Gays have always served in military

This is in response to Peter Heck’s recent column regarding homosexuals serving in the military. Since Mr. Heck didn’t elaborate on his military experience, I don’t know if he ever served. I have: three years active duty in the Army and three years in the Army Reserves.

Here’s a news flash for you – there have always been homosexuals in the military. The only thing the new legislation does is allow them to enlist and serve without having to lie about or hide their sexuality.

Mr. Heck seems to want to perpetuate the myth that homosexuals engage in sex in more public or flagrant ways than heterosexuals, or that they try to seduce every person of the same gender as themselves. Nothing is farther from the truth. In my experience in the military, heterosexual men were the ones who most frequently abused, harassed and assaulted others.

To insinuate that a person is a poor soldier because he/she is homosexual is ridiculous. I knew many gay and lesbian soldiers, and none of them were ever accused of any type of unbecoming behavior. Indeed, they performed their military jobs well, and with whom they slept wasn’t relevant. We had no morale problems due to homosexuals in our unit, though I do recall a lot of problems with married spouses cheating on each other. As for the notion that there will be devastating physical effects and an unchecked spread of sexual diseases due to gays in the military, I should point out that sexually transmitted diseases are plentiful among heterosexual populations. Last I heard, HIV/AIDS was spreading to heterosexual women more than any other group.

And while sexual behavior may be chosen, as Mr. Heck argues, sexuality is not. Humans are born with hetero-, homo- or bisexual preferences and trying to deny their identity can lead to misery and pain, for the individual and those around him/her. It seems as if Mr. Heck thinks only married heterosexuals should be allowed to have sex and everyone else should be celibate. While that may be the idealistic world he would like to live in, it is not the real world and never has been.

I’m not sure why Mr. Heck and his followers are upset about being “easily portrayed as cruel, discriminatory, hateful bigots unwilling to extend the rights they want for themselves to others who are not like them.” After reading his tirade, all I can say is, if the shoe fits ...

Sheryl Merkel


‘Eradication’ isn’t part of God’s plan

In a recent letter, the author wrote that sexual behavior cannot be immoral if it does not harm another person. “If someone engages in actions that do not harm others or themselves, then to call it immoral or even illegal is illogical,” he declared. The fallacy of the conclusion begins with his premise, as can be demonstrated from the evolution worldview.

A basic tenet of biological evolution is natural selection, which causes traits that aid survival and reproduction to become more common and traits hinder survival and reproduction to become more rare. This is commonly referred to as “survival of the fittest.” According to the worldview of evolution, the overarching purpose of a species is to survive. Every species has a method for reproduction; Homo sapiens is no exception. As mammals, the reproduction and survival instinct includes the important component of nurture. It is well-established that the species Homo sapiens demonstrates superior survival traits when reproductive behavior and nurture are held together. Engaging in reproductive behavior outside the boundaries of the nurturing relationship decreases the survival traits and abilities of the species, which is counter to the worldview of evolution. Consequently, such behavior is immoral because it impedes, and thus harms, the survival of the entire species. From the worldview of evolution, not only should immoral reproductive behavior be avoided, it should be eradicated.

Herein lies a critical distinction between the worldview of the evolutionist and the Christian. Even though both worldviews can legitimately and logically declare sexual activity outside of nurturing relationships immoral, the Christian invites the immoralist to consider and respond to the love of God rather than to demand eradication for the sake of the survival of the fittest.

Charles A Layne

Bunker Hill

React to this story:


Trending Video

Recommended for you