Gay/Lesbian Membership Approval/Retention in CAP?

[tjaxe]

^ I agree.  The conversation has probably run its course.  Most of us are aware that respect matters in CAP, and humanity.  For the rest... they won't learn about respecting others in this thread, nor, I fear, anywhere else.

[DC]

Inappropriate topic.

The only inappropriate topic is the one that isn't discussed out of fear. Any topic is appropriate if it is discussed in a professional, thoughtful, and intelligent manner.

In today's society, orientation should be a non issue. I think its safe to say that today, almost everyone either has a gay relative, knows someone who is gay, has a gay co-worker, or comes into contact with gay people in the course of normal daily life. 

If people started worrying more about the things that really do affect them rather than the things that only affect them if they allow it to, the world would be a much better place.

To put it bluntly, unless you are the person crawling in bed with them, why do u care about how the other person is.

Because their behavior is immoral and does not reflect the values held by the majority of Americans or our founding principles.  Moreover, as I have previously pointed out, this behavior makes a person ineligible for military service.  As the Auxiliary of the USAF we should enforce a similar moral standard.

Now I'm beginning to understand why we no longer have MLOs.

If this discussion, or the numerous polls done on the subject, are any indication the majority of Americans do not care about a person's sexual orientation. The title 'Immoral' is hugely subjective, there are those that believe that military service is immoral, or eating pork is immoral, or not following a certain religion (want to talk about the founding fathers, remember Religious Freedom?) is immoral, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Your argument that CAP should follow the same membership standards of the USAF is utterly rediculous, as numerous posters have pointed out, CAP's initial membership was entirely based on those unfit to serve in the real military, whether by age, gender, or physical condition. By your logic CAP should not have a Cadet Program, too young for the military, or allow SMs who are overweight, or like facial hair. To limit the potential membership pool of an organization that is already understaffed is just plain stupid, especially when done for reasons that have no bearing on a person's ability to accomplish the missions of CAP. A person's sexual orientation is their business, and I, for one, could really care less what a person does in their own bed. If they are willing to answer the phone at oh-dark thirty to go on a mission, keep 'em.

[alamrcn]

4. Respect: CAP members come from all walks of life. Therefore, it is extremely important that members treat each other with fairness and dignity, and work together as a team. To do otherwise would seriously impair CAP's capability to accomplish the mission.

Well, since all of our regulations by definition should spring from our "Core Values" - #4 pretty much says it all and in my opinion answers the OP. CAP is no more likely to have a "Straights Only" squadron than it is a "Whites Only" squadron.

So long as a (formerly-known-as) MLO's "moral" instruction is correctly based on modern social and civil standards, he/she should have an easy time with this type of situation. Their position should not be entirely based on scripture or religious teachings that may direct them. Or even their political interests for that matter.

The military has its own laws (UCMJ), which it must have to exist outside of society. Civil Air Patrol falls under the laws of our society, beginning with the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

-Ace

[D2SK]

It is a sad day when people will defend something that is an abomination.  Would you care if what they did involved animals???  I guess it is a sign of the times.   What I've never understood about homosexual conduct is this:  the man wants another man, but often times acts feminine.  Likewise, the woman desires another woman, but many times appears so manly that it is difficult to discern her true gender.  What about this suggests integrity...or what is good and right?  It is perversion and unnatural behavior.  I do not hate these people, nor am I unwilling to work with them.  Indeed, I do work with them on a daily basis.  However, I do not condone, encourage or support their lifestyle.

I wonder if the CPPT should be revised to require that cadets being supervised for over night activities must be watched by a member of the same sex who is straight.  After all, the basis for requiring a same-sex chaperon for females is the rationale that women will not view girls as potential sex partners.  With lesbians, this is questionable.  Likewise for gay men and male cadets.

[MIKE]

I think that is just about enough.