Somewhere along the campaign trail over the past few years, politicians are being asked to define the moral code for the rest of the country. Maybe it is because the land of the free and home of the brave is shifting and subjects like homosexuality do not belong in the closet. Interestingly, the far right apparently has no problem being the morality police, unless the issue is personal, as it is for Vice-President Cheney, who took offense when Wolf Blitzer asked him about Mary. Obviously, one's morality can sometimes be very flexible; other times, not so much.
In light of General Peter Pace's comments stating that homosexuality is immoral, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are now being called upon to weigh in on the topic. Those of us who are not running for any office are much freer to venture an opinion, since we are not depending on those much-needed votes from all sides.
Initially, Clinton skirted around the issue by simply saying it was for "others to conclude" while later she eventually took a somewhat stronger stance and said that she did not think being gay was immoral. As of this writing, Obama maintains his position on gays serving in the military without making a judgment on whether or not he thinks the lifestyle is immoral.
The topic of homosexuality is not a frivolous one, since the rights of gay men and women are being denied daily based on the moral codes of others. People like General Pace are unable to separate their beliefs from what is just, which is why Clinton, a woman who had to justify not staying home to bake cookies, and Obama, a black man, should be unwilling to defend the injustices. However, will they be willing to do so if it may mean sacrificing their candidacy?
It's quite unlikely.