West Point men become first to marry at academy

Two graduates of West Point became the first men to marry each other at the military academy when Larry Choate III married Daniel Lennox Saturday afternoon at the U.S. Military Academy’s Cadet Chapel.

Both men are out of the Army and both wore tuxedoes for the ceremony. About 20 guests attended, some in uniform. There have been two previous gay marriages performed at the Cadet Chapel but they involved females.

I would say that Choate and Lennox have a better chance at a career in the Army now that 197 senior officers have been sacked by President Obama in the past five years. The point is, the mission of the US Military is to train, deploy, fight and win our nation’s wars – -combat engagements – not overseas contingency operations.

The job of the military is to take the individual and conform its behavior to the unit in order for it to fight as one. When the day comes that the military is made to conform itself to the behavior of the individual, then it will begin to erode and lose effectiveness. And mind you, race and gender are not behaviors. This is not equivalent to integrating blacks.

I have been to West Point, and even addressed the Junior and Senior Cadet leadership classes. I do not celebrate this event at all, especially considering the Army only has two combat ready Brigades. Where are our priorities? I will always love the Army but what I am witnessing is an all-out progressive assault to destroy the foundations of a segment of our American society that represents and instills into young men and women the highest standards of honor, integrity, and character.

I absolutely support civil unions but believe marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman. Why is it necessary to redefine the foundation of a society, a family? States should make the determination about marriage, however, we should not allow activist courts to overrule the referendum of the people in order to institute their ideals on social equality, and fairness, as in what happened in California.

If I could summon the great Spirits of the “Long Gray Line,” to include Henry O. Flipper, I wonder what they would say? Something tells me that George Patton would have some choice words for President Obama and Secretary Hagel.

So, I toss the ball into your court, my friends. Do you think West Point alums will be sending congratulatory notes to Mr. and Mr….well, heck, I don’t know how to address them. And be on the lookout for this couple to be recognized at this year’s Army-Navy game. I’m sure President Obama will give them a personal call of congratulations, just like with NBA player Jason Collins.

Leave a Reply

890 Comments on "West Point men become first to marry at academy"

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
James Caldwell
Guest

I don’t recognize this country anymore. And I’m not even that old. I’m 30 years old, and this isn’t the same nation I grew up in thru my formative years.

JoeCasepack
Guest

It’s amazing how fast a country can “change” into something nobody wants.

Eric S. Ward
Guest

yeah – who would want fairness and equality for gay families and their children… This is America. Bigots should be able to decide who some one else wants to marry and spend their life with.

thebeerczar
Guest

“Gay Families” is an oxymoron, it is impossible for a gay couple to create a family and/or bloodlines. Two adult dudes who want to poke each other in the bum, is none of my business. However, the definition of marriage is my business. There is no way that a perversion of the natural will ever be the same as a man and a woman. Never. You may have your feel good, self righteousness, and I suggest that you are bigoted against those who believe differently than you.

Eric S. Ward
Guest
My (legal) husband and I have been together for 24 years and we’ve raised our adopted daughter from infancy to adulthood. One’s genitals don’t determine one’s ability or competency to parent. And it is not bigoted to call out those who demean you and your family, spread lies about you, and seek to have you labeled as a second class citizen in a country where you pay taxes. I don’t try to force you to live by my religious beliefs, why do you think it’s so important for me to live by your’s? What do your religious beliefs have to… Read more »
Tish
Guest

your name calling is not helping your cause… in fact .. quite the opposite.. Lately it seems.. gays are the ones not willing to respect those who do not agree with their lifestyle…At one time i sympathized with your dilemma…not anymore…your intolerance and obsession to push your lifestyle down our throats; has caused me to rethink my position…try a little finesse and maybe agree to disagree….until then..your community is on my sh#t list

thebeerczar
Guest

Look here buddy, I am a card carrying Native American. I have adopted family members that I love. One thing I have no control over, is that my adopted family members can never be a member of the tribe, due to blood lines. You can get on your pompous high horse about what a family is, but you will never be blood. I love my adopted family members, and they also understand this, and understand that it’s not their fault. Not mine either, it’s just the way it is.

Danny
Guest

Honorable Mr. West:
The answer is sir that they have been given over to a reprobate mind. As you are aware sir all civilizations that promoted homosexuality ceased to exist. The empires fell from the inside out.

Leslie West
Guest

So true Mr. West. From Leslie West.

James G. Borden
Guest

West, when are you going to show some Political Courage be an American Patriot in speaking out against illegal president obama’s computer-generated Certificate of Live Birth?
Fine, you are against gay marriage which will undermine our society’s foundation – how about caring about an unconstitutional president undermining the United States Constitution by being illegally in the White House?

Emudude
Guest

Like they say in Duck Dynasty… That Dog Don’t Hunt.

JoeCasepack
Guest

That birth certificate stuff is no-win situation for whoever brings it up.

But you knew that.

Paul Carlson
Guest

Well,Mr.West. We both know the very 2words to your question.
GEORGE SOROS.
IT’S one more nail in the coffin of our beleaguered military. And there is no PUSHBACk on any of it!!!

betzinva
Guest

I wouldn’t equate George Soros with yrs of English Common Law, which actually represent marriage as a state controlled matter of property and issue. Soros is a black hole of almost all that is evil in this world, but he’s not responsible for Common Law.

disgusted
Guest

put them in the front line

disgusted
Guest

put them in the front line of war..problem solved!!!!!

Laurel Shaler
Guest

Hello Mr. West, thank-you for writing. My question is why do you support civil unions? My concern is that there really is no difference legally between that and marriage. So, it’s really just semantics. In my humble opinion, either we support 1 man + 1 woman or we don’t. But, I appreciate your hard work and effort!

Viola Martini
Guest

I can use my washing machine as a table, but I still wouldn’t call my washing machine a table. A table is a table, and a washing machine is a washing machine. Either words have meaning, or they don’t. I don’t care what the gays wanna call what they have; I’m still gonna call it a union. A marriage is that which is between a man and a woman. Otherwise we don’t speak the same language.

Laurel Shaler
Guest

I am glad to see so many standing up for traditional marriage. We agree on that point wholeheartedly! But, again, I say that the reason gay marriage has been allowed in some states is because it started with allowing civil unions. So many slippery slopes in this country. We have to be willing to take a stand. This is one of mine. And I believe in speaking the truth in love and being compassionate. I just don’t support something the Bible does not support. It’s okay if we disagree. Blessings to all!

BRwoman
Guest

Marriage between a man and a woman is the only true UNION recognized by God and society throughout history, anything else is a legal contract anyone can have drawn up…..

Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
Guest
Margaret Mcintyre-Farina

CHILDREN are the product of marriage between a man and a woman. (No, I’m not introducing artificial insemination and so on.)

JoeCasepack
Guest

It’s not semantics! It’s a thinly veiled attack on religion and tradition.

I have no problem with ANY civil union, 2 men, 2 women, 5 men and 3 goats… whatever, just leave it out of the church and don’t call it marriage.

FedUpInIL
Guest
Your proposal is spot-on. People should be able to enter into whatever contracts they want for the disposition of their private property, inheritance, medical decisions and visitation, etc. However, it is wrong to give a special “civil union” to only “2 men” or “2 women”, because doing that is the functional equivalent of going “well, we won’t call it marriage to keep ‘certain voters’ happy, but you know that we’re saying that homosexual coupling is no different than heterosexual marriage.” Make the civil union open to 5 men & 3 goats, as you say, because that would be as legitimate… Read more »
Laurel
Guest

But a lot of non Christians get married so the better argument is tradition. But my point is personally that I am against anything that is against God’s word. And the attack has led us from civil union to marriage…it was a slippery slope that wasn’t veiled at all. So I don’t support civil unions or gay marriage.

RightWingLeftyGolfer
Guest

Simply a very sad situation we find ourselves in.

