Don't Tell Us Because Why Should We Have To Care?

Let’s see now.

We have a lame duck session of Congress, the nation is about to run out of money it has borrowed largely from China and we have no budget, taxes go up automatically on December 31 in a horrible recession and what is the United States Senate under newly gelded leader Harry Reid worried about?

The estimated 2.8 per cent of our military (and that includes the reserve and guard) who are homosexuals.

Now, understand that there is no rule against being both a homosexual and a soldier, sailor, airman or marine.  The rule is that you cannot be “openly” homosexual.  The so-called Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy has worked well for anyone who really wants to serve as opposed to those who want to further a non military agenda.

Given the case law which the activist courts have set up for the private workplace, you probably can no longer be “openly” heterosexual, either.

Tell a co-worker you want to have sex with Paris Hilton or Perez Hilton and you have probably created a “hostile” work environment.

So my question is what, exactly, is it that the homosexual lobby wants that is so important we need to take up Harry Reid’s valuable time when we should be talking about extending the current tax rates and working on the budget?

Nobody in the military who has followed the rules has been discharged. And, let’s not forget we have an all volunteer military which is all about following rules.

Why does anyone need to know that you are a homosexual soldier?  Why is it so important to tell us and make those of us who do not accept your private behavior as normal be a party to it?

Until you shove your sexual orientation—whatever it may be—in someone’s face, nobody cares.  And it’s equally offensive no matter what that orientation is.

In short, how about “don’t tell because we don’t care—until you shoot off your big mouth!”

Does homosexuality make large segments of the population uncomfortable?  Of course it does.

So, common courtesy would be to leave it at your door.  When you put on your uniform, it is blue, khaki, green or camo.  There’s no gay medal or insignia, just as there’s no straight medal or insignia.  We don’t have special pink uniforms.

Sex is something you do in private and simply is not part of your duties in the military.  So, again the question, why is this important?

You want to be homosexual, (or, as you want to be known these days, gay) that’s OK.  But why is it that you cannot keep it to yourself, off duty?

It would seem to me that good military discipline would keep ALL sexual orientations to private, off-duty time.

Now, if, perhaps, we need to redefine “openly” a bit to encompass ALL members of the military so that homosexuals with partners could live together off base in the same manner that married couples do, that seems a reasonable thing to do. To me, “openly” means proselytizing. If you are not an evangelist for homosexuality, you are probably not “openly” gay.  If you are, you damn sure shouldn’t be serving in the military.

Simply changing the rules to allow homosexual members of the military to call press conferences to announce, “I’m Gay!” seems like it will invite the next step down a very slippery slope which will definitely affect combat units.

Or, let’s put it another way.

Assume MASH’s Corporal Klinger was a real, practicing, homosexual (He wasn’t.  In the show, it was an act to get out of the Army).  Would you want to sleep in the same tent with him?

My guess is that no matter what you may tell a pollster sent by the Secretary of Defense, the answer, for the most part, is a resounding, no.

The worst part of the current debate is that it is a total waste of time.  Only Harry Reid could justify such a waste on his watch.

If you want to be a homosexual soldier, why do the rest of us have to know?

Don’t tell us, we don’t give a flip. 

It’s not discrimination.  Just plain old GI common sense.

FRED WEINBERG