Obama Wants Openly Gay Military

For a very long time the United States armed forces had a rule that made it illegal for gay people to serve in the military. Homosexuality was deemed incompatible with military life. When Clinton became President he tried to change that to appease the homo crowd who he had pandered to but the best he could do was get don’t ask, don’t tell passed. Now, B. Hussein Obama wants to end DADT and make it OK for openly gay people to serve. To Obama, since England and Israel do it that way, it is fine. I love the way that liberals say we should do something because some other country does it but let’s give Hussein this one and say that additionally, Israel requires service in the military from everyone when they graduate high school. It is compulsory service so if we should follow Israel’s lead, we need to start making EVERYONE serve in the armed forces.

There area number of reasons that homosexuals should not be serving in the military, though to be honest, in a firefight I would not give a hoot in hell. However, there are more negatives than positives in this issue and the military has to look out for national defense first and foremost. Allowing homosexuals in would be another problem and cause other issues that would take away from the mission of the military. It is not the job of the armed forces to have equality and fairness. Fat people are not allowed, those with poor sight, those with other conditions are not allowed. The military has decided that homosexuality is incompatible with military life and that is how it should stand.

Hussein Obama should also be careful what he asks for because of the unintended consequences. Let us suppose that Obama wins the presidency and has a majority Congress and gets this passed. The recruitment of soldiers would go way, way down. Then Obama would be forced to implement a draft in order to provide national defense, something he claims to have a grasp on. You see, the majority of our enlistees come from the mid west and the south. These areas are full of the Christian right, people who believe homosexuality is an abomination. The liberal elitists in New England and the west coast regions have much fewer people enlisting than does the south and mid west. If Hussein Obama allows gays to openly serve a bunch of people who are in will leave at the end of their hitch and those who thought about joining would skip it. This would mean Obama would have to institute the draft.

I realize that he said that he would bring the troops home so people might not feel any need to have a strong, full strength military. They might feel that way until the next natural disaster comes and there are no guard soldiers to assist or the next attack comes and we do not have the troops to deploy. No, B. Hussein will have to force people to serve, unless of course, his plan is to weaken the military to make it easier for Muslims to take control.

Why is it that Democrats who have never served in the military feel free to use the military for their social experiments?

Military phrases we will have to be careful with if Hussein gets his way:
Is your chute packed?
Go get your sh*t packed.
I’m locked, cocked, and ready to rock.
Who is the rear Admiral?
I only want to see asses and elbows.
Where did you get your training son? Fort Dix, sir.

Big Dog



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

36 Responses to “Obama Wants Openly Gay Military”

  1. Bosun says:

    Bigdog,

    Thanks for the excellent commentary. I posted it to my sites and also cross posted it to Hannity Forum.

    Take care, my fried.

    Respectfully,
    Bosun

  2. Tom says:

    This is great and honorable. I am glad we have such “macho men” who wish to go die for the rights of all citizens (inlcuding gays).
    So I thank you for not wanting gays in the military.
    That works for me.

  3. Big Dog says:

    No problem Tom. No one wants you to break a nail or anything…

  4. We should probably exclude stupid people from the military too….

    Back when THE BIG DOG was in the military driving a truck – or uh – doing whatever it is he was doing – I wonder if his superiors ever said:
    Wow. That’s the dumbest fu*k in the history of the army.
    By the way, he’s now sporting a picture of a no…

  5. Land on Cox says:

    The problem is that there is not warrant as to why homosexuality is incompatible with the military code; it’s arbitrary discrimination.

    You say that if DADT were overturned, enlistment would go down; however, what evidence do you have for this? Just an essentialist generalization that people from the Midwest and South are intolerant. However, the problem isn’t just that DADT denies gays from enlisting, but also the discharges that occur because of it.

