# U.S.A.F. Chaplains promote misogyny, gay bashing **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 9, 2017, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203 "2017-05-09T14:53:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![John\_Bredin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@John\_Bredin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Bredin)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2017, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/61 "2017-05-11T17:50:20Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > _“Third, people should be very worried when they see women pastors/chaplains teaching. Why? It could be God’s judgment upon them (Isaiah 3, “…and women rule over them”)!”_ > > Did not seem that bad. Other things imputed to them from that cite do seem over the line, admittedly. Sounds pretty extreme to me. If an Air Force officer thinks women ruling over them/us will bring down God’s judgment on them/us, what does he perforce think of women Air Force officers, Air Force generals, Defense Dep’t secretaries\*, Senators, or a woman President? :smack: Sounds like he considers them illegitimate. And you’ll excuse me if I’m made nervous by a military officer who thinks the legitimate officials above him aren’t. \*The cabinet minister kind, not the “take dictation and book my lunch meeting” kind. ---
**Author:** ![Ztransform](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/48db29/32.png) [@Ztransform](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ztransform)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/62 "2017-05-18T21:21:24Z")
Small question, are USAF chaplains ever qualified to fly for example F-16s or any plane? Or are they always stuck on the ground, doing their padre thing? ---
**Author:** ![Ztransform](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/48db29/32.png) [@Ztransform](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ztransform)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/63 "2017-05-18T21:35:28Z")
There also seems to be a culture of Christian fundamentalism at the Air Force Academy. > **[Air Force Sued Over Religion](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-force-sued-over-religion/)** > > A.F. Academy Graduate Alleges Religious Intolerance I find it strange that a branch of the military with such scientific focus should be so infiltrated by religion. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/64 "2017-05-18T21:35:41Z")
> [@Ztransform](#): > > Small question, are USAF chaplains ever qualified to fly for example F-16s or any plane? > > Or are they always stuck on the ground, doing their padre thing? Pilots are trained to fly high-Chaplains are trained to fly higher. Unless one is switching careers, one doesn’t get to do the other’s job usually. ---
**Author:** ![Ztransform](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/48db29/32.png) [@Ztransform](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ztransform)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/65 "2017-05-18T21:50:47Z")
Good one, Czarcasm mate! ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/66 "2017-05-19T12:07:17Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > Hernandez also said that since General designate Goodwin’s service began before Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, she lied about not being gay in order to get into the Air Force, and therefore she is not an acceptable Commandant of Cadets. That raises the question of how the Armed Services handled the issue of Fraudulent Enlistment when homosexuality was dropped as a disqualifying characteristic for eligibility to serve. During (and before) the tenure of DADT, discovery of a servicemember’s homosexuality resulted in separation from the service under the UCMJ provisions for fraudulent enlistment (that is, the servicemember had falsely claimed to not be disqualified by his/her sexual orientation). When sexual orientation was officially dropped as a bar to eligibility, there were presumably some gay servicemembers who wanted to come out of the closet and get on with their military careers with that much less stress. But, technically speaking, these members were all serving while having fraudulently enlisted. It strains plausibility that the branches of the military were told to simply disregard any instances of fraudulent enlistment which were brought to light (because, IME, the military doesn’t adopt new policies without having an implementation procedure). Does anyone know how the branches (or possibly the DoD) implemented this policy change without running into a UCMJ-mandated mess? ISTM that the answer to this question is the rebuttal to Hernandez’s objection. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/67 "2017-05-19T13:18:28Z")
Maybe she wasn’t aware that she was gay yet. ---
**Author:** ![ganthet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de0a6/32.png) [@ganthet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ganthet)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/68 "2017-05-19T14:05:29Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > That raises the question of how the Armed Services handled the issue of Fraudulent Enlistment when homosexuality was dropped as a disqualifying characteristic for eligibility to serve. During (and before) the tenure of DADT, discovery of a servicemember’s homosexuality resulted in separation from the service under the UCMJ provisions for fraudulent enlistment (that is, the servicemember had falsely claimed to not be disqualified by his/her sexual orientation). This is incorrect (at least under the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell years). Homosexuality was its own unique basis for separation and always required evidence of homosexual conduct, not mere orientation. For example, an old overview of Army Regulation AR 635-200 on enlisted separations can be found [here](http://girightshotline.org/en/military-knowledge-base/regulation/homosexual-conduct-discharge/army) that examines the (now rescinded) chapter on separation due to Homosexual conduct. Sexual orientation under the DADT years was explicitly treated as a private matter not subject to any official action under there was some accusation or proof that it was manifested in homosexual conduct. [Here is the applicable](http://girightshotline.org/en/military-knowledge-base/regulation/homosexual-conduct-discharge/air-force) (now-rescinded) part of the Air Force regulation. This was because sodomy, whether committed with someone of the same or opposite sex, was (and still technically is, though almost never prosecuted unless it is non-consensual) a violation of the UCMJ punitive articles (Article 125). ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/69 "2017-05-19T16:01:31Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Their religion is telling them something should not be allowed while the military is telling them it should be allowed. The problem here is the reverse – the military is telling them that something (public expression of contempt for a superior officer) is not allowed while their religion is telling them it is allowed. Obviously, this should lead them to either refrain, to leave the service, or to suffer the consequences of deliberately violating military discipline. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/70 "2017-05-19T16:11:30Z")
You’ve heard the phrase “To have the courage of your convictions”? They’ve got the convictions down, but not the courage. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/71 "2017-05-20T00:32:01Z")
> [@ganthet](#): > > This is incorrect (at least under the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell years). Homosexuality was its own unique basis for separation and always required evidence of homosexual conduct, not mere orientation. For example, an old overview of Army Regulation AR 635-200 on enlisted separations can be found [here](http://girightshotline.org/en/military-knowledge-base/regulation/homosexual-conduct-discharge/army) that examines the (now rescinded) chapter on separation due to Homosexual conduct. Sexual orientation under the DADT years was explicitly treated as a private matter not subject to any official action under there was some accusation or proof that it was manifested in homosexual conduct. [Here is the applicable](http://girightshotline.org/en/military-knowledge-base/regulation/homosexual-conduct-discharge/air-force) (now-rescinded) part of the Air Force regulation. > > This was because sodomy, whether committed with someone of the same or opposite sex, was (and still technically is, though almost never prosecuted unless it is non-consensual) a violation of the UCMJ punitive articles (Article 125). Okay, thanks for the ignorance-fighting. ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/72 "2017-05-20T00:44:36Z")
> [@ganthet](#): > > This was because sodomy, whether committed with someone of the same or opposite sex, was (and still technically is, though almost never prosecuted unless it is non-consensual) a violation of the UCMJ punitive articles (Article 125). Article 125 was actually amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for 2014, so it now [only applies to “forcible sodomy” (i.e. non-consensual)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/925). ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203/73 "2017-05-20T01:00:38Z")
> [@ganthet](#): > > This was because sodomy, whether committed with someone of the same or opposite sex, was (and still technically is, though almost never prosecuted unless it is non-consensual) a violation of the UCMJ punitive articles (Article 125). There were (or maybe still are) other articles mentioning things like “unnatural acts” so guys kissing and giving handjobs didn’t cut it either. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-a-f-chaplains-promote-misogyny-gay-bashing/786203.md?page=3)