In its ongoing efforts to garner sympathy and support, the LGBT movement continues to put a “face” on its agenda, using US troops. Most recently, the Washington Post (repeated at the Stars and Stripes) reported on US Naval Academy Midshipman Regan Kibby, a female who entered the Academy after a lifetime of “not [feeling] like a girl” and decided to become a male — even though such gender confusion/dysphoria was an explicitly disqualifying condition when she entered the military.

For Kibby to be told she could serve openly — and then to have that decision reversed — is certainly frustrating (though she was the one to join the military in violation of the original policies to begin with).

More interesting, though, is the total absence of Washington Post, Stars and Stripes, or military articles on the other perspective. Even the US military has published a plethora of personal interest stories detailing the “sexual journeys” of US troops as they try to decide if they want to be a man or a woman — yet the military press has not published a single story on the other point of view.

Where is the news article on the US military doctors wondering if they will be required to prescribe male hormones to a female, when their professional medical opinion leads them to believe the proper course of treatment is counseling to accept the body God gave her?

Where is the media story on the male US Soldier who is struggling with the idea of being in an open bay shower with someone who is physically a biological female but claims she’s a male?

Where’s the heart-string tugging tale of the US Sailor who wonders if he’ll be discharged for calling a female “she” — because to call her “he,” as she wants, would be to participate in her sin?

Where’s the story of the male and female Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and atheist Midshipmen who quietly begged their Company Officer not to place stress and hardship on them by requiring them to room with Kibby in her gender confusion?

All of these stories exist — they’re just not being told, at least not by the press.

If the press — both civilian and military — were to be believed, the only story is the one being told by transgender military troops themselves. Thus, the public is blessed with tales of joy as men “transition” to women, or vice versa, in gleeful, intimate detail. (Or, in one case, a man becomes a woman who marries a woman who becomes a man, and then everyone is confused.)

(Only in this world of upside-down morality could a Soldier send a unit-wide email announcing his decision to become a woman and have that decision praised, while a secretary sends a unit-wide email about a charity for kids and gets lambasted because it’s a Christian charity.  An officer can call a staff meeting to tell her troops she’s homosexual — and that’s apparently encouraged — while an officer just mentioning his faith is derided as a criminal and worthy of “public” punishment.)

Where are the stories of the hundreds of thousands of other US troops affected — in very substantial ways — by these morphing policies governing troops’ sexual behavior and religious beliefs?

The answer is probably easy.

Anyone who expresses reservations, qualifications, or moral or religious objections to the acceptance of “modern” sexual practices is automatically a bigot (see then-SecNav Mabus, for example) — even if their opinions or beliefs are completely in line with military policy, and even if those beliefs are rooted in constitutionally-protected religious beliefs and exercise.

Thus, in the coming weeks tale after tale will be told about the sacrifices and martyrdom of LGBT troops who are “true patriots” who “just want to serve their country”. Their mental/sexual issues, as well as the logistical issues the military has to take to accommodate those mental/sexual issues, will be dismissed out of hand as irrelevant. Meanwhile, the very real issues regarding official acceptance of transgenders in the military will be obscured by the seemingly enforced silence on their peers, comrades, subordinates, and superiors who hold the “rest of the story.”

Not unlike the time period surrounding the repeal of DADT, many people will cite the lack of opposition — the “silence” from the troops — as acceptance, when nothing could be further from the truth.  Instead, a substantial number of US troops believe — religiously — that God made men and women to be men and women.  Even areligious troops question the validity of allowing someone to “choose” a gender and then have the institution require everyone else to bend to their wishes.

Yet, religious or not, that is not the story that will be told — over and over again.

There is, it would seem, only one permissible narrative as it pertains to the US military and the LGBT agenda.

It would seem diversity is the source of our strength — unless it is diversity in views about the morality of sexual behavior.

ADVERTISEMENT

---

---