    On average, about 2 people a day are discharged, with 742 discharges on grounds of violating DADT in 2005, an increase from 668 in 2004. In another twist of irony, while the Pentagon admits that it is having increasing trouble meeting its recruitment goals, they estimate that an additional 41,000 gays and lesbians would enlist if DADT were repealed, in addition to the service men and women they could recall . The General Accounting Office estimates that it costs taxpayers $200 million dollars a year to recruit replacement officers for the ones that are discharged; however heterosexism seems to have superseded rationality. However, there are far more important reasons to overturn DADT than purely a numbers game. DADT itself is gutting our military, and overturning the ban would solve our current recruitment crisis and therefore eliminate the current threat of overstretch of our armed forces. While fighting two overseas wars, plus maintaining a military influence across the globe, we cannot sustain continued losses any more than we have to on the battlefield. A sustained overstretch of United States armed forces would signal weakness that would invite regional conflict to challenge our dominance and hegemony; the visible overextension of our forces has the potential to significantly weaken our ability to deter and respond to international conflicts in the Middle East and various hotspots of animosity. If the Army were ordered to respond to a crisis today, it would be to deploy troops whose readiness is far below what operations require, resulting in a disastrous military campaign.

    However, overstretch isn’t the only crisis facing the readiness of our military today. DADT causes paranoia of expression and suppression of sexuality that increases disease outbreak specifically in closeted homosexuals ; suppressing of emotions triggers the flight-or-fight response by triggering the Sympathetic Nervous System (SNS) which, when overused chronically suppresses immune system functions in a number of ways. The SNS secretes neurotransmitters and hormones into the bloodstream which, overtime, have an adverse effect on the immune system; one of such hormones is cortisol, which eventually halts the formation of lymphocytes, as well as rendering existing lymphocytes useless. These lymphocytes are key to stopping the spread of infections, and without them disease runs rampant. This immunosuppression turns otherwise mild infections into disease episodes, a costly risk for any soldier. Obviously, diseases have an adverse effect on the readiness of our troops, which magnified by the current overstretch of US forces only sets up the stage for a collapse of US hegemony. Some may question the importance of a unipolar world dominated by a single super power in the wake of increasing trends such as globalization, but a world in which the United States exercises its hegemony has tremendous advantages; other nations are more inclined to accept American values, thus facilitating cooperation on various issues such as nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony, and the events that could preclude a global nuclear exchange. Since the military is the most visible sign of our hard hegemonic strength, then a well-equipped and ready military is essential to strong US leadership around the world. Our cooperation with other nation’s militaries is also uniquely threatened by sustaining DADT; all of our NATO allies outside of Turkey have removed restrictions on homosexuals serving in the armed forces. Going into a situation that requires international cooperation with a homophobic schism in the midst of combat guts internal cohesion of individual military units. If the argument that the world is shrinking and globalization is on the rise is true, then this type of international cooperation is absolutely essential to rapid response and containment of regional conflicts worldwide.

    I urge you to think rationally instead of thinking with bigoted notions of what makes a real soldier.

  6. Big Dog says:

    Interestingly, I think with bigoted notions because I do not agree with a lifestyle that is not in line with my religious beliefs but you are not a bigot for insisting that I ignore my religion and accept that lifestyle.

    The military also discharges (or prosecutes) for adultery, writing bad checks and many other items that are against the law. The military should be allowed to decide if it wants to allow openly gay people to serve.

    BTW, if a person is overweight they may not serve. I don’t see a bunch of fat people complaining about that discrimination…

  7. Land on Cox says:

    The military is a public institution and transcends your personal belief system. It is not to be dominated or influenced by religion. Stop trying to legislate your morality onto the nation; you’re forcing discrimination onto the public, where as we’re forcing equality. The reasons why your forcing of opinion is far worse are many; the fact that it’s illegal to discriminate, that your views are based entirely upon a religious point of view and therefore entangle the government excessively with a certain religious view point, etc. I’m not forcing you to change your view point; you can still think gays are going to burn in hell for all eternity, but you can’t legislate that view point into public policy. I’m not being intolerant of your religious beliefs, I’m merely asking you to not force those beliefs on the rest of the country.

    The military my prosecute for actions that are against the law, but being gay isn’t a crime, so that point is void.

    The reason overweight people aren’t allowed to serve is because it interferes with their job performance; your sexual orientation has no effect on your physical or mental capabilities that enlistment requires.

