2 Women Share 1st Kiss at US Navy Ship's Return

I have my own thoughts on homosexuality and its moral implicates, WRT my religious beliefs. However, the US government (and DoD) is not based upon my opinion or religious sect I choose to follow. Frankly, I like it that way. I would not like to live in a country where our leaders' religious beliefs defined what was right/wrong and moral/immoral. For every chance that their views will be "correct," there is a stronger chance that they will disagree with you (making their opinions the basis of laws you must follow).
wow, that's a lot of varied responses. i'll try to briefly address each, but at this point i think i've said my peace.

first, thank you Christcorp for appreciating my angle of attack on this issue. the only real education is self-education, and i believe strongly in owning my development into an adult and officer; which is why i try to be well-read and well-versed on current affairs.

second, bullet, 'm not going to claim credence to any one religion, but i can tell you that you're view of what the Bible says about warfare is very misconstrued. God ordered David into battle several times during the Davidic reign over Israel, so therefore warfare is not, at all times, unbiblical. moreover; "turn the other cheek" has nothing to do with self-defense or the defense of those who need it; i.e. national defense. finally, Christ had several interactions with Roman soldiers during his time on earth, and not once did he tell them to leave the military or that only "civilians" can be his followers. in short, warfare DOES NOT fly in the face of biblical doctrine or Christian living. frankly sir you just need to do more homework on the issue before you can see this fact.
concerning the biblical doctrine of homosexuality, all i'll say is that the Old Testament Law was lifted from the Church after God appeared to Peter. therefore obscure regulations contained within do not apply to us today. however; this merely has to do with ceremonial law. God's moral law never changes. i.e. murder was one of the 10 commandments techinically under the same Levitical law, but that doesn't mean God doesn't view murder to be any less reprehensable today. this is an issue that would require extensive prepartion to deliver, so i'll just keep it at that and strongly encourage anyone who has confusion to look further into this important difference.

with regards to Dr. Zimmerman's work, please don't use his "feminism" line as a copout for addressing the validity of his other claims. first, the full version of that tenant was "Widespread attitudes of feminism, narcissism, hedonism", so feminism was only one part. in fact, the biggest reason he even included feminism was to point out that an increase desire for power and control and therefore decrease in the desire to bear children breaks down the family unit; thereby supporting his thesis.
Zimmerman was not saying women can't have rights or voice their opinion or anything like that. i know it's convenient to focus on this so you can treat the rest of his claims as "hogwash", but that approach is simply illogical.

LASTLY, it seems that my words have gotten some of you to start thinking about the issue, and possibly will urge you to do some of your own independant research on it. i consider that, apart from anything else, to be a success.

"obviously the 8th trend is what i'm focusing on, and Zimmerman is not alone. Edward Gibbons in his 6 Volume masterpiece, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (published in 1781), identifies one of the main themes of Rome's fall as the rampant acceptance of homosexual behavior....SPECIFICALLY in the military ranks. "


FWIW, Gibbon believed that the rise of Christianity was one of the causes of the decline of the Roman empire, since it promised a better life afterwards and eroded dedication to the here and now Empire.

Another major cause according to Gibbon was the corrupting influence of power in the Praetorian Guard, a professional military class which among other things was involved in the assassination of numerous emperors over the years.

On the subject of homosexuality, it was not uncommon in the Republic, which preceded the empire. Julius Caesar was mocked for his tendencies. His hero, Alexander the Great, was a switch-hitter who married for political expediency.
Alexander, by the way, established a monument in Thebes to the Sacred Band, which he and his father wiped out at the battle of Chaeronea. Check that crowd out if you want to learn about an alternative approach to military cohesion.

Anyway the point of this is not to condone or condemn any particular form of human expression of love. Just keep in mind that the reasons for the rise, evolution, and decline of civilizations are complex. Sexuality is really a minor factor.
Last edited:
All right folks- now that you have all pontificated to your hearts content- why don't you give this topic a rest? The plain reality of the US Military today is that Homosexuality was removed from the UCMJ and as a bar to service a few months ago- ergo- as an officer you either need to be able to deal with that reality or move on. That doesn't mean you have to personally buy into it as a legitimate or moral way of life if you choose not to do so (and since it was not seen as such by the US Military from 1620 until 2011 I suspect that you won't be alone in that unspoken personal opinion) - but you have to support the law in your role as an officer. If you can't do so- then you can't do the job.