Everyone knows the Star Spangled Banner, but did you know it has another verse?
"Oh, thus be it ever when free men shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserved us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto, "In God is our trust"
And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!"
Showing posts with label Military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Military. Show all posts
Monday, June 14, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Don't Ask, Do Tell?
Matt Kaufman over at www.Boundless.org had this quick post about Obama's recent desire to get rid of Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.
The other night President Obama renewed the call for Congress to repeal the military "don't ask, don't tell" policy on homosexuality. Which means it's also time to revisit why that's a bad idea.
The longstanding military ban on homosexuality has never been based mainly on the moral arguments over the issue. It's based on issues of troop cohesion and morale. The military cares less about whether homosexuality is bad per se than whether it's bad for the military.
If you know anything about military life, you know the answer. I don't want to get graphic here, but hey: You don't make soldiers share quarters -- and showers -- when sexuality of any sort is in play. Doing it with men and women would be a disaster. And throwing in homosexuality would just make matters that much worse. This is the reality of the situation, and military officials don't have the luxury of pretending otherwise even if they wanted to.
But then, the push to change the policy isn't really coming from inside the military. It's coming from gay activists on the outside. And it's hard to imagine that's because they believe the military needs gay soldiers. What's best for the military isn't their priority. Their priority is officially erasing all stigma from homosexuality and discrediting anyone who objects. If most soldiers don't like it, that's their problem; if they leave in droves, good riddance. (Presumably those who remain must be subjected to "diversity training" to purge them of un-progressive attitudes.)
Which tells us something about gay activists. It tells you that their cause overrides all other considerations, even national security. But politicians who indulge them ought to have higher priorities. Like keeping all of us safe.
---I think in these situations, it is important to be comfortable in these situations and I think Kaufman makes a good point with the consideration for taking showers and being in close quarters with folks who might find you sexually attractive. Obviously, just because you are gay doesn't mean you'll oggle everyone who has there clothes off.
But, just as I wouldn't want to be in the situation where women were showering next to me, I wouldn't want to be showering next to a gay man. I don't think that is unreasonable. Any thoughts?
D.
The other night President Obama renewed the call for Congress to repeal the military "don't ask, don't tell" policy on homosexuality. Which means it's also time to revisit why that's a bad idea.
The longstanding military ban on homosexuality has never been based mainly on the moral arguments over the issue. It's based on issues of troop cohesion and morale. The military cares less about whether homosexuality is bad per se than whether it's bad for the military.
If you know anything about military life, you know the answer. I don't want to get graphic here, but hey: You don't make soldiers share quarters -- and showers -- when sexuality of any sort is in play. Doing it with men and women would be a disaster. And throwing in homosexuality would just make matters that much worse. This is the reality of the situation, and military officials don't have the luxury of pretending otherwise even if they wanted to.
But then, the push to change the policy isn't really coming from inside the military. It's coming from gay activists on the outside. And it's hard to imagine that's because they believe the military needs gay soldiers. What's best for the military isn't their priority. Their priority is officially erasing all stigma from homosexuality and discrediting anyone who objects. If most soldiers don't like it, that's their problem; if they leave in droves, good riddance. (Presumably those who remain must be subjected to "diversity training" to purge them of un-progressive attitudes.)
Which tells us something about gay activists. It tells you that their cause overrides all other considerations, even national security. But politicians who indulge them ought to have higher priorities. Like keeping all of us safe.
---I think in these situations, it is important to be comfortable in these situations and I think Kaufman makes a good point with the consideration for taking showers and being in close quarters with folks who might find you sexually attractive. Obviously, just because you are gay doesn't mean you'll oggle everyone who has there clothes off.
But, just as I wouldn't want to be in the situation where women were showering next to me, I wouldn't want to be showering next to a gay man. I don't think that is unreasonable. Any thoughts?
D.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
