RSS“Don’t Ask, Don’t Yell” **UPDATE: TUESDAY SENATE HEARING**
Gene Lalor | January 31, 2010
Gays don’t like it and the military likes it even less. I refer to Bill Clinton’s cop out, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy for homosexuals in the military. That coda is about to change into “Leave Me Alone and Stay Outta My Face,” should Obama get his way.
Clinton’s DADT compromise stated that “homosexual orientation alone is not a bar to service, but homosexual conduct is incompatible with military service.” In other words, no one will ask about your sexual orientation and gays should feel free to serve their country but should not feel free to flout or advertise their sexuality.
That’s pretty reasonable, I think.
It’s important to realize that essentially the same policy applies to heterosexual behavior in that public, publicized promiscuous activities between consenting males and females in the military is discouraged and could result in punishment by military authorities.
Heterosexual activities are not usually punishable by discharge, however, nor is “telling” about it, precisely because they are not militarily incompatible or detrimental.
Homosexuals are driven of late to change attitudes toward normal, common, human behavior, even if it means declaring they are as indiscreet and randy as heteros.
The words “sexual orientation” are never mentioned in the DADT policy change from the previous (1981) military stance issued as a directive by the Defense Department and which stated that “homosexuality is incompatible with military service.”
Both the spirit of the 1981 directive and the 1993 revision via executive order, not law, are about to be trashed by Barack Obama.
In 1981, America’s Commander-in-Chief was President Ronald Reagan who established a firm policy on gays in the military not only because it was incompatible but because it was detrimental to the military’s efficacy as fighting units. Today, our COH has a debt to re-pay to a major constituency, homosexuals, and has pledged to pay that debt.
Unlike so many other pledges made by Obama, he seems bent on actually keeping this one.
What’s so incompatible and detrimental of gays in the military?
One factor was reflected in an April, 2006 incident reported by the Fox News Channel. It involved 7 soldiers from the famed U.S. Army’s 82 Airborne Division.
To one degree of another, all 7 engaged “in sex acts on a military-themed gay pornographic Web site” for which they received judicial or non-judicial punishments or prison sentences and were all recommended for dishonorable discharges.
Those less than magnificent seven illustrate a common gay characteristic, not universal but common, namely of a tendency to exhibitionism, something little in millitary demand.
Why not just live and let live? Why prosecute and persecute homosexuals for practicing what most people still regard as deviant behavior? Why not just allow gays to serve?
First, as stated above, gays are invited to join the military and untold numbers have already served in every branch and military capacity and many no doub with distinction.
The other issues are more complex.
No branch of the military exists as a social service agency welcoming the tired, poor, huddled, freedom-loving wretched refuse of the world. Lady Liberty serves that function. The United States’ Army, Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard exist to preserve, protect and fight for the nation.
From time to time they are asked to perform rescue missions, as in Haiti, and in tsunami- and hurricane-ravaged locales but those are ancillary social functions performed as public services, and under orders.
As unsavory as it is considered in some quarters today, the military’s principal job is fighting, killing, and warring when necessary.
None of those assignments can be accomplished nearly as well in a divisive atmosphere which would exist as a consequence of troops fighting, killing, and warring alongside outed gays.
The oft-tried and invalid comparison of racially-integrated soldiers fulfilling their missions together is usually invoked at this point in the argument.
Granted some rednecks in World War II and even in Korea would have been unsettled by guys who were then called coloreds and Negroes fighting with them against a common enemy. They at least would have been accepted as guys and not just superficial males who may look upon them as most soldiers look upon females.
That might require 4 or more sets of shower facilities, for males, females, gay men, lesbians and maybe a fifth for transsexuals.
I hope not but perhaps in time gays and straights fighting together may become common and accepted. By then, unless they have 4 or 5 separate showering facilities, retrieving dropped soap in the men’s shower could be a court martial offense.
**UPDATE**
Urgent e-mail from AFTAH (Americans For Truth About Homosexuality):
Dear Readers,
Please read the Alert below from Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness and take action today. The homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign plans to spend $2 million to lobby Congress on this issue. Below is AFTAH’s Alert from Friday, followed by Donnelly’s urgent message to contact the Senate Armed Services Committee. Please pass this e-mail on to your network of friends, family and co-workers and ask them to take action! Thank you. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org
TAKE ACTION: Oppose President Obama’s goal of homosexualizing and politicizing our American Armed Forces (pro-”gay” “diversity” is political). As the Washington Post above reveals, homosexual activists will be going all out to pressure Congress to impose their radical agenda on our Servicemembers. Contact your Congressman and Senators by phone (202-224-3121; 202-225-3121; www.congress.org) AND in writing (preferably in a regularly mailed letter or a fax as opposed to e-mail) and urge them to OPPOSE H.R. 1283 — which we’re calling “Homosexualize Our Military Act” — which is mischievously named by liberals as the “Military Readiness Enhancement Act.” This act would impose a pro-homosexuality “non-discrimination” policy on our Armed Forces. In other words, it would radically force a change in ethos in the military to one of approving of homosexuality — including through one-sided “diversity” programs that would undermine servicemembers’ faith and morals (as happens today to people of faith in major corporations implementing pro-homosexual ”sexual orientation” agendas).
Also oppose all efforts by the President to advance his misguided agenda of homosexualizing our military non-legislatively (i.e., by various executive actions). Already, military leaders are laying the groundwork for a plan to gradually open up the military to homosexuality — the Washington Post reports. Obama must NOT autocratically launch this revolutionary change to our Armed Forces without legislative action and oversight.
Contributor's website: http://www.genelalor.com/
Content posted by users from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use and each author is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or its owner.
Leave a Reply
Loading ...Recommended Reading:
