Stix and Stones

Nicholas Stix, a former regular contributor to IC, has taken me to task for my latest piece on IC in support of the repeal of DADT.

Stix writes, "But don’t expect any honesty from the likes of Aaron Sorkin, er, Goldstein."

Now Stix is, of course, perfectly entitled to disagree with my position and judging by my exchanges with John Guardiano on the AmSpec Blog he certainly isn't the only one. Stix honestly believes repealing DADT is a bad idea. I honestly think it is a good idea. Thus we have a difference of opinion. Yet I am not questioning Stix's honesty. So why is he questioning mine?

If anything, Stix should appreciate my honesty because I certainly appreciate his honesty in this matter. Stix is honest enough to admit that he has no problem casting aspersions against gay military personnel simply because they are gay. How else does one explain the use of a term like "gay insurgents"? Stix is also honest enough to admit that any positive contribution made by military personnel is negated the moment they admit they are gay. Now I think those opinions are entirely misguided. But I would rather have someone come out and admit he has no problem casting aspersions against gays and lesbians than have someone like Guardiano who in one breath says he likes gays and lesbians and then in the next breath besmirches them.

Aside from disagreeing with the content and substance of Stix's piece the only problem I have is the fact he cannot recognize that someone might honestly hold an opinion that differs from his own. Oh well, c'est la vie. Stix can cast his stones but they will not hurt me.