Jack Ohman by Jack Ohman

Tags: Be the first to tag this comic!

Comments (56) Jump to Comments Form

Ken Warren said, about 1 month ago

If your an illegal immigrant and you join the military we will reward you by making you a citizen.

If you are gay, well you can’t join because, well because the Bible says you are abomination, and we all know that the Bible is always right. Usually Far Right.
Ken Warren said, about 1 month ago

If your an illegal immigrant and you join the military we will reward you by making you a citizen.

If you are gay, well you can’t join because, well because the Bible says you are abomination, and we all know that the Bible is always right. Usually Far Right.
believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

Don’t have the link, but read about a far-right religious organization that is now producing its own version of the Bible to remove all that awful “liberal” bias. They apparently only believe in a literal translation of the bible when it suits them.
tpenna said, about 1 month ago

You’d have a very small army, Edgar Bumpers. Please don’t pin this all on “religion” generally. I’m a very religious person who believes that homosexual persons should either be allowed to serve openly in the military or be exempt from federal income taxes. My religion is the very thing that informs this belief. And I am not alone in this.
motivemagus said, about 1 month ago

bcs, it’s Conservapedia. (http://tinyurl.com/ykq8pez) I’ve read excerpts, and it does things like soften the language around the “camel passing through the eye of the needle” to make rich people okay, despite Jesus’ words. Some want to rename the Pharisees “liberals” or “intellectual elites.”
What I have not heard is any shred of evidence that this effort is based on genuine Biblical scholarship, or whether it is the same approach the Bush Administration took to scientific reports, i.e., changing it to suit their own prejudices. Their own statement – see the link – is “the rules guiding this translation are to use and be informed by conservative insights and terminology.”
It is based on the King James Bible, which is a warning right there (cdward, you there?), since despite its beautiful language it has numerous well-known translation errors.
DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

BCS, motive’: Thanks for that. There’s my reading for the week.

In one sense, this is truly outrageous. The Bible doesn’t match their beliefs; therefore, change the Bible! Follows the same pattern of what the conservatives have done with science.

On the other hand, I think it’s time for another Great Schism in American Christianity, between liberal and conservative theology. And they can each have their own book, too.
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

In all history, successful military leaders have understood the importance of zero sexual tension in their units for their soldiers to form the higher bonds of brotherhood that are necessary for them to fight as one man.

When a man with homosexual tendencies reveals them to his unit, he automatically creates an atmosphere of sexual tension. He cannot be seen as a brother anymore, but as a potential sexual partner to be pursued or shunned (as the case may be).

We all understand how a platonic friendship between a man and a woman is ruined when one professes a sexual attraction for the other.

Why can’t we understand than a same sex attracted man in a military unit ruins it for the brotherhood bonding necessary for successful fighting. It puts the whole unit at risk.
believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

motive, thanks for the link. Truly amazing the boundless hypocrisy of those who believe they know and should dictate God’s will.
deadheadzan said, about 1 month ago

If you get the chance watch “Outrage” the documentary that enlightens us with all the closeted gays who help run the government, many of whom are publicly very anti-gay because they pander to the right Christian conservative base.
HUMPHRIES said, about 1 month ago

charlie555, you have either rewritten history or have never served in the military.

Curious point, your same comments were used, replacing “homosexiual tendencies” with “negro”, as a basis for aginist intergration the Army.
motivemagus said, about 1 month ago

charlie, that’s been gospel in the armed forces for years. Trouble is, it isn’t true. After all, closeted gays have been there for centuries now, remember? And in fact, a few of the most successful military units in history actively practiced homosexual acts to bond. The Greeks, for example, had no inhibitions about this, and the Spartans were pretty doggoned good soldiers.
Besides, there are reasons to think that “sexual tension” can lead to improved performance. When women were allowed into the military academies, it was found that they would challenge each other, and it raised overall performance.
This also feels like an extension of the old sexist arguments that “you can’t trust men to control their impulses,” which leads to women being blamed for their own rapes. In this case it is the presumption that a man interested in other men has to disrupt an entire troop. Nonsense. Esprit de corps is more powerful than that.
Controlling impulses is what being a professional soldier – or an adult – is about.
Ken Warren said, about 1 month ago

If you think you are a “Good Christian” remember you don’t get to make that judgement – your church does.
motivemagus said, about 1 month ago

No, Ken, God does.
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

“Controlling impulses is what being a professional soldier – or an adult – is about.”

Exactly!

We expect men with mother, daughter, or sister attraction to control themselves.

We expect men with 15 year old girl attraction to control themselves.

We expect men with married woman attraction to control themselves.

We expect men with chicken or sheep attraction to control themselves.

We even expect late night comedians with subordinate employee attraction to control themselves.

So from whence came the soft bigotry of low expectations aimed at men with same sex attraction?
Corosive Frog said, about 1 month ago

We don’t have low expectations. We wouldn’t believe in gay marriage if we didn’t believed they could be faithful to each other.

