FDRQ need not apply...
Posted on 07/14/2009 2:31:54 PM PDT by areukiddingme1
Imagine if you will, a battle scene where you are a Soldier or Marine and you are engaged in a fire fight outside of some remote village in Iraq or Afghanistan -- A fight for your lives. The loud noises, explosions, falling debris, flying shrapnel, shouting, the military radio crackling with current situation reporting and all of sudden the Soldier or Marine next to you takes a round to the shoulder and his blood is splattered on to you -- You have sustained several non life threatening cuts and scrapes that you are unaware of due to the adrenaline coursing through your veins and at the time, you would be more concerned with getting your fellow Soldier or Marine to aid as quickly as possible and then returning to the fight and you wouldn't give your minor cuts and scrapes or his blood being splattered on you a second thought.
What if you were on board a Navy ship, similar scenario, an explosion in the small arms locker rips through several bulkheads and three Sailor's are laying on the deck critically injured and bleeding heavily, you happened to be nearby and immediately jump in to administer first aid. However, in the process of administering first aid you received a cut on your hand or arm and you managed to get the blood of all three Sailor's on you and also in the process of administering first aid you manage to get the blood of all three of the Sailor's on each them, thus, cross contaminating each of the Sailors with the others blood.
Now, imagine, its six months later, everyone has recovered or partially recovered and you are diagnosed with HIV/AIDS -- How do you feel about gay's serving in the military now.
The enemy just multiplied its killed or wounded ratio 2 to 1 -- Not a bad day's work if you are the enemy.
What if you were married, with children -- You have possibly unknowingly infected your wife. Your children, because you chose to serve our nation, honorably, and faithfully and because you were in firefight or administered first aid and came into contact with an infected openly gay service member -- You are now infected with HIV/AIDS and your children will get the privilege of watching their parents both die of a disease that didn't involve them or their lifestyle.
According to statistics by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 1,009,219 reported AIDS (not just HIV - full blown AIDS cases, when you include HIV the number jumps to well over 2M) cases reported in 2007. 80% of those AIDS cases were in males. 66% of those cases all involved "admitted" male-to male sexual contact (when you factor in the males that do not admit to male-to male sexual contact and engage in male-to male sexual contact the number is closer to 76%).
This life altering, life ending disease is known to pass from human to human through the exchange of bodily fluid -- Predominately through male-to male sexual contact. You almost have to be completely ignorant and/or uncaring or both to subject the military to something that you already know is a problem and yet, our wonderful politicians, in their galactic stupidity are willing to trade off prevention for political correctness -- Brilliant! Just Brilliant!
However, in the scenarios that I have presented to you, if you were the Soldier, Sailor, or Marine that was infected with HIV/AIDS through no fault of your own, but in fact only through being a Patriotic American serving your nation, and in the course of serving your nation you became infected by a life threatening disease -- An infection that could have been prevented, how would you feel about your country then? How would you feel about gays serving openly in the military then? Still think it would be a great idea?
Why?
Because someone made a campaign promise. Simply put, your life, because you have chosen to serve your nation is now being placed at an even higher level of risk of infection by HIV/AIDS by serving with openly gay service members -- Just because someone made a campaign promise.
And, if things weren't difficult enough already for the men and women in our military, they would now have to contend with gays openly serving in the military. So, now in addition to the run of the mill traditional issues senior non-commissioned officers (SNCO's) have to deal with on a day to day basis, we will now effectively double the amount of "issues" that they are going to have to deal with, whereas before they were simply trying to keep young Adam and Eve stuff from spilling over into the unit -- Now, these SNCO's are going to have deal with Adam and Steve's stuff too. Oh boy, I know what this recipe bakes...disaster.
Unless what the left is thinking, by allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the military that they would force the DoD to target college graduates and effectively start stacking the Officer corps with gays in an effort to undermine military authority in five or 10 or 15 years when these people are moving into more senior ranks...But, that is a topic for a totally separate article. Something worthy of curious thought and discussion though.
Aren't the lives of our most exquisite all volunteer service worth more to the American people than just a simple campaign promise?
The one question that people are not asking is; How will allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the Armed Forces improve readiness, combat ability, and our ability to carry the fight to the enemy. I can answer that question -- It won't. Nothing will improve. We will not become a greater fighting force because we allow a few thousand homosexuals to serve openly in the military -- Period!
Net result, two steps back for the American fighting man and woman. And the beginning slide back down the slippery slope to the hollow force of the 70's, with rampant drug use, and alcoholism. (Hum, seems to be a theme with this administration -- return to the 70's).
In fact, I can answer the earlier question with an affirmative, it will only get worse. Homosexuality is not like/nor has the argument ever been similar to allowing African Americans to serve in the military and therefore the lefts assertion that this is somehow a civil rights issue is completely bogus.
"Homosexuality is not benign like skin color," to quote former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Colin Powell during a Q & A session at the U.S. Naval Academy during his address as part of the Forrestal Lecture series in late 1992 or early 1993. Homosexuality carries with it a whole host of inappropriate and immoral behavior that will most definitely hurt unit morale and cohesion and to think otherwise is a bold face lie and a lie that only an ignorant politician would cling to.
General Powell went on to say, that "he felt that homosexuality was immoral and that if someone who had sworn to uphold an oath could and should resign their commission if the military allowed gays to serve openly in the military and that serving with openly gay men and women would be contrary to their core values, beliefs, and principles that that individual should resign." He was very firm in his conviction when he made those comments, comments that I still fully support and defend to this very day.
The second argument that the left seems to cling to is that there a lot of farsi and urdu speaking homosexuals out there and without them, the US is completely incapable of winning the war on terror. If the Department of Defense needs linguists that speak farsi or urdu -- Hire them as a contractor, there, how simple was that.
Serving in the all volunteer military is still a privilege and not a right. Simply ask the thousands of fat young men and women that are turned away at the recruiter's office every year or the thousands of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines that are kicked out of the military for not continuing to meet height/weight and physical fitness standards. Not to mention the people with asthma, poor vision, bad hearing, and previous drug addictions that are not allowed to serve.
Serving is simply not a right, there are minimum standards that must be met and adhered to as a condition of enlistment, re-enlistment, and oath. Is the left going to start advocating for fat people to serve openly in the military? Why not? Aren't fat Americans just as important to our country as gay Americans? Where does the military get to draw the line? When does it stop being about politics and start being about what is best for the defense of our nation?
Are we now to believe that because the US allowed gays to serve openly in the military that the statistics related to HIV/AIDS are going miraculously decrease -- are you kidding me -- What about the spreading of the disease because of world wide assignment and shipboard deployments overseas to all the various ports that the Navy visits -- The US, through the "law of unintentional consequences," has just heighten the possibility of every port and every base, town, and village gay service members are going to be/visit that the likelihood of increased numbers of HIV/AIDS cases in the military will go up as well as for the locals in these overseas locations.
Does the US really need that as a legacy -- Being responsible for spreading HIV/AIDS around the world? I would think not. Coincidently, most recently we were eyewitnesses to the administration suggesting to parents that their children should stay at home if they suspected they had come into contact with something as innocuous as H1N1 (the Swine Flu) – That would be known as “prevention.” Yet this administration is willing to go along with the PC crowd to place our Armed Forces at an increased level of risk of contracting HIV/AIDS without batting an eye. Why? Talk about your head in the sand philosophy!
Please, I submit to you -- Let's not endanger our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines any further by forcing still yet another bad policy on them -- They certainly have more than enough to contend with as it is.
BTW, Happy (belated) FRanniversary!
Yes, but if you were active homosexual, you would always be at risk.
VERY good post.
VERY good post.
If you are sexually active, you are at risk.
How often does the military test for such diseases?
The scenario you describe has happened all too frequently in the US military for many years, but not with HIV, with hepatitis.
Hepatitis is in fact the more serious threat, because different types are spread not just by blood contamination, but orally as well. Besides that, the military has to contend on a regular basis with bacterial and viral meningitis outbreaks, severe outbreaks of MRSA, Necrotizing Fasciitis (the “flesh eating” bacteria), and the ever popular, if less lethal Norwalk virus and Influenza.
This is not to justify homosexuals in the military, but among their other problems, HIV transmission is pretty low on the totem pole. The military also tests for it, regularly, and it is grounds for discharge.
bump.
(footnote: remember active homosexuals can not donate blood)
They would have pre-enlistment, boot camp exams, pre- and post-deployment. I am not sure of the frequency, and it would vary by branch of service and length of deployments. But isn’t there a 60 day window before HIV shows up in blood?
You are tested before leaving for basic and again annually on your physical. But as everyone is aware, HIV/AIDS may lay dormant in the body for months or years — Especially in people that are not engaging in unsafe sex.
(footnote: remember active homosexuals can not donate blood)
Thanks, yes, absolutely 100% correct on that — Great point!
That was a wonderful explanation
about how the Gay lifestyle
does not belong
in the military
http://std.about.com/od/overviewofstds/a/incubationper.htm
Depends on what type of test they perform. I doubt they are doing the more expensive DNA variety.
IMO, unless the infection was full blown, the chances of getting HIV/AIDS from a blood splatter would be pretty low but, I’m not a doctor.
I’d test after every leave. These young fellas are not very careful at times.
“chances of getting HIV/AIDS from a blood splatter would be pretty low”
Actually, spit, blood, urine...There are more states now than not that will imprison a person (with HIV/AIDS) who so much as spit on another, have received up to 35 years in prison.
FDRQ need not apply...
One of the better vanities I’ve read here at FR.
Our servicemen deserve better. Much better.
Aren’t gays already allowed in the military? How does letting them serve openly affect this?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.