I see your point, and don't necessarily disagree-but I ask-what if the victim had been female?
"what if the victim had been female?"
That's the whole point...a man with normal sexuality didn't do this. A man who displayed symptoms of same-sex attraction disorder did it.
Normal sexuality, by definition, is not disordered.
SSAD, by definition, is disordered, and disordered people do disordered things.
For one thing, the establishment media would take it and run with it in order to disclose the sorry state of our troops in Iraq, whereas the News Observer, Drudge, and FR are the only places you'll ever read or hear about this incident most likely. Odds are the rest of MSM will never mention this it. Just another case of selective coverage to accomodate an agenda.
I don't think the soldier would have experienced the same type of "guilt" after having sex with a female. Unless caught, then it would be too late.
"I see your point, and don't necessarily disagree-but I ask-what if the victim had been female?"
There wouldn't be much point in shooting a female after consensual sex, worst case would have been a small reprimand for doing the wild thing on duty. Even rape of a female wouldn't have been a life ending move, might have even been overlooked if it weren't too brutal. Nope, this is a gay thing.
The victim was not female. Rapists of females in wars historically have not felt it necessary to kill them. Male partakers of hetero sex dont have the urge to shoot their partners. Homosexuals know they are beyond the pale just by being homosexual and murder addeded to such an act is no big deal.