Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:55 AM ET, 01/31/2011

DOD gets ready for a post-DADT reality

By Jonathan Capehart

The Pentagon isn't wasting any time in bringing about the official and final end to don't ask don't tell (DADT). The path to allowing gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military was outlined on Jan. 28. If the pace of this steady march continues, DADT could be history before the end of the year.

Congress repealed the discriminatory policy on Dec. 18, which President Obama signed into law on Dec. 22. But gay troops cannot come out of the closet without fear until the president, defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that the armed forces have regulations in place to deal with the new reality and that said new reality won't hurt recruitment, retention and readiness. The plans announced Friday were about getting this process underway, with the training set to begin next month.

Each of the military branches will start with the chaplains, lawyers and civilians. Commanding officers would go next. Then the rank and file. With 2.5 million folks to train, who knows how long all this will take? Also, each branch will have to figure out the specifics of its training using any number of tools, from PowerPoints to videos. I was going to urge that Gates keep an eye on Gen. James F. Amos, the Marine commandant. He was vocal about his opposition to ending DADT up until the very end. But Amos was singing a different tune in a video released on Jan. 28.

"I want to be clear to all Marines," Amos said, "we will step out smartly to faithfully implement this new law. It is important that we value the diversity of background, culture and skills that all Marines bring to the service of our nation."

The last hurdle to full repeal is the 60-day waiting period after the certification by Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen. I'm going to keep my eyes and ears open for congressional shenanigans, especially during this period.
Think something can't happen then? The night before Obama signed the DADT repeal bill, an effort by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to put up a road block to repeal was thwarted. So, don't breathe a sigh of relief -- and if you're in uniform don't come out -- until DADT's death notice is official.

By Jonathan Capehart  | January 31, 2011; 9:55 AM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Will President Obama raise the gas tax?
Next: 2012: The Year of the Mormons?

Comments

Great. Now do the same thing for women. lose the so called combat exclusion.

Posted by: Robynmarigny | January 31, 2011 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Thanks Jonathan for posting the video it's the first time I've seen it. I expected just such a reaction once repeal took place. Following orders is the foundation of all the branches of the military. It will be very difficult to derail or delay implementation of DADT with such a visual.

Posted by: hankjd | January 31, 2011 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Committed lifelong homophobes rarely get hit by lightning on the road to Damascus. They just lie about their conversions when it becomes politically expedient.

I think I'd rather deal with an honest bigot than a duplicitous hypocrite like Gen. James Amos or Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.

Posted by: Itzajob | January 31, 2011 11:07 AM | Report abuse

I read the comment by Robynmarigny and very much agree, but I recently read an article regarding the escalation in sexual abuse on the front lines. In some situations, women will stop drinking water early in the evening so they do not have to venture out of their quarters to reveal themselves. In the past many commanders have buried these incidences and they have gone unreported. Much more inviability, needs to be given to a great problem as the military opens more areas for participation by women.

Posted by: hankjd | January 31, 2011 11:24 AM | Report abuse

sorry- misspell not reveal but relieve

Posted by: hankjd | January 31, 2011 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Regarding the comment by Itzajob, his opinions, voiced in the past, have not changed, but he will carryout all orders and the implementation of the repeal of DADT is an order.

Posted by: hankjd | January 31, 2011 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Of course the Marines will obey orders with vigor and commitment. We've come to expect nothing less.

Doesn't mean the order is right or being agreed to.

Now, we just have to make it a crime for anyone to offend the homosexuals. Tolerance is not enough, acceptance must be forced.

Posted by: kitchendragon50 | January 31, 2011 12:03 PM | Report abuse

While there may be some issues, orders are orders, and the military will fall in line. When Admiral Mullens addressed troops shortly after the legislation was passed, during the question and answer session a chaplain asked him whether/how the military would protect the religious freedom of those in the chaplain corp who believed and preached about the sinfulness of homosexuality. To paraphrase, he told the chaplain that if he did not feel that he could carry out his duties towards gay soldiers seeking his counsel, then he should go find another job.

