Did a top U.S. Army general tell hundreds of troops in Europe that the armed forces will always employ people who hate the gays — whether DADT is repealed or not — just like they can’t get rid of all the racists? Or is a neocon newspaper making up the remarks?
Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, the Army’s deputy chief of staff in charge of personnel matters, reportedly told “several hundred troops” at the European Command headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany that, “Unfortunately, we have a minority of service members who are still racists and bigoted and you will never be able to get rid of all of them. But these people opposing this new policy will need to get with the program, and if they can’t, they need to get out. No matter how much training and education of those in opposition, you’re always going to have those that oppose this on moral and religious grounds just like you still have racists today.”
The remarks were published in an editorial in the Washington Times, the newspaper for conservatives with fewer conspiracies than World Net Daily‘s audience.
But through the Pentagon, Bostick is denying he ever said anything like that: “The statements attributed to me are inaccurate. I simply did not make those statements. Moreover, as a member of the Department of Defense Comprehensive Review Working Group, I have been extremely careful not to express any views that might influence the integrity of the comprehensive review. I therefore have not expressed any opinions that might suppress the opinions of anyone participating in our discussions. I find the statements falsely attributed to me to be personally reprehensible.”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
So is the Washington Times recanting? Nope. Brett Drecker, the paper’s editorial page editor, tells Politico Bostick “either forgot what he said, is confused, or is lying,” citing multiple sources for the quote.
But what’s the big deal about Bostick acknowledging what’s really quite obvious? That the American military (or any organization, really) will never be able to flush out every bigot from its ranks?
Well as Bostick says, he just happens to be on the Defense Department’s DADT review panel, the group charged with the unenviable task of deciding whether America’s servicemembers can handle hanging out with gay people they know to be gay. So anything he says on the topic, particularly the inability of the armed forces to handle its intolerance problem, might be seen as a smidge uncouth.
Including his insistence that if DADT is repealed and you remain anti-gay, then really, get the hell out of the armed services.
At the very least perhaps the military can use the opportunity to realize, hey, maybe employing white supremacists is a bit much?
MrDarwin
…”citing multiple sources for the quote.” Actually, Drecker didn’t cite ANY sources for the quote. He’s CLAIMING sources but not identifying a single one of them. This is the exact opposition of citing!
Mike in Asheville
Well except for the wingnuts, the vast majority of Americans agree with the sentiment attributed to the general — get with the program, ie., repealing DADT, or get out of the military.
I’d certainly prefer bigots get the boot than qualified dedicated patriotic American service members who happen to be gay/lesbian.
And contrary to the Washington Times editorial, no service members who believe that they have the right to deny another American their right to pursue their happiness should be allowed into the military IRRESPECTIVE IF THAT OPINION IS BASED ON RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. If a service member cannot bide by the very foundation of our country, that ALL men [and women] are endowed by God the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, then they are not right minded to defend that liberty.
reason
If he said them or not the statement is true, you will never be able to rid the military of bigots. People with hate in their hearts will always exist and be represented in every facet of life.
Taylor Siluwé
No. 2 · Mike in Asheville said: “If a service member cannot bide by the very foundation of our country, that ALL men [and women] are endowed by God the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, then they are not right minded to defend that liberty.
Wow, Mike, I don’t think it can be said any better. This one sentence should be enough to squash all dissent of repeal. Should be. But of course, processing logic and reason isn’t The Right best ability.
Loren Piller
So how
will
the
barracks
arrangements benset up. We now accomodate
women by giving them separate facilities will
we
have
to do the same for heterosexual males
so that they too can have their privacy?
Ralph T. Howarth, Jr.
What is this intolerance to people with moral and religious values? It is the American system that holds the right of conscience to be the most sacred of all property. It is very telling that “sensitivity” training has to be promulgated in order to desensitize people’s inhibitions to criminal and non-normative sexual behaviors.
It is dishonorable for any officer, public servant, or representative of the US to do any such criminal behaviors, legalized vice or not. This is true especially for an army that goes over seas at risk of making international incidents for the heinous acts of a few. If sodomy is tolerated as a double standard then what next? Is bestiality, rape, statutory rape, aggravated sexual assault, fornication, adultery, wife stealing, common law marriage, prostitution or consorting with prostitutes going to be given federal protection and benefits next? Is anybody crying “bigot” for those who oppose, say, check fraudsters, from enlisting in the military let alone committing the crime against nature of sodomy? Are people going to be called “racist” for proscribing bestiality in the military?
Homosexual behavior is not a right because it is non-normative, criminal behavior lock stock and barrel with disease, mental illness, indecency, and disdain of those who live right. George Washington did not allow it in his army and it is best not to change it now. And no, just because some managed to take to illicit and unethical behaviors of any kind in the military does not make for license to allow it in the military at any time. In war time, we do not want the American army to become the disdain of the world by allowing criminal behaviors to go unchecked.
Jon
“Well except for the wingnuts, the vast majority of Americans agree with the sentiment attributed to the general”
Wake up and smell the reality. No, most Americans do not think that way, and saying it does not make it so.
..any more than saying “If a service member cannot bide by the very foundation of our country, that ALL men [and women] are endowed by God the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, then they are not right minded to defend that liberty” legitimizes homosexuality as a way of life that everyone “needs” to accept. George Washington would not have accepted your inane argument, nor will I.
I’m not sure why so many gays can’t figure out the real reason behind most people’s argument against it. You want to be gay? IMHO, that’s up to you. But stop making stupid arguments that we need to accept your sexual, lustful attitude as a “way of life”.
Ted in Cali
@Ralph T. Howarth, Jr.
Sodomy: Not illegal in all 50 states. See the Supreme court case, Lawrence v. Texas. Thus, the military isn’t using sensitivity training to “condone criminal acts”. The Constitution in the 9th and 10th amendments, respectively, grant all rights and freedoms to the individual states. Being gay is not illegal in all 50 states. Thus the military isn’t using sensitivity training to “condone criminal acts”.
The Supreme Court has ruled many times in cases such as Roe v. Wade, and Romer that acts regarding sexual behaviors and relationships, including marriage, are private acts that are beyond the supervision of the government. Thus two men having sex is not a “criminal act” within the United States.
By what standard are you using non-normative? It appears to be as a synonym for “unnatural”. There are many things that are unnatural, such as flying in airplanes, brushing your teeth, or driving a car. Homosexuality is not unnatural, and is practiced widely in other species.
Please stop using that unnatural internet and go back to fucking your wife in the ass, which by the way, is not illegal in all 50 states.