Push back is making its way thru the military email nets.
This is from my email today....deleted a coupla names.
uw
Subject: Letter to the Chairman, JCS
The letter you forwarded from LtCol Sanford moved me to write and send the following letter to ADM Mullen. Feel free to share it with your Email contacts. ET
757 F Avenue
Coronado, CA 92118
February 5, 2010
Admiral Mike Mullen, USN
Chairman, Joints Chiefs of Staff
9999 Joint Staff Pentagon
Washington, DC 20318-9999
Dear Admiral Mullen,
Having offered the Benediction at the CNO Change of Command for Admirals Kelso and Boorda, I feel compelled to write to you as the former CNO and current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
While serving as the Command Chaplain at Naval Amphibious Base Coronado from 1994 to 1997, I had a very talented and dedicated Chief Petty Officer who taught our Catholic Confirmation class. In addition to being spiritually very sound, as a Search and Rescue (SAR) swimmer he was also in great physical shape.
As he was approaching his 20 year mark on active duty, he talked with me about becoming a Catholic priest. I took him for a visit to the Seminary in Camarillo. After a period of prayer and reflection, he decided to complete his enlistment; accept the 20 year retirement package; and enter a seminary to become a Catholic priest.
I’m sad to say that within a year of having entered a Catholic seminary, he got tired of being “hit on” by gay seminarians and left the seminary. I felt very bad when I heard about this and regretted ever having encouraged him to become a priest and leave the Navy where he could have stayed for another ten years.
When the Catholic Church decided in the early 70s to make up for its lack of seminarians by accepting homosexual candidates, it failed to consider the impact this would have upon the recruitment and retention of heterosexual seminarians and priests, as well as other complications that would arise.
The Roman Catholic Church in the United Stares has paid out over $3 billion in law suits and legal fees over the past decade for sex acts perpetrated by priests, over 80 percent of whom were homosexual priests like Navy Chaplain John “Matt” Lee who, while HIV positive, preyed on midshipmen while stationed at the U.S. Naval Academy and Marines while assigned to Marine Corps Base Quantico.
I believe you underestimate the importance of sexual privacy in the military and the effect a change in the DoD homosexual policy can have on the recruitment and retention of heterosexuals. I can understand how the President and the Secretary of Defense might not appreciate the importance of sexual privacy after never having served one day in the military, but you, Sir, should know better.
Sincerely,
Gene Thomas Gomulka
CAPT, CHC, USN (Ret)
Copy to: Senator John McCain, Congressman Duncan Hunter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 11:19:28 -0500
Subject: Re: [Message to Warriors from Sam] Letter to the Chairman, JCS
To:
LtCol. Sanford is in the bulleyes on this one. I have voiced my concern to my elected officials as well. I hope others do the same.
Semper Fi,
This went into the mail today from me to Admiral Mike Mullens, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. If you share my feelings you might want to write your own letter.
Sam
February 5, 2010
Admiral Mike Mullen
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
9999 Joint Staff Pentagon
Washington, DC 20318-9999
Admiral Mullen:
I am writing to express my anger and outrage at your recent testimony before a congressional committee concerning homosexuals serving openly in the military. If what I read is true, you believe that the military services should not make homosexual men and women, “…lie about who they are…” to serve in the military.
It seems to me and every military person I know that you are being used as an unwitting dupe by the Obama administration to force the political agenda of homosexuals on heterosexual servicemen and women. Or worse yet, you may really believe that you should force serving military personnel, the great majority of whom have deep seated religious beliefs condemning homosexuality, to accept their degenerate lifestyle within their ranks. In either case, we see you as unfit to chair the Joint Chiefs of Staff. If you had a shred of decency left, you would immediately resign that position and retire.
This despicable act will adversely affect our troops wherever they are, but especially in combat, which requires absolute trust in one’s fellow soldiers. There is no quicker way I can think of to destroy the cohesion and trust in a combat unit than to allow homosexuals openly to serve. If you have not yet gotten the message, the troops in combat units are already outraged at the politically correct Rules of Engagement that are costing American lives. I can assure you that your recent comments will kindle a flood of outrage among the troops. However, you are not likely to hear about this from your high level subordinates. You would have to read the blogs coming from combat troops to understand what they are saying. But those such as yourself who have not actually served in mortal combat might not be up to the task of understanding that.
The military is not a place for social experiments, especially when it is engaged in combat. Perhaps you propose to replace all those heterosexual troops who will refuse to reenlist with the rush of homosexuals who will want to be where “the boys (or girls) are.” Lots of luck with that.
I am also concerned that once you force this deeply offensive social experiment on the troops, it will become a court martial offense for straight troops to voice their religious objections to homosexual acts in the trenches, in their barracks and God only knows where else. It is now the rage in "progressive" circles such as yours to label that as “hate” speech. So instead of having homosexuals “…lie about who they are,” you will require straight troops to lie about who they are to appease the homosexuals’ radical political agenda.
This politically correct approach has been proven to be deadly, the massacre at Fort Hood being a recent example. It seems that general and flag officers have adopted the politically correct approach to leadership to advance their careers--and yours--without regard to the effect their intellectual cowardice has on the troops entrusted to their care.
And finally, there is no right for an American to serve in our armed forces. There are tens of thousands of competent, patriotic Americans who have been rejected for military service because of physical characteristics such as height and eyesight. There surely were and are places where those rejected persons could have served faithfully and honorably. Homosexuals have been and should continue to be denied the honor to serve based on perverted sexual behaviors, not physical characteristics! Allowing them to serve is not “…the right thing to do.”
So, admiral, however competent a ship driver or budget cruncher you are, you have earned my everlasting scorn. Better get used to it, because you can expect the same from hundreds of thousands of active troops, retirees and veterans because of your ill advised and dangerous tinkering.
I usually close my letters with “respectfully,” but certainly not in this case.
Samuel S. Sanford
LTC (ret), U. S. Army |
