What is it with these guys? Can't they just leave well enough alone? Among the the many things conservatives and traditionalists have to worry about, the whole gays and the military thing is rearing (no pun intended) its ugly head again. Only this time, there will be no resolute Colin Powell (when he wasn't a wimp) to contain the damage.
At the risk of being labeled a "homophobe," which is a made-up word devoid of any real meaning (I much prefer pervertophobe if you must label me), I'll go ahead and declare myself against the whole homosexualist agenda. That means gay "marriage" as well. Look, I got no beef with what consenting adults do in their spare time, but to force society to alter its institutions in favor of gonadal preferences is foolish at best. It's actually worse than that, it's damn near destructive.
Let's stay with the military. It has never been the contention of traditionalists that homosexuals can't fight or that they don't love their country. History shows this to be false. Our contention has always been that introducing sexual tension into cohesive fighting units inevitably degrades them. This means putting women in combat situations as well. It's not enough for the high and might to deride the opinions of straight men and simple say in a snide manner "straight men don't like to shower with queers. That's their problem." No sir, it's YOUR problem. Already, it's predicted that reinlistment rates will drop. Pretty soon, the military will have achieve a critical mass of homosexuals, which will have a demoralizing effect on those who aren't gay.
Why is this, you ask? Think of it, what do you think would happen if you put a straight man in a shower with 20 or say naked, nubile young women? Of course, if you believe in human nature, you would say he would be aroused. Why are we to believe otherwise for gay males in the same situation? Part of it is because we've been propaganzized to believe that gay males are somehow "holy" and "virtuous." Women are notorious for believing this horseshit. They draw their impressions of homosexuals from TV shows like "Will and Grace" and like the fact that men can be sensitive and caring (like themselves). Many women love having gay men as friends because they're non-threatening and seem far more empathetic than their loutish husbands or boyfriends.
This is all besides the point however. As far as the military is concerned, the fears of straight men go far beyond possible homosexual rape in the showers. The single greatest fear men have (of whatever sexual orientation)is: will my CO endanger my life on a mission because I haven't returned his affections (or because he wants my wife/girlfriend)? The moralistic strictures of the USMJ, such as prohibitions against adultery and fraternization between the ranks, are there for a reason. Any relationship between the ranks that goes outside of the normal hierarchy is dangerous. It breeds discontent and can have disastrous consequences. Hence concerns about unit cohesion.
Any talk about famous homosexual military commanders in the past is gratuitous. Alexander may have been bisexual. Same thing with Julius Caesar. But would any American raised on belief in the equality of man want to have served in their armies? These men lived in societies that had rigid class structures, including slavery. Sodomy was a time-tested way of enforcing subservience. Do we really want to overturn our republican social norms (which is what homosexuality will ultimately do) just so homosexuals can serve with impunity in the last, workable institution we have?
Look at the other institutions that have been damaged by homosexuality: the academy and the Roman Catholic priesthood. American higher education today is in a parlous state. Censorship exists because of political correctness (just as Larry Summers). The purpose of liberal education --free and open inquiry--is all but dead. As for the Catholic Church, its Christian witness has been horribly damaged and all thanks to a "lavender mafia" burrowed within its ranks that made it impossible for heterosexuals to pursue the priestly vocation.
Make no mistake: there has been no greater engine for social good in the West than the Roman Church. All of the greatest institutions that drove Western Civilization to its present apogee --universities, hosptials, orphanages--have been products of the Church. Today, when we stand on the precipice of legally sanctioning a new abortion holocaust (via the FOCA), the only bulwark standing in the way is the Catholic Church. And because of the pederast scandal of the recent past, its moral authority has been horribly compromised.
In conclusion, the United States Armed Forces are perhaps the last bastion of professionalism left in our culture. It is the one institution which still commands respect across the political spectrum (not really: the Left are seditious bastards who hate the military, but they can't say so openly). Its forces are all volunteer. According to standardized tests, they have higher IQs, better organizational skills, and are considerably less criminal than the population at large. And now because of a Leninist comintern of homosexual brownshirts, President-elect Obama is going to grant them their every wish.
Most homosexuals in America are patriotic. But despite their feelings for our country, their lifestyle is incompatible with what we expect from professional servicemen serving in the army of a republic. The American people may not care much about this at present, but there will come a time in which they will wake up and find out that their armed forces, which used to be the envy of the world, have become a giant homosexual cadre of Mameluks, unrestrained by moral concerns and the plaything of oligarchs and tyrants.
Negroes, Converts, Cradles & Slaves
10 years ago