The really interesting issue, though, will be what the military does about DOMA. Since the federal government can't recognize same sex marriage, how will next of kin/benefits/hosptal visitations, etc. be addressed? how will the military handle it when a member who is legally married to a same sex partner is transferred to a state that does not recognize, or is even hostile (e.g. Norfolk) to gay rights and same sex couple recognition.

Nobody says it, but this has to be the beginning of the end of DOMA too.

Posted by: ado211 | January 31, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the comments of ado211, DOMA will fall as did DADT, you cannot allow peopl to give their lives for our country and then deny their love ones the full rights guaranteed to every other partner of a straight member of the armed forces.

Posted by: hankjd | January 31, 2011 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Regarding Admiral Mullens' response to the chaplain, sounds like a future conscientious objector basis in the case of a draft. Your religious beliefs don't comport with gays in the military.

Posted by: kitchendragon50 | January 31, 2011 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Great. Now do the same thing for women. lose the so called combat exclusion.

Posted by: Robynmarigny
==================
Great. Now if that is done, amend the Draft law so women have the same "opportunity" as men do of being Drafted. Especially if the volunteer military becomes unaffordable with our deficit woes. Our big military potential foes all have far lower military costs in personnel than we do, from conscriptions. Leaving a lot left to build modern navies, fighter wings, other weapons systems.

Women want the "choice" of equality and the "right of women" to join combat units - that "equality, right to choose" - should translate into feminists having no objection to women being put at risk like men are if a Draft becomes necessary.

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | January 31, 2011 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Great. Now do the same thing for women. lose the so called combat exclusion.

Posted by: Robynmarigny
==================

Fine, but in additional to ChrisFord1's comment, there still needs to be an understanding of what it takes to physically be a front-line soldier is much different than your sexual preference or racial background.

All front line soldiers should meet the same physical requirements (PT, etc...) and if that means 7 pullups for jumpschool, it's 7 for all, not modifed pullups for some.
Yes, that might sound a bit hard but the physical demands don't and can't change because of gender and the enemy doesn't care if you can or cannot carry your 125lb rucksack with a radio inside, or a mortar baseplate or a .50cal barrel attached for miles on end (or while running).
The physical requirements aren't to weed out women but everyone who physical limitations make them a liability in the field or restricts their ability to support their teammates, regardless of their chromisones.

Posted by: MadiganT | January 31, 2011 3:46 PM | Report abuse

As for Gen. Amos, i'd expect no less from him. As a good soldier, he'll argue his position until the decision is made and then he'll do everything he can to implement the decision as ordered.
To do less would be an insult to both his uniform and to just being a Marine.

Posted by: MadiganT | January 31, 2011 3:50 PM | Report abuse

As for Gen. Amos, i'd expect no less from him. As a good soldier, he'll argue his position until the decision is made and then he'll do everything he can to implement the decision as ordered.
To do less would be an insult to both his uniform and to just being a Marine.

Posted by: MadiganT | January 31, 2011 3:50 PM | Report abuse

As for Gen. Amos, i'd expect no less from him. As a good soldier, he'll argue his position until the decision is made and then he'll do everything he can to implement the decision as ordered.
To do less would be an insult to both his uniform and to just being a Marine.

Posted by: MadiganT | January 31, 2011 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the comments of ChrisFord1 --if we had a draft-- there would fewer wars to fight. it would have nothing to do with the female soldiers. Let there be a fair and universal draft, instead of a mercenary force that becomes an arm of foreign policy. When Americans die we should all share in the potential death of a soldier.

Posted by: hankjd | January 31, 2011 3:54 PM | Report abuse

I am not sure that Kitchendragon50 and ChrisFord1 are aware that we no longer have a draft. And, as a matter of fact, some of the announced new regulations regarding repeal say that some members who are opposed may request to be discharged, but that each request would be handled on a case by case basis depending on the needs of the military. After an initial shakeout, that won't be an issue since post DADT volunteers who join will be aware of the inclusion of homosexuals in the military. What this will do to recruitment efforts is unknown--it may decrease, but it may increase the number of people who join--but the year long study predicts only a minor effect (and in light of how young people view this matter--essentially as a non-issue--that makes sense, at least in the longer term).

