Cadet Cole Manders: I’m Successful Because I’m Gay

Last week the Foundation for Moral Law published a letter to Secretary of Defense James Mattis opposing the nomination of Col Kristin Goodwin as the next Commandant of Cadets at the US Air Force Academy:

“I oppose this nomination because Col. Goodwin does not set a proper moral example for youth…The person responsible for the education of cadets at the academy is a role model and an exemplar of proper deportment and conduct…

By nominating an open lesbian who proclaims that she is married to another woman, the Department of Defense states its disregard for the fundamental moral order established by God, thus breaking trust with the millions of Christians who voted for the new president in hope that the ungodly policies of the previous administration would be repudiated.

Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness had previously made a similar objection.

In response, USAFA Public Affairs officer LtCol Allen Herritage said

[BGen(S) Goodwin] was hired for her superb record, which began here as cadet where she excelled…

The Foundation’s letter was written by Kayla Moore — wife of twice-deposed Alabama State Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore.

In an interesting rebuttal, Alabama native and Cadet Captain Cole Manders, currently the Corps Commander at Texas A&M Maritime Academy, decried Moore’s “unnatural and uncivil beast of society” and — in a soliloquy that is almost mistakable as satire — declared he is successful because he is homosexual:

I truly believe my sexual orientation is the single-biggest contributing factor to my success.

That odd statement runs counter to virtually every argument the homosexual movement has made in their efforts to normalize homosexuality in society.

In an argument meandering between illogical and arrogant, Manders essentially makes the claim that being homosexual makes one smarter:

You see, growing up gay, you suppress…anger and resentment. What this boils down to is a special sense of Emotional Intelligence. For decades, research showed that many individuals with mediocre IQ’s far exceeded those with high IQs [because of] the unique ability to control your emotions and use that energy for forward-progress…

Though he seems to credit his success and superior intellect to his homosexuality, Manders somehow concludes leadership has nothing to do with sexuality — thus, Col Goodwin should be allowed to lead the Cadet Wing at the US Air Force Academy.  Checkmate, Kayla Moore.

Despite his self-confidence, Cole Manders’ statement is not the most artful or well-constructed defense of homosexuality in America — but it is an interesting one.  It would seem he represents a part of society that has moved beyond the “homosexuals are no different than heterosexuals” to “homosexuals are better than heterosexuals.”

It should be a statement of the obvious that the ability to control one’s emotions is ultimately beneficial for a person’s future success.  (That’s a lesson Mikey Weinstein could have used.)

Manders’ problem comes in the justification of the source by virtue of the results.  That is, being homosexual caused him anger, which he learned to suppress, which benefitted him — therefore, being homosexual was “good.”

By that logic, former Marine Captain Chuck Colson’s involvement in Watergate led to his conversion to Christianity, his imprisonment (in Alabama), and ultimately his founding of the impactful Prison Fellowship — which was a “good thing” that wouldn’t have happened otherwise.  So does that mean the initiating event — Watergate — was “good” and should be celebrated?

In 2013 Cole Manders was described as a “rising star” in the Alabama GOP.  Manders calls himself a “progressive Republican;” in his column, he notably only mentioned his conservative credentials in the past tense.

Perhaps some day Manders will be able to look back and define himself by something other than his sexuality.  Either that, or he’ll publish another column saying “gotcha!”

Also at AL.com.

ADVERTISEMENT



16 comments

  • Cadet Cole Manders, what have you profited if you to gain the whole world, but lose your soul (Matt. 16:26)?

    Boasting about sexual perversion may gain you success in this life, since the culture is desperately wicked. However, think about the implications of calling evil good and good evil. Hell is a long time to be proven you are wrong.

    Repent, and believe in the Gospel (Rom. 3:23-26).

    • In 2017, the fact you still quote scripture is embarrassing to you, your intellect, and your family. It’s actually disgusting that you would even think of imposing your flawed faith on someone else. ‘Definition of Faith – strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.’

    • Alex,

      We still quote scripture because it is never out dated and flawless and still applicable to life situations for today. Can you give me 10 reasons how our faith is flawed and be specific okay!
      Now let me give how scripture defines faith – “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” – Hebrews 11:1!

    • @Alex
      When you looked up “faith,” you should have also researched “imposing.” It doesn’t mean what you seem to think it does.

