Repealing U.S. Code Section 654 of Title 10, also known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) relied upon deception, disinformation, and discrimination. Deception came from the Department of Defense (DOD) poll presenting the fraudulent idea that the military supports homosexual behavior. Disinformation came from requiring equivalency for rejecting homosexual behavior with discrimination based on sex and race. Discrimination came from repudiating religious freedom for Christian, Muslim, and Jewish believers.
Politicians supporting repeal of DADT relied for cover on the DOD deceptive proclamation that 70% of service members see positive or no effect for repealing DADT. The poll was conducted after Congressional Representatives had voted for repeal of DADT. Therefore, only 29% responded by completing half or more of the questions, under the compelling logic that nobody really cared. DOD contacted equal numbers of reserve and active troops and spouses, but only 20% to 30% of those whose family member’s military specialty could place them in harm’s way. Also, nearly one third had never deployed. Supposedly all these responses provided valid information, even though people in base housing, civilian neighborhoods, and CONUS bureaucracies never experience firefights and IED’s.
The entire military exists to serve Marine and Army combat infantrymen. DOD accomplishes nothing of lasting significance until infantrymen walk the ground formerly held by an enemy, and well over half of those trigger-pullers opposed repeal. Only they understand the unimaginable totalitarian leadership and obedience demanded by their chaotic and brittle environments.
Military service deals with the issues of race and sex amid the consequent extraordinary restrictions of Constitutional freedoms unknown to the civilian world. Disinformation must therefore achieve equivalency for rejection of homosexual behavior with those discriminatory issues. That objective in turn relies for vindication on the 1973 American Psychiatric Association (APA) decision to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.
Removal followed two years Newsweek described as ongoing disruptive, chaotic attacks on psychiatrists and physiologists. Yet throughout this campaign, no academic papers arose at conferences refuting any previous research. Eventually sufficient under-votes and abstentions enabled a third of APA’s 17,000 plus membership to approve removal.
Next activists established a committee targeting leading researchers such as Dr. David Reuben, and Masters and Johnson to ensure perpetual sanctity for APA actions. No research papers would again confirm initial therapy success rates of 30% to 60 %, substantiating 7 of 10 homosexuals could eventually walk away from the lifestyle. Persistent activism over 37 years enabled ubiquitous infiltration of academia ensuring pre-ordained theses, approved research designs, suitable human data points, and enchanting statistical enhancements. The result has been social alchemy.
Psychology and psychiatry abandoned scientific rigor for popular acclaim. With homosexual studies freed from objective analysis, DADT repeal advocates relied upon base antidotal, emotional politics to dominate discrimination concerns. Advocates were free to avoid the realities of military operations characterized by sacrificial, primitive and intimate relations. Psychology and psychiatry were unwilling to demand a rigorous discussion of whether any mental disorders could be tolerated within the exceptional human structures needed to defeat enemies.
The Pentagon study never addressed the area of religious freedom, placing this form of discrimination for the first time among those restricted Constitutional guarantees inherent in military service. Previously the religious faith exception provided a critical foundation for surviving the grinding stresses and shattering experiences of warfare.
Basic theology explains why Jewish, Christian, and Muslim believers find their religious freedom evaporating with repeal. Followers of desert religions, who send their pastors into the chaplaincy and believers into military service, consider homosexual behavior unacceptable. It resides among the myriad sins entrapping fallen humanity.
For tens of millions “People of the Book” foundational Old Testament scholarship concludes homosexual relationships separate believers from God. When speaking of the character, identity, and purpose of God, He is spoken of as masculine, and all humans become feminine in relation to Him. Besides creating all things, God created heterosexual marriage as the earthy manifestation of the absolute unity and love He seeks with each person. Classical Semitic theology emphasizes identifying with God in spiritual intimacy, meaning any subsequent reasoning must proceed from that basic understanding.
Therefore after repeal, when believers reject homosexuality in counseling rolls and normal life activities, these people reside outside Constitutional boundaries guaranteeing religious freedom. They see themselves becoming guilty of at least cultural prejudice, if not criminality.
This debate veered into humanist social alchemy as a means to fabricate attachments to our Constitution and to dissemble concerning military operations. Unaddressed in the whole debate were the primary issues of Constitutional speech and religious freedoms, and of whether any mental disorders can be tolerated within the exceptional human structures needed to defeat enemies.
“Discrimination came from repudiating religious freedom for Christian, Muslim, and Jewish believers.”
You got that right. Now the military can and will FORCE believers to cohabitate with homosexuals.
I wonder how many straight liberals celebrating this “historic day” would be fine with being forced to living with a homosexual.
Now that is all over it Mike! This all has been making me sick! My buds (not the warning orders) who went into Iraq desevre way better. This is a travesty. Gay marriage wrecked my loving partnership with the perfect girl. Now gays can act out in the military, and that’s likely the end of American Military superiority. Just watch.
Good point Mike. It’s been discussed before but that survey was written in such a way to elicit PC responses. I received one as a military spouse so I saw it myself. Plus you have the “fear factor” for respondents if they are serving. There was pressure to be PC before this.
DADT worked fine because sexuality shouldn’t be anybody’s business in the first place. It’s just not relevant. My husband definitely worked with gay military members and who really thinks that a large percentage of women in the military aren’t gay? Like police and fire, it’s just the type of job that attracts lesbians. Well, except for all the women getting knocked up on Navy ships for example—another bright idea by the way—.
Anyway, my point is that it’s really nobody’s business and if you don’t shove it in most people’s face they really don’t care what you do in your private life, which is exactly as it should be.