Defending the military while they defend us
Wartime is the worst time for social experimentation
By Robert Knight

While the nation watched the Gulf oil spill and other distractions, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Barney Frank managed to ram through on May 27 an Obama-endorsed bill overturning the military's homosexuality ban.

But the war is not over by a long shot; the full Senate still must act.

Liberals have attached to the defense-authorization bill a repeal of the law that Congress enacted in 1993 and is mislabeled "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The bill also would require military medical facilities overseas to perform abortions. These two immoral provisions should be enough for senators to reject the measure and start over. Plus, there are controversial provisions regarding military pay and a jet engine that Congress wants, but the Pentagon opposes.

Shamefully, by voting 234-194 to attach the bill, the House acted with utter disrespect for our servicemen and women. All four service chiefs wrote letters asking Congress to hold off until a study is completed in December and to hear from people in the military as to how open homosexuality would impact them. On May 27, the Senate Armed Services Committee also ignored the chiefs, voting 16-12 to approve a repeal sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent.

Speaking of Mr. Lieberman, can we finally ask some prominent conservatives to quit holding this man up as a great statesman simply because he supports the war on terrorism? Mr. Lieberman has sponsored or supported the hate-crimes law, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), "Cap-and-Tax," the gaying of the military, the stimulus boondoggle and last but not least, socialist ObamaCare.

On the gays in the military issue, the left is deploying its favorite weapon - implying inevitability. That's the tactic that scares wobbly Republicans who fear they'll be "on the wrong side of history." They won't, if they stick to respecting the military and upholding our God-given, transcendent moral order. They need to see through the liberals' theft of the moral capital of the black civil rights movement. Is being black really the same as Fred sizing up Larry for "the crime against nature"?

Besides, whatever your position is on homosexual activism, this is first and foremost about ensuring maximum efficiency and combat readiness of our armed forces. It's about giving our servicemen and women the best chance at victory and coming home alive. Injecting homosexuality into the barracks, showers, submarines and "diversity" training cannot possibly improve combat readiness or morale.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid must cobble together 60 votes for final passage of the bill in order to break a promised Republican-led filibuster. All veterans groups and 1,163 generals and admirals oppose the change. Opposition is increasing.

With enough calls and letters to the Senate, this destructive move can be averted. Many senators have bases in their states. They should be getting an earful, especially from military families.

Forcing open homosexuality on the armed forces would destroy the volunteer military and bring back the compulsory draft. Since women are now deployed close to combat, and the only legal reason they are not eligible is their combat exemption, a new draft could include our daughters. And some would face pressure to have on-base abortions in order to complete their tours of duty.
Chaplains would be the first victims of Mr. Obama's homosexualization of the military, followed by anyone who violated "zero tolerance" policies for homosexual acceptance. Bible-believing Christians would quickly find themselves unwelcome in Barney Frank's new pansexual, cross-dressing military.

Other fallout includes family housing, reduction in retention, recruitment and unit cohesion, an increase in homosexual sexual assaults and a boost to overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
The military is a bastion of traditional values and symbolizes America's strength and independence. Opening the ranks to open homosexuality will accomplish the left's dream - undermining the military and transforming it into a wrecking ball against Judeo-Christian morality.

That would delight our Islamo-fascist enemies, wouldn't it, Mr. Lieberman?

Where's the social scientific evidence to back that statement up?? Oh right, there isn't any.... NEXT!

CW

What was the purpose of this law to begin with? This whole thing to me could be classified as the communist government workers. one pretends to work and the other pretends to pay them. Except in the USA Military one soldier pretends not to know who is gay and the gay one pretends not to tell them. I can assure you that most males will know if another one is gay very quick and especially when they spend so much time in the same location like many in the military do.

So they have to put up 4 showers and barracks

Straight MAle
Straight Female
Lesbian
Homo

Would straight guys want to share showers with guys who are checking them out?

Homosexuals should just stay out of thr army.

Studies - ask any straight soldier!

Problem is, straight and gays already DO work, shower, change together and always have! The question is, is it in the interest of the military to criminalize something that has year after year cost them many of the brightest and most needed brains they have. Many of the best analysts, linguists, interpreters, engineers etc are gay. Why the hell would it be a good idea to lose good people for something that isn't hurting anyone except for the morale of a few homophobes? The fact is, most people in the army don't give a shit whether someone is gay or not. What does it have to do with them? It only bothers people who have sexual insecurities of their own...

Listen, we're at war. The army needs whomever they can get their hands on, period. I say if gays want to go and volunteer for this fight then go ahead. I sure as hell am not and I'm sure that neither would you. Besides, homosexuals can be warriors, too. After all, the Spartans were at one time the elite fighting force of their part of the ancient world and there was an unquestionable homosexual ethos among the fighting Spartans. Socrates stated that Thebans and Elean warriors, along with the Spartans, shared beds with their lovers and fought alongside them.

And Alexander the Great batted for both teams. Sure - they can fight and die- but under the don't ask don't tell policy and the must remain celebate. - which for homosexuals is impossible

The Army has codes against cheating and such....