Robert Collins
Guest

I’m With U Mr. West , So Sad what these so called leaders of this great country have allowed , Judgement day !!

betzinva
Guest
I respect you tremendously Col. West, and I understand your consternation, but the law is against you here. Marriage, as defined by the state, is a contract of property and issue. The state, not the church nor the community at large, is in charge of issuing the licenses. Church law is different. Because we accept pluralism, finding a non-religiously based argument against same-sex marriage is very, very hard, as demonstrable harm has yet to be proven; and most arguments against same-sex marriage are couched in religious terms which have no legal standing regarding property and issue. We are a nation… Read more »
Emudude
Guest

Matthew 22:18-21 “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s”. When the Laws of Man start to over write the laws of God, we follow the Laws of God. The US Constitution was written following the laws of God, but has been perverted by corrupt politicians throughout the history of America. Read Romans 1:26-27 if you need a New Testament view of God’s take on Allen’s Topic.

betzinva
Guest

This country is not comprised solely of Christians, nor is it a theocracy. The Constitution makes this abundantly clear. The Constitution does not rely solely on the laws of God, because it would then be a Talmudic court we enter in seeking redress. That said, you are free to follow your conscience and advocate for others to agree with you. In the matter of the law, however, Biblical nor Koranic quotations should not be the persuasive or sole argument. We already see attempts to allow sha’ria law in US courtrooms, is that what you want?

Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
Guest
Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
Licenses could and should be differentiated based on the ability of the couple to produce children. The potential of a heterosexual couple to have children would be implied, as it is today, in the marriage/union/contract license. Then, if and when a pregnancy occurs, the license exists as a potential parent. Once a live birth is produced or a child adopted, the marriage union/license morphs automatically into a marriage license. The only change would be that the couple would need to mail in a copy of the birth certificate. How hard is that? “marriage” laws must reflect the reality of procreative… Read more »
betzinva
Guest
You ask “how hard is that?” You want to layer even more bureaucracy and government intrusion into our lives. So, let’s say there’s a live birth, new license, then (tragically) the child dies. Do you have a new, Orwellian form to fill in for that instance? It is nonsensical to create different licenses based on different types of unions, some argue it is nonsensical to require the license in the first place. As the law now stands, all marriages are civil unions no matter where they are performed and this ” entire legal marriage framework…based on parental status” of which… Read more »
Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
Guest
Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
No, baby dies, it’s a life, parents were made. End of legal ‘consummating” of the “marriage.” Already, a baby dies or is born dead, guess what–a death certificate is required. No more Orwellian society than gays ‘marrying” as equal with heterosexual’s ‘marrying”. I could put on my lawyer’s hat and say, “and DNA tests showed the legal ‘spouse” was not the real father…” or this and that. The point is, we need to put a fence around this insane ‘marriage equality” and my fence is parenthood. Laws originally presumed a sexual act consummated a marriage. Now we’ve moved way beyond… Read more »
loveyaman
Guest
I don’t think they should have a choice for marrying same sex. The same arguments can and are being used for polygamy and pedophelia and even bestiality. The problem is that the homosexual deviants have torn down the walls of decency and it’s only a matter of time before the next wave of deviant sexual behavior is accepted and the sad thing is that it will be our children who have to be subjecte and raised by this dysfunctional behavior growing a more angry society in the next generation. Right and wrong are being redefined sexually but the same sad… Read more »
betzinva
Guest

Find a non-religious basis on which to restrict the current common law definition of marriage and I will hear you out. Talk of deviancy and biblical law and I will not. I am only engaged in this argument to defend pluralism. I don want wish to live in a theocracy, and the Founders did not, either. Find me something defined outside of Biblical law and your person opinions and let’s see if it meets the strict litmus of the founder’s words.

HighInformationVoter
Guest

Read his statement again. He’s pro-civil union (legal rights for “spouses”), but against redefining marriage, a union of man and woman.

betzinva
Guest

Where is marriage defined? Where is civil union defined? In law, mind you, not scripture. This is a fallacy of nomenclature.

pugsrule21
Guest

I agree that people should have a choice in who they marry, but it is up to each state to make their own laws not the Federal government.

betzinva
Guest

It is. That is the concern at present about DOMA, the Supremes and the rest….State’s are racing to redefine marriage so quickly they are probably writing laws so poorly that they won’t meet the test of the 14th amendment.

JDana
Guest

Though I don’t agree with your and the states definition of marriage. I still believe in one man one woman. I do appreciate your respectful argument. I wish more people would be as nice as you when they disagree. There would be so much LESS hate and dissention in this world.

betzinva
Guest
Thank you. I understand and respect(though can not legally defend) your definition. I am trying to keep this legal and legally historical, as opposed to personal or religious….those pesky Founders left us a grand and complex legacy. My greatest problem with debate in our society is that logic, and historical, legal fact, are cast aside in favor of ad hominem. I am as impassioned and as ill considered in my language as the next person, on occasion. I am trying to get better, and reasoned discussion is more often found in the more libertarian/conservative precincts. Exceptions are there, surely; but… Read more »
Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
Guest
Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
I understand and agree ‘license” is for the legal framework of the partnership, who can sign as next of kin, for inheritances, for medical issues, housing allowances in the military and so on. Divorce is the legal framework that ‘reverses” the legal framework of what we used to call marriage, but now is ‘domestic partnership”. Then the next level of ‘legality” would be the unions that will involve children–closer now to the meaning and functioning of ‘marriage”–a family unit for the birthing and raising of children. Next, is the religious meaning of marriage, also based on the union of one… Read more »
betzinva
Guest

You are seeking to see into the future. Many people marry intending to procreate, yet can not due to all manner of impediment. Into which category shall you place them? The ‘willing but unable’? We are not the masters of all of our fate, your system of differentiation would require a rework the minute fertility/infertility was discerned. To do this would require such legal machinations to the framework of marriage/domestic partners/civil unions, whichever, as to make the ACA designers blush.

JoeCasepack
Guest

Marriage is historically defined as one man and one woman. Changing the definition to suit your whims doesn’t change that history. Civil union is one thing but a marriage has already been defined by religion, tradition, and history.

It’s all part of the progressive’s end goal to eliminate religion.

dapowellii
Guest

Marriage has been narrowly defined by certain cultures as one man and one woman. Changing the definition to suit your whims doesn’t change that history.

Mary
Guest

Spartans were all gays an that made them loyal fighters.

Tish
Guest

Prove it…

Tim Lewis
Guest

I call BS on that .there may have been gay Greeks but to say ALL spartan warrior where gay is BS .2 percent of people are born gay .there is no way you could force thousands of men to be gay .i would rather die fighting before I took a Di ck up the poop Shute.i don’t care if its fashionable .

betzinva
Guest

I thought that was the Janissaries….or am I mixing up my historically improvable rumors?

Steven
Guest

I highly doubt, that they were all gay. But what I am comvinced of is that homosexual couples get far more positive attention and “vital momentum” than neccessary. Especially in comparison to traditional families. This contradicts equality and it does so in a very negative kind of way, because it implies society, that “gay” is the path to take.

betzinva
Guest

Although I like the phrase, I have never heard of “vital momentum” as a legal definition of anything.

Doug Alexander
Guest

All? Name one you knew personally? Oh read it in a book? Oh I guess I read different one? I got a blood line that has been researched and proven? An ancestor was a spartan and not a homo? So I am a liar or you got your facts fucked up? Go figure, the best soldiers in history were not pent up homo’s so they took their rage out in war? They actually were humans that woman looked up to, loved and bore children, Geez so many history majors out there?

Mrs.Fox
Guest

Can you prove that?

JoeCasepack
Guest

What does that have to do with anything?

Margaret Mcintyre-Farina
Guest
Margaret Mcintyre-Farina

I think the point here is that disciplined and fierce fighters as we would expect products of the Military academies to be were found in Sparta–and they were gay–without divided loyalties to families with children. Brotherhood was easily maintained in the all male and large homosexual society. Another feature of gay male societies, exclusion of women.

Doug Alexander
Guest
Another history major? So lesbians did what in history? Oh that would be the amazons right? Killed all males that they ran into? Problem with both arguments is how did they procreate? Men had sex with men and had? Turds? Women had sex with women and had? Carpets? Wow that is where all the carpet is coming from? Come on men joining men and then paid and take an oath to protect your beloved America and your way of life. Proven point. Society as a whole, a marriage is between a man and a woman, that is how our race… Read more »
Emudude
Guest

They kept the most handsome men around for Pro-Creation and slave labor. Even the Amazons knew how Nature really works.

TomCar
Guest

Yes and they shipped their wives off to the Island of Lesbos (uh where have I heard that word before. Oh yes.. Lesbian) The Greeks aren’t really a good example. Their culture, society and their morals made them no more superior than any of the other pagan societies of their time. They also practiced pedophilia and bestiality and celebrated the fact. Do you suggest we do the same?

betzinva
Guest

All marriages in the eyes of the state are civil unions. Nomenclature is important, but only to a small extent. I KNOW that the word matters, but my translation of the Bible calls it the “wedding” at Cana, not the marriage.

