Don’t rip my head off here, but isn’t it true that DADT has allowed gays to serve in the military all along? Won’t the difference now be the extent to which conduct that might have previously been limited becomes acceptable?
I don’t like it but I’m not seeing Armageddon on the horizon either. For those who do, please explain what is going to be so different going forward. And why the surveys I’ve heard about indicate the troops aren’t as vehemently against this as some of US are.
Thanks.
Please see musicman’s post 161.
No doubt gays have always served, but the behavior itself was never sanctioned, that’s the difference. Now gays will be able to flaunt it without fear of retribution.
For a majority of those here at Free Republic, this is not only a military matter, but a spiritual matter. Armageddon is coming, we just hoped our nation wasn’t going to be on the wrong side of that judgment of God. Legalizing an abomination to God, is participation in God’s eyes, and our openly stating NO is our affirmation that what is evil and destructive in God’s eyes, is evil and destructive in our eyes. Not too long ago I would be rending my coat and throwing dust onto my head. Right now, I am in mourning, again, over the outright destruction of the principles upon which this once great nation was built. The foundation is not cracking, it is being annihilated.
There have always been homos in the military.
I recently traveled to reconnect with an old Navy buddy and he confessed to being homo. We were close friends back in the day. And, he was a good sailor.
He supports DADT and is opposed to the repeal. He believes it's too disruptive and will lead to separate quarters for homos just like separate quarters for women today.
Those who believe this will destroy military effectiveness probably have not served. Everyone who has served knows there are homosexuals in the military, always have been, and most are just as good of fighters as the heterosexuals.
Who would encourage their 18 year old son to live, sleep, and shower, with men who are openly perverts who practice anal sex? Who in their right mind would put a young man with a now uninhibited homosexual, (who btw, admittedly prefer very young boys for obvious reasons).
And if that young man objects advances? Says the wrong thing? The Congress has stated they now need “special training” for the military...ie, special disciplinary rules for those who may commit a “hate crime”.
And there will be “special medical” needs, (as the Homosexuals in Canada are now asking for.)
No parent should allow or encourage a teenage son to serve now.
Yes- gays have been allowed to serve- as long as they weren’t overt, in-your-face and basically stayed in the closet.
The problems are myriad in my view. Let’s imagine base housing, shall we? Husbands and wives, families etc. live in communities on or around the military bases. NOW- you will have them mixing with lesbian and gay “couples” who are also living in base housing. What rights do heterosexual couples now have NOT to have their kids exposed to this “alternate lifestyle”? None.
This is going to have an enormous effect on the culture of the entire country- not just the military. Watch and see.
Meanwhile- the UCMJ does not look kindly on sodomy. I wonder what will become of that law?
This will change many of the assumptions we’ve made about life in America.