Reasons Gays Should Be Allowed In The Military

As part 2 in the ongoing Gays in the Military Series, today we'll have a look at why gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military.

1. People who say they shouldn't be allowed give reasons that are wrong.
People who believe gays shouldn't be allowed in the military (who shall be known from now on as "bigots") have essentially two reasons that homosexuals should be banned from the Army: They are immoral and/or disrupt soldiers from carrying out their duties. First of all, being homosexual is not immoral; saying it’s immoral is bigotry. Secondly, gays don't interfere with the military's everyday functioning. For more elaboration, see numbers 2 and 6.

2. They don’t affect other soldiers
As mentioned previously, homosexual soldiers do NOT affect other soldiers. They can go about their daily military activities, just like everyone else. Should women be barred from service because they distract male soldiers? No, of course not, that would be sexist! Then why isn't stopping homosexuals from joining the military, homophobic? If women don't disrupt the military, why would gays?

3. There was no problem before the 1990s
Throughout the Revolutionary War, The War of 1812, the Civil War, World War I, World War II, The Korean War, and The Vietnam War, and The First Gulf War, homosexuals served in the army without major problems. Why couldn’t they now?

4. It creates a loophole for those wishing to leave the army
If a soldier, suffering under heavy stress, wishes to stop participating in an unpopular war (Iraq), "Don't ask, don't tell" creates a way in which deserters can get out of the army. If a soldier appears to admit that he or she is not heterosexual, they can be discharged.

5. The army needs more soldiers
As a more practical approach towards the situation, you could look at this way: The army needs more soldiers. How can the army go about achieving this? Allowing gays to enlist.

6. “All men are created equal”
This line may not be law, but it is the symbol of American justice. Homosexuals are just like everyone else; they were born equal too. It is about time we live up to our promise.

Gays in the Military Series:

[POLL] Should Gays Be Allowed in the Military
6 Reasons Gays Should Be Allowed In The Military

Should Schools Stop Teaching the Holocaust to Avoid Offending Muslim Students?

The Cafferty File, part of The Situation Room on CNN, poses a question every hour The Situation Room is on. This is today's 7:00 question, and a response.
------------------------------------------------------------
7 p.m.: Should schools drop the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils?

First of all, how does the Holocaust offend Muslims? If Wikipedia is correct, Hitler was Christian. Second, what about Jews' and Gypsies' feelings? If we don’t teach about this grave injustice, it could happen again. Wouldn’t many Americans be offended if the Revolutionary War wasn’t taught in out schools? The Holocaust is just as important to humanities history as the Revolutionary War was to our history. Please pick a better question next time, Jack.

Were the Confessions Forced?

The Cafferty File,
part of The Situation Room on CNN, poses a question every hour The Situation Room is on. This is today's 7:00 question, and a response.
------------------------------------------------------------
7 p.m.: What do you make of the recent string of terrorists' confessions?

Terrorists bragging. If you were a captured terrorist, and knew you were going to be convicted, you'd probably go out as a martyr, claiming you were so great. Did some of confessions come out under pressure, or even torture? Probably.

The Debate Continues

The debate at PoliteTalk Forums continues. Is it ever prudent to submit to blackmail? (Specifically North Korea).

There was an earlier post detailing the first response to the debate.

The rest can be read here.

A Logical Solution

Another quote from Polite Talk forums:

Assumptions:

1) Gay People are overwhelmingly in favor of their right to marry.

2) Gay People would marry other gay people.

3) Regardless of law, non-gay People would marry someone of the opposite sex.




Deductions:

1) Overwhelmingly, people opposed to a right to gay marriage would not choose to marry someone of the same sex.

2) No one who does not wish to marry someone of the same sex could be forced to.

3) A Legal right to gay marriage would have a positive individual effect on those who would exercise that right.

4) A Legal right to gay marriage would have no negative individual effects on those who would choose not to exercise that right.




Analysis:

1) Noting the absence of negative individual effects on detractors, it follows that the reasons for opposing such a right are largely abstract. Examples include varying degrees of religious opposition, and to a lesser extent, the simple desire to impose one's will on others.

2) Noting the overwhelmingbelieff in religion that humans have free will and one's final judgement is made on an individual basis, it follows that regardless of whether or not gay marriage is an abomination or a sin, the judgement of those who choose to exercise that right could in no way affect anyone who don't.

3) Noting the overwhelming belief among people that "I am entitled to equal rights," it follows that the imposition of anyone's will on another constitutes a double standard.




Conclusions:

1) Any Religious Judgement is between the individual and his/her God, and therefore no one's business but theirs. Ergot, the validity of religious arguments is dissolved.

2) Hypocrites aside, the overwhelming majority of the people believe fairness and equality of opportunity are the cornerstones of a democracy.




Solutions:

There are two solutions that would make the situation both fair and equal in opportunity:

1) Make it an inalienable legal right for anyone to marry the person of their choice, regardless of gender.

-or-

2) Make it a crime for anyone to marry a person to whom he or she is sexually or physically attracted.I say, let them eat (wedding) cake.

Now, conservatives and die-hard believers, please explain why gay marriage is bad.

What Most People Don't Get

PoliteTalk.com:

His post reminds me of something I heard a couple of months ago by former Muslim
and former PLO terrorist Walid Shoebat. He said that (and I paraphrase): For
Westerners, anything moral or good is anything that tends to enhance or promote
life. Anything immoral or bad is anything that tends to impede or diminish life.

In Islam, morality or goodness is anything that tends to enhance or
promote Islam and the spread of Islam. Anything immoral or bad is anything that
tends to impede or diminish Islam or the spread of Islam.