Posted by: ado211 | January 31, 2011 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Mitch McConnell --- condemns DADT ???

But Mitch McConnell has never served in the military?

And Mitch McConnell is a Role Model for Congressmen who serve Big Money?

Geeze! Give me a break . . Draft the pompous hypocrite.

Posted by: lufrank1 | January 31, 2011 4:08 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't come out either until the DADT is officially gone. You can't trust Republicans on this issue as the only use they have for gays is when they can fool them into voting for them.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | January 31, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

It was clear from years of studies on our own military and those of other countries that the repeal of DADT would be a non-issue within the military. But Washington politics -- now that's another matter.

Posted by: syfredrick | January 31, 2011 4:23 PM | Report abuse

ado211 - "I am not sure that Kitchendragon50 and ChrisFord1 are aware that we no longer have a draft."

I am not sure if ado211 realizes it or not, but there is a reason why guys still haveto register at 18. The whole Selective Service system for the Draft is lying in place. Dormant. But ready to be reactivated at Congress's notice.

Ready to be resurrected if we cannot recruit enough people for vital military roles - based on pared down military budgets in the future that require supplementing or outright replacing the volunteer military. The other case where the Draft could come back is a a large scale protracted war, Mexico explodes into cross-Border anarchy, or massive & violent civil unrest in America.

You want to "progress women", who can "do any job a man does in the military"? Fine. Equal opportunity comes with equal responsibility.

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | January 31, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

I was going to urge that Gates keep an eye on Gen. James F. Amos, the Marine commandant. He was vocal about his opposition to ending DADT up until the very end. But Amos was singing a different tune in a video released on Jan. 28.

============================================

Let me enlighten Mr. Capeheart and anyone else with basic ignorance of the armed forces. The Commandant expressed his opinion and now, being the officer and gentleman he is, he has his orders and along with the SgtMaj of the Marine Corps will do their damn best to carry it out.

To piggy-back on MadiganT's comment to expect anything less would be an insult to both his uniform and to just being a Marine.

Posted by: bbface21 | January 31, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

If you want proof that change is coming and has already arrived, look no further than this linked article re the Naval Academy's respectful and dignified interactions with the same sex spouse of a deceased veteran who was afforded the dignity equally due to all grieving spouses.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/steinberg/3526027-452/ketterson-academy-naval-usna-husband.html

And further showing that DOMA will not be able to resist the arc of history and justice will ultimately prevail (even with the inevitable short term setbacks and all of these sorts of struggles produce).

Re the draft: This is not your father's military. It is a professional fighting force, and incompatible with any sort of mass draft. It would have to be such a catastrophic set of circumstances for a return to the draft to even be realistically considered that serving with openly gay and lesbian soldiers would be the least of anyone's problems. The selective service is just an anachronism that keeps the bureaucracy employed (I'm sure that there is some sort of justification or use that is put forward to keep it around, but it is NOT a nascent draft in any way shape or form).

Posted by: ado211 | January 31, 2011 5:11 PM | Report abuse

bbface - CMC will do his duty, got it. Let's all check back in 18 months when we see how the video message is upheld when the rubber really meets the road. The jury will be out for years.

Posted by: Shawnnnva | January 31, 2011 5:45 PM | Report abuse

If Mr. Capehart is so 'pro gays-serving-openly-in-the-military' when does HIS enlistment start? Never? He'd rather write snarky newspaper columns about alleged discrimination, than go serve alongside his "brothers". Typical of what I expect from homosexuals....whine about what they want, but when it's given to them, men like Capehart don't avail themselves of the opportunity they whined to get.

Capehart, go enlist or shut up about how wonderful you think it's going to be with 'open' gays in the military.

Posted by: momof20yo | January 31, 2011 6:24 PM | Report abuse

To momof20yo and kitchendragon50:

I could care less about "objectors" in the military who will go along just so they can pat themselves on the back for being "good soldiers". It's now the law and your personal feelings have nothing to do with it. There is a reason you lost and it's because you're swimming against the tide of history that you can't keep up with. Just keep faking it, you'll eventually make it.

Posted by: nvamikeyo | January 31, 2011 7:41 PM | Report abuse

“Regarding Admiral Mullens' response to the chaplain, sounds like a future conscientious objector basis in the case of a draft. Your religious beliefs don't comport with gays in the military.”

If there were a draft, conscientious objectors could claim those religious beliefs now but they better belong to a religion that preaches non-comport with gays in everyday life.

Those are the arm-chair-cowards commenting everyday in the WaPo.

“Great. Now if that is done, amend the Draft law so women have the same "opportunity" as men do of being Drafted. Especially if the volunteer military becomes unaffordable with our deficit woes. Our big military potential foes all have far lower military costs in personnel than we do, from conscriptions. Leaving a lot left to build modern navies, fighter wings, other weapons systems.”

Sooo …. Who are “Our big military potential foes”?

I’m all for restarting the draft for men and women so the “arm-chair-cowards” can finally have skin in the game.

Vietnam Vet

Posted by: knjincvc | January 31, 2011 7:45 PM | Report abuse

***INTERSEX VARIANT GENETICS, IT'S NOT A SIN, IT'S GENETICS PERIOD, GENETICS IS NOT A SIN****
PLEASE OPEN IN WORD PAD TO SEE STRESSING POINTS IN LAW/ MEDICINE/ LOGIC-REASON AND JUST ADD PLASTIC SUGERY FREEBEE TO THE HEALTHCARE LAW AND MORE WILL SUPPORT IT ASAP

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

~Mahatma Gandhi


HUMANE CIVILITY EQUALITY MOVEMENT ( HCEM )
IN LIGHT OF THE PUBLIC VOTE IN IOWA etc , THEN PLEASE START TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC AT LARGE TO THESE FACTS THAT MOST DON'T KNOW THROUGH THE MEDIA, BLOGS , UNIVERSITIES, AND HOLLYWOOD, TO STOP THE LIABLE AND INTENTINAL RELIGOUS MISLEADING THE PUBLIC AS A SIN

GOOGLE/ WIKIPEDIA/ YOUTUBE: INTERSEX/ XXY MALES IS GENETICS THEREFORE A RACE , SEE SCOTUS 379US184,191 AS ALCHEMY TEXT SAY THERE ARE THREE SEXES MALE-FEMALE-& HERMAPHRODITE CALLED THE REBIS SPICES WHICH IS BOTH THE OLDEST FROM WHICH "ADAM" WAS CREATED AS, AND WHAT MAN WILL BECOME AGAIN, SEE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ON GENETICS PROTECTIONS, AGAIN FORIEGN/ RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMAN NOR A TERRORIST AND JIM CROW LIKE PERIOD,THEY ARE LIABLE JUST AS THE KKK CASE LAWS, GENETICS


RELIGIOUS INHUMANE DEATH LAWS DOSE NOT PASS THE 14AMEND. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS, LAW DOCTRINES OF [RATIONAL BASIS TEST ] 431US471,489 427US307,314, [STRICT SCRUTINY ]403US365, 405US330, 411US1,16-17 , [COMPELLING INTEREST] 394US618,634 AND [SUSPECT CLASSIFICATION ] 411US1,28, RELIGOUS LAWS ARE FORIEGN LAWS, AND THATS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
IMF IRS 501 (3)(c) CHURCH/ TEMPLE LLC CORPORATIONS ARE BOTH LIABLE CRIMINALLY/ CIVIL FOR WHAT THEY TEACH OTHERS PERIOD, JUST LIKE THE ANGLO KKK CASE LAWS ( EQUALITY SUITS )

THE AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COVERS BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS WITH REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS " INTERSEXED/XXY MALE etc" ARE BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS, AND SOONER THAN LATER EVERYONE WILL FALL UNDER THIS DUE TO AGING AND ACCIDENTS ALONE, IN ALL MY BLOGING DEBATE ,NO RELIGOUS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DISPROVE THE GENETIC FACTORS PERIOD, THEREFORE IT'S NOT A CHOICE, JUST AS TANNING IS NOT A CHOICE UV EXPOSURE WILL HAPPEN


