Do Tell

60% of combat Marines surveyed felt it was inappropriate to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.  As we just ignored the will of 3/5 of our combat Marines, I have just a couple of quick questions regarding the repeal of the 1993 Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law that prevented gays from serving openly in the military:

1.

Men and Women will now be subjected to showering and living with persons who may find them attractive in a sexual nature.  Gay men will have the opportunity to ogle heterosexual men found attractive.  Female homosexuals will have the same bonus in their barracks.  This may be no difference from what has occurred over the past 17 years, but now the troops will know for sure that the man/woman on the other side of the shower finds their sex to be attractive for anal, oral, or product-assisted sex.

The obvious question is… …will this benefit be restricted only to the gay men and women that join the armed forces?  Or, will all service men and women be given the same opportunity to shower and live with the sex to which they are attracted.  And, if integrated showering / living  for heterosexual man / homosexual man as well as heterosexual female / homosexual female is not a problem for the military, then why would it be a problem for heterosexual males and females to shower / live together?

Remember, God (or Mother Nature if you prefer) made the plumbing to work for heterosexuals — not homosexuals.

2.

Many recruits joined the Armed Forces, with DADT in effect, under the assumption that they would not be expected to shower / live with homosexuals.  They may find homosexuality morally repugnant or religiously inappropriate.

Will such troops be given the opportunity to leave the Armed Forces with Honorable Discharges?  Or will their free expression of their right to abhor homosexuality be met with reverse discrimination?

I haven’t read the legislation or heard anyone discuss these questions as we have approached the vote that was taken yesterday.  And, since we ignored the will of 3/5 of our fighting Marines when deciding the issue, I wonder if we ignored these issues too.  Answers and replies are welcome.

 

I’m Heterosexual And I’m Going To The Prom

I went to my first prom in 1980.  I did not find it necessary to announce that I am heterosexual.  If gay, I doubt that I would have announced such in a school that forbade gay prom dating… …unless I wanted to cause a flap.

Lesbian Teen Sues To Force School To Hold Prom

So, the school canceled the prom instead of changing the rule to allow gay couples to attend.  And, we’re suing for an affirmative injunction to force the school to hold the prom — a standing that will be hard to prove.

Thoughts:

It’s interesting to me that, at her age, she can make the choice to be Lesbian, which is an astounding decision for her age.  She’s not mature enough to drink, vote, join the armed forces, be a state representative, can not make the choice to have sex with a 25 year old or 52 year old, but she can determine her sexual preference.

Another thought is… …what if one of the boy’s had a nice white sheep for a girlfriend; would that be his ‘free expression’ and okay w/ the ACLU et al?  If not, then where do you draw the line?  Multiple partners?  I’m certainly not equating homosexuality with bestiality, but it is a ‘slippery-slope’ argument.  If we allow inter-racial and homosexual couples, why do we draw the line there?  Shouldn’t we allow multiple partners (ala former Mormon rules), tree lovers, a girl and her tricycle?

This is a perfect example of why the federal government should not be involved with school in any way.  States must be the highest level of control and more choice needs to be available to handle such situations.  Vouchers would allow people to go to private school.  She could choose a school that welcomes homosexuals and others could choose differently.

You know — Freedom.

But government is not and never has been about freedom.