  8. Big Dog says:

    Homosexual activity IS against the Uniform Code of Military Justice and that is LAW. There is no rule that says there has to be equality if the organization feels that there is some detriment. What next, blind fighter pilots just so we do not discriminate.

    I know many people who are over the military weight limit who can max the Army PT test but they are not fit??

    The military has standards and until those standards are changed then the law is the law. I also am not trying to legislate my morality into the nation. In case you are unaware, morality has been legislated for a long time and our laws have Christian beliefs built in.

    As far as being able to say who can and cannot be part of something, perhaps we can end the Congressional black or Hispanic caucus before we worry about the military allowing openly gay members.

    The problem is, you don’t like the law. Fine, work to change it and people can work against changing it. But quit whining because gays are not allowed to serve. It is the law.

    I don’t like abortion but it is the law. I can work to change it but until it is changed, it is the law.

    I have served and will not have to go back but since we have no draft people are free to decide if openly gay people is a reason for them NOT to serve.

  9. Land on Cox says:

    Too bad that 10 U.S.C, 654 and Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice constitute violations of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and the Constitution of the United States supersedes the UCMJ as it is the Supreme Law of the Land.

    There is no detriment to having gays in the military; other countries prove this example. With the military not meeting its enlistment quotas and discharging multiple people per day (many of which are translators essential to the war on terrorism), plus the detrimental aspects that living in the closet has on your nervous system, there seems to be no reason to not allow gays to openly serve in the military other than a discriminatory view point that has no rational basis. Blind fighter pilots have an actual detriment because they cannot fulfill their duties; gays are fully capable to do what the military requires.

    An alternative reason to reject people that are over the weight limit but can pass the physical requirements is that in combat, if they are shot down it would be an incredible burden for the rest of the team to attempt to save them, putting the whole squadron at risk.

    Morality and ethics are two clearly different things. We have always tried to legislate things that are basic ethical principles (like killing and stealing are wrong); just because Christianity has those principles doesn’t mean that they are uniquely Christian values. These things are not just ethical principles that most people, regardless of religious affiliation, would find to be reasonable, but are also common to pretty much every religion out there. Just because we have ethical views that are similar to Christian morals doesn’t mean we automatically give credence to all Christian beliefs.

    We’re whining because the law itself is illegal; the Supreme Court just refuses to take the case up because they defer to the military and the executive.

  10. holly says:

    Look this is really rude of u. every one should be able to defend their country if they r well enoph to. Homosexuals are no better /no worse than u or any one else no matter what we r all people. who r u to judge? I can not help but feel sorry for u. Why must people be rude. there is nothing wrong with being gay

  11. Rich Wright says:

    I think we should all remember something very important…once a Muslim, always a Muslim. This ignorant country is about to select a “hard line” influenced and educated Muslim to the Democratic party. Having gays in the military will be the least of our nation’s concerns once this heretical and putridly “patriotic” man takes the oath…oh, by the way, on the Koran!

  12. cole says:

    Look at it this way if gays were to join openly the only thing that would be different is you would see people for what they really are. No more hiding for any one. People could see how people really are. More people would see that gay people are just like every one else. We can do our jobs and serve the U.S.A just like straight people. Just take me for example I been in the military for a little while now and not just the military but one of the hardest branches “The United States Marine Corps”
    and believe me if a gay person can make it throw the Marine Corps boot camp they have earned the right to carry the tittle they worked so hard for. And because you are saying being openly gay in the military is agents the UCMJ so are allot of other things like sodomy but military personal do it gay and straight alike. But that does not get punished because people in the military are getting smarter and are realizing that some things in the UCMJ has no reason at all, because they do not affect our job, performances, or ability to save lives in combat. And not to mention it does not put fellow service members lives in danger.

  13. tt says:

    There are 65,000 gay and lesbian servicemembers in uniform right now. If thier homosexuality was a detrement to thier performance it would have made itself plain by now. What is a detrement to there performance is lying to some of thier friends and telling the truth to others which in turn have to lie to others it is not the right way. Honesty and judgement on performance only should be the policy of any orginization of proffessionals especially our countries defenders.

  14. Dustin says:

    ummm… are you retarded?