HighInformationVoter
Guest

“…in the eyes of the state…”

betzinva
Guest

The state, as defined by the Founders does not enumerate or define restrictions on marriage. If you elect to do so on religious principal, which you may try, you are willfully creating a theocracy.

JoeCasepack
Guest

Again, the goal is the elimination of the church.

I will bet you all the money in the world that at some point a Christian church will be sued for not allowing gay marriages and will be threatened with losing their tax exempt status to impose the state’s will.

When you realize that the progressive’s want to eliminate religion it all makes perfect logic.

CitizenVetUSA
Guest

It still is difficult to understand for an old ARMY man like me.

JoeCasepack
Guest

Obama has no respect for the military. This gay stuff just makes it convenient to marginalize the military.

Penni Price-Lindsey
Guest

I so agree with you, sir…it’s just not right to change an entire society to conform to the few. I wish you were our president, sir.

JoeCasepack
Guest

I wish he was our President too.

We need common sense like his in a leadership position.

CaptMike03
Guest

The Milatery is rotting from within thanks to the Falsely Elected MFIC

Godisnotreal
Guest

With writing like that I think maybe we worry more about education and less about who we marry.

loveyaman
Guest

I worry about accepting deviant sexual lifestyles which are dysfunctional and destructive. The gay lifestyle is no picnic. Dysfunction produces dysfunction.

Mike King
Guest

This is why I’m an Independent. You have no right to tell people who to love just as the Left has no right to tell people they can’t defend themselves with deadly force. Freedom is freedom to choose, and every one should be free to live their lives as they choose. The Constitution is for everyone, and everyone has the right to live their lives as they see fit.

Doug Alexander
Guest
So let men get with men and women with women, hell all problems go away cause no more children. Only turds and carpet? LOL, give me a break, any decision a person makes affects another person even tho they don’t see it does not mean it does not affect them. If your dad only liked men you would not be alive? So the chain would continue? Maybe when man procreates with a certain animal (sheep as they say it is the closest to woman) Maybe by chance a new race would appear “Sheeple” Oh hell they are already here, Democrats,… Read more »
Doug Alexander
Guest

Oh just a little side note, the United States Of America Constitution does not mandate, nor condone homosexuality in any way shape from or abnormality, in any line, word or sentence?

TomCar
Guest

Mike, I think by your own argument then an officer in the military has no right to tell a subordinate “That is the enemy shooting at us, pick up your weapon and kill him”. For that matter the police officer does not have the right to tell me to put down the gun I am holding to your head in a hostage situation. But that is okay you have the right to post absurd drivel and show yourself for what you are. Just curious, do i have the right to say you are an idiot?

FlipFlop
Guest
not even close to logically sound. Military is voluntary, and you agree to adhere to a heirarchy where those above you can command action from you as long as it is a lawful order. The police one is even more pathetic, because someone putting a gun to your head is not even close to an example of someone living their life in a way that doesn’t interfere with another. and yes you have a right to say and do anything you want, no matter how ‘pot calling the kettle black” the words are. Just like those guys have as much… Read more »
Mike King
Guest

Those are really poor examples. Actually the Military is a contract, you signed that contract and can break that contract and pay the consequences, that’s freedom. You don’t have the right to take someone’s freedom away from then, so yea the police can tell you to put down the gun. Your first Amendment gives you the right to call me an idiot, and frankly I could care less.

Emudude
Guest

But those couples had every right to shut down those businesses because they didn’t share their beliefs because that’s the Law, right?

loveyaman
Guest
Then don’t sue or harass those of us who disagree and don’t want to be forced to participate in their wedding ceremonies like the the florist in tri cities washington who is now being sued by our state for turning down making floral arrangements for a gay wedding. Or the cake maker in Gresham Oregon who is also a Christian and had two lesbians want him to make a cake for their wedding. He is now out of business because he and his family have had their lives threatened and the Oregon State attorney General looking for ways to sue… Read more »
betzinva
Guest

Blame the Oregon legislature for that one….THEY decided to pass anti discrimination legislation that applies to private businesses. This no doubt happened when times were good and no one paid attention to the legislature and then WHAM…..surprise, while the state’s citizens were whistling passed the graveyard, they missed seeing their liberty’s grave being dug.

Mike King
Guest
I’m not suing or harassing anyone. I really don’t understand why it matters who your customers are if they are paying for your services. Do I sometimes want to turn away a customer because of their beliefs? Sure I do, but I don’t because they are paying me. They are just people that have a right to believe what they want and live as they see fit, I could care less. It’s just a job and I get paid. Oh, and I’m against discrimination of any kind, but you can blame your examples on a government making laws that deny… Read more »
Emudude
Guest

It’s a Religious Belief that is being trampled upon. Those who support the Bible don’t support Sodomy, and those who perform Sodomy. Those couples could find other businesses that support them instead of forcing them to close.

Doug Alexander
Guest

If you are against homos and their union in wash then dont’ respond to their requests your going to jail, how is that freedom? Did you read the above post? The owner of a business disagreed to who to sell their product to (freedom) and no one sued them the state did? Oh your version of freedom not mine sorry I misunderstood the definition of freedom? Your version is the only valid one sorry for disagreeing with you in America? I stand corrected sir please forgive me?

Doug Alexander
Guest
Another side note? If I start a business it is mine, so I can choose who to sell to and who not to, that is freedom. Who has the right to walk in my front door and mandate that I sell to anyone? If they can do that then they can walk in my residence and tell me that my spare bedroom if needed when asked I have to let whoever is mandated to stay in it? Same logic right? Not, one size does not fit all and your argument sir is not valid, either you have freedom or you… Read more »
FlipFlop
Guest

THANK YOU! someone with some sense! gay money spends just as good as any other kind, and inversely why give money to someone who openly despises you.

Craig Manke
Guest

Mike,
I do not know if you are a Christian or not, but the laws of God supersede any laws of any land. God does not allow homosexual lifestyle among his people, therefore consequences will come. The Bible speaks to sexual immorality and for societies that embrace this sin and others that destroy the moral fabric of a society.

dapowellii
Guest

Since when do we live in a theocracy? The government’s job is to be agnostic, not favorable toward any religion.

Craig Manke
Guest

dapowellii,
The Constitution was based on Anglo Saxon-Christian belief. Next you need to ask yourself if God is truly the supreme power of men. God has set his laws in place to protect us and maintain order (I am assuming you are a Christian). I have a hard time believing our founding fathers would approve of the immoral, and sinful decisions our government has made.

dapowellii
Guest

OK, then, how do you reconcile your beliefs with laws that are against those beliefs? For instance, divorce is morally reprehensible in most cases, but perfectly legal. It is also against the Bible for a Christian to be “unequally yoked” with an unbeliever, yet perfectly legal for them to marry. So far, not one person in this thread has presented an even halfway cogent argument as to why gay marriage should be illegal.

Mike King
Guest

My religious beliefs don’t matter. I also believe in freedom of religion, which also means freedom from religion. No one’s religion alters the fact that people should be free to live their lives as they see fit. Your religious ideals have nothing to do with anyone else. You live your life as you see fit, and let others do the same. That is true freedom.

Craig Manke
Guest

Mike,
God is in charge, not men and their ideas. If you wish to conform to these ideas that is your choice, but Gods laws are there to protect us; life is not a “free for all”. The United States and the Obama Administration is doing anything and everything to take God (Christianity) out of U.S., yet the country has prospered because of the foundation of Christianity, and obeying his word. The problem is that the President and his followers do not fear God and His commandments; but he will at some point.

Emudude
Guest

That would be on Judgement day.

Mike King
Guest
Sorry but your god is not going to enforce his “laws” on anyone, so ultimately we are in charge of our own lives. We as a people govern ourselves, so “man’s” laws are what we have. I didn’t say anything about a “free for all”, I said we should be free to live our lives without someone pushing their morals on us. You have a right to live your life within your values, nobody says you have to accept a same union marriage, but you can’t push your values on anyone else. They are free to live their lives, and… Read more »
Emudude
Guest

Sodomites are forcing their beliefs on unsuspecting small business and the state government will force the business to comply or go out of business. Why can’t they just start their own businesses to cater to themselves. I’m still waiting for a Church to be forced to be shut down because the Sodomites want to get married there. It’s coming.

