“Hopefully he is the first of many who resign their commission rather than order his men to attend indoctrination classes to accept homosexuality.”
It is a conundrum. If all the moral people resign, then only the immoral or amoral will be left. A group of armed persons without morality to keep them in check is nothing more than a rabble...it isn’t an army.
What is a better idea is to lobby the incoming House to push legislation that forbids indoctrination over the homosexual issue. Also, legislation that will not allow homosexuals in the military to be considered a “class” of person that requires special protection. Don’t ever allow homosexuals to claim EEO protections.
OR give anyone with moral objections to homosexuality EEO protections as a class that protects them from “indoctrination” classes and reprissal for their beliefs. That would really stir up the liberals.
Anyway...surrendering the military to the immoral/amoral is not really a viable option. They will just lower the standards for soldiers more to fill recruiting goals. And the people will then have to fear those in uniform.
Also, if all the GOP controlled states (legislature & governor) would pass legislation refussing to allow homosexuals to serve in their national guard units...and stick to it as a State Right and ignore the courts.
Then it would take a big chunk of the total Army out of control of the POTUS. The modern Army relies heavily upon the NG to fill out gaps in combat operations. If governors/legislators held fast...it would create such a stir that the SECDEF could NEVER certify that DADT repeal was going OK. This country is very dependent on the ARNG. If just one major state like Texas was to do this...it would cripple the effort to homosexualize the military.
The National Guard is VERY political where the governor of the state can control who are the senior officers in his state units. By purging his state guard of any senior officer that wasn’t conservative and loyal to conservative principles first, then such a move by states would be possible. An attempt to federalize a state Guard by the POTUS will not work if the senior officers in that state guard refuse to comply....owing first allegiance to the governor. When I was commissioned in the national guard, my original commission came from the governor of the state. Later I received “federal” recognition. I’m not ARGN anymore. So, I cannot came first loyalty to a governor of a state.
These are pretty desparate measures. The question is, are they called for? Also, can they be accomplished? For that matter, should they even if possible?