  15. Big Dog says:

    No. People who are retarded start their sentences with “ummm”.

  16. Common Sense says:

    No one chooses to be gay. No one. So when a person signs on to serve their country and is made to swear an oath to not lie, yet not to tell the truth thanks to DADT, you tell me who is at fault. That person, or the system forces them to hide who they are.

    I do not believe that our sexual predispositions define who we are, or that they have any bearing on a soldier’s performance in the military. Instead it is our choices that define us. I chose to be a soldier. Therefore, I am first and foremost a soldier in the United States Military, not a homosexual. Being homosexual means nothing more than you happen to like members of the same sex.
    As for the men and women in the military who believe that homosexuality is an abomination and simply don’t want gays serving side by side with them – Buck up. You are in the U.S. Military. Leave your personal biases behind and do the job you signed on to do.

  17. tad says:

    i agree completely.
    i dont want some f*g watching my back

  18. Corey Lynxx says:

    The problem really isn’t gay people themselves, the REAL problem is prejudiced. Just grow up and get over it. Gay people are strong enough to be in the military just like anyone else who is fit to serve. Don’t ask don’t tell actually creates a homophobic environment because nobody can actually say that they are gay so it makes the recruits paranoid because they are always asking themselves, “who’s gay, Omg where?” Also, superior commanders are often times very homophobic and purposly single out new recruits that they suspect are gay and call them names like fag and poke fun at their supposed homosexuality. Then guess what happens? The younger 18-19 year old recruits follow their superior’s lead and join in on the anti-gay assault constantly tormenting the gay soldier and sometimes assault them. In a few instances this has lead to brutal murders. I think that don’t ask don’t tell should be repealed and soldiers who harass, threaten or assault gay, lesbian soldiers should be given a stiff punishment for disrupting things. They are basically putting America at risk by hating on their fellow soldiers like that. Like I said It’s time to get over it and grow a pair men. if you are strong enough to get through basic training then you should be strong/mature enough to serve alongside an openly gay person without bullying them, calling them names, giving death threats etc etc. The only good side to this is I personally believe that the fear of letting gay and lesbian people in is keeping us from a draft.

  19. Big Dog says:

    Corey, you are full of crap. People are not being murdered for being gay and quite frankly, commanders have more important issues than “wondering” who is gay.

    People in the military do not go around wondering who is gay. The policy is if you are caught in a homosexual act you will be discharged. So don’t kiss other guys in public and you should be OK.

    The only talk about a draft by politicians has ALL been from Democrats. So if you get drafted it will be because some Democrat made it so. BTW, a draft does not stop the law. It would still be don’t ask don’t tell.

    I want to know, if they allow openly gay people in the military who will they shower with. You see, I think it is wrong to allow people who are sexually attracted to men to shower with men. I am sexually attracted to women and they do not let me shower with them.

    I don’t want to hear the argument that a gay man is not attracted to all other men because I am not attracted to all other women but they still won’t let me shower with them.

    **Shower with = in a large shower like a locker room, not in a single shower, for those who might not know.

  20. Taylor says:

    I fully agree with what your saying Big Dog ALL OF IT the military isn’t the place for interior design and pretty flowers you can call my sterotypical but that is openly gay like it or not I am in college now and plan to commission into the Army as an officer once im out but I will NOT if they can too.  Women aren’t allowded into combat positions so why not them too they can have a desk job for all I care but I don’t want to have to worry if hes got my back or is more worried about not geting his uniform dirty. 

  21. Mark says:

    Taylor You are so right:
    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20070228_gay_iraq_veteran_demands_rights/