Tim Lewis
Guest

That’s the problem .gays don’t want to just be married and keep it personal and quiet ..they want to force you to accept it and call it normal and put it in your face constantly on TV,movies .sports. Just look at Jason Collins .a nba nobody one day .says he’s gay instant hero ,greatest person ever to walk the earth .its to much .its having the affect of making people resent gays.if you really break it down its all about being proud of what you do with your genitals.

Mike King
Guest

And you don’t have to watch or pay attention. Live your life as you feel you should and change the channel if you don’t like something. I swear people will find things to be offended by. I’m sure there are people out there that find your tattoos offensive, should you be forced to cover them when your walking in public? Hell no, what you do with your body is your choice.

thinkingabovemypaygrade
Guest
thinkingabovemypaygrade

what is happening is that peaceful people are being FORCED to either provide a service or are FORCED to pay damages/go out of business. There is open damaging harassment to people (such as florist/caterers/photographers…usually small businesses) who wish to NOT provide their goods/ services directly for a service (gay marriage in this case) that is against their beliefs.

Plain Joe
Guest

It seems to me that the Liberal left for years has been championing gay marriage, all the while being very dismissive of traditional marriage. They’re the ones who’ve said publically “you don’t need to be married to be happy or to raise a child”. Then why fight so hard for gay marriage or adoptions?

betzinva
Guest

They are using a “topic” and the people for whom it matters, to enact statist agenda. The government may have no right to prohibit same -sex marriage, but neither have they the right to force a private business to cater said marriage…..UNLESS they’ve passed a non-discrimination law that applies to private business.

Evan
Guest

I don’t see why this even deserves a write up. Two people got married. Who gives a crap.? Move on, if they are soldiers, then they are soldiers. Not male, not female, not gay, not strait, not black, not white. Two soldiers got married. The end.

Barbara
Guest

You’re missing the point.

Sandy Caruso
Guest

Former Utah Supreme Court Judge, Dallin Oaks said, “…man’s laws cannot make moral what God has declared immoral.”

John Adams also stated, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

When we as Americans turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to such reprehensible attacks on traditional marriage and families and allow sodomites to infiltrate our military in the name of tolerance and ‘love’ the future of this country and the Constitution is at risk. Morality matters!

loveyaman
Guest
Well, I live in Washington state where a florist could not, by her conscience, participate in a gay wedding. She is now being sued by our state. I have friends who do photography and videography and now they risk being fined by the government and even jailed, for refusing to participate in a gay wedding. It’s one thing to sell a can of pop because sexuality doesn’t matter at a grocery store. But when you are now being forced legally to participate in a ceremony which you believe is an insult to our God, then it matters, especially when people… Read more »
betzinva
Guest

Your state passed non discrimination laws that applied to PRIVATE business…that is a definition of insanity. Gay people didn’t get THAT law passed, liberal statist morons did.

Emudude
Guest

How do you know that those Liberal Statist Morons were not gay? Did you ask?

thinkingabovemypaygrade
Guest
thinkingabovemypaygrade

Will an Orthodox Jewish catering service be similarly forcedto serve meat they consider ritually unclean? Same with a catering service owned by Muslims? (Pig is considered unclean to both)???

And what of the firing of the many, many career officers – including some generals???
“… Choate and Lennox (the gay soldier couple) have a better chance at a career in the Army now that 197 senior officers have been sacked by President Obama in the past five years.}

betzinva
Guest

Depends on the state and whether they have snuck in non-discrimination laws applying to PRIVATE businesses. This is how statists roll and it has nothing to do with sexual orientation. I just can’t wait for the first Imam in Washington State who is forced to officiate at a gay marriage…..not to be unkind to rational Muslims,but good luck getting a strict, hard line Imam to do so without threats of violence….that, or a tidy exception inserted into the law.

FlipFlop
Guest
I’ve never understood the logic of taking someone to court because they refused you service. How f-iing stupid do you have to be to want to force a bigot to take your money? lol but back to the point, who exactly was forced into performing a ceremony? I must have missed that part in the piece. I have to say I side with those people who don’t understand why it is even worthy of a write-up. Two people got married, who cares. If gays wanna be miserable and chained to another person legally then go for it. I just don’t… Read more »
betzinva
Guest

Several states have put non-discrimination laws into place that apply to private businesses. So far, no one has managed to pass the laugh test of attempting to alter the freedom of religion.

Drawer22
Guest

When I first saw the headline, my reaction was an incredulous, “WHAT‽” Now, having read the article, my measured response to the headline is…an incredulous, “WHAT‽”

De Oppresso Liber

Mary
Guest

Well said Sir.

BRwoman
Guest

Col. West,
As a veteran who served in the 1970’s, this is just another way Obama is using our military to make us laughing stocks of the modern world.

Doug Alexander
Guest

A person on this thread suggested debating him on the Bible concerning this subject? His name was matt murphy? Must have got mad or lost what he considered an argument as he is now blocking me from commenting? His basic premise was the Bible is a lie, not proven and Jesus never spoke against homosexuality? Sorry I tried to just talk to him but I guess?

Doug Alexander
Guest

Oh left out that he was looking for a fight more than searching for truth? Sorry for him and I am paying for him

BRwoman
Guest

It wouldn’t surprise me if he was a paid troll….they are out there!

Doug Alexander
Guest
Yeah I could not get to this thread on my laptop just cell phone, he kept attacking the Bible, I actually felt sorry for him, I was trying to be kind and use verse’s but my phone is so hard to use, lol. Anyway when I finally found thread on my laptop I either got unfriended or blocked? Thanks for at least listening. There are alot of folks out there just trying to make it hard for normal Americans that work hard and are trying to make this country better for all, they make it hard as they come at… Read more »
Brett
Guest
This entire article begs the question. It raises a series of concerns in place of making a logical point upon sound premises. It’s ridiculous. How are gays responsible for the demise of the military and it being unprepared? And it assumes straight people are the only fit persons capable of maintaining the military without citing any supporting facts. What I conclude is the author doesn’t support the military unless it conforms to his prejudice. How unpatriotic and hypocritical. If he thinks marriages performed at the institution are so much a distraction, the logical thing to do would argue to ban… Read more »
Doug Alexander
Guest
Ever served in a fox hole, been awake for over 4 days and nights, its your turn to sleep for two hours? In a fox hole there is only two people, been there, walked thru that situation? Hell who cares who is next to you it is your time to sleep, Know how many in history fell asleep and woke up to a bullet, bayonnet, knife or the person next to them bleeding them out? Hell yes it makes a big difference you can only stay awake for so long then you have to sleep. You get put with who… Read more »
Brett
Guest

There is no requirement to be in a foxhole, war or receive a purple heart to form an opinion or be allowed an opinion. If that were the case, we’d have a shortage of thoughts and opinions.
If someone in a war or foxhole is more concerned about sexual matters during war, then I’d reason they shouldn’t be in the military. Furthermore, I’m certain the desire to rape one’s comrade is the last thing on one’s mind when in such a situation. Perhaps reality is something you should revisit, sir.

Thomas Beal
Guest
I saw the end of the world as we know it when the military started to allow satanists to practice their religion on base. This is just another nail in the coffin for the downfall of the new USA Roman empire. Some gay supporter mentioned that all the Spartans were gay. That is bull! However, they were corrupted by their “masters” in Rome. Every society has fallen that lived like them and ours will too. Homosexuals can’t reproduce and it is against natures way. Read about Sodom and Gomorrah. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Enough… Read more »
Barbara
Guest

AMEN!

Brett
Guest

In the story of Sodom and Gomorrah they wanted to rape the visitors. I have yet to hear the case for legal rape, heterosexual or homosexual.
And marriage by definition means union- period. A union of anything. It’s legal marriage that defines parameters for the purpose of the law and what’s being argued for is equality, nothing more. Have you considered the end of the world would be when the majority has lost its humanity and inability to love each other and respect each other and begins to control one another and destroy one another for being different?

Thomas Beal
Guest

I’m not sure where you are going with this? I think you are supporting gay marriage?

Sillysally
Guest

Sodom and Gomorrah was about gay rights. When the gays demanded their rights (in their eyes). Same spirit is operating now in America.

dapowellii
Guest

Sodom and Gomorrah was about gay marriage? Which Bible are you reading?

Thomas Beal
Guest

I didn’t say it was talking about gay marriage. The bible that says that gay is wrong! Doesn’t matter if you say you were born with it! Gay according to the experts is a learned behavior at or around the age of 5 years old. It’s not genetic. It’s a choice. People that are gay couples that want to adopt children are even WORSE! Now they are indoctrinating children to become gay!

javanaut
Guest
Jude 7: Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. I Corinthians 6:9-10: Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. Homosexuality is a sin. Repent. The verse following says: And such were some of… Read more »
dapowellii
Guest

Whuich of those two verses *actually* even refers to homosexuality or gay marriage? It never ceases to amaze me how my fellow Christians love to twist the Bible to support their own agenda.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Romans chapter 1, but I hate to cast pearls before swine.

javanaut
Guest

effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind
Romans 1:27 also.

thinkingabovemypaygrade
Guest
thinkingabovemypaygrade

about gay unions, about other human actions which also equally sadden the heard of God.

American Christian
Guest

Sodom & Gomorrah had nothing but evil people which included all kinds of perverts. Some would rape men and/or women; it didn’t matter. There were sick pedophiles. Where do you think the word Sodom(y) came from; it came from the way in which gays have sex.

javanaut
Guest

As long as God grants a person a smidgeon of sound thinking, they can choose to understand this. Rebellion against God means they are standing on thin ice.

Thomas Beal
Guest

The King James Version

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

You got that right!

dapowellii
Guest

Perhaps you should actually read it.

Thomas Beal
Guest

Maybe you should read it? Spreading filth and lies without understanding the truth.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Perhaps you should, dapo.

dapowellii
Guest

Mr. West, I wonder how you would react when reading similar views written by white men fifty years ago, in reference to interracial marriage. Once again, your obvious bias is disappointing. Why is it necessary to hate?

javanaut
Guest

You have been (willingly?) misled to believe that you cannot change your sexual “orientation”. It is not an orientation at all, but a preference, and we all prefer to pervert that which is pure and good. We are born that way. That is why Jesus said, “Ye must be born again.”

betzinva
Guest

Calling out peoples’ motives in an ad hominem attack, does nothing for your point. Your obvious bias shows, as well, by labeling sincere belief with “hate.” We all get to have our beliefs, and so long as no blood was spilled in the believing, I think we can all co exist without agreeing with one another. Miscegenation law and the current debate are similar in certain points of law, and dissimilar in others. I take your point, I believe you could have made it without calling Col.West a hater.

dapowellii
Guest

Sincere belief based on selective reading of the Bible is still wrong — and any advocation of denying American citizens equal protection and access under the law, just because someone believes differently from you, is still hate.

Emudude
Guest

God made man a “Free Moral Agent”. It is man’s choice to follow God or not to follow God. God has said there will be consequences in the Afterlife for those who don’t follow him. If you don’t believe in that Afterlife, it’s your choice. The Afterlife still there though whether you believe it or not.

dapowellii
Guest

So what? While you are correct from a religious standpoint, your opinion still has no bearing on the question of legalized, homosexual marriage. Fail.

betzinva
Guest

You have a lower threshold for the word “hate” than do I. I can accept that people may not understand the law, or be ill informed and still not call them ‘haters’, and thereby condemn them and their beliefs in one swell foop. I actually think persuasion is far more effective and doesn’t turn YOU into a judgmental ‘hater’ in the process. I don’t hate you or your self certainty, I pity you and that arrogance.

SD
Guest

This has nothing to do with race so stop the liberal deflection tactics. The military defends our country they don’t need this kind of distraction it’s absolutely ridiculous!

dapowellii
Guest

Funny, after 25 years of continuous military service, I have never felt distracted by gays marrying anyone they choose. In fact, I am more distracted by closed-minded bigots who want to keep insisting that it is God’s will for our government to legislate moralty.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

The agenda is obvious. Y’all need to get together and find another catch-phrase. “Legislating morality” is way over used.

dapowellii
Guest

Okay, how about “theocracy”? You want our government to prevent gays from marrying, based on your religious beliefs. That is the very essence of theocracy. If you want to see how well that works, I highly recommend visiting one of the many Muslim countries in which I have had to defend your freedoms.

GoneFishing
Guest

Closed-minded bigots? I served in the military as well. I can tell you that on more than one occasion, homosexuals tried to compromise my values. And that by higher-ranking and threats of insubordination, no less. You can’t tell me that doesn’t affect the mission of the military. As a service member (thank you for your service), shame on you if you don’t know better.

GoneFishing
Guest

It seems to be pretty easy to throw the words “hate” and “homophobe” around. Labeling anyone a “hater” or “homophobic” is nothing more than a dishonest attempt to shame a person into abandoning their moral convictions. I suspect that you just can’t understand the difference.

Mike
Guest
No I suppose he wasn’t being a “hater” he just really believed that gay marraige is wrong being totally ignorant to the harm he’s causeing not realizing that his convictions are wrong. People keep saying this has nothing to do with race, can you chose what gender you are attracted to? If you say no then you are against a group of people who have no choice in what they are if you say yes then you are technically bisexual and a hypocrite. There is no reason why homosexuality cannot coexist with our society, the bible does not warrant for… Read more »
Nancy Rutledge
Guest
A person is born of a particular race. Sexual preference is a choice. In the late ’90s, a team of researchers at the University of Western Ontario in Canada found no trace or evidence of the “gay” gene in homosexual men. The study found that the region of the X chromosome known as “Xq28″ has nothing to do with the sexual “orientation” of a person. Neurologist George Rice studied the DNA of 52 pairs of homosexual brothers and found that their Xq28 sequences were no more similar than what might happen from sheer chance. Despite the debunking of evidence to… Read more »
Emudude
Guest

I honestly believe it’s a state of Mind. Mental, not physical.

Morris Rhoades
Guest

You do realize that Homosexuality has been observed in almost every species on Earth? Let me ask you Nancy, At what age did you choose not to be gay?

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Sure, I do.

Thomas Beal
Guest

Thank you! You nailed it to the cross! My professor at college told me something similar without the details in 1990.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

It is nice to hear from someone who can reason. I have received a bunch of bloviating from people on my other posts. When you put facts up there, no comment from them.

GoneFishing
Guest

“Ralph”, you seem to have taken the liberty of making many hilarious accusations and assumptions about me. Seeing as I addressed only the subject of false “hate” and “homophobia”, as opposed to moral convictions, you seem to be arguing someone else’s points. I’ve not indicated what I think outside faulty adjectives.
You on the other hand have demonstrated that you have precious little, or none of what I presume you demand from others. Tolerance. You’re intolerant of beliefs outside your own. YOUR hypocrisy is showing.
FYI, your logic in relation to the Bible, is equally faulty.

Thomas Beal
Guest

The first thing a homosexual will say is that you are homophobic. They they will say you are racist. Get used to it.

GoneFishing
Guest

That’s just it, Thomas. They’ve latched on to labels because intimidation is the only recourse they have to opposing views. If I should “get used to it”, so should they get used to the idea that they can’t intimidate everyone. Try as they may, as indignant as they will be, deviant behavior will not be accepted by everyone.

betzinva
Guest

Did I miss an edit? I read dapowellii’s post and didn’t see homophobe once… hate, yes, and that was an unnecessary judgment of assumption; the old, if you disagree with me you must hate me fallacy.

Barbara
Guest

I certainly didn’t read “hate” in Mr.West’s feelings. I AGREE with him!!!!!!!! We are free to feel any way we please. We don’t have to go on the outside and exibit our feelings and that’s exactly what some if not all of these people are doing. Can’t they keep their private lives just that, PRIVATE?

dapowellii
Guest

If you want gays to keep their lives private, then perhaps you should equally keep your opinion private.

Barbara
Guest

There you go again, trying to put words in my mouth! I believe you are maybe a person who likes to play “word” games!! Get a life and also get some help, it’s available. Have a Great Day!

Barbara
Guest

Better have your eyes checked!!!!!!!! Where did I say the word gay??????? There you go, you used the word. I guess you are not a very private person!!!!!!! I bet that felt real good to get your remarks off your chest, hope so!!

dapowellii
Guest

Right, because who else were you referring to if not the subject at hand, gays? Who else is “all of these people”? Maybe you were instead referring to left-handed carpet installers, or Minnesotans.

Tom
Guest

Barbara, you really are a piece of work.. If you were not referring to Gays, then who are “These People” that you speak of ? I bet you even claim to be a Christian….. LOL

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Great response, Barbara.

Rob Frizzell
Guest
“Why is it necessary to redefine the foundation of a society, a family?” In 1967 that same question was asked in Loving v. Virginia. The case was brought by Mildred Loving, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man. They had been sentenced to a year in prison for marrying each other. Many of the same arguments made against gay marriage were made against interracial marriage. Fortunately the Lovings won the case and many years later I was able to marry the love of my life without fear of going to jail. She is black and I am white.… Read more »
Nancy Rutledge
Guest

There is a difference between a behavior and a race.

dogpants
Guest

Why only between two humans? Why not between three or four? Can three or four humans not enter into a contract? Gays and lesbians don’t want marriage equality for everyone, they just want the definition changed to suit their purposes.

thinkingabovemypaygrade
Guest
thinkingabovemypaygrade

In 1990s, Defense of marriage act passed…Now, we so quickly have overturned it.

Why A RUSH to redefine our civilization’s foundational human pairing…because it has been made “equivalent” to a civil rights issue?

How quickly we buy the hastily marketed but VAST change to gay “marriage”. Too bad we did not study late ancient Greece/Rome, nor the observations of many older historians…that great nations usually fall from within.

Mike
Guest
Really? I am pretty sure the Greeks alone have been practicing homosexuality with minors no less for hundres and hundreds of years and they were fine, infact I would argue that the Roman empire forcing Christianity on them cause Ancient Greece to fall, Rome was a Christian empire when it fell and I think homosexuality was punishable by death. Also a big part of America is about freedom of religion so why are you making it out to be that the very definition of marraige is between a mam women, I say if there is clergy out there willing to… Read more »
dogpants
Guest

then the government should not be required to recognize the marriage and administer benefits as a result of the marriage. Let’s take away the government benefits of marriage and see how loudly the gays and lesbians are screaming for it then. Crickets, I would bet.

Kay
Guest

The color of ones skin dapowellii is quite different than sexual orientation. Sodom and Gomorrah was not destroyed because of the color on ones skin.

dapowellii
Guest

Sodom and Gomorrah have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand, as they were destroyed for their “wickedness,” not because of gay marriage. That story also is irrelevant because it also has nothing to do with the fact that government has no right – legal, biblically, or otherwise — legislating morality. I suppose if you actually read the Bible, you might know that.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

I have read the Bible several times, and study it frequently. I recommend that you rethink your view that anything in the word of God is “irrelevant”.

dapowellii
Guest
I recommend that you read my comments again, only without a closed mind. Notice I said that the story of Sodom and Gommorah was irrelevant to the discussion, not that the “word of God” is irrelevant in general. I too have read and studied the Bible, and am not naive enough to think that the story of Sodom and Gomorroah is related in any way with gay marriage. If the Bible as God’s word is relevant to your daily life, then I applaud you. However, religion has no place in politics. Religion is about black and white – politics are… Read more »
John Burkey
Guest

I think you have a few things right but where I have to disagree with you is on what you said about – politics are about compromise. Yes in some instances yes. But not when it goes against the constitution. Obamacare for instance is unconstitutional and I don’t care what the supreme court says. And there are so much more that I can mention that our Gov. is doing that by law they can not do.

emwheeler
Guest

Why can’t civil union be what defines marriage between gays?

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Religion was very much in politics when our country was founded. It seemed as though you were going to have a good argument, but then you resorted to name calling, ie: “hater” and “closed-minded”. Typical. Civil unions give equal protection/benefits under the law. But you aren’t happy with that. By taking on Christianity and Christian covenants you are attempting to force God to change His definition of marriage. I’m afraid He won’t do that, and if the “Bible” you are reading says otherwise, maybe you should get a good KJV.

dapowellii
Guest

You would also to be wise to recall Jesus’ own words to the Pharisees of his day. He called them a “brood of vipers” for many of the same hypocritical attitudes you and your ilk display.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

If you actually STUDY the Bible, you would realize that Jesus was talking about religious leaders what added their own traditions to His teachings.

dapowellii
Guest

Tell me again, what part of theocracy appeals to you so much?

MotherBatherick
Guest

Bad day for Army. The Black Knights lost to Air Force Falcons 42-28. Distraction can cost.

betzinva
Guest

Hate to say it, but given the football I’ve seen Army play over the years, I don’t think THIS can be laid at the feet of the “gay” marriage issue.

MitchBaxter
Guest

One hell of a way to carry on the tradition of Lee, Jackson, McClellan, Custer, Meade, Sherman, Stuart, Pershing, MacArthur, Arnold, Patton, Bradley, Eisenhower, Abrams, Borman, Aldrin, and Schwarzkopf.

Lonnie
Guest

If a liberal president can change the rules set forth by a conservative president, can a conservative president then change rules made by a liberal president?

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

great point

Mike
Guest

1. if you are don’t think two men should marry because of how marraige is defined by the bible then why is it okay for non Christians to marry? 2. If marraige is sacred and there is supposed to be seperation between the Churchand state then why does the government have any hand in marraige in the first place?

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

There is no separation between church and state in the Constitution. Read the document. It says that the government cannot interfere with the free practice of religion.

betzinva
Guest

THAT is the question? Property and issue is why the state has inserted itself. Also, Christians are not the only religion to decry “gay” marriage…..watch that built in bias against Christians as the only activist faith on earth. Marriage, union, civil union, wedding, all have different meanings. The semantics is a red herring, the issue of the Government’s position is legal, not semantic.

javanaut
Guest

God is not mocked. He fights our nation’s wars, and our brave men and women have been mostly fighting on his side.
You can redefine marriage and corrupt God’s way on earth. Go ahead. Flood last time, fire next time.

betzinva
Guest

Did I miss the definition of the United States as a theocracy? Christians and Jews and members of any other faith may support every effort to keep their congregants from entering into marriages of which they disapprove, provided they do not use physical or legal harm to do so. The Constitution does not allow the Federal government that privilege.

javanaut
Guest

Did you miss the references to our Creator in the constitution? If we did not want to be a theocracy, why mention “their Creator” at all? In fact, without a theocracy, all the rights listed (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) by the constitution are rendered meaningless.

betzinva
Guest
First, the Declaration is the document you are referencing, not the Constitution. Secondly, you apparently have not read the Constitution, and are therefor unfamiliar with the first Amendment and the pluralism consciously established by the Founders therein. Thirdly, Iran is a theocracy, the United States of America is a representational Republic. Before you accuse the Founders of the malfeasance of creating a theocracy, you really need to refresh your memory. I would suggest reading the Declaration again(see if theocracy is mentioned); the Constitution( see if it’s all left up to the Creator), the Federalist Papers, just because it will illumine… Read more »
betzinva
Guest
The references about the Creator and the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. Also, and I do mean this question sincerely, did you miss the whole of the First Amendment of the actual Constitution? We do NOT live in a theocracy, we live in a representational Republic. Of all the comments I’ve seen regarding the faith of the founders I have yet to see one so blatantly miss the pluralism they DELIBERATELY crafted into the Constitution. BTW, Natural law is also used to support the unalienable rights of… Read more »
javanaut
Guest

Ok. point taken. I have only read the declaration of independence, not the entire constitution. I will inform myself. Basically, I understand people are going to do what they want (like the satanic bible says, ‘”Do What Thou Wilt” shall be the whole of the law.’). I just cannot shake my Christian faith, which compels me to “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them”. So, if the Bible says it’s wrong, I’m going to agree. Thanks for your reply.

James Johnson
Guest

“Whenever you remove a fence, always pause long enough to find out why it was put there in the first place”–G.K Chesterton

Ralph
Guest

Just threw up reading this. Hey LTC are you sure this isn’t an Onion Story!! Two men Officers no less married at THAT CHAPEL!!! God I hope not.

Varian Wrynn
Guest

Marriage is a contract between two people. Restricting people from engaging in contracts because of gender is sexual discrimination, and therefore illegal. What business is it of the government to support any particular religion and their view of marraige? Oh wait, the First Amendment to the Constitution says they can’t.

