Posted on 12/30/2010 7:35:01 AM PST by IbJensen
Millions of folks are all aglow now that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy regarding gays in the military has been repealed. While that may be a good thing in some ways, there will be some fallout we can expect, that some folks haven’t thought of. And that won’t be a good thing.
Folks who have read my blogs know that I supported the DADT policy, and thought it should remain. I don’t see straight people walking around announcing they are heterosexual. I don’t see the need for homosexuals to make such announcements. I don’t know how that advances the military. Meanwhile, gays have served proudly.
I have also written that I have no objection with open gays in scores of functions within the military. However, that’s different when it comes to the intimate quarters that prevail such as boot camp. Being an old timer with values that were ingrained during the “Grease” years, I would be uncomfortable sharing sleeping quarters, showers, etc., if I’m aware that my shower partner is gay. I would bet that thousands of straight soldiers today feel the same.
That aside, here’s what we can expect now that gays have a full and open voice in the U.S. armed forces.
1 – Gays in the military, now open and legal, will be empowered to establish minority status organizations within to ensure their rights are not violated, similar to blacks and females.
2 – If anyone says a derogatory word toward or about gays, they may be subjected to court martial for inciting “hate speech.”
3 – If and when a superior, i.e. boot sergeant, screams and hollers at a recruit who he knows is gay, the sergeant may be accused — and even disciplined — of anti-gay behavior. Civil suits are not out of the question.
4 – Will gays who are not promoted for legitimate reason file discrimination complaints and/or suits based solely on their sexuality. Will the Armed Services committees of congress now form statistical studies to ensure gays are being promoted at the same rate of heterosexuals? Will gays get promoted at a faster rate now, to make up for discrimination of the past?
5 – Will an officer’s negative opinion about gays be an impediment to his getting promoted in the future?
6 – What about gay partnership rights? Will they mirror marriage laws that apply to heterosexuals? Does the spouse of a married homosexual get an I.D. card, or qualify for “dependent” status? On base housing entitlements? Health care entitlements? Then again, what would be the definition of a “legal” partner?
7 – Will homosexual Marines be allowed to date each other, hold hands while on duty and on base?
8 – Will homosexual soldiers be assigned to countries where homosexuality is forbidden?
9 – Will gays who are HIV positive be discharged? Could that be a “service connected” illness?
Sure, other countries have openly gay service members serving in their military. But those countries don’t have the U.S. Constitution and it’s wake of liberalized interpretations, which have fostered law suits by the kazillions, especially by minority organizations on constant watch to demand equal rights.
I would suggest the items listed above are but the tip of the proverbial iceberg once this gets under way.
What’s most important now, is adjusting to reality. The law is changing, and people have to change with it.
It was President Bill Clinton, a very liberal Democrat, who first supported the DADT policy which went into effect during his administration. It was a good one, and it worked. It certainly did not mean that he — or any other supporter of the policy — was anti-gay.
I have a wonderful 23 year-old family relative who is bright, beautiful, cheery, exciting, and gay. I love her with all my heart, and she knows that.
But we must be aware of all the consequences of enacting new policies that are not in the best interest of the military armed forces, in general. And if it’s not in the best interest of our military, then it’s not in the best interest of national defense.
Meanwhile, gays have served proudly.
Like the WACs, homosexuals will be allowed certain accouterments that would resemble something out of a Castro Street parade. Many forget that these perverts have become mentally unbalanced. It's no doubt due to the amount of fecal matter they ingest while 'making love.'
With the majority of serial killings being homosexual they're not fit to rub shoulders with polite society let alone jump in a foxhole with a man.
As far as any dedicated homosexual serving with 'pride'in combat, this is something I sincerely doubt. They are an aberration in society that should keep their mouths shut...very difficult for them to do I realize.
Ya! What he said!
10. Will chaplains remain or resign in protest at not being allowed to counsel against sin?
Behaving like a barnyard animal to get her jollies must really make her sweetness shine though, I'm sure.
Fallout? This is gold in the eyes of liberals. Imagine the chops-licking the lawyers are doing at this very minute.
Sgt Harry Berres, USMC
Another wheezelturd editorial trying to get us to enjoy the fudgesicle the 111th gave us for Christmas.
11. Will the repeal of DADT cause a mass exodus from the armed services?
YUP.
Well, the exchanges can start stocking gerbils. There’ll be a run of ‘em now.
YUP.
And that is the dynamic the Left wants. The more they can de-populate the military of its war-fighters and weaken it, the better, in their twisted minds.
Do you have a reference?
A great many (male) serial killers seem to focus on prostitutes, probably because they are vulnerable, but also because they are female.
“”.... Why does a homosexual feel compelled to be a homosexual first, before being a human being....””
Couldn’t agree more. I call it the ‘crotch-centric existence.’
If you define yourself as nothing more than a crotch, I will treat you as nothing more than a crotch.
Now, that’s one remark I don’t get. I have never heardof a lesbian barnyard animal; and as far as I know, barnyard animals’ copulation is reliably reproductive in form.
My apologies to barnyard animals....
I have three sons. Two are of age to begin military careers. I just took an hour or so to explain to them what the problem will be with the repeal of DADT.
I told them NOT to join.
Will members of the military now be required to be tested more often for HIV or other STDs? If so, how many millions of dollars more will this cost the taxpayer?
And since the homosexuals won’t be singled out for more extensive testing (imagine the outcry), I should think ALL members will need to be tested more often. I shudder to think of what might happen if they aren’t-and I bet they WON’T be, even though they SHOULD!
And aren’t members of the military asked, or ordered (??) to give blood in cases of shortages or during any National emergency?
This is sounding worse all the time..!
It is sounding worse all the time, for sure.
re: military giving blood in cases of shortages or during any National emergency... though military members are encouraged to donate blood whenever possible, it’s not mandatory.
I know that is what the left wants, and I personally will get out after my current enlistment is completed. I also know a number of SR enlisted will do the same, and the SR officers don’t care what happens.
That survey quoted about DADT repeal was never given to the enlisted people. We get a link to the annual survey, but there was not a single question about gays. I gave the officers a mid to low score.
I'm doing the same to all the young adults in my family and circle of friends. The military above all... especially the combat specialties... requires a life-on-the-line degree of trust among troops in the field. Repeal of DADT disrupts that... unnecessary loss of American lives will result.
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.