The following video takes place during the Republican debate in Orlando, as an openly gay soldier is booed by the crowd of supporters when discussing his resentment towards the current views on homosexuality in the military. According to Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, marriage is between a man and a woman, and he has made it clear that ones sexuality should not be intertwined with their role in the military. He has stated that, since soldiers must spend ample time in close quarters and in the bathrooms, showering etc. their safety and ability to coexist as a unit could therefore be in jeopardy. Essentially, he believes that the military would be compromising itself if it were to allow gay soldiers to continue enlisting, as their attraction to the other soldiers could endanger them during wartime.
1) As a young Canadian, whose Conservative government currently holds a wishy-washy stance in regards to homosexual rights, do you think that our government, as well as the US government should allow homosexual enlistees to partake in military activity, and furthermore, will this have any effect on the safety of the other soldiers?
Megyn Kelly, the Fox news anchor believes that the audience was being respectful and had every right to boo the soldier.
2) Do you think that it was under the political figures duty to chastize the audience, or was it fair and merely practicing their freedom of speech?
3) Santorum states that were he to be elected, he would not banish current gay soldiers as that would be "unfair", but instead return to the former state belief that gay soldiers will no longer be allowed to enlist. Do you think that a political figure has the right to tell any person physically, mentally and emotionally capable of fighting for their country that they may no longer fight?
4) When given the quote that Colonel Eugene Householder states in the 1940s that African American soldiers are unfit to fight in the army and could compromise the safety of the entire unit based solely upon biological make-up, Santorum argues that in the case of a homosexual soldier, their circumstances are completely different because "homosexuality is behavioural".
Do you think that the exclusion of African American soldiers from the military differs from the exclusion of homosexual soldiers from the military? If homosexuality is in fact "behavioural", could the soldiers not just "stop being gay" until the end of their mission? Why or why not?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiU3maL6rzE
1) As a young Canadian, whose Conservative government currently holds a wishy-washy stance in regards to homosexual rights, do you think that our government, as well as the US government should allow homosexual enlistees to partake in military activity, and furthermore, will this have any effect on the safety of the other soldiers?
~ NOW watch this link ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w5wraEPP7Y&feature=related
Megyn Kelly, the Fox news anchor believes that the audience was being respectful and had every right to boo the soldier.
2) Do you think that it was under the political figures duty to chastize the audience, or was it fair and merely practicing their freedom of speech?
3) Santorum states that were he to be elected, he would not banish current gay soldiers as that would be "unfair", but instead return to the former state belief that gay soldiers will no longer be allowed to enlist. Do you think that a political figure has the right to tell any person physically, mentally and emotionally capable of fighting for their country that they may no longer fight?
4) When given the quote that Colonel Eugene Householder states in the 1940s that African American soldiers are unfit to fight in the army and could compromise the safety of the entire unit based solely upon biological make-up, Santorum argues that in the case of a homosexual soldier, their circumstances are completely different because "homosexuality is behavioural".
Do you think that the exclusion of African American soldiers from the military differs from the exclusion of homosexual soldiers from the military? If homosexuality is in fact "behavioural", could the soldiers not just "stop being gay" until the end of their mission? Why or why not?