Lt. Col. bashes gays in military newspaper

So yesterday, a Lt. Col. in the US Army wrote a letter to Stars & Stripes, a military newspaper with a worldwide circulation of about 300,000. He bashes homosexuals and I was angry enough to prepare a reply. Here is my reply. With a bit of luck, it should get published in the same newspaper in the coming days. I just couldn’t leave his :***: uncommented.

In response to “Right to military service” (letter on Aug. 26 by Lt. Col. Jeff White), Lt. Col. White is quite correct that to serve in the military is indeed a privilege, not a right. However, that privilege should be accorded to homosexuals as openly and equally as it is to heterosexuals. Anything else amounts to discrimination based on sexual orientation. Fortunately, we, or should I say, most modern armies have advance since the days of George Washington and allow homosexuals to serve their country proudly and openly, with no ill effects. Lt. Col. White seems to have missed the news that 13 of 19 NATO allies allow gays to serve openly. That includes Great Britain who lifted the ban in 2000. The British Ministry of Defense described the policy to lift the ban as “a solid achievement”, with no perceived effect on morale, unit cohesion or operational effectiveness.
In recent years, restrictions have been lifted on openly lesbian, gay and bisexual service in US civilian law enforcement and security agencies including the FBI, CIA, NASA, the National Security Agency and the Secret Service. There is no evidence to suggest that any of these organizations have suffered a decrease in proficiency or unit cohesion. Sorry to say that people like Lt. Col. White have yet to see the light. Homosexuality is not “a set of behaviors done in private with discretion or resisted altogether” as White claims. Homosexuality is a genetically and biologically based sexual orientation that cannot be changed, anymore than a heterosexual can decide to turn gay.
Lt. Col. White goes on to say “Homosexuality carries no benefits to anyone, and merits deference from nobody.” I beg to differ. If some 60,000 gay and lesbian soldiers serving in the US military would suddenly withdraw from service, Lt. Col. White might see some huge holes in the ranks, including his own in Iraq.
But then Lt. Col. White loses it completely when he says, “gays have no more right to serve and flaunt their sex tastes than do similarly patriotic obese, overage, or mentally ill people.” Disqualifying the military service of homosexuals for being similar to service by the “obese, overage or mentally ill” is slander unbecoming an officer in the US Army, or anyone else.
And the final blast: “No person has a right to public approval for any medically, socially and psychologically damaging lifestyle, or to insist on soldierly acceptance of their public celebration thereof.” So White in his letter.
The only things that are medically, socially and psychologically damaging about homosexuality are the narrow-minded, bigoted and discriminatory attitudes of people like Lt. Col. White. Homosexuality is not a choice or a lifestyle. Most of our NATO partners have grasped that fact. Lt. Col. White apparently needs some refresher training in “Sex 101” or better yet, a gay son. Both might help his enlightening process into the 21st century.
(hope that wasn't too harsh per the guidelines)

 

Here is the link:

http://epaper.stripes.com/index.php?archive=202703761764088209645088238789

Go to the 26 August European edition. It's a 10 MB PDF file so it will take a while to download, unfortunately secure, so I couldn't copy and paste.

My response should be in Friday's edition.

I'm curious as to what the reaction of my colleagues and bosses will be. :eusa_doh: