Military Gay Activists Jump Shark in Attacks on Col Leland Bohannon

UPDATE: This topic must have hit close to the mark, as Tom Carpenter is a bit upset.  Still, based on his inspiration, consider using #GivingTuesday (or any day) to support First Liberty, the non-profit organization currently working in Col Bohannon’s defense.


Tom Carpenter’s Forum on the Military Chaplaincy — which was founded to support the repeal of DADT — recently shared on Facebook Col Bohannon’s story as covered at Military.com. The response from his supporters was predictable — yet still shocking.

LtCol Elisa/Victor Valenzuela — an Air Force active duty homosexual-turned-transgender presumably threatened by President Trump’s policies — asked, apparently sincerely, if Col Bohannon would let his homosexual troops die.

Victor Michael Valenzuela So if he was in a war zone and a gay man came under fire, would the Col be exempt from helping him because of his religious bias? This is a serious question. We are in the military and as leaders, we advocate for all.

That’s moronic, but completely predictable. Amazingly, the homosexual movement has, without mainstream criticism, been able to turn “as a Christian, I will not affirm your lifestyle choice” into “Christians want to round up Gays in ghettos!!!1!11!1”. Declining to personally sign an unofficial document that personally affirms a sinful relationship is completely unrelated to Valenzuela’s fantastical hypothetical.

Her comment is also ironic, as it comes from a woman who — as an Air Force commander, just like Col Bohannon — allegedly denigrated a military chaplain by calling him a “bigot” only because of his faith. She even did media interviews — as an active duty officer — about her sexuality.  And yet — despite her intolerance, “sexual bias,” and apparent religious prejudice — then-Maj Valenzuela not only kept her job, she was promoted.

It would seem someone of her ideological passion could continue to serve — so why does she think Col Bohannon couldn’t do the same?

The second winning comment came from another repeat offender:

Chris Rowzee And if the colonel was in charge of let’s say personnel and dependent benefits, could he use his religious beliefs to deny spousal benefits 2 LGBT spouses?

That’s similarly moronic — and it assumes a wrong not committed, because Col Bohannon didn’t deny anyone anything. Col Bohannon was asked to personally affirm a sinful relationship, something explicitly in contradiction with his faith — a faith whose exercise is protected by law and the Constitution. Not only did he not deny anyone anything, he actually went out of his way to make sure the “spouse” did receive a signed certificate.  Rowzee’s comment is bigoted and wrong.

Rowzee’s comment is also ironic, because she’s the one who — as a superior military officer — called a staff meeting to tell her subordinates her preferred sexual behavior. (Seriously, who does that?) Yet Rowzee wasn’t fired. (Who does that and keeps their job?) It would seem someone of her ideological passion could continue to serve — so why does she think Col Bohannon couldn’t do the same?

Some have complained that the sacrifice, support, etc., from the homosexual spouse earned him the certificate, regardless of any opinion on the relationship. But here’s something else to think about: What if a commander declined to sign an “appreciation” certificate for a live-in girlfriend? Doesn’t the Air Force value her contribution? Didn’t she provide support to the AF member? Isn’t it discriminatory for her not to get one?

Perhaps, but that’s the Air Force’s decision to discriminate. The Air Force only gives appreciation certificates to spouses — not girlfriends, fiances, lovers, mistresses, sisters, etc. Is that unlawful discrimination based on marital status?  Why isn’t anyone fighting that battle?

More to the point, until very recently, the Air Force agreed with Col Bohannon and many like him that a same-sex “marriage” isn’t a marriage at all.  Thus, same-sex partners didn’t warrant recognition — sacrifice notwithstanding.

The Air Force can change its mind, of course. But, by law and by the DoD’s own words, it can’t and isn’t supposed to try to change Col Bohannon’s mind — or his religious beliefs.

Perhaps one day Tom Carpenter, Liz Valenzuela, Chris Rowzee, and others like them will finally learn to exercise the tolerance they claim they deserve from others. Until then, someone needs to stand up and defend the rights and liberties of those they choose to attack.

If not, the US military may find those citizens of moral and righteous character becoming less inclined to join the “honorable” and upstanding service that no longer values or protects the virtues of their faith — or worse, is hostile toward it.

And that would be a tragic day indeed.

ADVERTISEMENT



3 comments

  • These people (Carpenter, Valenzuela, Rowzee, et al.) are so obsessed with sex that they have lost all perspective on what the military is all about—being prepared to fight and win our country’s wars. At all levels of our military we need people who are 100% focused on the real task, not their selfish, time and attention consuming battles to make the military conform to their perverse sexual views and practices.

    • @Michael Martin
      To some people, being in the military is a means of selfless service to one’s country. To others, the military is a self-serving vehicle, or a means to an end. It’s probably obvious where Tom Carpenter and his “Forum” fall.

  • Was going to reply directly to Victor’s post and ask her – when she says “as a leaders, we advocate for all” – does that apply to members that have religious convictions that run counter to her beliefs. Oddly, her post has been deleted.

Leave a Reply

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