April 10, 2013
“Revised” Army Values?
That would seem to be the proper heading for this post if a certain Lt. Col. Jack Rich is to be believed!
From Instant Analysis
Two pro-family organizations are calling on the Pentagon to provide some answers after an Army officer sent an e-mail to subordinates labeling the organizations as “domestic hate groups” and stating their values don’t align with “Army values.”
The Fox News Channel obtained the 14-page e-mail sent out by Lt. Col. Jack Rich telling subordinates at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, that the American Family Association and the Family Research Council are “domestic hate groups” because they oppose homosexuality. Rich said: “When we see behaviors that are inconsistent with Army Values, don’t just walk by – do the right thing and address the concern before it becomes a problem.” (See Fox News report)
Of course, the allegations against this Lt. Col. are being “investigated”.
Pentagon spokesman George Wright told the Fox News Channel that the Army is looking into the origin of that e-mail, adding: “Any belief that the Army is out to label religious groups in a negative manner is without warrant.”
Now, I don’t want to be accused of cynicism, but… But Mr. Wright’s statement sounds pretty much like all “buy time while we either smooth this over or make it go away” statements sound, doesn’t it?
So now we wait…and wait…and wait…
http://hardastarboard.mu.nu/wp-trackback.php?p=2739
April 11th, 2013 at 12:52 am
Oops, someone let the cat out of the bag …
Want to bet the Lt-Col gets promoted and sidelined until his political masters can figure out how to ’spin’ this out of the headlines?
Funny how about 3% of the population have ‘rights’ which trump everyone else’s. I don’t give a damn who cuddles who in the privacy of their own homes and bedrooms (with the exception of adults abusing chidlren) but I fail to see why the rest of us must be forced to place our own values in the trash can just because we don’t like the lifestyle. And, yes, I do recognise that it isn’t a ‘choice,’ you either are gay or you aren’t, it is a genetic, or perhaps hormonal conditioning and you might as well ask a leopard to change its fur pattern as ask someone with this orientation to change his/her sexual inclination. It is far more complex than many are prepared to accept on both sides of the argument, but the colonel’s style of addressing what is apparently a policy dictat from the CinC, is well beyond the line.
There will be no progress on resolving any of these issues until people on both sides stop the name-calling and bad mouthing and sit down to examine the facts and the evidence in a calm and rational manner and work out how best to address the very real disadvantages many of those who are gay suffer under. Trying to force the issue is not the way forward.
April 12th, 2013 at 11:02 am
Gray Monk
I completely agree.
As to Lt. Col. Rich, he is obviously one of those “ambitious” types who’ll pursue any agenda if it means currying favor with those in a position to promote him.
He undoubtedly has to wipe his nose off at lest ten times a day!