russ ([info]goulo) wrote,
@ 2007-05-24 07:07:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
the us army keeps firing gay arab specialists, mccain keeps defending the practice
U.S. military continues to discharge gay Arab linguists:
Usona armeo daŭre maldungas gejajn arablingvistojn:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/23/america/NA-GEN-US-Military-Gays.php

Senator John McCain Defends 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' Calls Gay Troops an 'Intolerable Risk':
Senatano John McCain defendas tiun politikon kaj nomas gejajn soldatojn "netolerebla risko":
http://www.sldn.org/templates/press/record.html?record=3877§ion=2


Strange that McCain and so many other rightwingers think it is more important to have no gay soldiers in the army than to have have Arab linguists (despite the severe shortage of such specialists in the "War on Terror"). Strange that the British, Israeli, Canadian, etc armies seem to get along fine despite having openly gay soldiers. Strange that McCain willingly puts US troops at what he feels is "intolerable risk" by permitting them to work with openly gay British troops in Iraq. Strange that such an idiot is still treated as a serious candidate for president.

Strange ke McCain kaj aliaj dekstruloj pensas ke pli gravas havi neniujn gejajn soldatojn en la armeo ol havi arablingvistojn (spite la severan mankon de tiaj fakuloj en la "milito kontraŭ terorismo"). Strange ke britaj, israelaj, kanadaj, ktp armeoj ŝajnas funkcii bone kun malkaŝitaj gejaj soldatoj. Strange ke McCain volonte metas usonajn soldatojn en situacion de "netolerebla risko" per permeso kunlabori kun gejaj britaj soldatoj en Irako. Strange ke tia stultulo ankoraŭ estas konsiderata kiel serioza kandidato esti prezidento.

(Post a new comment)


[info]zooplah
2007-06-02 01:30 pm UTC (link)
I'm probably a little late, but I wrote a blog post about this (and linked to your post). Like I wrote in my post, I don't believe this has anything to do with averting intolerable risks. What it has to do with, I firmly believe, is keeping gays as second-class citizens. It used to be women, then it was blacks, now it's gays and you can bet your buttons the next target will be atheists (who are the most hated minority in the US, according to polls). The religious right doesn't feel powerful enough if there aren't people to dominate and mistreat.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]goulo
2007-06-02 02:02 pm UTC (link)
In fairness, I think many of the anti-gay-soldier people are indeed trying to avert what they think are intolerable risks. Yes, they are naive at best, if not stubbornly stupid, to think that it is an intolerable risk... but it is a truism that people fear what they don't understand... One likes to think that important policy makers would be more rational and better informed, but no.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]zooplah
2007-06-08 03:51 am UTC (link)
Yeah, that's true. However, the republicans rely on appealing to the religious. It's like the marriage bill (defining marriage as between one man and one woman) that was going around a while back. There was no way it was going to pass, but they had to give the religious right the impression that they were doing something. I believe that it's all political. It's a way to keep the abominations in their place so that they win the values voters. I'm sure there's a big queue to draw from in the off chance that gay rights become a reality in the US.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…