Wednesday, January 07, 2009

A dog returning to his vomit

The Obama administration is already looking like Clinton redux, so one would expect that among the first things our fearless leaders will do is demand that our armed forces enlist "out and proud" homosexuals. Of course, they won't do it as ham-fistedly as Bill Clinton did in 1992, but if you put your ear to the ground, you can already hear the wardrums beating on this issue.

As our leftist overlords won't be able to resist this opportunity for institutional deconstruction, I'm am taking the moment to post the inevitable outcome of such a move. In a "gay friendly" military, expect many more incidents like this one: Colonel Discharged Over Homosexuality [NY Times, July 27, 1997].

In brief, according to this NY Times article, Lt. Col. Loren S. Loomis, a bronze star recipient then age 50, was dishonorably discharged after his house burned down. The discharge was enforced after firefighters discovered that Col. Loomis had videotapes of himself engaging in sex acts with other men.

Oh, the injustice! Right?

Not exactly. Col. Loomis's house was set on fire by a 19-year-old Army private. Why? Because Loomis had taken nude photos of the private and the young man had burned the house down in an attempt to destroy the pictures in Loomis's possession.

Does this sound like the kind of distraction/fraternization we need in the military? Does anyone doubt that allowing open homosexuals to serve will result in a proliferation of this kind of behavior?

If you do, you might want to refer your opinion to the Catholic Church. Not too long ago, our bishops thought it would be a good idea to allow homosexuals to become priests....


Anonymous said...


Neither are all Christians MENTALLY RETARDED.

Live up to the standard, PLEASE.

Florentius said...

Dear Seansy,

Clearly, you don't know much about the "pedophile" crisis in the Catholic Church. It was anything but a pedophile crisis. It was, and is, a homosexual priest crisis. Those predator priests were nearly all homosexual and nearly all preying on teenage boys--not pre-teen children.

As for your "mentally retarded" jab--I don't think you're doing your point of view any favors by demeaning those with developmental disabilities.