Concrete moral truths are why he shouldn't have done so.
Should Bush make a clean sweep to remove all gays, lesbians, their friends, families, and supporters from the administration? Bush hasn't expressed any interest in doing so, in fact he hasn't even revoked the executive order banning discrimination on account of sexual orientation.
Then there is the issue of unmarried men. Do you really believe they are all chaste? Yes, unmarried men are almost all guilty of fornication. Shall we get rid of all unmarried ambassadors, or require them to forego sex during their service?
As long as gay ambassadors and unmarried ambassadors do not have sex in public or with foreign agents, it just doesn't matter.
It seems that the religious right is just stuck. We aren't going to be given the time of day. Bush and the republicans want our money and our vote, but could care less about our issues. Do you really find nothing objecionable to appointing openly practicing gay men to represent our nation? Do you have any core beliefs?
Then there is the issue of unmarried men. Do you really believe they are all chaste? Yes, unmarried men are almost all guilty of fornication. Shall we get rid of all unmarried ambassadors, or require them to forego sex during their service?
I'd settle for simple decency standards in regard to who represents us. I understand I'm not going to get even a tenth of what I want, but someone has to stand up and bang the pots and pans for concrete truths, otherwise the lines will be blurred that much quicker.
As long as gay ambassadors and unmarried ambassadors do not have sex in public or with foreign agents, it just doesn't matter.
"If it doesn't hurt anyone...." I'm sorry. I don't live by moral laissaz fairre relativism. Truth exists.
The fact is that nations simply do not send 'public sinners' as Ambassadors---or didn't; it was an insult. Some ambassadors (and others) of course, turned out to be rather horny--and often were removed.
Seek proof? If the 'bad guy' public figures were convinced of the rectitude of their actions, then they most CERTAINLY would not be clandestine.
If the ambassador is really keeping it to himself, it doesn't matter.
When an ambassador uses the position as an opportunity to advocate a degenerate lifestyle, it does matter. It matters even if he or she does so only in the U.S. but respects his/her foreign hosts.
Shalom.