Barney Frank's Pink Bazooka Brigade

Too many times we folks on the right let ourselves be forced to be either the straw man or part of the angry mob flogging the straw man.  Never is that more clear than when gay rights is the debate.

A perturbed Anne Flaherty at The Associated Press has painted the fighting lines as best as she can see them from her undersized Upper East Side flat: either you want gays openly serving in the armed services tomorrow, or you advocate their immediate mass deportation to Antarctica.  For the time being, Senate Republicans (other than Susan “Scruples” Collins) are holding their ground and rightly pointing out that there are a lot of good reasons this may not be such a responsible idea.  To hear it explained by Ms. Flaherty or Harry Reid, Jeff Sessions is busy firing up the galleon to set sail for Queen Maud Land while John McCain gears up as a frogman, ready to poke holes in the hull somewhere in the South Atlantic.

But maybe we right-of-center folks should get a little better about ignoring the straw man and finding the correct position in between Ms. Flaherty’s two extremes.  DADT was implemented in 1993 under the very reasonable premise that open, flaunted homosexuality among soldiers could damage morale and potentially bring unnecessary emotional distractions and health problems to the one government institution that simply cannot afford them, especially in combat units.  The other very reasonable premise was that superior officers had better things to do than investigate the sexual proclivities of their troops if no problems were reported or evident in the first place.

Conservatives, of all people, should be able to look right past the easy charges of hypocrisy DADT invites, and appreciate a policy that suggests some things are just better left behind closed doors.  During the 17-year lifespan of DADT, no one of any repute has suggested rounding up in-the-closet gay soldiers, smoking them out of their hiding places, or otherwise persecuting them.  What then is the left’s agenda here?

Only 38 years removed from Jane Fonda hopping behind the controls of a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun, you could argue the Marxists are trying to bring as much turmoil as possible to the institution they loathe most.  Perhaps in light of the great troubles organizers take to bring leather-clad, pornographic “gay pride” parades into the suburbs, you could posit that, at a visceral level, they just love shoving the gay lifestyle in the faces of all the delicate Christians who take their families of six to church in a gas-guzzling SUV.  Both of these are valid perspectives.  But I would suggest something even more sinister is at play.

Racial minorities, women, and, to a lesser extent, the disabled have had to fight way too hard for their basic constitutional protections, much to our national shame.  Conversely, only a people generally predicated on the belief that all men and women are made in the image of God, regardless of race, could have ever had these fights fought and won in the first place, much to our national pride (try getting elected Prime Minister of Japan if you’re not Japanese).  Leftists, however, have made an art of hijacking the legitimate civil rights struggles of our young history, and, for their own political profit, inflaming the growing pains Western Civilization has had to endure to bring us all the way from Magna Carte to this moment.  And in this moment, a woman can be the CEO of Kraft Foods, EBay, or DuPont.  A black family could traverse the width of Interstate 10 on summer vacation and reasonably expect to not get harassed or mistreated by rednecks along the way.  Heck, the CEO of XEROX is a black woman, the CEO of PepsiCo is an Indian woman, and the President of The United States is a black man.

So where does the left go from here when real equality under the law cements itself over the next couple generations?  Where will they hustle us and divide us to cling to their fleeting political power?  This is where women and minorities should be jealously furious…  The Marxists are trying to equate the knowing, consensual participation in a sexual perversion with the loving way God created each person differently; skin color, sex, or otherwise.  One thing we also know about the left is that they won’t stop here.  Today it’s open homosexuality in the military.  Tomorrow, it will be in Boy Scout troops, preschools, and blood banks.

No one in front of a television camera seems to have the guts to say it, but it doesn’t take a study commissioned by the Joint Chiefs to know gays are more prone to sexually-transmitted disease, emotional instability, suicide, and that those things don’t mix well with the battlefields of Iraq or Afghanistan.  You don’t need a million-dollar study to know woman like to talk on the telephone and men like to channel surf.  In the paraphrased words of Jerry Seinfeld, sometimes you simply know because you live and you breathe.

Since no one intelligent is suggesting gays be imprisoned, kept from voting, or fired from their jobs, my message to the GOP is: have the courage to do what’s right by our servicemen, political correctness be damned.  Gays are also made in the image of God, but their unnatural sexual choice is theirs alone.  Even if they’re scared to fully articulate the reasons why, congratulations to Senate Republicans for standing strong so far.  There are few more conservative notions than the idea that choices have consequences.  If you choose to be openly gay, you’ve chosen your career path will be something other than our armed services.  God bless our men and women in uniform.