The confusion here is that I am a purist protecting the institution, could care less about sexuality as much as I am concerned about a strong military. Is that unreasonable? In my service, which goes back to high school corps of cadets, I’ve never had a drop of problems with gays at all. In the 80s people served and most others knew their orientation but unless there were personal clashes no one really came out with great force to ‘out’ them. The issue at hand, and perhaps I can help you understand, is that sexual orientation is not important. It is the service and focus on the service that should matter. this is not about lack of ability to perform one’s duties; only about chosing self-expression in an environment and profession where these traits are not conducive to operational readiness. Even some people I know who are gay and served would agree partially to this argument, however, yes, they probably would want to express themselves more often. You can’t change mainstream society. You can also try to legislate core beliefs and attitudes but human nature rejects that.

I don’t by the way, agree with people going out of their way to ‘out’ someone. I would much rather let people live peaceably as long as the overall purpose of the service is not affected. And that goes for both straights and gays.

Thanks for posting but you left so soon. I invite you to expand on your response to my article by perhaps providing examples of what bothers you. This piece as I stated, is about focusing on what the military services need, not to please individual social whims, which is exactly what has happened in the services. I am not going to defend your claim that I sound like a bigot because it is irrelevant to this discussion. Gays will always serve in our military. I have served with many who were superb in their jobs and their sexual orientation was not an issue ever. Others want to make that the purpose of their service which is misguided. The issue is the overt display of a bevahior where it affects the overall mission, not the people themselves.

Perhaps you’d like to return for further debate and though I”m not here to talk about my own qualifications the piece, regardless of the angle, would have incited the same reaction as you have exhibited. All that can be done is present the argument from one perspective and go from there. The way the world is changing seems to suit you and that is fine however you should try to see things from other points of view without feeling threatened. These changes are not for the better and I stand by that belief.

By all means, Bill, do come back to chat.

It is changing, lady. Change with it, or watch the world pass you by.

Also, you kind of seem like you are a bigot. (If that matters to you.)

Toodles!