John Burkey
Guest

exactly so get gov. out of marriage. No tax breaks or any gov. aid or anything like that just because you are married.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Marriage was started by God, and is a covenant. Man cannot hijack God’s covenant and turn it into whatever abomination they want.
You also reference the first amendment. It states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an estabishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” and goes to to discuss free speech.
Marriage between a man and a woman existed a long time before the Constitution was drafted. Your argument is convoluted. I recommend you take a few courses on the Constitution. They are offered free online.

dapowellii
Guest

Polygamy was also started by God, and never forbidden in his Word.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Yes, there was polygamy in the Old Testament, for the purpose of populating the world. In the New Testament, when God was describing the attributes needed for service to God, one of the stipulations was “the husband of one wife”.

dapowellii
Guest

Jesus also explicitly condemned divorce, yet divorce and remarriage are perfectly legal today.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Yes He did, and it is still a sin. And I have had a divorce. I am not saying I am perfect. You can legalize anything, that doesn’t make God change His mind.

dapowellii
Guest

I’ve never tried to get God to change his mind. However, it would be nice if my fellow Christians realized that your tactics and strategy on this issue are completely ineffective and serve only to isolate the church further from the rest of society. It’s too bad we have to continue to exclude this one segment of society, instead of including them as another thread in our otherwise rich tapestry. We are all sinners just trying to make our way in life, and work out our own salvation with fear and trembling.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest
I’m glad the apostle Paul didn’t “go along to get along”. If I am offending God, I need to know about it. It does not mean that they hate sinners. We are all sinners, and Christ died for us all. He spelled out what sin is, and tells us to repent. Of course, we still sin. If you are doing something that God says in wrong, but you think is ok and continue, that is not repentence. If you do know you are doing wrong, you confess to God and ask for help. You will no doubt still fall. It… Read more »
Nancy Rutledge
Guest

Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
2 Tim, 4:2

Guest
Guest
I’m glad the apostle Paul didn’t “go along to get along”. If I am offending God, I need to know about it. It does not mean they hate sinners. We are all sinners, and Christ died for us all. He spelled out what sin is, and tells us to repent. Of course, we sill sin. If you are doing something that God says in wrong, but you think is ok and continue, that is not repen tence. If you do know you are doing wrong, you confess to God and ask for help. You will no doubt still fall. It… Read more »
John Burkey
Guest

I am a Christian and agree with what you say. But I also believe in freedom and liberty and believe if it doesn’t break my leg or pick my pocket people can do as they please it is up to god to judge them not us. But if someone marries someone or more than one person they should not get tax breaks subsidies etc. etc. as that would be picking my pocket….

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

When a society decides to ignore God, decay naturally ensues. That is history, not hypothesis. You certainly can see that the USA has suffered such decline. Then God judges, His people suffer along with the rest. By the way, civil unions give the same breaks as marriage. Are you aware that Obamacare penalizes married couples, but not those living together? Look it up. That is picking your pocket.

dogpants
Guest

why only two people? why can’t three or four people enter into a marriage contract?

Inspector911
Guest

and why just humans?

dogpants
Guest

because our laws do not acknowledge animals as having either the right or the mental capacity to enter into a legal contract

Guest
Guest

I can use my washing machine as a table, but I still wouldn’t call my washing machine a table. A table is a table, and a washing machine is a washing machine. Either words have meaning, or they don’t. I don’t care what the gays wanna call what they have, I’m still gonna call it a union. A marriage is that which is between a man and a woman. Or else we don’t speak the same language.

dapowellii
Guest

Or, you could just compare apples to oranges.

Viola Martini
Guest

That is precisely what the gays and their dumb supporters are doing. You just further elaborated my point. They wanna call an apple an orange. This is purely a matter of logic for me.

dapowellii
Guest

OK, where is the word “marriage” strictly defined as only between a man and a woman?

Viola Martini
Guest

I’m defining it. I’m calling it a marriage, and everything else that isn’t that I’m calling non-marriage. You, on the other hand, can choose to call the gay union a marriage, and call everything else non-marriage. Good luck with that. But you can’t go around changing definitions, or else next thing I know I’m married to my pillow.

Tom H.
Guest

“Can someone tell me why it is necessary to redefine the foundation of a society?” ~Allen West
Sure, no problem.

Because if we didn’t, then we’d still have knights and kings who rape village women. Because if we didn’t, Hitler would rule the world.
Because if we didn’t, Osama bin Laden would be at war with Hitler.
Because if we didn’t, you might still be in slavery.

There are a few million examples of history answering this ignorant question. Do I need to go on?

Tom H.
Guest

How in the hell did my comment get attached to a gay marriage post?
This social media crap… is crap.
Had I realized Mr. West was talking about West Point gay marriage…
I don’t agree with changing this part of the foundations.

ronp12
Guest

FYI – ‘foundation of a society’ is in regards to America, marriage and family. That is the premise of West’s comments, which whittles down your list of ‘everything you can pull out of your hat’. But by all means, go on about pumpernickel and rye, how clothes dryers came about and what celebrities will be wearing this fall…

Dana F. Davis
Guest

Please do…

Kowalewski
Guest

You have to love people who have never read the Bible talk as if they know the Bible. No, the marriage rules of the Old do not apply due to the New.

Also, have you ever read the IG complaint filed against the “Repeal of DADT” Pentagon Study? It is a fact that the repeal was a fix and forced on our military.

dapowellii
Guest

You are spot-on! I would also add:
Because if we didn’t, we’d still put people in jail for interracial marriages.
Because if we truly followed the Biblical principles of marriage, we’d still allow polygamy, force women to marry their rapists, fathering heirs with our slaves, and impregnating our dead brothers’ childless widows.
Because, despite Christians’ best attempts, America still is not a theocracy.

Inspector911
Guest

You are a dedicated leftist Liberal. One must know this before reading any of your comments. Your agenda for America is far far different than mine I believe. I do agree with you on one thing, we need to separate religion from politics.

But, I would love to get an honest opinion from you on something: how do you justify Benghazi in your head? I assume you give Obama a pass on the dead marines? Seeing you are wearing a uniform, I wonder how make that leap of acceptance in your mind…….

dapowellii
Guest

Uh…I have no idea whose comments you think you just replied to, because yours have absolutely nothing to do with anything I have ever posted, anywhere.

John Burkey
Guest

Your right it’s more of a communist country that we live in today.

dapowellii
Guest

Have you ever actually studied Communism, or read anything about any Communist countries?

ronp12
Guest

An ‘encyclopedic’ knowledge of communism is literally at the fingertips of everyone with internet access and basic reading and comprehension skills. Pretty hard to make the case today that, ‘I know more than you, buster.’

Josh
Guest

Just because the information is there doesn’t mean everyone takes advantage of the fact that it is there, though.

John Burkey
Guest
Ok lets start with a progressive tax. Where in the constitution do you see it? Lets go to the communist manifesto the ten planks of communism. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Ok how about taking all inheritance where do you find that in the constitution? Back to the ten Planks of communism Abolition of all right of inheritance. Ok OK you could say we don’t take it from you if its you don’t have that much or that if you are over that threshold we only take 50%. Point being where is that right in the constitution and… Read more »
Louise Sensabaugh
Guest

Yes, read the new testament. Polygamy is against the instructions of the new testament.

dapowellii
Guest

Oh really? Which verse? Divorce was explicitly denied by Jesus, yet it is perfectly legal today. Why are you not protesting that divorced people have no right to be married?

ronp12
Guest

Jesus ‘denied’ divorce? Is that what you meant to say?

emwheeler1
Guest

Those are not the Biblical principles of marriage, read the new testament.

dapowellii
Guest

The Old Testament is still part of the Bible, right? These Biblical principles of marriage are not refuted anywhere in the New Testament.
Besides that, please tell me which parts of the NT define “Biblical principles of marriage.”

Morris Rhoades
Guest

Jesus said the old laws will always be valid (Luke 16:17).

Josh
Guest

That is why I wonder why so many Christians get tattoos and piercings, wear mixed fabrics and eat shellfish, to name a few things that are not acceptable by old testament standards.

Morris Rhoades
Guest

Yeah I know right..It’s almost like their holy book was written remotely located, illiterate, sexually repressed goat herders, instead of god…..weird ..

ronp12
Guest

Are your fingers broken? Make your own researched and well-supported point.

Nancy Rutledge
Guest

You are way out there, Tom.

Guest
Guest
Our country was founded on Godly Principals yes there have been many disruptions to our great nations stability. To distract what the military is truly about only brings discord and friction to the military in general. But speaking of what Obommer thinks, he’s never been on the front lines in the military therefore has no respect whatsoever or regards for our military along with his followers who are bringing total discord to our nation. Example: Bengasi is a perfect example of his respect to our fellow American military that keeps being avoided and not addressed as it should be. Instead… Read more »
Nancy Rutledge
Guest

This is totally disgusting.

