Don’t Repeal DADT

I like this theme, and have written about it here before, as has Justin Raimondo. Simply: the world isn’t made more just for gay people by inclusiveness being extended to history’s largest murder organization. Lesbians don’t have an equal right to kill. It’s not progressive to include transsexuals in the American project to garrison the globe. And so on. To promote this theme, and to culture-jam in general, I made a page on Facebook entitled Don’t Repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which includes a few links to sympathetic essays. So far, it’s a few people I know and some other general military or christianist flunkies who don’t seem to have even glanced at the content. The description is clear:

“In the fight for equality, gay people now claim the right to join in our government’s pointless, counterproductive, and expensive wars. This page is for those who think the equal right to kill isn’t something worth fighting for.”

I invite those who agree to “Like” the page, join in the discussion, and make this a more well-known position. US-Liberal types embrace gays in the military automatically, unthinkingly — “gay” = “good.” But gays who kill for the state are killers like anyone else.

Gays Don’t Have an Equal Right to Kill

My whole life it seems “gays in the military” has been an issue. Liberal democrats and gay activists have been arguing for years with right-wingers and the military establishment over the issues surrounding the right of homosexuals to fight in the armed forces — from troop morale to religious morality, everyone’s got a problem. Bill Clinton attempted to defuse the issue with his “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy neutering the military’s witch hunters and silencing would-be out-and-proud gay soldiers, but the next wave in this socially liberated age is to fight for gays to be allowed to openly, outwardly, “serve their country.” Not surprisingly, the military establishment objects.

My stance has always been one of ambivalence. Obviously I’m against the government discriminating against people for any reason, but I always thought the gay ban was great for those young people, gay or straight, who needed the out (hah) from a possible future draft. On the other hand, there is the admittedly shocking dismissal of many gay Arabic interpreters in a time when the military would admit to desperately needing their skillset. But now that the subject has been brought up again, I realize I finally have a solid viewpoint: I am completely against the ban being lifted.

Gay people do not have the equal right to join an organization, government-run or not, that seizes vast amounts of American wealth, weaponizes it, and then detonates it in foreign countries full of innocent people who have caused the United States no harm — and in the process destroying them and their wealth, turning their kinsmen against us in rage. There’s nothing progressive about claiming they do. I support the military’s ban on gays in the military, and I do not at all sympathize with those heartbroken homosexuals who have been ousted. Their pain is nothing compared to that wrought the world over by the organization they hope to join or re-up with.

On the issue of gay marriage, I don’t feel the same way — equal legal rights should be extended to all parties no matter what I think about the institution of marriage. But not so when it comes to literal life-and-death issues of war and occupation.

Want to serve your country? We’re in a recession — start a business, soldier.