Possibly, then, you will clarify your position after I have removed the reference to your comfort, though I meant "ethically comfortable, as an American," and so it seems to me a fundamental and important question. Still, I will remove it to learn more fully what sacrifices of our own American principles you think we Americans might reasonably make for "effective diplomacy":
<<So it is your position that a qualified gay should not be appointed as an ambassador to a Catholic country.
Do you think it would be okay in a Protestant one? A Jewish one? A Moslem one? (Do you also think they should not be made department heads?)
Do you feel that there are countries where qualified Jewish
Americans should not be appointed as American ambassadors?
Are there countries where qualified Catholic Americans should not be appointed as ambassadors?
Are there countries where qualified American women should not be appointed as ambassadors?
Are there countries where qualified black Americans should not be appointed as ambassadors?
P.S. Do you think the Peace Corps should have the same
restrictions on what Americans can serve in what countries?
Do you think that the entire American Foreign Service should take as automatic disqualifications for service in particular countries race, gender, religion, and sexual orientation?
We haven't been doing that, and we're doing okay. Do you think we should begin now? George Senior knowingly appointed a gay male ambassador in a homophobic country, and the gentleman did a great job, according to reports I received. People tend to judge others as individuals, when they meet them. I think you can trust Catholics in Belgium to do the same, don't you?>> |