  • The Department of Defense has already stated its disregard for the fundamental moral order established by God, and if thus, if breaking trust with the millions of Christians who voted for the new president in hope that the ungodly policies of the previous administration would be repudiated, I doubt it will happen anytime soon. President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election. Repealing any law, policy or memo regarding this issue will affect more than just the Military; e.g. federal contractors and millions of others.

    http://archive.defense.gov/home/features/2010/0610_dadt/USD-PR-DADT_Repeal_Day_Memo_20Sep.pdf

    Regarding Cadet Cole Manders, his logic is ridiculous, but he’s not the only one.

  • Anonymous Patriot

    “Illogical and Arrogant”, indeed. Gay supremacism is supposed to be legitimate, now?

  • Please tell me what Jesus said about homosexuality in the Gosple, the source of salvation. Oh wait not a single red letter. BOOM!

  • Steven Schwartz

    1) The Government is not in the business of enforcing any particular religion’s “fundamental moral order”.

    2) There are many Christians* who believe that being non-heterosexual is not a violation of God’s will, and they are just as entitled to their beliefs and freedoms on the matter.

    3) Expecting Donald Trump to do anything for “fundamental moral order” just goes to show that you’ve been conned.

    4) “wife of twice-deposed Alabama State Supreme Court Chief” — that would be twice-*suspended* by the Courts for failure to behave in a manner befitting the judicial branch.

    5) I find it odd that someone saying, in effect, that they learned self-control and discipline because of who they are is a *bad* thing. I don’t agree that it can be drawn broadly (I don’t think that *all* LGBTQ folk do that), but you would, I suspect, have no problem with someone saying that their Christian faith had heightened their emotional IQ, making them more fit than they had been. What you object to is the *source*, not the sentiment.

    And, indeed; “So does that mean the initiating event — Watergate — was “good” and should be celebrated?” No, it does not. But it is worth noting that the pattern is that of the traditional Christian testimonial — “I am better than I was because (x)” — and so dismissing it as *evidence*, especially of how he feels the world works, and how it worked for him — is tantamount to undercutting what is often the basis for evangelism; the notion of testimony.

    ” Perhaps some day Manders will be able to look back and define himself by something other than his sexuality”

    I am quite sure he already does — you are the one electing to define himself solely by that.

    • Steven Schwartz

      Ahem; I miswrote. “That last line should be “Electing to define *him* solely by that.”

    • @Steven Schwartz

      5) I find it odd that someone saying, in effect, that they learned self-control and discipline because of who they are is a *bad* thing.

      Who said that?

      What you object to is the *source*, not the sentiment.

      You’re repeating what’s said above as if it doesn’t say that.

      the pattern is that of the traditional Christian testimonial — “I am better than I was because (x)”

      You’ve disproven your own point. A stereotypical Christian testimonial says “I once was lost (“bad”), but now I’m found (“good”).” It does not say I’m glad I was a sinner because it led to me being saved. A Christian repents of who he was; he does not celebrate it.

      you are the one electing to define himself solely by that.

      No one said “solely,” and the “single biggest contributing factor” were his words.

  • @Shaun,

    Jesus did talk about homosexuality in a way, He said that marriage is between one man and one woman. He also did not say anything about beastiality, domestic violence, sex before marriage, but does that make those things okay? Your point is again?

    BOOM!!

    • Loving your neighbor as yourself? Sumed it up and uh oh you hate ! Salvation is key not how you think you earn it how do you earn salvation ?

    • To Simply the question was should a man separate from a woman and not is it okay for a man to marry a man it’s contextual isn’t it?

  • Steven Schwartz

    @JD

    “You’ve disproven your own point. A stereotypical Christian testimonial says “I once was lost (“bad”), but now I’m found (“good”).” It does not say I’m glad I was a sinner because it led to me being saved. A Christian repents of who he was; he does not celebrate it.”

    You’re focusing on individual detail, rather than larger form. The testimonial as a form is one that uses internal states as “evidence” — “Because of my experience X, I am now Y.” Whether that experience X is a transformational change from bad to good, or an ordeal due to external oppression, is not essential to the question of whether testimonial evidence is worth anything.

    Manders’ evidence of the positive effects of his homosexuality is just as strong as the evidence of any given testimony arguing an improvement of life through being “saved”.

    As to the last bit: since you seem intent on hairsplitting: “perhaps someday be…able to define himself by something other than his sexuality” implies that he doesn’t already do that — i.e., that he defines himself solely that way. Your words carry the clear implication.

  • Imperfect person plus imperfect actions equals perfect salvation?

  • I was tought there are 4 contexts… which one did you use?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *