Homosexuality and Military Service (Merged thread)

[Tacitus]

Duncan Hunter's response at 01:30

..most Americans, most kids, who leave that breakfast table and go out and serve in the military and make that corporate decision with their family, most of them are conservatives, and they have conservative values, and they have Judeo-Christian values, and to force those people to work in a small tight unit with somebody who is openly homosexual, who goes against what they believe to be their principles, and it is their principles, is I think a disservice to them...

Back to Hunter’s statement, specifically, he claimed.

1. Most of the “kids” in the military are conservatives.
2. Conservatives, who have Judeo-Christian values, would be forced to go against their values if they served with homosexuals, and would be a “disservice” to them.
3. Therefore, conservatives in the military have veto power over this question of gays or lesbians in the armed forces.

I’m just curious how many people around here back Hunter’s statement, in particular, on why they should be excluded.

Are these in fact the armed forces of the United States of America? Which presumably would generally coincide with the characteristics of the population at large.

Or should this be renamed the armed forces of Conservatives of America, Republicans of America, or Evangelical Protestants of America?

I am not persuaded by the argument that "we conservatives in the military would consider it a disservice to serve with <insert whichever group, race, class, color, creed, religion here that you don't want to be around>, so they can't." Any others besides gay and lesbians that, like the Irish, Blacks, Jews back in the day, need not apply?

[Stu-6]

Duncan Hunter's response at 01:30

..most Americans, most kids, who leave that breakfast table and go out and serve in the military and make that corporate decision with their family, most of them are conservatives, and they have conservative values, and they have Judeo-Christian values, and to force those people to work in a small tight unit with somebody who is openly homosexual, who goes against what they believe to be their principles, and it is their principles, is I think a disservice to them...

Isn’t this a little like saying most of the people at the country club are white so it is unfair to force them to accept anyone different?

If you would be a little nicer to the gays maybe the conservatives would have to do all of the work. Or maybe we would find out that there are plenty of people who are willing and able to serve who just don’t care about stuff like that.

Besides there is no longer a draft no one is forced to work with anyone. . . you don't like it Burger King is hiring.

[tequila]

Hunter's claim seems to run a bit contrary to my own recent experience at the School of Infantry at Camp Lejeune, N.C., where some enterprising soul took the trouble to wallpaper the interior of all three bathroom stalls for my platoon with some quite interesting hardcore pornography, to the general approval of the squadbay. Perhaps the Rangers were more pious in the 1960s?

[Ken White]

you can't pay much attention to anything those squirrels say.

The Armed forces are a reflection of the society from which they come; same percentage of crooks, liars, con-men, eagle scouts, gay, straight, totally irreligious, evangelicals, jews, catholics etc. etc.

There are a few such as Hunter describes, the vast majority are not. There are a few who are offended by gays, the vast majority could care less as long as it doesn't become an issue.

Tequila's got it right.

[J Wolfsberger]

you can't pay much attention to anything those squirrels say.

The Armed forces are a reflection of the society from which they come; same percentage of crooks, liars, con-men, eagle scouts, gay, straight, totally irreligious, evangelicals, jews, catholics etc. etc.

There are a few such as Hunter describes, the vast majority are not. There are a few who are offended by gays, the vast majority could care less as long as it doesn't become an issue.

Tequila's got it right.

I'm with Ken on this. Some years ago a new 2Lt (out of OCS) was asked by his CO to look into whether an enlisted man was gay. He asked the platoon sergeant. The answer was that everyone thought so, but the guy was damn good at his job, didn't ghost, took showers after everyone else and after one or two social beers, took off on his own (private) activities after duty hours.

The 2Lt then asked, So we don't have a problem?

The platoon sergeant answered, Not unless you create one.

The 2Lt decided he had more important concerns than a witch hunt.

That has pretty much summed the entire situation up for me.