[Vigilanteman]

Correct. And even if we accept at face value the study claims that only 16% or so of the military are so opposed to homosexuals in the military that they would consider leaving, I have yet to hear even the most ardent advocates explain how they expect to replace this 16% from the 2-3% of the population which is homosexual.

In business, it is generally not considered good practice to drive away 16% of your best workers in order to attract 2-3% of those of unknown quality.

[onyx]

You’ve both made excellent, valid points and I am at a loss to explain the drive that’s pushing some military poo-bah’s to get in the forefront of this unconsionable change in our military, which is NOT supposed to be about social experiments.

Are Mullins, Gates and the CG admiral brown nosers or closeted homosexuals themselves? Mullins smugly told McCain and others he knew of homosexuals he severed with -— how wonderful! - and that they were mighty fine sailors -— again, how wonderful!

What are the our brave troops to do in the line of fire when they’re serving with homosexuals all bloodied-up and he is HIV positive? Or are the Armed Forces supposed to incur more expense by testing the blood of the homosexuals once a month “against their CIVIL rights”?