Posted on 03/14/2015 8:48:56 AM PDT by marshmallow
Active Duty ping.
And I'm sure that he questioned the men about their sex lives and called them sluts as well, right? </sarcasm>
So it seems to me also. But I wonder where are the Christian Churches coming to his defense. Who got the tongue of the Bishops?
Well said.
Actually, the workers are not allowed to drink in the Jim Beam distillery. It’s a cause for getting fired. :>)
Who are the obama undercovers that are infiltrating military churches to check on the political correctness of the sermons? And why aren’t there also FBI agents doing the same thing in mosques?
Oh, yeah: Abdul Rahman Mahmoudi Al-Obama.
FWIW, the primary responsibility of a military reason, and the primary reason he’s brought on active duty is to be a TRUE, fully-ordained, fully acceptable representative of HIS/HER own denomination. In this chaplain’s case, he’s Assembly of God, iirc, in which case he has done EXACTLY as he was supposed to do. He cannot something in private that is contrary to the reason he was brought on board in the first place.
Only secondarily, does the chaplain have other responsibilities, and when those are with an audience required to be present, then he must give the military information on that subject as the primary focus of the training or presentation. That is NOT to say that in an aside or in response to a question that he cannot honestly, briefly relate his own personal position. For example: “The military now accepts homosexuality, so in this class, I’m relating to you the military’s position on family structure, and not that of my denomination which differs at many points, so if I accidentally slip into my denominational shoes at this or that point, it is unintentional.”
FWIW, the primary responsibility of a military reason CHAPLAIN, and the primary reason he’s brought on active duty is to be a TRUE, fully-ordained, fully acceptable representative of HIS/HER own denomination. In this chaplain’s case, he’s Assembly of God, iirc, in which case he has done EXACTLY as he was supposed to do. He cannot something in private that is contrary to the reason he was brought on board in the first place.
Only secondarily does the chaplain have other responsibilities, and when those are with an audience required to be present, then he must give the military information on that subject as the primary focus of the training or presentation. That is NOT to say that in an aside or in response to a question that he cannot honestly, briefly relate his own personal position. For example: “The military now accepts homosexuality, so in this class, I’m relating to you the military’s position on family structure, and not that of my denomination which differs at many points, so if I accidentally slip into my denominational shoes at this or that point, it is unintentional.”
Looked at your BIO and saw “WWII Infantry.” First of all, thank you for you service sir. I lost my father almost a year ago - he was 88 - who also served during WWII but was USN. I really miss him. I consider it a great privilege to speak with one of you vets from that time.
Something I was wondering. Were the WACs and WAVs of that time “loose” in their sexual conduct? I suspect some were, but that it wasn’t the norm. Also, those that were didn’t advertise it proudly. Am I correct? Or is this just naïve thinking on my part?
I know men have always chased after women, and the military types were more apt to frequent prostitutes...I have seen that when I first served in the early 70s. However, except for an occasional braggart, most didn’t advertise their exploits (especially those married).
I am around serving military, and have been shocked when commissioned officers (Army Captains) openly bragged about hanging out at strip joints (the really raunchy kind). Also, they did this in front of other officers to include female ones. The female officers did not appear to be remotely offended - also disturbing. I can understand the young men being drawn to the smut, but I cannot understand them being proud about it.
I am starting to wonder if I am just a naïve old fool that has just not really been paying attention in the past. I would like to think that I am wrong about that.
If you don’t want counseling from the Chaplain, don’t go see the Chaplain.
Simple, really.
Thank you for your nice post. I neither knew WAC or WAV in WW II. They didn't go near the Infantry and the front where I spent my time. I did not even see them in occupation. I did see some Red Cross women when I went on leave. All that said, I did not even hear of any promiscuity about WAC or WAV. I did hear that Gen Eisenhower had a shack job. I think it was a WAC. So from what I know, the military gals were military gals with duty coming first.
“So from what I know, the military gals were military gals with duty coming first.”
Sir, that is good to hear. Thank you for responding. So much knowledge and wisdom is disappearing with the passing of your generation. I so wished I had spent more time talking with my father.
You mentioned that as infantry at the front, you didn’t even see women. Well they are putting them into infantry units as I write you. They have already put them on submarines. Not to put down the integrity of the ladies that have done this, as I believe most (to all) are just attempting to serve honorably and the infantry is the point of the spear (as is the submarine service). It is prestigious to serve in the infantry....especially the rangers.
However, I just don’t understand the foolishness of our leaders that have allowed this (actively promoted it). It is not that the women cannot do the job, it is that it is a mistake to mix men with women in such a job. They have already had some problems on submarines with the male sailors being stupid and secretly filming the women taking showers. I cannot imagine what will occur in the infantry? The Army already has a really bad problem with sexual harassment, but they create situations that are sure to bring it about. Plus, how much damage will this do to the morale of these combat units?
Of course, the brass (and those politicos that pushed this) will suppress any negative results.
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.