- The Washington Times - Friday, November 12, 2010

Not all of the snipers targeting U.S. military personnel are in caves or perched on cliffs in Afghanistan. Some are right here in America, planting stories instead of explosives. Their mission: to destroy the military’s moral backbone. On Oct. 28, unnamed “sources” claimed to the Associated Press that a survey conducted by the military over ending the ban on homosexuality reveals that most soldiers are thrilled with the idea. Sure they are.

The next shot was fired by an unnamed “source” who managed to get a front-page story in The Washington Post on - you guessed it - Veterans Day. The headline was: “Report: Little risk to lifting gay ban.”

I had to read the “source” reference twice because it was so outlandish: “The source declined to state his position on whether to lift the ban, insisting it did not matter. He said he felt compelled to share the information out of concern that groups opposed to ending the ban would mischaracterize the findings.”

What a selfless, objective source. Why make Congress read the full report before voting on the bill to end “don’t ask, don’t tell,” sponsored by Rep. Patrick Murphy, Pennsylvania Democrat, whose constituents voted on Nov. 2 to throw him out ? Congress didn’t bother to read the 2,700-page Obamacare bill before voting on it. Why should members read a far shorter report that could profoundly alter every branch of the service?

And how handy that the “source” concluded that the military can accommodate open homosexuality “with only minimal and isolated incidents,” as the Post put it.

Congress is back for a lame-duck session this week, and members are being pressured to vote for a military authorization bill that contains Mr. Murphy’s repeal of the 1993 law barring open homosexuality in the armed services. Often mischaracterized as “don’t ask, don’t tell,” a Clinton policy that watered down the actual law, the law has functioned fairly well. About 14,000 men and women have been separated from the armed services under that law over the past 17 years. That’s less than 1 percent of total military separations, most of which are for pregnancy, substance abuse, being overweight, etc.

President Obama has urged Congress to overturn the law, and a federal judge in California, Virginia A. Phillips, issued a profoundly arrogant ruling in October ordering the entire U.S. military, including overseas troops, to cease enforcing the law. The 9th Circuit put a stay on her order as requested by the Obama administration, and the case is expected to go to the U.S. Supreme Court, where its fate is uncertain.

Meanwhile, homosexual activists and their media allies are putting on a full-court press to persuade the still-liberal current Congress to overturn the law before a more conservative Congress is seated in January.

Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, is leading the opposition, with Sen. Lady Gaga and most of the media occupying trenches on the other side. Just kidding. Lady Gaga, who has the pop world by the throat, would never settle for being a mere senator.

The stakes in this fight are enormous, beginning with chaplains, who would be forced to recant their biblical morality or resign. Enforcement of any new “tolerant” policy would result in zero tolerance for servicemen who believe that homosexuality is wrong. The military would then be used as a battering ram against American society’s resistance to mandated acceptance of homosexuality.

The survey itself, which is due for release on Dec. 1, is deeply flawed because it seeks input only on how to lift the ban, not whether to do so, according to Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness.

Buried deep in the Post story is this: “About 40 percent of the Marine Corps is concerned about lifting the ban. …” The story also notes, “Objections by troops who do not want to room or shower with openly gay troops should be handled case-by-case by commanders and should be scrutinized, the source said.”

Mrs. Donnelly responds: “Translation: ‘Personnel officials will scrutinize your attitudes with regard to homosexuality. If you have an attitude problem that does not fully support the new (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered) personnel policy, you are on your own.’ The solution to the ‘problem,’ of course, will be individual denials of promotions, ending the careers of thousands of experienced personnel who will be told they are the ‘only ones’ who object.”

The new Marine commandant, Gen. James F. Amos, told reporters on Nov. 6 that he strongly opposes ending the ban: “There’s risk involved,” Gen. Amos said. “I’m trying to determine how to measure that risk. This is not a social thing. This is combat effectiveness.” Combat, he said, is an “intimate” experience without parallel in civilian life. “We’re talking about our young men - laying out, sleeping alongside of one another and sharing death, fear and loss of brothers.”

What a killjoy. Gen. Amos became commandant two weeks ago, succeeding Gen. James T. Conway, who told Congress in February, “My best military advice to this committee, to the secretary, to the president would be to keep the law such as it is.”

The Los Angeles Times reported, “In August, during his last visit with troops in Afghanistan, Conway repeatedly asked gatherings of enlisted Marines throughout Helmand province whether they thought unit cohesion would be harmed if openly gay people could serve. Almost unanimously, the young Marines indicated they felt it would.”

Apparently, the surveyors cited by the mysterious “source” missed those Marines.

The Marine generals’ views parallel those of 1,167 retired generals and admirals who have signed a petition opposing any effort to remove the law. They are not currently serving, so they weren’t included in the survey, either.

Watch this week for more leaks and talking heads concluding that the “science is settled,” that GI Joe really does want Gay Joe for a bunky. They just have to make sure the data collectors steer clear of certain Marines in Afghanistan.

Robert Knight is senior fellow for Coral Ridge Ministries and author of the newly updated “Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who Are Pushing America Toward Socialism” (radicalrulers.com, 2010).

Copyright © 2023 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide