Gays in the Military? Thank Pro-Gay “Conservatives”

Those who oppose treating the military as a social engineering laboratory for the Gay Left’s agenda should consider turning their ire against a new target: pro-gay “conservatives” and their establishment Republican allies. As I noted two weeks ago, U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips ruled the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy “unconstitutional” — a decision that certainly would have surprised James Madison or General Washington. The Obama administration essentially threw the case, making, in Phillips’ words, “no affirmative case” against DADT’s repeal, which the president is on record supporting.

John Gizzi reported in Human Events this weekend that Family Research Council President Tony Perkins is “pleading” with National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Sen. John Cornyn, R-TX, not to address the Log Cabin Republicans next week. The Log Cabin Republicans is a homosexual Republican group that occasionally describes itself as “conservative.”

It is also the group that brought the successful lawsuit against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Why are Cornyn and the NRSC kowtowing to the very group that just used judicial activism to impose a policy that will weaken the military during the middle of two wars? Sadly, a cohort of leading “conservatives” have spent several years telling their traditional elder brothers in the movement to sit down, shut up, and unfurl the rainbow flag of our new effeminate fighting force.

The cultural revolution has been embraced wholeheartedly by the usual gang of pseudoconservatives, “former” liberals/radicals, and RINOs. One flashpoint emerged this weekend, when WorldNetDaily‘s Joseph Farah debated the head of the gay “conservative” organization GOProud at WND’s “Take Back America” conference. A similar fissure opened up last December, when GOProud sponsored the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). However, the homosexuals’ anti-military argument has been taken up by those who are not homosexuals.

Arguments in favor of putting gays in the military have come from FrumForum — but also from certain commentators at The Weekly Standard (Michael Goldfarb, specifically). Bill O’Reilly’s aptly named “Culture Warrior,” Margaret Hoover, supports repealing DADT. (Hoover’s great-grandfather, President Herbert Hoover, was also a forgotten economic progressive. There’s no denying the Hoover brand has been pure gold for the Republican Party.) Although John McCain opposes the repeal, his daughter Meghan wrote on her Twitter page Friday, “I am a supporter of LGBT rights and am against DADT – I fight every day.” She and her mother, Cindy McCain, also posed for pictures opposing California’s Proposition 8, the overwhelmingly popular voter initiative to ban gay marriage.

However, Charles Krauthammer was perhaps the most gratuitous in his offense against traditional conservatives. In March, he said he supported the Obama administration putting homosexuals into the military and added, “I think it’s a form of discrimination that’s sort of outlived itself.” (Krauthammer is far from the only “national security conservative” to accuse those who believe in traditional morality of “prejudice.”)

This kind of defection from 6,000 years of Western moral tradition and social stability weakens conservatives’ ability to preserve our disintegrating national culture.

Although many of these call themselves “national security conservatives,” they urge the Right to embrace the ideology of the Left (identity politics), enforced by the means of the Left (judicial fiat), serving the goals of the Left (cultural radicalization). Indeed, affirming the Log Cabin Republicans and other “gay conservatives” who support hate crimes laws, gays in the military, and redefining marriage weakens the institution their advocates say they cherish above all: the U.S. military.

Despite recently trumpeted releases, Lt. Col. Bob Maginnis (Ret.), who studied the issue of gays serving in the military in 1993 for the Department of Defense, said all the commission’s objections remain “just as valid today.” Experts have testified open service will create a lack of unit cohesion, threat of sexual blackmail, homosexual nepotism, and a general breakdown in military culture. This is why most military leaders oppose social tinkering with the nation’s defenses. Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness has written, “the four military service chiefs of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps were ‘furious’ that their strong letters of opposition were disregarded.”

Adding homosexuals to the military may lead some brass to purge the service of “homophobes” currently serving valiantly in their ranks. Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, the U.S. Army’s deputy chief of staff in charge of personnel matters, speaking to a military audience in Germany, equated those who oppose the Gay Left’s agenda with racists. He said those opposing sexualizing the military “will need to get with the program, and if they can’t, they need to get out. No matter how much training and education of those in opposition, you’re always going to have those that oppose this on moral and religious grounds just like you still have racists today.”

Rugged heterosexual soldiers may not wait to be fired. A Military Times poll taken in December 2008 found that 24 percent of enlisted servicemen would leave the military or consider leaving if the political authorities repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” with 10 percent saying they would definitely resign. The two hot wars America is waging have stretched our military resources to the breaking point. Losing one-in-four soldiers to curry favor with the homosexual voting bloc, 70 percent of whom voted for Barack Obama in 2008, would have devastating consequences on our military and our national security.

In short, some prominent “national security conservatives” are promoting an agenda that threatens our national security.

As I reported in July 2003, the founder of the radical left-wing group Code Pink established an organization called “Occupation Watch” in Iraq (later renamed “International Occupation Watch”). Its mission was to convince enough U.S. soldiers in Iraq to declare themselves conscientious objectors to end the war. IOW founders Medea Benjamin and Leslie Cagan hoped to destroy U.S. morale and collapse our fighting forces by attrition.

If the cultural revolutionary “conservatives” succeed in foisting their agenda on America, they will decimate the military more effectively than the Hate America Left ever dreamed.

This article originally appeared on Monday, September 20, 2010, on