Very different
philosophies and I don't think too many Americans seem to understand that he is
very correct.

Life in Iraq

This picture is so saddening. Think about it; too often do we just pass it by, accept it as life. The media has changed how people think of things. Imagine the pain he's experiencing. Imagine the pain his family will or already is experiencing. His life will never be the same. It is so horrible.

On Torture

Although torture is meant to keep the United States of America safe, it does not always have that effect. Sometimes, in dire emergencies, torture may be necessary. Usually, this is not the case. President Bush does not agree with this. He thinks that torture is necessary to prevent another terrorist attack. While the President believes that, others, who have been in the military, including Republican Senators John McCain, John Warner, and Lindsey Graham, have the opposite view on interrogation techniques. Both sides have proposed a bill. The senate bill, which was approved by the Senate Armed Service Committee (led by McCain, Warner, and Graham), is not much better than the President's bill. It would allow the President to have the final word on torture. If he wanted to torture a detainee, he would NOT have to make his intentions public.

The effects of torture are worse than the information gained from it, excluding extreme cases. If the United States tortures prisoners, other countries will too. This puts the United StatesÂ’ soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan in danger. Tortured POWs often give false information to receive better treatment. One well known case Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a terrorism suspect, admitted” that Iraq and Al-Qaeda were connected so he would not be tortured by the Egyptians. Countries become less trustful, creating weaker treaties. Besides that, the U.S. agreed to the Geneva Conventions. Bush has no right to decide that he can just over rule the agreement. Mistreating captured enemy combatants is morally wrong, and diminishes how the world looks at the U.S. Even for people who donÂ’t believe in any God must agree that torture is wrong. A watered down version of the McCain bill, or even better, a new bill, must be passed in Congress if the United States is to regain its image of fairness and the soldiers of the United States are to remain safe.

The Origin of Life

There are three main theories on the origin of life; the Theory of Evolution, Intelligent Design, and Creationism. These are all called theories. One thing must be said about scientific theories first, because scientific theories are different from normal theories. Scientific theories have proof behind them, and are accepted by more than one person. The Theory of Evolution is the current theory on the origin of life taught in almost all science curriculums in public schools. It is the theory that all species of plants and animals descended from a common ancestor. Natural Selection, first voiced by Charles Darwin, is also expressed in this theory. Public schools do not currently teach Intelligent Design, but there are people who believe it should be taught. Intelligent Design says that there was a creator instead of a planless mechanism. While this theory does not reject evolution as change over time, or common ancestry, it does not accept natural selection being random. Creationism is also not in science curriculums, but as with Intelligent Design, some want it to be taught in public schools. Creationism is a religious idea that a supernatural creator (God) made the world and all life. It's usually based on the Bible. Out of the three main theories on the origin of life, the Theory of Evolution, Intelligent Design, and Creationism, the Theory of Evolution is the only theory taught in public schools, and is the only real scientific theory.

"You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes." The United States President, George W. Bush, believes that students should be exposed to different ideas on evolution, meaning he thinks that Intelligent Design should also be taught in schools. Not everyone agrees, but the President consistently supports this view. It is also clear that President Bush does not want to get deep into this argument and that he believes it should be the state government, not the federal government that makes the final decision on what should be taught. From the Washington Post, before Bush was President, "Bush's spokeswoman Mindy Tucker said, 'He believes both Creationism and evolution ought to be taught...He believes it a question for states and local school boards to decide he believes both ought to be taught.'" To reiterate, Bush believes other theories alongside the Theory of Evolution should be taught in schools, but it should be the states decision what the curriculum is.

While Bush and others believe Intelligent Design should be taught in schools, there are others who don't. This group includes Barry W. Lynn, who is the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. He says Bush, "...doesn't understand that one is a religious viewpoint (Intelligent Design) and one is a scientific viewpoint", and that Bush showed a "low level of understanding of science." Supporters of the Theory of Evolution concur that Darwin's Theory of Evolution should be taught in schools. The population that agrees with the Kansas professor that called intelligent design "creation in a cheap tuxedo” says there is no valid debate on the subject. As explained earlier, a scientific theory has evidence to back itself up. Many people argue that there is no evidence of a Creator, neither religious or from Intelligent Design. The most well known debate occurred in Kansas, where the board of education there now requires high school teachers to teach the doubts about evolution. This ruling is victory for President Bush and his allies, but a defeat for Barry Lynn and others like him.

The Theory of Evolution should be the only theory taught in schools. As stated at the beginning of this, the Theory of Evolution is the only real scientific theory. The other “theories” are really just called theories more as a marketing ploy. The amount of evidence the Theory of Evolution has is colossal compared the Creationism or Intelligent Design. Humans have never found evidence of an Intelligent Creator, or any Gods, of any religion, besides a bible (different per religion), which each was written a very long time ago. No one has any concrete evidence that their bible was sent from their God. In contrast, evidence of evolution can be found virtually everywhere. If one finds a living thing, including plants, you have evidence of evolution and natural selection. And no matter where one goes, one still has his or herself, which is also a product of evolution. By looking at fossils one can see how life has changed over time. Also, because public schools are bound by the laws of separation of church and state, they shouldn’t even be allowed to teach Intelligent Design, let alone Creationism. Even though President Bush and others believe we should be exposed to different ideas, which is true with most things, religion and science do not mix. If we are to uphold The Constitution, and maintain one of the most important traits of the United States, the separation of church and state, we will listen to the facts and only teach the Theory of Evolution.