COMITY (COMITAS) LAW DOCTRINE IS A RULE OF COURTESY, BUT NOT A RULE OF LAW,
RELIGIOUS/FOREIGN INHUMANE DEATH LAWS FAILS THE TEST OF EQUALITY/ BILL-CIVIL RIGHTS OF US CITIZENS, " In the exercise of one's religion one, CANNOT INSIST ON CONDUCT WHICH THREATENS important interest on the society in an UNREASONABLE MANNER. The courts must, therefore, BALANCE the Importance of a religious exercise claim against the State interest involved in a rule or practice which prevents or hinders the exercise 367US488,489.

Posted by: shaiarra | January 31, 2011 7:52 PM | Report abuse

EVEN BIBLICAL/KORAN etc RECORD THE HERMAPHRODITE ( INTERSEX )BEGINNINGS OF MANKIND, AS WELL AS SCIENCE ie. SURA EL KIYAMA "FROM 1 BLOOD HE (ALLAH) MADE BOTH MALE AND FE-MALE, THE ( YHVH) ADAM AND EVE ie WO-MAN ( WOMB OF MAN SHE WAS TAKEN OUT OF MAN AS ADAM SAID IN GENESIS, IN SCIENCE BOTH X (FE-MALE ie SOFT/LITTLE MALE) AND, Y ( the infinite testes x/y bisexual ) and yet in the First Trimester ALL MALES ARE GENETIC FE-MALES, THE INTERSEX IS A PAST SYMBIOTIC ECHO THAT IN THE 90% Estrogen in Food/ Water/ Air, I.E. THE INTERSEX GENETICS IS NATURAL, NOT A SIN PERIOD.


LEVITICAL/SHARIA DEATH LAWS ARE UNREASONABLY CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS , OF WHICH THE FOUNDING FATHERS LEFT EUROPE BECAUSE OF INHUMANE RELIGION. ie. THE SEPARATION OF RELIGION AND STATE, NOR ANY RELIGIOUS TESTS EVER, IT ALSO OFFENDS THE USA ABOLITION, EMANCIPATION OF WOMEN, AND CIVIL RIGHTS ERAS


ie XTIANS USE OF LEVITICUS ,BIBLE AND SHARIA TO BLOCK DADT REPEAL AND SAME SEX MARRIAGE CONTRACTS , THE SCOTUS US CONSTITUTION LAW DOCTRINE CALLED "FREEDOM OF CONTRACT" ALLOWS ADULT US CITIZENS TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS, XTIANS MIS-LEADING USE OF FOREIGN RELIGIOUS LAWS TO BLOCK BOTH CONSTITUTIONAL/CIVIL RIGHTS OF THOSE SAME SEX (XXY MALE/ INTERSEX )US CITIZENS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND TREASONOUS.


IT IS GENETICS BEING RE-ENFORCED BY NATURE ie ESTROGEN IN FOOD/ WATER/ AIR/PLASTICS/ and mercury etc. GOOGLE: Study: Mercury pollution causes birds to act gay : IT'S IRONIC THE IRIBIS/ BENNU/ PHOENIX BIRD REPRESENTS THE DIVINE BI-SEXUAL CHILD CALLED RIBIS/ REBIS IN ALCHEMY OF WHICH IT SAYS MERCURY MUST BE JOINED TO MERCURY, IBIS=THOTH, THOTH = MERCURY/HERMES= HERMAPHRODITUS= HERMAPHRODITE ie INTERSEX/XXY MALES


SIN INVOLVES A CHOICE, ESTROGEN IN THE FOOD -WATER-AIR SOURCES AND IN GENETICS IS NOT A CHOICE, ITS NOT A SIN OR "GOD" WOULD BE UNJUST IN THESE TWO MAIN AREAS ( FOOD/ GENES) : THEREFORE IT'S NOT A SIN (-CHOICE)