Peter Bollwerk
Guest

I’m always amazed when a member of a group that had to fight for their own equal rights has no problem fighting to deny another group equal rights. It makes my head explode.

ronp12
Guest

Depends on ‘the group’. You can have a ‘group’ of pedophiles who fight for their ‘equal rights’ claiming they cannot change their sexual orientation. Stay tuned.

Peter Bollwerk
Guest

I can’t believe I have to explain this, as it should be obvious.
Pedophiles are no more relevant to this than serial killers.
This is about a group of people who are not causing any harm to anyone else. Pedophiles are not engaging in consensual adult relationships.
But congrats on comparing the LGBT community to pedophiles.
Classy.

dapowellii
Guest

Some Americans, indeed most of you in this thread who claim to be Americans, need to be reminded of these words: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

That is all.

ronp12
Guest

All men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights – not special rights that promote deviant behavior as normal behavior.

dapowellii
Guest

Oh, so it only applies to people who interpret and live by the Bible the same as you do? Thanks for confirming that for me.

ronp12
Guest

There are two human genders – male and female. That’s not my ‘interpretation’ of fact – it is fact. The Constitution is the language you quoted above. Your ‘interpretation’ of it was to exclude the parts you didn’t like and include the parts you did. Other people may accept it as it is written, which does not require ‘interpretation’ – biblical or otherwise – or a defense of their comprehension skills.

1AuntLinda1
Guest

Then keep your sexual activities out of my face.

Hmmm
Guest

Gay is a behavior that you can change or choose not to engage in, Get it. You are born with your skincolor, hair color and other physical/biological traits that you can’t change.

Josh
Guest

That’s funny, I feel no attraction to other men, so how is that a choice? I assume it is very much the same for a gay person, they just feel attraction to the same sex. I don’t know about you, but if the attraction isn’t there, how can I make the choice to be with the same sex?

R.D. Wyatt
Guest
dapowelliii you need to read the bible a little more The Lord does talk about how it is a sin for man to sleep with a man. The Bible is the Truth from the first page to the last we can’t just take the one’s we want and go by them !! (Look it up on line if you don’t have the word with you just ask what does the bible say about man sleeping with man) You have a right to do what you want but remember there will come a day where we all we stand before the… Read more »
Louise Sensabaugh
Guest

That is “inalienable” rights. I have no problem with gays, but I do have a problem with changing the meaning of marriage. As I said previously, civil unions.

dapowellii
Guest

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
If the National Archives is wrong about “unalienable,” then so am I.
The “meaning of marriage” has changed many times in this country’s history, so that is an empty phrase. That aside, you are just like most others in this discussion thread – the Declaration of Independence only applies to people when they agree with your particular interpretation of the Bible.

ronp12
Guest

Marriage is a bible-based term for the union of a man and a woman which has long been upheld in America. The fact that some in America today do not recognize God’s law and want to change it through government to reflect a wholly secular law does not change God’s law one iota. What the government does is constantly changing. What the biblical God does is constant.

Morris Rhoades
Guest

Your gods laws don’t apply to everyone. Btw Marriage has been around longer than Christianity. Your god nor your religion own it.

Josh
Guest

That would be the problem with the biblical god.

John Burkey
Guest

A 2012 speech by Masha Gessen, an author and outspoken activist for the LGBT community, is just now going viral and it includes a theory that many supporters of traditional marriage have speculated about for years: The push for gay marriage has less to do with the right to marry – it is about diminishing and eventually destroying the institution of marriage and redefining the “traditional family.”

D. Lenore Hutchens
Guest

Just curious, but when and where in this country has “the meaning of marriage changed many times”? (Not counting the past decade)

dapowellii
Guest

It is a fact that not that many years ago, men and women from different races were forbidden to marry. Not only that, but divorce was also illegal.

D. Lenore Hutchens
Guest

ok, that’s not “many”, but it’s still man and woman.

Inspector911
Guest

I think you are missing the point. Being more worried with diversity than with military readiness is not helpful to a declining military.

Guest
Guest

Didn’t Zeus have a wife? Keep your religion out of my life.

1AuntLinda1
Guest

Then keep your sexual activities out of mine.

Edward Delahoussaye
Guest

God created Man an Woman to procreate,Homos can do none of that it’s against nature,two men or two women can not create children an that is sick for two guys to have annal sex,there is nowere in nature that two male of any kind procreate,God is gonna punish Mankind because of the Faggs actions.

Randal Petty
Guest

Sad news…

CableNewsGuy
Guest

It’s sad how a few gays can make our once proud military bend over and take this sh!t. I guess the next step will be for the Army band to lead the next gay pride parade dressed in rainbow camo unitards.

BRwoman
Guest

Don’t know if you heard about it, but a few months ago, on a military base in Afghanistan,(of all places), there was a gay pride parade, complete with all the barely there clothing – wasn’t led by the Army band, thank the Lord. Sadly, this isn’t the military I served in…….

D Rhone
Guest

Indeed its a sad day for our military and country.

1AuntLinda1
Guest

Yes, it reminds me of people who are into “selfies” or as another poster put it, they have the pride and ‘look at me, ain’t I something’ of a toddler with their first big kid poopoo. It’s ALL about the fact that they require society’s acceptance. And they will never have that.

D Rhone
Guest
Stop confusing your desire to be with another man or women with the civil rights movement. It sickens me that you use that to further this gay agenda and thats what it is an agenda to make your way of life the new norm. I served in the Army under don’t ask don’t tell, I knew gay military members who proudly. They didn’t go around throwing it in your face, because they understood the code of which the military is and the discipline which comes with wearing the uniform. Obama who has never worn a military uniforn wouldn’t understand.
Kristin
Guest

Sexual orientation is not a choice. Don’t make it an issue unless you want it to be an issue. I usually agree with you Mr. West, but this one is a personal issue that only the two people involved can decide. God made each of us different and unique. Wouldn’t you rather see two men get married than a man and a woman and the man beats the woman? Honestly, it’s really none of our business what someone’s orientation is.

ronp12
Guest

Human gender is distinctly male or female. To define homosexuality as normal is not supported by scientific fact. Nor is it fact that heterosexuals who hold that homosexuality is abnormal reflect ignorance, intolerance or phobia. If anyone has scientific evidence showing otherwise…

D. Lenore Hutchens
Guest

Yes it is our business. When you referenced God, that changed everything. God says it is the business of His church. And the word “orientation” doesn’t fit. Isn’t sex an action? That means you can choose to do it or not. That’s the only thing (who they have sex with) that separates them from anyone else. Not height, weight, color, intelligence, nationality. Nothing. Nothing but sex.

Hmmm
Guest
That’s right. As far as I’m concerned everything was fine until they’re so called rights started to trump my freedoms. First they said that it an issue of their personal lives and no one had the right to interfere. Fair enough. Than they ran with it and now they are teaching grades K-5 that homosexuality is normal and criminalizing christianity. Wake up and see what’s really taking place. There is NO..I repeat NO Genetic research that proves that people are born gay. I think that they should take social and environmental factors into consideration. Im pretty sure they would have… Read more »
Cappy Paxton
Guest

Not sure why a progressive uses the worst case scenario to illustrate their point. Making something that does happen but at a fairly small percentage and illuminate as thought it were 90% +. What does one human’s physical violence against another have anything to do with gay marriage? Also the ignorant assumption that it is always the man who beats on the woman. You may want to rethink your response. It stinks too much of the Progressives Play Book.

John Burkey
Guest

Mr. west did say that he was for civil unions as am I In all reality Gov. should not be involved in marriage in the first place.

Pete
Guest

Kristin:
Neel and Bob made it an issue not Mr West. Marriage has been between a man and a woman since biblical times. What does two gays getting legally recognized as a family have to do with a man beating a woman? Typical liberal b.s.

Inspector911
Guest

Neel and Bob………. ha

Kowalewski
Guest

LTC West, thanks for the article. This is a slippery slope issue and I love how the left wants to keep insisting it’s not. It’s as if you’re going down a water slide and you keep hearing the secular progressive insist, “You’re not going down a water slide!” But it’s difficult to believe them when the water keeps hitting you in the face.

Louise Sensabaugh
Guest

I believe the “don’t ask, don’t tell is best policy. I don’t need to know what anyone does in their own bedroom, but I also believe in Civil Unions, not marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and has been that way since the beginning.

Josh
Guest

Well, it was about time for a change then, I suppose.

david
Guest

Before long, they will allow them to wear a rainbow beret like the boy scouts who relaxed their uniform code. Then, it will be a downward spiral.