Armed Services Panel Dem: Repeal Bestiality Ban, It's Not ‘Relevant To One’s Conduct [...]

Rep. Rob Andrews (D-N.J.), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, told CNSNews.com that he supports repealing the military's ban against sodomy and bestiality because, while he does not condone these practices, he does not think whether someone engages in these behaviors is "relevant to one's conduct as a military officer or an enlisted person."

On Capitol Hill on Tuesday, CNSNews.com asked Andrews: "Did you know that the Senate Version of the Defense Authorization Bill, it includes a provision which repeals Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice--that's the law against sodomy and bestiality--a provision not in the House Bill. Are you aware of that?”

When asked whether he thought that provision should be in the final version of the legislation, Andrews said he believes Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice should be repealed.

"Repealing the provision against sodomy and bestiality in the commercial, uh, in the military code? Yeah, I do think we should repeal that in the military code," he said.

"I think--I don't condone either practice,” he said, “but I don't think either practice is really relevant to one's conduct as a military officer or an enlisted person. So, I think if there are instances of that, they’re better dealt with by the civil law of whatever country it would occur in.”

It comes down to the basic difference in liberal vs conservative philosophy and outlook: Conservatives have standards, and Liberals do not.

To Liberals, the cardinal sin of all sins is...Hypocrisy. (They don’t believe in God, so Lying, Stealing, Adultery, Murder and so on are simply relativistic sins.

Relativistic as in: “You say stealing is wrong. They say stealing is okay. Their culture says it is okay, so who are we to inflict our values on them?” Their golden rule is: There is no morality. All morality is relative.

Because of this viewpoint, Hypocrisy is the worst charge a liberal can level against anyone. (It is why they use the charge so freely, ubiquitiously, and frequently against their enemies.)

Liberals have no standards. Because, in their little teeny minds, if you don’t have any standards to live up to, you cannot possibly be called a hypocrite for failing to meet those standards.

And there is the difference.

Conservatives believe three things in this respect: Morality is NOT relative, Standards are critical for a well-functioning society, and Human Beings are fallible.

Very few conservatives believe morality is relative, and those that do are usually Libertarians, not conservatives.

Standards are critical and you must have them. They are behavioral goals to be met, and can only be instituted and aimed for in a society that doesn’t believe all behavior is relative.

Human beings are fallible. But that reality does not stop conservatives from having standards, even if they aren’t always met. We understand that people try, and that people fail. We also understand that people are allowed to fail, but must always pick themselves up and attempt to succeed. Failure is no excuse for future failure. You are always allowed to try again to meet standards. (Unless it is a particular failure like murder or certain crimes)

So, when a choice has to be made does the soldier save his buddy, his “gay” lover, or his cat.

Which is why our military figured out their rules the way they did. They didn't just make cr@p up. It came from studying the effectiveness of forces over thousands of years of military history. The unit needs to be a team is the inescapable conclusion.

This is the same problem created by women serving in combat roles. Do I feel sorry for the female pilot and dive after her to save her even when I tactically am not supposed to do that for the good of the squadron ? In the infantry platoon, which man is the "favorite" of the female lieutenant ? Resentment, jealousy, love, all that works against unit cohesion. I haven't even served and I've learned that much.

Of course, the righteous army follows the Word of God as a foundation, so automatically the correct choices are made on all such foundational questions.

Between the Bible and other reading, history is not only fascinating, but a fantastic guide, IMHO.

Now this issue could get a bit complicated.

If a man makes it with a female goat that is clearly heterosexual bestiality.

On the other hand, if the man makes it with a male goat, then it is homosexual bestiality.

If the man should do it with an underaged female goat, it is pedophilic heterosexual bestiality.

But again, if the man does it with an underaged male goat, you have a case of peodphilic homosexual bestiality.

Nothing like variety in sex. :)

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.