    Eric Alva, a gay soldier was the first injury in the Iraq War combat. He lost both of his legs. Huge sacrifice for his country, and he is gay.
    You have ideas that all gays are out there picking out flower patterns or something. Plenty of gay people are ALREADY in the military 23% of Military personnel already know a person who is gay in their unit.
    The British Military, and Israeli miltary have openly gay soliders, and we work in joint command operations with British and NATO ally militaries in Iraq– all NATO countries allow gays to serve openly.
    50 Generals have already come out, among them William Cohen and Shishkievelli stating that DADT must end.
    As for his religious beliefs? So WHAT? The military isn’t the place for you to be legislating your religion. Love God, beat your bible, but work is work, and fighting is fighting, it has nothing to do with Jesus or what you think about peoples sexuality. You do your job. And he stated that the it is against the UCMJ to have gay sex, therefore it is wrong and should remain so. Well, when the UCMJ is changed by an act of congress, it won’t be wrong, and your argument wont hold water.
    As for the unit effectiveness issue, please take note: Every NATO ally and ISrael have removed the ban on gays, and not one country experienced unit cohesion problems. You people are like the same types who were against desegregating the military– once it happens, you will shut your pie holes and get over it. Grow up it is 2008– not 1958.

  22. Mark says:

    The seismic shift in military opinion supporting gays serving openly has paralleled the shift among the general public. According to the Post poll, 75 percent of Americans support gays serving openly today, up from 44 percent in 1993. Significant majorities of evangelicals (57 percent), Catholics (82 percent) and conservatives (64 percent) support gays serving openly.

    In 2000, America’s strongest military ally, Great Britain, lifted its ban on gays in the military without incident, joining 23 other nations that have lifted their bans, including one of the most combat-tested militaries in the world — Israel’s.

    The 2006 and 2007 Pentagon data released Monday show for the first time the number of dispensations issued for specific felonies. The number of army waivers for aggravated assaults with a dangerous weapon rose to 43 from 33. Waivers for burglaries increased to 106 from 36. Waivers for possession of narcotics, excluding marijuana, rose to 130 from 71 and for larceny to 56 from 26.

    In the Marine Corps, waivers for burglary convictions rose to 142 from 90, while those for aggravated assault increased to 44 from 35.

    The army also listed a handful of felony waivers granted for kidnapping, making terroristic threats, rape or sexual abuse, and indecent acts or liberties with a child.” Yet heaven forbid we let gays in openly, we could after all accept less rapists and criminals if we allowed gays to remain!

  23. Big Dog says:

    Homosexuality is immoral and since it is immoral it should not be allowed in the military or anywhere else.

    Personally I don’t care what people do in their own homes but the military is not the place for social experiments.

    I would be against allowing child molesters or pedophiles to serve as well because they too are immoral.

    Yes NATO countries have removed the ban and they all require the help of the US to get anything done.

    Let me be your father for a minute, if they all jumped off a bridge would you jump off too?

  24. Mark says:

    About the showering? You really need to get over yourself. Gay guys already shower with straight guys in locker rooms across the country. In gyms etc. And it is a idiosynchratic element of the same sex thing that gays will shower– and do- with straights. If you don’t like that, you should be able to shower on your own (the Israelis allow that). If ANY harassment takes place, from a gay guy, there is ALREADY firm sexual harassment rules that could be implemented to remedy that, and discipline the guy quickly.
    Something tells me this has more to do with your homophobia and erratic fears than any actual threat or problem. Like I said, in gym locker rooms all across this country gay guys and straights shower together, and in my life I have never witnessed any harassment or problems with such a situation.

  25. Big Dog says:

    No Mark, I am not homophobic and I have a few homosexual friends, some of whom were in the military and no I never told.

    The issue is about principle. If Gays are allowed to shower in the same place as the kind of people they would be sexually attracted to (not necessarily are) then I should be allowed to shower with people I might be sexually attracted to but not necessarily am (ie: women).

    I have spent enough time in the service to know that if any harassment took place it would be handled long before it ever got to the sexual harassment complaint process. Only problem is the guy would claim he was beaten up for being gay not because he did something wrong.

    In any event, you are entitled to your opinion and I mine. If they change the rules then the military and the people serving will have to decide if the issue is important to them. If people stay in and don’t care then fine. If they leave the service because they don’t like it then that is fine as well.

    I am retired and do not have to worry about it.

