I’m most interested in the military’s policy (currently) regarding those infected with HIV who are deployed- does it change? Will the soldiers deployed with the HIV virus, but not sick, be required to inform other soldiers deployed with them?
Soldiers living in the, necessarily, tight situation of the barracks, sharing a “head”- will they be allowed to know the HIV status of those who engage in aberant behaviors? How about those seving on ships? submarines?
WHAT are the rights of soldiers and sailors who are NOT gay? How about their families?
“DADT” was a stupid idea...a very “clinton” idea. But THIS one is a whole lot dumber. When one chooses a twisted lifestyle, then they should also accept the consequences.
They are achieving success with the military. Mark this: the traditional and evangelical churches are next.
I don’t know about other branches, but the Army will not deploy a soldier who is HIV positive. Simply being HIV positive is not a reason (by itself) for discharge, either IIRC. So we have soldiers who won’t be deployed while other soldiers deploy over and over.
The disease risks alone—given that ALL research shows the inescapable massive promiscuity of homosexual males—should disqualify homosexuals from service.
Not to mention the fact that ONLY after physical threats and intimidation did the American Psychological Association remove homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses.
Active homosexuals are both sexually perverted and mentally ill, not to mention immoral, and besides this pose a direct health threat to any and all around them in combat situations.
Will the soldiers deployed with the HIV virus, but not sick, be required to inform other soldiers deployed with them?
Soldiers living in the, necessarily, tight situation of the barracks, sharing a “head”- will they be allowed to know the HIV status of those who engage in aberant behaviors? How about those seving on ships? submarines?
That would be "no" on both counts:
http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/summary/index.html