| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| First Casualty: Army NG LTC Requests Relief From Squadron Command Over Homosexual Policy |
| 2010-12-25 |
| President Obama's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is already damaging the U.S. military. An Army lieutenant colonel has asked to be relieved of command rather than order his troops to go through pro-homosexual indoctrination following the repeal of the policy, which required homosexuals to keep silent about their sexual preference. Currently the commander of a squadron in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo "behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality. The Lieutenant Colonel sent the following letter to his commanding officer: Subject: Request for Relief from Command due to Personal Moral Conflict with New Homosexual Policy "I will not be the person who forces this training on my soldiers," the officer, whose identity was being protected. He plans to go on the record as soon as he discusses his request with his chain of command. The officer said he's aware of other officers who intend to resign their commissions. "These people want to serve. I want to serve. I love my job, but I can't do this job once they begin to implement this policy." Under the terms of the DADT repeal, the armed forces will not be permitted to allow open homosexuality in the service until the president, secretary of defense and head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can certify that terminating DADT will not impair military readiness. During the transition period that will precede certification, the military plans to require servicemen to attend mandatory training sessions intended to change their attitudes toward homosexuality. "Very few soldiers are fine with open homosexuals in the service," said the officer. "I cannot believe the numbers jibe with what was published in the previous survey," referring to a study commissioned by the Pentagon to assess whether the military could safely repeal DADT. "I did not give up my constitutional rights and freedom of religion when I joined the military. I don't believe in subjecting myself to all of the behavior modification and sensitivity training. They're going to try to push the position that this is an acceptable lifestyle." Beyond concerns about violating his own conscience and the beliefs of his soldiers, the officer predicts several additional adverse consequences to repealing the military's ban on open homosexuality. "I don't believe the steps they're taking allow a commander to maintain good order and discipline in a military unit. DADT was a compromise to allow homosexuals to serve as long as they kept it to themselves. Now they'll be able to throw their lifestyle in everybody's face and commanders won't be able to do anything about it." The officer also predicted problems with retention and recruitment: "I think it might not have an immediate, huge impact, but as enlistments expire you'll get people who vote with their feet and leave the service, and I don't believe the recruiting effort is going to offset the amount of people that leave. The military historically attracts a more conservative group of people who have certain principles and beliefs and swear an oath to the Constitution." As previously reported, some experts predict as many as a quarter of Americans in military service will resign or leave earlier than planned because of the advent of open homosexuality. Nearly half of the Marine Corps respondents to the Pentagon survey said they would consider leaving the service earlier than planned. The officer also predicted growing security problems as homosexuals become more prevalent in the service. "One of the Army values is selfless service. Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier, who may be called upon to give his or her life in the nation's defense. When you start trying to attract people who are so self-centered that they put living their lifestyle out in the open above the needs of their country and national defense, then you have a really dangerous combination. "That's when you get instances like PFC Bradley Manning, who is a homosexual. Because of his personal beliefs and bitterness toward the military he decided to leak 150,000 sensitive wires that have done irreparable damage to our nation." Manning, an openly gay soldier, reportedly sent many thousands of sensitive documents to the Wikileaks website out of anger over the military's ban on open homosexuality. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose |
| #6 "O TEMPORA! O MORES! |
| Posted by: borgboy 2010-12-25 15:29 |
| #5 I don't have a problem with homos*xuals in the service. I don't have a problem with them being able to be open about it. I DO have a problem with forcing others to condone and even affirm their status. It will inevitably lead to just the sort of thing Rambler mentions. I suspect that the soldiers (heck, even the Marines) in general would be accepting of openly gay colleagues - AFTER they proved themselves willing and able to stand up to the abuse that everyone else does, in some shape or fashion (weaklings, v*rgins, pick a topic.) But our wussified leadership will 'protect' them from that, and thus degrade the potential ability of the whole service. (Again, in the eyes of such 'leaders' that's a feature, not a bug.) |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-12-25 14:46 |
| #4 Does indeed say something about our..... "professional military" when a reservist LTC "bets his bars" while senior Pentagon officers (who have nothing to lose), look the other way in phueching silence. A POX on all of you political careerists 'yes men' and gutless wonders. You have been revealed at long last! I salute you Colonel! |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-12-25 14:22 |
| #3 If the military does in fact REQUIRE "sensitivity training" about the gay life style, they may (and should) have a mutiny on their hands. It is one thing to openly allow gay people to serve (a bad idea, in my opinion). It is a completely different thing to force people to accept homosexuality as a valid life style. Yet I think that sensitivity training will be the next logical step, at least in the minds of gay activists. This means that if a Sergeant yells at a gay soldier who has f*cked up, even if it is not because the soldier is gay, but just because he screwed up, the gay soldier will go running to the command Sensitivity Officer to complain. And the Sergeant will get sent to more re-education sensitivity training. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2010-12-25 14:09 |
| #2 a quarter of Americans in military service will resign That's a feature, not a bug - to those who have been promoting the new law. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-12-25 11:44 |
| #1 Lets see if the Army treats Christian beliefs with the respect they have treated the muzzies and kwanzaa and all other moonbat religions.... Point of order to the JAG types. Don't ask don't tell was a policy to ignore the UCMJ. As I understand it, the UCMJ regs about gays was never repealed, just ignored by policy. Is that reg still standing??? Did the repeal of don't as just re implement the old reg of it being against the rules?? |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2010-12-25 11:29 |