  26. USMC Grunt says:

    Gays in the military? Women are allowed to serve in the military. Personally, in a combat unit, I dont have a problem with homosexuals, there were some in my company, but it might cause some internal problems. Fat people, bad eye sight, writing checks. Lets look at that. Overweight means they probably cant meet the mandatory physical goals, bad eye sight means the cat cant shoot correctly or identify neccessary flags, and writing bad checks is a crime and is a sign of dishonesty. Those reasons are justifiable for discharing someone.

    Showers? In the Isreaeli army they allow homosexuals to shower alone if they so desire. There, problems done. I was at boot camp, we were always rushed yes but there was definitly time for some extra showers. or dare I say, have homosexual showers?

    You cant say oh gay guys will hit on me. How do you think females feel? or guys who have gotten advances from women they did not want? The male perspective of being the alpha male would probably come into play here “Well he will think Im hot and rape me.” Do women think that? Physically males are usually stronger than females, but women dont live thier lives fearing men. Why? Because they are intelligent beings.

    Personally, I think gays in the military would be a good thing (not in infantry or combat units). Homosexuals could help our stretched military back on its feet and be a good test of the military’s ability to accept others. Hell, if the military cant accept and tolerate its own people, how can the modern grunt get past racism and intolerance and try to respect foreigners.

  27. Big Dog says:

    USMC, I understand your points and appreciate your views. let me clear something up. You equate bad eyesight or overweight and fitness levels to homosexuality. One is behavior, the others are not. We can correct eyesight and if the vision cannot be corrected we exclude from service. We can force overweight people to lose weight or discharge them and we can make people get fit or do the same.

    Though i would argue that fitness and weight are not great indicators in any event. Women have to do fewer items on a PFT to pass than men do. A woman can score higher than a man and have done less of every event. Does her higher score mean she is more physically fit? He can probably carry more weight and do more physical work but she has the higher score.

    Women are allowed more body fat than men are. That means a man with the same amount of body fat as a woman will be overweight. Is he in worse shape than she when it comes to doing the job? He might even look better because of the differences in physiology. In Gulf I there were soldiers awaiting discharge for being overweight because overweight soldiers are not fit to fight. When the war broke out they were sent to the Gulf. Is the standard worth something if we change it?

    Want to take the stress off the military? Make the ILLEGALS serve. If they serve honorably, make them citizens. Do not let them decide, if they get caught here they go fight. If they do well we reward them with citizenship. How many millions of people would that put in the military?

  28. USMC Grunt says:

    I get what you mean. Maybe the government should make a misfit branch of the military, immigrants, homosexuals, criminals, etc could fit in there. I think that would workout quite nice, hell the french have a foreign legion that used to be made up of mostly criminals.

  29. Big Dog says:

    Grunt,
    I thought the government had a misfit branch of the military, the Air Force…. LOL

    Just poking fun at the Air Force.

  30. TJ says:

    Thanks BigDog. I had no idea that BO wanted openly gay men and women in the armed forces. That was the deciding point. I serve in the AF. I remember after 7 weeks of basic all the guys were ready to get to “business”. If you know what i mean. So when i heard what obama wanted, that was the first thing i thought about. How “close” everybody is in basic. It could be a very bad idea. If he wants to do that then men and women should be able to train together in basic as well!

  31. navysailor says:

    big dog i agree and disagree because im gay and wat i do at home is none of no one else business so i dont think people should be parading around work saying there gay. but the only thing is i could get discharded for wat i do at home so dont no how to decide with obama maybe its good or maybe its bad but gay people are like straight people we no how to control our self i took showers with dudes a boot camp but it dont make me catch a hard on so i guess that gay people should just be perfessonal at work but shouldnt get discharged for wat they do at home

  32. Corey Lynxx says:

    Actually bigdog I am not full of crap. Look up Barry Winchell. He was bludgeoned with a baseball bat because he dated a transexual woman in Nashville. His murder happened in the baracks of Fort Campbell after enduring a long time of anti-gay harassment. They murdered him because he was perceived to be gay. Also Allen Schindler was beat up so bad that his bladder exploded and it was just because he’s gay. Kyle Lawson was recently attacked for being gay and although he narrowly escaped with his life it just proves how ignorant and uninformed you are. I suggest you educate yourself a little bit before questioning me because I pretty much just put you in your place. What do you have to say about that big dawg? lol If there was to be a draft, don’t ask don’t tell would be lifted. Anybody in the military knows this because it would be too easy for just anybody to claim that they are gay to get out of service.

