Risto Juola
Ab absurdo, ad libertatem.
Previous   |   Next       

Political (ne)Science

Nov 30, 2007

Setting aside the impositions of indoctrination, faith based beliefs are ultimately a Faustian deal that a person makes with themselves; playing both the dupe and the devil, undertaking willful self-deception, mistaking imaginary omniscience for intellection, and trading reason away for the inert bliss of ignorance. Unfortunately, the effects of this choice are not limited to the self.

Bear witness to the ignorance foisted upon citizens of the United States by Congressman Duncan Hunter.

During Wednesday's Republican debate, a retired Brigadier General posed the following question:

"My name's Keith Kerr, from Santa Rosa, California. I'm a retired brigadier general with 43 years of service. And I'm a graduate of the Special Forces Officer Course, the Commanding General Staff Course and the Army War College. And I'm an openly gay man.

I want to know why you think that American men and women in uniform are not professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians."

Presidential candidate Congressman Hunter replied:

"General, thanks for your service, but I believe in what Colin Powell said when he said that having openly homosexual people serving in the ranks would be bad for unit cohesion.

The reason for that, even though people point to the Israelis and point to the Brits and point to other people as having homosexuals serve, is that most Americans, most kids who leave that breakfast table and go out and serve in the military and make that corporate decision with their family, most of them are conservatives.

They have conservative values, and they have Judeo-Christian values. To force those people to work in a small tight unit with somebody who is openly homosexual goes against what they believe to be their principles, and it is their principles, is I think a disservice to them. I agree with Colin Powell that it would be bad for unit cohesion."

I could scarcely believe Hunter's words. Congressman Hunter openly stated his support for the malevolent persecution of homosexuals. Let's not make any mistakes here, and let's not hide behind a poor application of managerial theory: this is bigotry. Bigotry of precisely the same variety as racism and sexism.

Could a solution to this issue perhaps entail education, helping to stem intolerance at its root? For Hunter the only answer is wholesale bigotry.

Applying Hunter's words to bigotry in general, he implies that to "force" a racist or sexist "to work in a small tight unit with somebody who is" a racial minority or female is "a disservice to" racists and sexists. Note that considering racism and sexism in the United States army is not a test of history or the imagination, it is a contemporary documented fact.

Hunter certainly does not consider himself a bigot, but his assertions and self-declared core principles reveal his oppressive, philistine, selective, faith inspired ethos.