GOOGLE:Study: Mercury pollution causes birds to act gay [ STILL IT'S NOT AND INDIVIDUALS CHOICE]

MALES FEEL THIS WAY BECAUSE OF "GOD" NATURAL ESTROGEN /PHEROMONE RE-ENFORCE BY THE FOOD SOURCE OF DIVINE ORDER, ALL "HETERAL"? MALES HAVE GOOD LOOKING MALE FRIENDS NOT THE "NERD" LOOKING ONES ,SHOWS MALE ARE INFLUENCE BY APPEARANCE OF OTHER MALES, THE POPULAR ONES ARE BUILT BODY AND OR FACE FEATURES always

LETS GO...SO XTIANS SAYING THE ESTROGEN DOES NOT INFLUENCE SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT....ASK A FEMALE...AND XTIANS SAY BEING ONE OF THE INTERSEX GENETICS VARIATIONS, WOULD NOT CROSS OVER FEMALE FEELINGS INCLUDING SEXUALITY INTO A XXY MALE AND VISA VERSA ?, IF SO ,THEN WHY IS A FEMALE ATTRACTED TO A MALE? AND A MALE TO A FEMALE?

SEXUAL ATTRACTION IS MORE THAN OUTWARD APPEARANCE ALONE, AN INTERSEX VARIANT PERSON, ATTRACTS ,CARRYS AND EMMIT'S BOTH XY/XX PHEROMONES, AND IS ATTRACTED TO BOTH MALE AND FEMALE PHEROMONES SO AN ALL MALE WOULD BE ATTRACTED TO A FEMALE AND INTERSEX PERSONS, SO WILL A FEMALE BE ATTRACTED TO A MALE AND INTERSEX PERSONS AS WELL,

PHEROMONE IS THE HIDDEN

Posted by: shaiarra | January 31, 2011 8:14 PM | Report abuse

What did Jesus say about SAME SEX?
Not a word from Jesus has been recorded in the New Testament. Nothing!

Since when did "JESUS" avocate death penalties???, YOUR THE SO-CALLED SATANIST NOW!!! PETER PUT AWAY THAT SWORD, YOU WILL DIE BY THE SWORD!!

But what did Jesus say about two men lying together in one bed?

From the Gospel of LUKE 17:verses 30, 34, Jesus said,

"In the day the Son of man is revealed, in that night there shall be two men in one bed, the one shall be taken, and the other left.",

So ok 2 GROWN MEN in 1 Bed {TOGETHER}? (what does this sound like?...AT THE RAPTURE SAME SEX "JESUS" says he takes one and leave the other in the same bed on that night ON THE RAPTURE, HMMMMM, ok?)

SEE LUKE 17:30-34, TWO GROWN MEN "LYING" IN BED TOGETHER AT NIGHT, HE TAKES ONE AND LEAVES THE OTHER...IT DID NOT BOTHER "JESUS"

Men are told to KISS Each other!!! ( BIBLE NEW TESTAMENT ) ROM16:16, 1Cor 16:20, 2Cor13:12, 1Thes5:26 1Pet5:14

Posted by: shaiarra | January 31, 2011 8:30 PM | Report abuse

The Blow By Job "ORAL JOB" and "NATURAL SEX INSIDE MARRIAGE" (man & woman) IS AN ABOMINATION ALSO....ITS UNCLEAN AND SIN IN "GOD" OWN WORDS According to LEVITICUS 15:16-30,and DEUTERONOMY 23:20-22, there is only ONE acceptable use of "reproductive fluids", and that is reproduction. Any christian that has received a "trouser friendly kiss", and "spilled his seed" has committed a sin against the lord. AND THE NATURL SEXUAL ACT IN MARRIAGE IS UNCLEANS AND SINFUL [And if marriage is so "special", then why "GOD" calls it "UNCLEAN=TAME" or just outlaw divorce.]

The Hebrew word "TOEVAH" was used in Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. "TOEVAH" has been translated in our Bibles as "Abomination" or "Detestable". The "TOEVAH" was used throughout the Old Testament for activity involving ethnic contamination and religious idolatry. "TOEVAH" refers to things that were ritually unclean - like eating pork.and "TAME"(Taw-May=Infected/ Filthy)

It is significant that another Hebrew word, "ZIMAH" also translated "ABOMINATION," which means intrinsic evil or evil by its very nature, was not used in Leviticus 18:22, or Leviticus 20:13. BUT "TAME" IS USED BY LEVITICUS 15:16-30 "MARRIAGE SEX ACTS"

From the Gnostic Gospels

But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan.[2

Posted by: shaiarra | January 31, 2011 8:36 PM | Report abuse

CRITICAL LOGIC AND REASONING, IF SOMETHING IS "UNNATURAL/SIN" "GOD" AS THE LAW GIVER SHOULD NOT PUT IT IN THE FOOD/ WATER SOURCES THEN, JAMES SAYS"GOD IS NOT TEMPTED NOR TEMPT HE ANY MAN", SO DOES ESTROGEN IN MANS FOOD /WATER/ AIR TEMPTATION IN DEVELOPMENT
SOME WILL SAY THIS IS BLASPHEMY,BUT I DO REMIND THEM"TRUTH CANNOT BLASPHEME" ACTS "WHAT GOD"HAS CLEANED CALL THOU NOT UNCLEAN"

So again, why does "GOD" put Estrogen in the Food source then? Its AN UNJUST ENTRAPMENT to call Same Sex "SIN AND UNNATURAL" when "GOD" the lawgiver puts Behavioral Estrogen Hormones in the Food/Water and Air Sources and BLESSED THEM, ITS NOT A CHOICE nor a Consent, Google: "Estrogen Feminizing Men/Males", in Sefer Raziel Regarding the Power of Ruoch "MASH" Mem-Aleph-Shin=Male and "MESHA" Mem-Shin-Aleph=Female, Do you see the place switch of Mem and Shin, ie Hebrew Letters are also Kabbalistic Math which means a Mathmatical switch in Genetics accures in THE SAME THING ie ADAM ex He and S-He, Him (Heem) and He-r, Male and Fe-male (Fe=soft/little as in Fe-Lion for Cat ) etomology of words

Posted by: shaiarra | January 31, 2011 8:42 PM | Report abuse

http://OutMilitary.com is providing a supportive environment for gay active military and vets to friend, share and network.

Posted by: skoa | February 1, 2011 12:05 PM | Report abuse

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO POINT OUT THAT A HOMOSEXUAL WHO CLAIMS TO HAVE A "SEXUAL ORIENTATION"- CAN NOT SHOW WHERE OR HOW THAT PERSON GOT HIS/HER "ORIENTATION"! THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF PEOPLE WITH VARIOUS ORIENTATIONS, AND MANY OF THESE "ORIENTATIONS"(DESIRES) ARE AGAINST OUR LAWS!
SOME HAVE THE DESIRE TO ROB BANKS,MOLEST CHILDREN,HAVE SEX WITH ANIMALS,OR MARRY A FAMILY MEMBER, AND WE DISCRIMINATE AND SAY, "NO,OUR SOCIETY DOESN'T ALLOW THAT!"
BUT THE HOMOSEXUALS (A 2 OR 3% OF OUR POPULATION) HAVE PUSHED AND CLAMORED FOR OUR ACCEPTANCE OF THEIR DISGUSTING, DISEASE SPREADING SEXUAL ACTS-TO THE POINT THAT OUR MAJOR LEADERS, COURTS, AND NOW OUR ELITE MILITARY ACTUALLY BELIEVE AND ACCEPT THESE RIDICULOUS CLAIMS!
BILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS ARE SPENT ON THE ATTEMPTS TO CURE, OR AT LEAST SLOW DOWN THE AIDS HOLOCAUST.
TELL THE TRUTH- SODOMY IS WHAT IT IS- AN UN-NATURAL SEXUAL ACT AND A SIN!

Posted by: lyn3 | February 1, 2011 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company