PFC Bradley Manning’s Defense May Offend Homosexuals
A few articles have begun to take umbrage at the apparent planned defense of accused Wikileaker PFC Bradley Manning: In essence, the nation’s worst release of classified information was the fault of the US military — not Manning. The military was the one who allowed him to keep his clearance despite knowing he had ‘issues’ with his sexuality.
Manning’s lawyers argued his superiors failed to address his struggles with gender-identity disorder…
The defense team says Manning was nearly paralyzed by internal struggles over his belief that he was a woman trapped in a man’s body. They say his chain of command failed to suspend his access to classified data despite clear signs of emotional distress…
That defense, of course, would likely be the first time someone personally claimed some form of “gender identity disorder” or homosexuality made them unfit for duty. (It is not the first time this form of defense was at least partially used, however.)
Perceptions or accusations of homosexuality were, at one point, potential disqualifiers for higher security clearances.
The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer was more than happy to agree with the apparent planned defense of Manning’s lawyers, saying there is empirical evidence homosexuals in the military are an “increased risk to national security.” (Those are attention-getting buzz words; Michael Weinstein has used similar terms to describe Christians in the military, though he prefers the “national security threat” mantra.)