from Amazon
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Gays in the military
Non-baseball, obviously, although it could apply.
This is a charged topic, but I am sure that our readers will comment on it sensibly and responsibly, unlike virtually all of our lawmakers.
What I am really perturbed about is the fact that no one (politicians and military people) has the cojones to say what needs to be said, in my opinion of course:
The idea that we have to “debate” or study the issue of whether to allow gays to openly serve in the military is repugnant to me and should be to a free and compassionate society.
Whether gays serving in the military has an effect on the morale of our soldiers should have NOTHING to do with the issue. Discriminating against a class of people for something that has nothing to do with their ability to serve is simply wrong. The “debate” as to how a change in policy might affect military morale is irrelevant. The reason is this:
1) I don’t think anyone is going to argue that it will significantly affect morale. (Not that that should be a bar either.) In fact, there really is no way to ascertain the effect. They’ll never have an answer. The answer is that it might a little and it might not, but in any case, the effect can NOT be profound. Not in this day and age.
2) Much more importantly, if we were to think or find that having blacks in the military would affect morale, which it might as many soldiers are not from particularly liberal cultural backgrounds, then do we ban them from serving? What about Muslims? Jews? Ugly people?
Whether other people like something or not (i.e., morale in the military suffers) should NEVER be a reason not to right a wrong. Never. Did baseball players by and large like the fact that Jackie Robinson and later other blacks were allowed in MLB? I don’t think so. Why did we “allow” it then? Because it was the right thing to do!
Bigotry is bigotry folks. Even when it is disguised as pragmatism. I want to say that in other words one more time, because I think it is important.
Bigotry is bigotry, even when it is disguised as something else, like pragmatism.
So, I am waiting for someone, Obama (who should damn well know bigotry when he sees it), anyone, to simply say:
I don’t give a damn about whether some soldiers like having to serve with an “openly” (whatever that stupid word means) gay person, or whether someone thinks that morale is going to suffer. Bigotry is bigotry. The policy before DADT was repugnantly wrong. The current policy is still wrong. Let’s right that wrong now because now is always the best time to do something right!”