Posted on 03/13/2007 8:32:37 AM PDT by cilbupeR_eerF
How soon before some of the "official conservatives" join the PC Klan and form up a lynching party? We could probably start a betting pool and lay some bets on which abused wife syndrome "conservative" bolts back to his/her abuser first.
A number pulled straight out of thin air.
Believe it or not, 64.7% of all statistics are fabricated.
Of course he has a right to his beliefs. But just wait. I'll bet "W" will be asking for his resignation ASAP. I'll lay a bet on it.
God love him for speaking the truth to the deranged--an inordinate number of whom occupy positions of power in DC.
"No one is obligated to accept homosexuality"
You sir, are in serious need of sensitivity training. Someone will be coming to your home shortly. Please do not resist. It will only make matters worse. But don't worry, I think we can help you make a full recovery.
I really don't care what people do in the privacy of their homes. But, I support the 'don't ask - don't tell' rule within the military. If gays/lesbians have an issue with that - don't serve. The General was honest in expressing his opinion and he must represent our armed forces. He owes no one an apology.
He just blew (no pun intended) his chance as SECDEF for President JulieAnnie!!
Hooray for General Pace.
I don't think you need to be an AOL subscriber to vote
http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/top-general-calls-homosexuality-immoral/20070313002509990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
Who does this man think he is spouting moral absolutes??!!
Hang him high.
Why must someone apologize for his or her beliefs? If I feel something is immoral that is my right and I have every right to say so. How soon are they going to apologize for calling me a Bible thumper and being offended by my beliefs?
Hurray for Pace!
General Pace would have been immediated scheduled for REHAB....lol
There is no need to apologize for telling the truth.
Never apologize for saying something that is trueor for expressing a perfectly reasonable opinion.
General Pace was drawing a distinction between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Yet I have yet to hear from people in the Drive-by media acknowledge such a distinction; to them, expressing disapproval of homosexual acts is the same as expressing disapproval of homosexuals. This is the same sophistry that people use in reporting on the Catholic Church's position against homosexuality (which condemns homosexual acts but not the homosexual) - to the Drive-by media, it's the same thing.
Will the General be sent for sensitivity training? Will he get the Ann Coulter treatment?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.