A local Colorado paper interviewed graduates and students of Colorado University on their perceptions of the recent repeal of the law banning homosexuals from military service. Some of the article focused on the desire of former servicemembers, discharged for being homosexual, to re-enter the service, though that has been widely discussed. The end of the article was interesting:
CU senior Kyle Inselman, a member of the GLBT campus community…said the repeal is not a victory for the transgender community, since “don’t ask, don’t tell” is only one of the issues keeping them out of the military…
“I think that to frame this as a victory for the GLBT community is wrong, because transgender people still cannot serve in the military,” Inselman said. “We need to not forget about fighting for (transgender) inclusion in our military as well as gay, lesbian and bisexual people.”
Seems like this line of thinking has been brought up before…
A few different sources, including Dr. Albert Mohler, have recently brought up the case of David Epstein, a professor of political science at Columbia University. Apparently Epstein was recently charged with incest over a sexual relationship with his adult daughter.
The natural question, of course, is why?
If what two consenting adults do is no one else’s business, why is incest illegal? If reproduction is not germane, then the traditional genetic argument fails.
On what moral basis, then, is incest illegal?
Over at the SoldiersPerspective, a similar question is raised: Read more
Gays have been in the military since the beginning of armed conflict, and allowing them to admit that fact does not change the fact that they take the same risk as straight service members and are due the same respect.
Quotes like these are increasingly common — even from Christians — and demonstrate ignorance of the point of those who have opposed repeal of the law banning homosexuals from serving.
The fact that homosexuals have served within the military, in violation of the law, does not nullify the validity of the law (anymore than violation of any other law does so).
Risk, sacrifice, etc, are all irrelevant. There is no Read more
Former Army Lt Dan Choi announced in the Huffington Post that he intended to rejoin the military service now that DADT has been repealed. Homosexuality aside, Choi may have other issues to overcome before the military will let him in.
Choi, originally promoted to “Mr.” below-the-zone for being homosexual, reportedly admitted to being “involuntarily committed” to a psychiatric ward due to Read more
The Army Times covers (and CNN repeats) the lengths to which Army troops are now going in order to avoid discharge for being overweight:
They’re increasingly turning to starvation diets, weight-loss pills, laxatives and even liposuction…
Soldiers write about wrapping themselves in Icy-Hot, Preparation H treatments, popping stool softeners, going to saunas to meet the Army’s requirements. Many of the comments say the military should reassess its weight standards.
Keep in mind this has nothing to do with the military’s rigorous Read more
Summary of recent articles/news on the potential change to the law banning homosexuals from serving in the US military. Below:
- Oliver North on “who they are” vs “what they do.”
- North again asking will DADT repeal improve the military?
- The “no effect” of repeal compared with gender integration: A Navy commander fired.
- Secretary Gates addresses the possibility of de facto repeal of DADT within the military.
- CSM Marvin Hill, Petraeus’ top enlisted Soldier, reportedly “pushes” against the law.
- Congress prioritizes DADT repeal higher than the parent Defense Authorization Act
- Calls for Senator McCain to do the “right” thing…but how do you define “right?”
While much discussion has occurred over the Department of Defense’s report on DADT, many seem to have missed the completely separate (and substantial) report written on how to implement repeal within the military.
Much of the “Support Plan for Implementation” (PDF, 1.9MB) is at least alluded to in the original report, and much is administrative (like suggesting the use of “gay and lesbian,” as opposed to “homosexual”). Still, there are some interesting specifics. For example, while the plan reiterates that average servicemembers will not be allowed to separate for moral reasons, it gives a “suggestion” to Chaplains on how they can get out of the military if they so choose: Read more
As reported at FoxNews, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen took those who might still support DADT to task:
Military members who have a problem with a change in policy to allow gays to serve openly may find themselves looking for a new job, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned Thursday.
This seems consistent with prior leadership statements that those who support the current law could “vote with their feet.” However, to be fair, it seems the Admiral was excessively paraphrased. It seems the relevant quote is actually: Read more