Right now, many gays are not because all they have as role models are the party animals you see in gay pride parades.

Also, if any potential sexual partner ruins a military unit, women would be the downfall of the military.
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

“if any potential sexual partner ruins a military unit, women would be the downfall of the military.”

Thus the controversy over mixing men and women in foxholes.

We train men to revert to their basic survival instincts down to SMELLING the enemy, then we expect them to suddenly revert to Christian gentlemen when a woman soldier in the foxhole with them goes into “heat” and starts emitting sexual pheromones.
dtroutma said, about 1 month ago

As Motive noted slightly, the movie “300” brought all the right-wing anti-gay, “draft dodger type”, pro-military to the theaters to watch those Greek warriors kick Persian butt, without the slightest knowledge that that Spartan line was gay.

We had gays in the military in my time, and though they weren’t all totally in “the closet”, as long as they didn’t “bother” anyone, nobody bothered them either, and they did their jobs effectively.

Those who want to truly serve their country, by serving, rather than by waving flags at every opportunity, talking about it, and finding “better things to do with their time”, should be allowed to.
Ken Warren said, about 1 month ago

motivemagus – True, very true, but, sadly, God judges you after you die, the Church judges, and may perscute you (as many “Christians” do) while you’r alive.
deadheadzan said, about 1 month ago

dtroutma,,that’s why gays love the movie “300”. Isn’t that ironic?
roccekt said, about 1 month ago

Charlie 555, read about the Spartans.
motivemagus said, about 1 month ago

charlie, you’re making *my* point. Why do you think gay men are less able to control themselves than straight ones? As you note, “So from whence came the soft bigotry of low expectations aimed at men with same sex attraction?” I don’t have one. I think we should admit that many fine soldiers are homosexual, and quit this “don’t ask, don’t tell” nonsense once and for all!
Obamascares said, about 1 month ago

If gays want to join the military I’m okay with that. It shouldn’t matter what their sexual orientation is. The fact that they want to defend their country is good enough for me. God bless them.
I’ve always thought that “don’t ask don’t tell” was a foolish idea.

It’s no one’s business!
ahab said, about 1 month ago

Yes , cemeteries are filled with patriots who died for us, their country and their fellow soldiers. The book ,The Better Angel about Walt Whitman, shows you can love your country and sexual preference does not diminish the contributions made for your country. Only in narrow minded bigots’ thinking are gays less… human.
nomad2112 said, about 1 month ago

Yep, and gays in the priesthood worked so well for the Catholic church too …
motivemagus said, about 1 month ago

Gays ≠ pederasts, nomad. And I live in Boston and send my kids to Catholic schools, and I assure you I am enraged by the Church’s lack of response to these scandals. But you are talking apples and oranges.
Corosive Frog said, about 1 month ago

Nomad, not all gays are pedophiles AND girls also get abused, by men. How do you explain that?
NeoconMan said, about 1 month ago

Corosive Frog, men abusing girls is NORMAL abuse, whereas gays abusing boys is ABNORMAL abuse. That’s the difference, as anyone can see.
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

“I think we should admit that many fine soldiers are homosexual, and quit this “don’t ask, don’t tell” nonsense once and for all!”

Who doesn’t admit that there are many fine soldiers with same sex attraction issues?

All the military asks is that they control their impulses while in service to their country which in their case includes not labeling themselves by their sexual predilections in order to receive affirmation from others .

No true soldier should be this needy.

Should we suggest a soldier who is attracted to children ignore “don’t ask, don’t tell?”
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

roccekt:

The Spartans are extinct.
DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

What are you insinuating, charlie, that they gay-ed themselves to death?
roccekt said, about 1 month ago

Actually, they are not extinct, just a part of Greece.
omQ R said, about 1 month ago

Charlie555 Should we suggest a soldier who is attracted to children ignore “don’t ask, don’t tell?”

Again equating homosexuality with paedophilia. Homosexuality is not a disease nor a perversion.
4uk4ata said, about 1 month ago

“All the military asks is that they control their impulses while in service to their country which in their case includes not labeling themselves by their sexual predilections in order to receive affirmation from others .”

As far as I know, soldiers have no problem labeling themselves by their sexual predilections when they are heterosexual. What they might get in trouble for is if they can not adequately control those predilections and let them interfere with their job.

When you say “We expect men with married woman attraction to control themselves” you probably mean that they shouldn’t have affairs with married women. Do you think a soldier should be excluded from the army for saying something like “Man, look at the bleeep on Jack’s girl!” ? I doubt you do - as far as I know such words are considered fairly harmless, and not exactly a rare thing. Admission to being a homosexual is no worse (or better).

Now, if being homosexual was illegal, like paedophilia or drug use, I can see the “don’t ask, don’t tell” (although in those cases it probably would be a “don’t serve” as well). However, under the current laws admitting you are gay is no more illegal than admitting you are a smoker. a Methodist or of Pacific islander descent.
NeoconMan said, about 1 month ago

It’s also quite normal for soldiers to rape the women and children of defeated countries. Always been that way. Demoralizes and terrorizes the enemy. We need to encourage American soldiers to use every tool at their disposal to win these wars.
motivemagus said, about 1 month ago

Uh-huh, except we didn’t do that in WWII, one of the things that impressed the world with us.
Ken Warren said, about 1 month ago

It’s silly subject, but the fact is that, in the long run, demoralizing and terrorizing doesn’t work. The Germans paided dearly for this in WWII, and it was part of why the Russians were kicked out of Afghanistan.

Burning villages didn’t help us in Vietnam.

As a side note to those who want us to stay in Afganistan remember the Russian military was given a free hand to do what ever they wanted – they still lost.
DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

Say, striper, how do you deal with the knowledge that gays and lesbians are dying in Afghanistan to protect your freedoms?
Ken Warren said, about 1 month ago

Thanks Striper, I am sure none of us knew that, no wonder you are so angry.
fennec said, about 1 month ago

There are some really sick puppies posting on this one!! Rape is OK if it’s not homosexual rape???
(To quote DrC, good grief.)
charliekane said, about 1 month ago

Ncm:

One crazy mutha!

;-D
believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

neoconman must love Polanski
oldlegodad said, about 1 month ago

The Spartans were not “gay”. They were taken away from all female contact at age 7 and trained to be killers. Females were for procreation only after having served as a warrior for a set time. Meanwhile release was within the army. The comrades in arms took on a whole different meaning. Wish more of you read more, I wouldn’t be so upset at the ignorance portrayed here.
4uk4ata said, about 1 month ago

Oldlego, technically you are right, it’s not that they disliked women. However, homosexual relationships in their military were quite common, if Xenophon was to be trusted. To be honest, this was not unique to them in any way - it was a common thing in Greece at the time. Such relationships were as often physical as mental, and this was widely accepted (sometimes even supported).

The most curious thing is that the Thebans, who eventually mopped the floor with the Spartans in the 4th century, were even more known for this practice. One of their elite units, the Golden Band, was practically based on it.
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

fennec

Nobody said “Rape is OK if it’s not homosexual rape.” The poster called both ABUSE.

Please don’t twist poster’s words. It is the worst kind of false witness.
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

“Homosexuality is not a disease nor a perversion.”

On the contrary, homosexuality is the very dictionary definition of perversion, that is, the alteration of something from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended.

Biologically, the male and female genital organs are designed for reproduction. Sodomy is a perversion of that purpose.
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

“However, under the current laws admitting you are gay is no more illegal than admitting you are a smoker.”

It’s more complex than this. The courts have engineered rights for “gays” for which the people have not voted. The ultimate recognition of “gayness” - “gay” marriage - has been rejected by most states. The people have proved by this rejection that they prefer “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

charlie555 said: “On the contrary, homosexuality is the very dictionary definition of perversion, that is, the alteration of something from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended.”

DrCanuck corrects: Sir, you are misinformed. The final authority on normal and abnormal behaviour is not the dictionary but the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychological Association. After years of research, evidence, and reason, homosexuality has been removed from the taxonomy; it is NOT abnormal.

striper, on the other hand, is.
Magnaut said, about 1 month ago

MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY LET THEM IN AND SCREW THEM
charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

“The final authority on normal and abnormal behavior is not the dictionary but the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychological Association.”

The APA considered homosexuality abnormal for a lot longer than they have considered it normal.

And the fact remains that it is abnormal by definition, that is, deviating from what is normal or usual.

It is abnormal to use the male genitalia on another man or an animal. It’s not in accord with nature.

If a zoo has only two pair of an endangered species and the males are more interested in each other than the females, do the keepers stand back and say, “oh, that’s natural?” No, they do all they can to reprogram the males to normal reproduction.
4uk4ata said, about 1 month ago

“It’s more complex than this. The courts have engineered rights for “gays” for which the people have not voted. The ultimate recognition of “gayness” - “gay” marriage - has been rejected by most states. The people have proved by this rejection that they prefer “don’t ask, don’t tell.””

Ok, let’s set the stereotypes aside. Courts don’t “engineer” rights. They are not the legislative authority and do not make laws. They interpret the existing laws, and in particular the constitution, and are the experts in what they state and how they should be applied. While it doesn’t always work out perfectly in practice (then again, what does) their interpretation is on average much better that most laymen’s.

As for gay marriage, it is not a “recognition” of homosexuality alone, but how it interacts with a specific social institution - marriage. Marriage is an institution with a lot of history and meanings, both symbolic and material. As far as I know, very few states have said anything about gay marriage, or the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in particular - voting for this party or that ties this issue to many others, and is not the be-all, end-all indicator.

Frankly, I wish there would just be a referendum to decide that issue and let it be done.

« Previous 1 2 Next »