Very good article. I used to be against having gays openly in the military until I gave it rational thought. Gays have served in the defense of this country and have served it well. After learning how well it has worked for the Israelis how can we rationally say it would not work here?
“Sodomy is neither the change we want nor can believe in,”
Gays have been honorably serving in our military all along. Keeping it to themselves seems to have worked quite well too.
Sexuality has no legitimate place in the on duty military and nobody really cares what they do in their off duty hours. This is just more “look at me” legislation and social experimentation with our military.
Always been gays in military. When shit hits the fan, all those divisive issues that tear America apart (racism, politics, sex orientation, ect) go by the way side. Then we become Americans trying to survive. This is just for public consumption.
I am glad you were able to finally think of it rationally, but thinking of something rationally does not automatically make it right.
“Don’t ask. Don’t tell.” Seems simple enough.
The Israeli military has a draft. Though I suspect that if you “tell” in the IDF, you’d be hounded and harrassed beyond bearing. It’s the nature of the warrior: If it isn’t there you’re finished.
This entire argument hurts more than it helps. The state of ‘Being’ can be no crime. It is the actions taken that hurt or help unit cohesion, and those actions hurt or help whether the actor is straight or gay, male or female.
Simply being ‘gay’ is no more a crime or problem that being straight, male, or female.
An indecent act is an indecent act. Is it different if the act is indecent straight or gay? It is by definition indecent. That is where efforts should go, a persons actions, not towards who or what they are. Let the flames begin.
Perhaps the straight soldiers and sailors recognize this too. They recognize that keeping gays in the closet or in fear of being summarily dismissed, may be the only way for straight soldiers and sailors to stay competitive. They may know they are faced with this “force within a force” that seeks in every way to outperform as a way of proving social worth. The possibility of straight soldiers and sailors having to “up their game” in order to compete may scare the hell out of them and so they opt to keep their gay colleagues in a coercive detainment instead.
In that way, perhaps gays in the military is similar to blacks in professional sports half a century ago. A majority of white players may not have wanted them and said the reason wasn't anything other than team cohesion. However, the ugly truth might have been that they had seen blacks play and they were threatened by their abilities to perform, compete and even (heaven forbid) win.
You do know, don’t you, that soldiers infected with HIV are protected? The soldiers in a battlefield situation are not allowed to know their HIV status? Even the field commander cannot know. Yet they are not “sick” and CAN be sent downrange. You are aware of all this, right?
There are plenty of gays in our military today and some have died in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as in all of our previous wars and all are heroes.
And now that we are going to move from “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” the military will need to enforce strict sexual harassment polices. And under such policies if a man makes unwelcomed sexual advances on another man while on duty he should be severely reprimanded and if a man makes an unwelcome sexual advance on a woman, he too must be severely reprimanded.
I see this move as a social engineering move. Once the military acknowledges "partnership" or marriage from certain states, they will have to grant benefits to all and recognize gay marriage.
I don't see this as patriots mistreated but as a move to use the military to legitimize gay marriage, nationaly. I think that is wrong.
“I used to be against having gays openly in the military until I gave it rational thought.”
Then obviously your thoughts were not “rational” they were “rationalizations.” Right now we have enough problems in the military maintaining good order and discipline because of men and women serving to together (no blame to either women or men - it is just natural for their to be problems). It is unsafe for females in some areas because of sexaul harrassment. On the flip side, many a foolish male soldier has been booted out of the military because he fraternized with a subordinate female soldier (especially Drill Sergeants).
So, now politicos want to make things worse by allowing openly homosexual persons in the military. A very bad idea. The Inspector General Corps is already dealing with numerous military members (some correct some false) filling the R (race) Card complaints or the G (gender) Complaints....so you want us to further deal with the H (Homosexual) Card complaints.
Females are half of the population and HAVE been more good than bad, but there is still a long way to go. They are a valued part of the military...but problems remain.
I can’t see the value or sense in disrupting the morale, religious sensibilities, social sensibilities, etc. to accomondate a very small minority of 1-3% of the population (I suspect it is well below 1%) to be politically correct.
What contributions that small minority may potentially make isn’t worth the disruption.
Would you still feel this way if your average berthing bay gets cut down the middle, with one half a giant suckathon, and the other half too scared to say anything about it?
We were the first ship to get females. First Arctic cruise, we had 29 enlisted and 1 female office on board. we medievac’d 25 pregnant off before the cruise ended.
Before they go making a policy like this, I’d like to see how they are going to change the average berthing bay. Before you get all the accommodations down, and account for some remaining sense of privacy among the less deviant, there won’t be room for food or weapon systems.
There is a large difference in the two services.
There is also a difference in the total lack of privacy.
It is very rational and very logical. The sole reason for this administration to foist homosexual practitioners on the military is for the campaign donations to the democrats. This is a social experiment that has no place in the us military.
homosexuality is ONLY about recreational sex. The military forbids forms of recreational sex conduct. no adultery and no fraternizing with the lower ranks. homosexuality is a recreational behavior not an imutable trait.
This whole exercise is just a backdoor way of imposing the junk science of “born that way” upon society in general.
Because it will be implemented here along a liberal Democrat model complete with touchy-feelly mandatory indocrination sessions, victim group status, EEO bull____ complaints, forced sharing of showers with "bigots" being discharged and punished for not being progressive enough.
The military is about breaking things and killing people--not groups hugs, drama queen antics, and male-male bonding in the bunk.