Homosexuals in the Military: Problems the Left Ignores

US Army Tent in Iraq (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

US Army Tent in Iraq (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

I read about some disappointing comments from GOP Vice Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan today.  According to comments at CNS News,

“Now that it’s done, we should not reverse it. I think that would be a step in the wrong direction because people have already disclosed themselves.”

“I think this issue is past us,” he added. “It’s done. And I think we need to move on.”

One could make the same argument about ObamaCare, or any other assault on freedom and what’s right. I like Rep. Ryan, but that dog don’t hunt.

On the heels of that article, I read that, despite liberal proclamations that “See, the world didn’t explode because homosexuals were allowed to serve openly in the military” (their stooges in the “mainstream” media would make sure we didn’t know about it if it did happen), this asinine social experiment is indeed causing problems in our armed forces…just as we knew it would.

From the Washington Times we learn of several incidents where consideration of others, along with their freedom, has been quashed in the name of political correctness:

  • Military officials have allowed pro-homosexual voices to speak to the media while those who oppose this policy have been silenced
  • Military personnel having a private discussion about the negative consequences of this policy have been harassed
  • A chaplain who had religious reservations about the policy was forced to “get in line” or resign his commission
  • Another chaplain was threatened with early retirement for not toeing the politically correct line, the reassigned and placed under “close supervision”
  • A senior chaplain was stripped of his authority for refusing to violate the law and allow counterfeit marriage ceremonies to be held in a military chapel
  • At an Officer Training School, a male service member was sexually harassed by a male homosexual, but authorities took no action
  • Homosexuals have demanded exceptions to open-door policies (that apply to everyone) in facilities in order to engage in homosexual behavior
  • The Navy has allowed homosexuals to choose fellow homosexuals as their bunkmates–something that would never have been allowed for a male and female service member couple
    • It is easy to imagine the condemnation for “intolerance” that would be heaped on a military member in a nearby bunk who did not want to be exposed to this unnatural and immoral behavior
Sailors relax in their bunks aboard USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74). (Photo credit: Photographer's Mate 2nd Class Jayme Pastoric)

Sailors relax in their bunks aboard USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74). (Photo credit: Photographer’s Mate 2nd Class Jayme Pastoric)

Knowing how many things don’t get reported in the military–especially in a politically correct environment–we can only wonder how many more incidents may have occurred that we have no record of. The article goes on to discuss even more of the ramifications of this politically correct policy, as well.

The fact that the first anniversary of forcing open homosexual behavior on the military came and went quietly (according to the Obama Administration’s Ministry of Public Enlightenment, aka the “mainstream” media) is nothing more than a fresh illustration of the same whitewash the pro-homosexual Left smeared on this issue prior to the lame-duck vote in congress.

Woodrow Wilcox


Anyone who has ever served in the military knows (actually, you don’t even need to have served in order to possess the common sense to see this a mile away) social experiments of this nature trample freedom and degrade the effectiveness of our military forces. We also knew normal human sensitivities and liberty would be ground underfoot by the ruthless homofascist mindset of the Left.

I spent 10 years in the military in the 1980s and 1990s. I know the close-quarter environment military members must often live and work in, especially overseas and in forward operating areas. I also know that the military strongly enforces whatever the “wisdom of the day” is. Sometimes that consists of whatever asinine buzzword philosophy the paper-pushing bureaucrats in DOD force on them, and at other times it may include legitimate things like stopping sexual harassment, racial discrimination and so forth. I received extensive training on these subjects in basic, and again at my first duty station, as well as periodic re-emphasis of these priorities.



Having this experience, I knew very well what lay in store when a lame-duck Leftist congress decided to force this on the military in late 2010. It took less than a year to begin to see the problems surface.

I sincerely hope that, if Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are able to unseat the anti-American Marxist who currently occupies the White House, they–and hopefully a Republican-controlled congress–will change their mind and right this wrong.

Despite the confusion and uncertainty a repeal of this scheme may cause, the effectiveness of our national defense–as well as the God-given liberties of our military members–are far too important to allow this travesty to continue.

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Bob Ellis has been the owner of media company Dakota Voice, LLC since 2005. He is a 10-year U.S. Air Force veteran, a political reporter and commentator for the past decade, and has been involved in numerous election and public policy campaigns for over 20 years. He was a founding member and board member of the Tea Party groups Citizens for Liberty and the South Dakota Tea Party Alliance. He lives in Rapid City, South Dakota with his wife and two children.
Bob Ellis
View all posts by Bob Ellis
Bobs website
  • thisoldspouse

    Besides the trampling of liberty and rights once enjoyed by the vast majority of service members, the issue of the proliferation of disease has already been reported. At Alaska’s Elmendorf Joint Reserve base, a sharp spike in the incidences of HIV infection was reported among male service members right after the DADT repeal. You have to be an absolute idiot to deny the correlation, if not the causation.

  • WXRGina

    Oh man, Bob. I didn’t know Ryan said that. Disappointing, indeed, and foolish on Ryan’s part.

    As always, you have the truth summed up professionally. I wish our “leaders” would heed it.

    • thisoldspouse

      I wouldn’t expect RINO Romney to pick any other type, Gina. Ryan may be more conservative than Romney on some issues, but on social issues, he just as liberal, I’m afraid.

      • WXRGina

        Of course, Spouse. In this election, we have the most terrible choice between two evils that we’ve had since time out of mind. I am not naive to not understand that we are in trouble, either way.

        • thisoldspouse

          Exactly, Gina. I cannot get excited about this election, although I am motivated to vote like never before, even planning to be a poll watcher.

          It will be the supreme paradox of my life on election night that elation when Obama is defeated, and, at the same time, utter despair that he’s been replace by another ultra-liberal will be mingled in a single moment.

  • DCM7

    It tells you something about a viewpoint when those who hold it have to use bullying and force to protect it.

  • Carrie_K_Hutchens

    I believe that Ryan is open to discussion & can be convinced he is wrong on this issue. He does not demand worship of his thoughts and forbid others to challenge his position.

    • thisoldspouse

      Do you think Ryan would be in favor of an ENDA adding sexual perversion? Romney has already stated his support for this.

      • Actually back in 2007 Ryan did vote for ENDA, then turned around shortly after and voted against it. I haven’t been able to find out if his “FOR” vote was a parliamentary maneuver of some kind or genuine, but it’s worth noting.