  33. Big Dog says:

    OK Corey,
    I concede that some people broke the law and beat up or murdered gay people in the military. What is the prevalence?

    Don’t act like gays are innocent. They way they are acting since Prop 8 was defeated is no different. They are trying to force their views with violence.

    I bet more guys get murdered in the service for screwing their friend’s wife than for being gay.

    There is not a prevalence of this kind of violence (though I think one is too many) but you mentioned 3 out of millions who serve.

    You are taking a small number and making it into an everyday occurrence.

    I think if we have a draft then people will get in under the rules in place, don’t ask and don’t tell just like they do with people who volunteer.

    If you would lie about being gay just to avoid service then who wants you fighting anyway?

  34. John says:

    IF someone is Homophobic, Racist, etc… they can be discharged from the military (atleast I can say for sure that is the way in the Navy because I am in it). It is conciderd something along the lines of “failure to conform”.

    I personally would like to see the military allow openly gay people. To me its like saying that african americans can’t join because they are black.

  35. Out of Sight Out of Mind says:

    It’s not illegal to be gay in the military. You don’t get prosecuted if you are gay. The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is an administrative one.

    However, the point, I think is, the potential effect that allowing gays to serve openly in the military would have on unit cohesion and ultimately combat effectiveness.

    But, do we really have a constitutional right to serve in our military? I think the right we’re talking about is not to be discriminated against. The reason for the discrimination and what national interest is at stake drives the train here. The military discriminates against women. They cannot be part of an infantry unit because they simply cannot do the same things a man can do.

    I’m sure gay people can make it through boot camp, do push ups, shoot, and even kill in defense of our country if need be. But allowing people to be gay openly will have an all around negative effect on the military that will eventually trickle down to the infantry units.

    Regarding racial integration of the military. Being black is clearly something you cannot choose or change. The debate is still open with regard to homosexuality. I think that is one reason that the argument that history has proven that blacks can serve alongside their white counterparts does not apply as well to openly gay. The dynamics of being openly gay in the American military society is quite different.

    I think the pertinent question in making this determination is whether the folks in the military want this change. Sure, we serve the people of this great nation, and we don’t set the rules. However, historically, the primary consideration when it comes to changing things about the military, whether it be the Supreme Court or Congress or the President, has been how it would affect our national security. Our leaders have always placed great weight on this factor, and they still should.

    6) Question: Of those of you who would say they would like to have an openly gay military. How many of you have actually served in the military, and also served in a combat unit – an infantry unit -a trigger pulling unit? That is the backbone of our military. That is why we have a military – so we can fight.

    That is also the part of our military that is comprised of largely southern and midwest Bible belt males ages 17-24. Do you think we should make the military a forum for a social experiment like this during a time of war because some people feel that gays should not be discriminated against?

    I heard somewhere that 65,000 gays are currently serving in our armed forces. That isn’t proof of anything. If we had 65,000 openly gay folks serving in our military, then that would be different. We cannot do this because other countries do it. We are an all voluntary force. (Countries like Israel, given their situation, understandably requires its citizens, both male and female, to serve).

    We cannot do it because some idealistic and naive people want it to happen just for the sake of equality.

    The military, its lifestyle and all the values espoused and embraced within, its rigid rules and requirements – all revolve around good order and discipline and combat effectiveness. It and its values is not a mirror image of the society it protects. It cannot be completely. Please do not try to make it. Trying to force it, especially in current times will only weaken what is still the greatest military power in the world that protects the greatest nation.

    I imagine that there will be a right time for gays to serve openly in the military. It, however, is not now.

    Does that make those who think gays should not openly serve bad people or anti-gay? Most certainly not. Does it make those who believe so unprogressive and short sighted and rough? Perhaps, there is a little bit of truth to that. But as I said before, the military is not and should not be a ground for social experimentation. If that makes for a force that is comprised of folks who are a little slower to come around to a new way of thinking, then so be it.

    “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” Someone famous.