Ringknockers out of the closet

TSO sent me this article about Knights Out, which is a gay support group formed at the US Military Academy, West Point.

Thirty-eight graduates of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., came out of the closet Monday with an offer to help their alma mater educate future Army leaders on the need to accept and honor the sacrifices of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender troops.

“Knights Out” wants to serve as a connection between gay troops and Army administrators, particularly at West Point, to provide an “open forum” for communication between gay West Point graduates and their fellow alumni and to serve in an advisory role for West Point leaders in the eventuality — which the group believes is both “imminent and inevitable” — that the law and policy collectively known as “don’t ask, don’t tell” are repealed by Congress.

I always have problems getting my point across when I write about this issue, and I don’t know why. It’s probably because of the biases of the readers who assume too much about what they THINK I’ve said. So let me type this slowly. My problem with gays in the military is not their sexual habits, it’s their inability to follow instructions, their inability to abide by the agreement inherent in the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Their constant harangue about how they’re unable to publicly celebrate their private lives in the military.

I’m pretty secure in my opinion that there are not legions of gays just waiting for the DADT to be overturned so they can climb into a few hundred Bradleys and kill jihadists. And I’m also pretty sure that there are lots of gays serving silently and just pleased as punch that they have the opportunity to serve as long as they keep their end of the bargain – and I have no problem with that.

But there’s a much smaller number who think they’re being oppressed because they can’t announce to the world which set of genitalia they’d prefer to have in their mouths. That’s absurd and childish. They certainly don’t need 38 ringknockers to liaise between the straight world and their world.

This is not a sexual behavior discussion. It’s a discussion about whether people are suited to serve in the military. People who can’t follow a simple set of rules for behavior don’t belong in the military. Period. It’s not a question of whether DADT is right or wrong, it’s a regulation – just like the fraternization rules that everyone is expected to follow. The people who can’t follow rules (which aren’t supposed to be like rules in general society) don’t belong in the military. How simple is that?

The military is not a place to be an activist. Whether you’re gay, in the IVAW or an environmentalist. You either serve, follow orders, perform your job to the best of your abilities, or stop wasting the tax payers’ money and be an activist in the outside world.

Drunken fool, Jim Moran makes the worst arguments for overturning DADT I’ve ever read;

“At a time when our military’s readiness is strained to the breaking point from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the armed forces continue to discharge vital service members under the outdated, outmoded don’t ask, don’t tell policy,” Moran said. “Our allies have overcome this issue, facing no adverse consequences from lifting bans focused on soldiers’ sexual orientation.

“Polls show the American people overwhelmingly support repealing this policy,” Moran continued. “Yet, how many more good soldiers are we willing to lose due to a bad policy that makes us less safe and secure?”

Like I said, there aren’t legions of gays lining up outside of military bases waiting for the DADT to be overturned. I doubt overturning it would improve recruiting even a little bit. And the people they’re throwing out would just get thrown out for something else because they want to get out. “Our allies have overcome this issue” is just stupid – culturally, we’re Americans. We’re not like our “allies”. We actually win wars with our military – we don’t have someone to march in behind so we can take credit for their victory.

Why are we asking the American people who don’t have to serve in the military how they feel about it? What could they possibly contribute to the discussion? Ask them if they think a firefighter’s helmet is too heavy, too – their opinion on that would be equally important as their opinion on gays in the military.

I’d be more impressed if Moran could produce an actual number of how many people would be affected by changing the policy. But, just like every other policy for the military to follow that comes out of Congress, it’s more about making the legislators feel good about themselves than it is about improving readiness.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Society, Usual Suspects