According to General Pace it is immoral for people of the same sex to express their love for each other in a sexual manner.
But it is NOT immoral to drop cluster bombs on civilian populations and blow innocent men, women, and children to bits. (It's just collateral damage.) (Note also that the radiation from cluster bombs causes birth defects and crippling lifelong health problems.)
Doesn't this seem like a rather twisted view of 'morality'?
2007-03-15 09:23:15 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=3410
2007-03-15 09:34:37 · update #1
The morality of General Pace and the right wingers?
Mass murder and Killing people is good.
Loving another person of the same sex is bad.
you're right this is twisted morality. It's sick and twisted.
Funny thing is that the Taliban and the Al Queda think the same way.
2007-03-15 09:29:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Morality is different from every view. I believe that most people generally have good intent. If that somehow makes sense to them... idk. I can't see how that is right, but then some people look at America and think of us as monsters. It all depends on perspective my friend.
I once read an article based on the Nacirema people... which can be found here:
http://www.aaanet.org/pubs/bodyrit.pdf
Read that and then look up what it is really about. It's -ALL- about perspective. The people who believe these things must have good intent, but from my perspective personally it looks horribly wrong.
2007-03-15 16:35:31 · answer #2 · answered by Life Is Illusive 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So you are trying to compare homosexuality to war? I do not think that you can make this kind of analogy.
Homosexual activity may be immoral in the eyes of some and perfectly normal for others... That's a personal choice.
War, on the other hand, is always bad, but sometimes necessary.
This is a silly question just meant to vent your personal opinion.
2007-03-15 16:29:49 · answer #3 · answered by Dog Lover 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
So let me get this straight, you would rather have General Pace support homosexuality so it could be them in the military dropping cluster bombs on civilian populations?
2007-03-15 16:29:27 · answer #4 · answered by Gus K 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
His morality is quite clear and, to me anyway, completely understandable. Adultery and homosexuality is a sin, therefore immoral. I was taught the same thing in church when I was a kid, so I understand it perfectly.
The comparison of gay sex to warfare is, at very best, ludicrous. At the worst, just plain stupid.
2007-03-15 16:39:10 · answer #5 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I can explain his "morality" in a single word, LEVITICUS! And if he was really the gay-basher the liberals are making him out to be, he'd be recruiting gays to go to Iraq and get their butts shot off, or blown up, and spare the straight ones!
2007-03-15 16:44:26 · answer #6 · answered by texasjewboy12 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No body should have a personal opinion on homosexuality any more unless they in favor with it.
It now official politically incorrect to have opinion.
2007-03-15 16:41:15 · answer #7 · answered by Sgt 524 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all Einstein, radiation does not come from cluster bombs. Radiation is the result of a nuclear explosion.
Nobody says you can't be a homo if you want to, but it is not natural for you to be exchanging spit with your boyfriend.
2007-03-15 16:29:31 · answer #8 · answered by Duh 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I doubt it if you think people get radiation from cluster bombs.
2007-03-15 16:27:34 · answer #9 · answered by ML 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
It seems that whenever somebody speaks out so strongly against homosexuality, there's usually a gay prostitute hanging out at their house.
2007-03-15 16:26:05 · answer #10 · answered by kappalokka 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