Logic and Elementary, “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

At a campaign fundraiser for Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, Obama faced a group of hecklers demanding to know what he was doing to get rid of the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy that prevents gays from serving openly in the military. (April 19)

.

Logic and Elementary, “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”
by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired
During Obama’s recent “campaign” trip and speech in California, he encountered “gay activists” protesting his lack of action to repeal Title 10 USC Section 654 (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell). He retorted that both he and Senator Boxer support their cause and are working to repeal the law. The applicable portion is shown below.
“(b) Policy.— A member of the armed forces shall be separated from the armed forces under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense if one or more of the following findings is made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulations:
(1) That the member has engaged in, attempted to engage in, or solicited another to engage in a homosexual act or acts unless there are further findings, made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulations, that the member has demonstrated that—
(A) such conduct is a departure from the member’s usual and customary behavior;
(B) such conduct, under all the circumstances, is unlikely to recur;
(C) such conduct was not accomplished by use of force, coercion, or intimidation;
(D) under the particular circumstances of the case, the member’s continued presence in the armed forces is consistent with the interests of the armed forces in proper discipline, good order, and morale; and
(E) the member does not have a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts.
(2) That the member has stated that he or she is a homosexual or bisexual, or words to that effect, unless there is a further finding, made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in the regulations, that the member has demonstrated that he or she is not a person who engages in, attempts to engage in, has a propensity to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual acts.
(3) That the member has married or attempted to marry a person known to be of the same biological sex.”
For the past half century there have been concerted efforts to “normalize” homosexual behavior so that those who engage therein would be more generally accepted as part of society. The latter part, the right of homosexual persons to behave as they choose in the privacy of their homes has been settled by the Supreme Court.
What is not settled is that no amount of legislation or training will ever change biology although there is plenty of grotesque experimentation along those lines and we’ll see where that movie ends. We have passed the day when open homosexuals were excluded from the civilian workplace. Thus, the argument goes, it stands to reason that given acceptance in the civilian workplace it should be a mandate for the Armed Forces.
Most Americans do not serve in the Armed Forces and those who do quickly learn that the purpose of their service is to engage and defeat the nation’s enemies, just ask most any Veteran of WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and/or Afghanistan. (Not to be too sarcastic, they also learn that they are a large laboratory for experimentation by social planners, politicians and some self-serving military careerists.)
For those readers who have never served, it is the nature of military service to live in close proximity to one another. Living arrangements vary from location to location and from service to service, but in general there are shared rooms and bathroom facilities. Also, more often than not, one does not have the luxury or right to choose ones roommate(s).
Courtship and romantic relationships between service members of whatever variety already exist in the military services despite limitations, restrictions and certain proscriptions. The costs and deleterious effects of male/female integration on good order and discipline are significant although carefully and intensively managed and largely obscured from public view.
That fact detracts from the good order, discipline and combat effectiveness of the Armed Forces, now add the prospective costs and additional detraction of having to manage issues arising out of openly serving homosexuals. The obverse is that absent such negative effects the Armed Forces could operate more efficiently, effectively and at lower costs.
Many in the public debate argue that homosexuals are not allowed to serve. That is categorically false. Homosexuals are allowed to serve under the provisions of the law cited above and as a practical matter have been serving since before the law was enacted.
Given the nature of homosexuality, specifically sexual activity between members of the same sex, it is logical to conclude that homosexuals would find perpetual sexual “open season” on their military comrades of the same gender. “Open season” in this context is akin to having females and males living in the same rooms, undressing, dressing in one another’s presence and sharing the same bathroom facilities. Given the state of hormones of the age group in question, it is a fact that the quest for sex is one of the group’s foremost thoughts and activities. Now, combine hormones, alcohol/drugs and close living arrangements, and those without any moral, ethical, or legal restraint would “score” in their sexual quests as often as possible; in most cases of same sex, sexual flirtation or unsolicited contact would engender serious acrimony, animosity and conflict.
In a stroke of propaganda genius, homosexual activists have tied their cause to the Civil Rights Movement. To the extent that racial minorities accept that there is parallel logic between racial discrimination incident to the color of their skins and homosexual conduct, it makes good propaganda but diminishes the moral authority of their just cause. From his stance on the subject it is evident that Obama views social mores and legal restrictions that apply to homosexuals’ military service as analogous to racial discrimination.
Such mindless thought is morally vacuous and logically baseless. His comparison is more of the “change” he promised and a crass ploy to garner supporters and votes of those who know nothing of military service. To even the most casual observer it is evident that there is a vast difference between skin color and aberrant behavior, and no logical, right thinking person should or would engage in it. However, with homosexuals and liberals in control of most of the media, combined with the fact that too many Americans do not think, it comes as no surprise that the “comparative view” is the one that many if not most, believe.
Proponents of repealing the law cite the study of homosexuals in Israel’s armed forces. Those proponents argue that Israel has had formidable armed forces for the past sixty years, albeit homosexuals have served “openly” since 1993, and therefore should be a model for the U.S. What they do not acknowledge from the same study is that in the majority of Israeli cases, homosexuals keep their behavior closeted and this latter dear reader, is as it should be. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” satisfies that condition.
What is unstated here and will be the subject of another essay at a later date is that the effort to repeal the law is part of a larger agenda that Obama finds to be symbiotic.
Semper Fidelis

.

Wild Thing’s comment……..
Excellent article by the Col. I really like the way he walks a person through the facts and his opinion.

….Thank you Mark for sending this to me.
Mark
3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67