What I want to know is why the gutless Rs in Congress didn’t de-fund this. Why they are silent. Sickening. Expert testimony in Congress told them why homos in the military is extremely destructive.
Ten Reasons to Oppose an “LGBT Law” or Policy for the Military
The Center for Military Readiness ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608259/posts
Senate Testimony: European Militaries Are Not Role Models for U.S.
The Center for Military Readiness ^ | 3/22/2010
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608228/posts
Rates of Homosexual Assault in the Military Are Disproportionately High
FRC ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608306/posts
In Support the 1993 Law Stating that Homosexuals are not Eligible to Serve in the Military
CMR ^ | July 23, 2008 | Elaine Donnelly
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608370/posts
“THE REAL PENTAGON POLL: 91% OF SERVICE MEMBERS REJECT HOMOSEXUAL LEADERS - 1 IN 4 WOULD QUIT”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2635458/posts
“MILITARY: Marines lead opposition to repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2635350/posts
“Mullen: Troops Who Balk at Change in Gay Service Policy Can Find Other Work”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2636350/posts
well all of my reps will be hearing form me and my wife over this.
gutless GOP when it comes to social issues and yet it is a winning issue for us.
PATHETIC.
The Republican refusal to engage on this issue comes down to two things, I think: 1) They don't believe the policy can hold up in the Federal Courts (even though the Federal Courts have no business involving themselves here, and I believe no actual authority to do so) and 2) they agree with the claim that if a homosexual wants to "serve their country" he/she should be allowed to.
The problem with the first is that the Federal Courts have no jurisdiction. The problem with the second is that the number of homosexuals actually serving in the military is even less than the 2.5% of males and 1.5% of female homosexuals in the general population.
The truth is the opening of the military to unrestricted homosexual behavior is nothing more than an attempt to create a target-rich environment for homosexual litigation. Homosexuals without talent will be promoted to avoid the suits, but many of them will be brought by washouts, malcontents, and others who had no intention to serve in the first place.
And homosexual predators will be bought-off or rewarded for behavior that would have landed them in the brig in the past. Let's face it, with the possible exception of defenseless altar boys, there probably isn't a more appealing meat market for aggressive homosexuals than the US military.
Already pressure is being applied to accept "transgendered" individuals. Eventually, sex-change surgery will be a required benefit of military service, and those undergoing sex changes will ask for medical discharges shortly after "reassignment surgery" probably on the grounds that they're now being "bullied."
It's going to get very ugly, and we're going to lose a lot of talented servicemen as a result.