The coming LGBT military
Posted: December 24, 2010
1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

I have a few questions I haven't heard anyone else ask about the attempt to do away with the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

I've read all the studies.

I've heard all the rhetoric.

I've listened to all the debate.

But I'm curious about what is not being discussed – the unforeseen but inevitable issues that will arise very quickly after the new policy is instituted.

As I understand it, the reversal of "don't ask, don't tell" would mean ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs and lesbians would be welcome in the U.S. military. There would be no prohibitions against sex between two or more men. And there would be no prohibitions against sex between two or more women. At least I have not detected any concerns about group sex.

I raise the issue because it was not that long ago that the military was very concerned about group sex. In fact, the entire nation was scandalized by it.

The incident occurred in 1991. It was called "Tailhook." And, if my memory serves, Nancy Peℓσѕι and Harry Reid were outraged at what took place at the Las Vegas Hilton Sept. 8-12 during a convention of Marine and Navy aviators. Now granted, what started out as an orgy degenerated further so that some of the activity was non-consensual. What a shock – that the tolerance of group sex could degenerate so!

Anyway, my key question is whether the condoning of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ sex will be limited to only couples. If so, where is that written? And why is the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ lobby going along with such archaic restrictions if they exist? Has anyone in the U.S. Congress thought about this? After all, the sanctioning of same-sex marriage in some jurisdictions has already led to challenges by polygamists who want to get into the action – using exactly the same legal and moral logic.

I also need to remind those so enthusiastic about the scrapping of "don't ask, don't tell" that those pushing this agenda call themselves the "LGBT movement." They don't just promote special rights for monogamous same-sex couples. Not by a long shot. They also promote the very same special privileges for bisɛҳuąƖs, transvestites and transsɛҳuąƖs.

Has anyone thought this through?

This barrier about to be broken down hardly represents the last taboo.

Why is it that no one conducting these multimillion-dollar government studies and advocating such a drastic change in policy is looking through the implications?

Are Congress and the U.S. military also ready to embrace transɛҳuąƖism and transvestism? If not, on what basis does it make a distinction? Or do we just worry about that down the road?

How will and should military recruiters respond the day – and it's coming – a man tries to enlist while wearing a dress?

How will and should military recruiters respond the day – and it's coming – a woman tried to enlist who was formerly a man or in the process of becoming one?

How will and should military authorities respond the day – and it's coming – when the first ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ triangle is discovered?

I know how this column will be received by "progressive" elements of our society. They will call me a bigot. They will ridicule me for suggesting what I say here is absurd and, for some reason, will never happen. That's what they said when I suggested same-sex marriage would lead inevitably to calls for polygamy. But those lawsuits followed immediately after the judicial rulings in favor of same-sex marriage – and for good reason. The arguments are the same. The logic, or illogic, is the same.

These are questions of morality, and when you change moral standards, you open up a Pandora's box of unintended consequences.

Isn't it better to explore these questions before such a radical change in policy?

Isn't it better to follow the argument through to its logical consequences?

Isn't the defense of U.S. security worth it?

As far as I understand, sodomy is a crime under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice and the Manual for Court Martial and will continue to be a crime whether committed by ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs or heterosɛҳuąƖs.

If, for example, a roommate were to walk in on two "openly gαy" men committing sodomy in the barracks, they can be prosecuted.

But, who knows what will happen in the current climate.

most leaders flaunt and/or ignore laws anyway.

The lunatics and lobbies are using the military as an experiment nowdays.  It's a kinder gentler, PC, military.  I heard about surveys of opinions of military members not having problems with the repeal.  I sure wasn't interviewed.  More sensitivity training will be implemented.  Hazing will probably go up, and the straight soldiers will more than likely be dishonorably discharged for doing hazing imo.  Then the gαy military will be fast tracked up to avoid discrimination charges.  Remember what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah?

There is no such thing as a "victimless crime" - between consenting adult.

Our Lady of Fatima: "War is punishmen for sin."

I wanted to post this here, because I believe this is how the military is going to "phase in" ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ sodomy "rights."

My neighbors have an 18 year old grandson who just joined the Marines.  After boot camp at Paris Island, he has been stationed in Hawaii.  My neighbor served 20 years in the Army before he retired.  He is very proud of his grandson's service.  

His grandson called recently and told him that he was sending for his girlfriend because he missed her.  My neighbor scoffed because, in his thinking, the young girl would never be able to afford to live on the economy there.  However, his grandson informed him that there are new rules in place that allow enlisted to live off post with their unmarried girlfriends and receive a housing allowance and separate rats.  

Now, I can't verify that this is so, but IF it is then this is how the military will deal with this.  Some ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs can "marry" in some states and can enter into civil unions in others.  I have long wondered how the military will deal with this regarding benefits and also regarding ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs who can't "marry" because  of their states laws.  

I'm going to keep watching this.