Thanks to
Julie Ponzi for pointing me to Mac Owens' good piece on the repeal of DADT. Byron York has already shown that the "support" of troops doesn't mean what you think it does. Owens now shows that the Pentagon report
misses the point, which is military readiness.
The “functional imperative,” i.e. the purpose of the U.S. armed forces is to fight and win the nation’s wars. Success in combat requires trust and personal/unit bonding. But as a number of commentators have noted, the report does not identify a single benefit of repealing the ban when it comes to recruiting, retention, unit effectiveness, and readiness of the force.
People talk as if all that were at issue is homophobic "discomfort" with serving with a homosexual. But has anyone answered these and other questions Owens raises?
What, he [a Marine colonel in an important command] asks, does “serving openly as a homosexual” mean? Is all homosexual conduct permitted, e.g. cross dressing when going to the PX? What conduct is not permitted?
Will “hate speech” policies apply to the armed forces after the repeal of the law? If a service member uses a term offensive to homosexuals, can he be charged with hate speech? Will commanders be required to take judicial action? If no judicial action is taken, will commanders be subject to civil or criminal suit by various homosexual political groups and their elected sponsors?
Will the personal opinion on homosexuality of a service member become an impediment to promotion or assignment to key billets? Are there any assignments to which homosexuals must be or may not be assigned?
Will the Senate and the House Armed Services committees demand sexuality statistics to make certain that homosexuals are being promoted at the same rate as non-homosexuals? Will homosexuals be promoted at a faster rate to "compensate" for previous years of discrimination?
Will homosexuals be deployed to countries where homosexuality is a crime? If not, who picks up the slack?
These aren't trivial questions, and the last thing the military needs during the era of terror is to be constantly adjudicating grievances of this nature.
