Upon Repeal of the Military Ban on Gays

President Obama has hailed the repeal of the recent military ban on gays by terming ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ as discriminatory.

States Mr. Obama,

"Today, every American can be proud that we have taken another great step toward keeping our military the finest in the world and toward fulfilling our nation's founding ideals.”

A repeal of the gay military ban in the name of fighting discrimination is a gross violation of the US military's property rights, which is against America's founding ideals. The only proper application of the political concept of discrimination is equality before the law. The law should apply equally to all citizens irrespective of race, religion, creed, national origin, sexual orientation, etc. However, the rationale behind the gay military ban was the possible effect that openly gay soldiers might have on troop morale, unit cohesion, etc. A blind man is unfit to be a fighter pilot and irrespective of how patriotic and freedom loving he might be, he continues to remain unfit.

This same logic must apply to gays.

The exact psychological roots of gay and lesbian behavior are not known. However, we do know of the practical effects that such open behavior can have on military discipline, readiness, and morale as commanders, on the field, have repeatedly pointed out. This evidence must not be ignored. It is also not proper for normal, straight men to exclude or ignore what they intuitively feel about homosexuality. It is this intuitiveness that would one day lead to the identification of the proper psychological/philosophical principle governing homosexual behavior. Intuitively, most straight men, including me, find homosexual behavior revolting, sometimes comical, and otherwise generally associated with a man who is lacking in self esteem or in the best case, owing to the cultural nonsense he imbibes, is confused and introspectively trying to identify the proper psychological state or principle. It is also worthwhile to point out the obvious that nature meant a romantic/sexual union between a man and a woman and not between men and men or women and women. For a straight man, it is intuitively conceivable and plausible that gay people are suffering from psychological problems that must be addressed. It is also for this reason that a heterosexual soldier may have serious compunctions serving alongside or commanding, openly, gay soldiers.

In this context, putting openly gay soldiers alongside straight soldiers during combat or service when these are, generally, the issues surrounding homosexuality is to put an unnecessary psychological strain on straight soldiers who form the majority of the armed forces.

Further, gay sexual behavior is also in conflict with normal relationships that are possible among men. Within the military, proper relationships among soldiers such as a sense of brotherhood or camaraderie, based on shared ideals of freedom and liberty and a common purpose, last for a lifetime and are what enable soldiers to form trusting professional bonds that permit them to, collectively, undertake life-threatening missions. Such relationships are an absolute necessity to the discharge of effective military duties in a collective unit, as any professional soldier would concur. To introduce an element of the sexual or even the mere hint of permissiveness of sexual activity among soldiers of the same sex is to pervert this sense of brotherhood based on common ideals. 

As this Reuters article states,

“Marine Corps Commandant James Amos had said that implementing the change could cost lives because of the impact on discipline and unit cohesiveness.”

The article, further, reports,

“The law [Don’t ask, don’t tell] had allowed gay men and women to serve in the military only if they kept their sexual orientation a secret. They faced the threat of being kicked out of the military under the law if they were open about their homosexuality.”

In its present form, the law worked just fine. It would have been impossible to police sexual behavior but to permit gays to be open about their sexuality would undermine military professionalism and was thus forbidden. Moreover, the repeal of this law would seriously undermine the military readiness of the United States. It, further, sends a message to the world that the United States military comprises not only of men but of men and sissies.

Can one imagine Commander James Bond engaging in homosexual behavior? Or Brigadier General Norman Cota (Robert Mitchum) and Lt. Col. Benjamin Vandervoort (John Wayne) in The Longest Day flirting with the men they command?

It is politically incorrect soldiers, such as Commandant James Amos, that the Pentagon should be listening to and promoting to positions with the responsibility of determining military policy.