Posts Tagged ‘dadt’

Among the certain truths held to be self-evident by the founders of this country is the tenet that all men are created equal. While it took a little while to recognize that a minority skin color did not actually constitute being 40% less equal, and that a person’s gender did not automatically render them more or less qualified for certain tasks and duties, we pride ourselves on the level of equality we have achieved.

Unless, of course, one happens to be gay. Why is it that I fail to see any kind of distinction between this and other discriminatory ideology?

One of the biggest issues right now is the proposed repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. I support this repeal wholeheartedly, and favor the full integration of LGBT personnel into all levels of the military. Personally, I believe that a nation which prides itself on its diversity and its freedoms should be represented by military personnel with a similar respect for diversity and freedom.

Allow me to illuminate something for you here: placing a homosexual soldier in barracks with the rest of a platoon does not mean that the homosexual soldier is going to be desperately trying to get conjugal with the others. We are all capable of the same levels of discipline and restraint.

I would further venture to suggest that if a heterosexual soldier has a problem with serving in the same unit as a homosexual soldier, perhaps it is the heterosexual soldier who, by dint of his prejudice and bigotry, merits a dishonorable discharge.

The other big issue is of course gay marriage. I have ranted about this in the past on this blog, but some points are worth re-making. The objections to gay marriage have been almost exclusively religious in nature. It has been explicitly stated by the founders of this country that religion has no place in the governing of the land, and therefore in the making of its laws. Ultimately, who is harmed by the marriage of Adam and Steve? These are not people who would otherwise marry women and continue the great chain of life. However, their union can provide a stable family unit into which an orphaned child can be adopted and provided with care which would otherwise never come. Also, it should be noted that if you (a hypothetical heterosexual married person) honestly think that allowing the gay couple down the street to marry in any way cheapens or degrades the meaning of your own marriage, you should perhaps look to what weaknesses must lie within your own marriage to make it so susceptible to such cheapening.

We’re all people. Let’s all treat each other that way.

Read Full Post »