The common-sense case against homosexuals in military service
December 23, 2010
In an outstanding essay for the National Catholic Register, Tim Drake argues that the decision to allow avowed homosexuals into the US armed services is likely to produce unattractive results—of a sort with which the Catholic Church is all too familiar, after an era in which many homosexuals were admitted into seminaries.
Drake asks rhetorically:
What will be the result once the military has been compromised by disordered love? What will happen when an 18-year-old recruit finds himself in an unequal power differential with a superior officer who wants something more than push-ups? What’s likely to happen when brotherhood is tested on the field in the midst of battle?
The Drake article contains telling citations from Albert Einstein, who “once said that doing the same thing, yet expecting different results, is the definition of insanity;” and from Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr, who wrote from the Birmingham jail about the need to repent “for the appalling silence of the good people.”
Posted by: raschfamily4452 -
Dec. 24, 2010 7:04 AM ET USA
I can speak to the power situation. First, it should read Non Commissioned Officer. This is where the abuse is most rampant. I spent three years as enlisted in a field artillery (line) unit. I know of such a case between an E3 and E7. There were other incidents. These happened between 1972 and 1974. The unwritten rule was keep yourself to yourself or bad things can happen. When the other E.M.s, E4 and below found out about this, they were ready for retribution. The E7 was quietly reassigned.