Gays in the Military....

Last night, I sat and watched the Republican YouTube debate. As always with these things, I have an outsider's view and often find myself agreeing with both sides. As someone who in US terms would be described most accurately as a fiscal liberal and a social conservative, there are things said that I agree with wholeheartedly and some things that sound like drivel. And that's on both sides of the political spectrum.

The debate posed about gays in the military offended me horribly, both as a social conservative and a community member. I can't imagine anyone justifying the marginalization of any segment of the population, especially when it's based on false data. In common terms, I call that "propaganda".

One of the candidates stated that he believed the "don't ask/don't tell" policy was correct because most people who join the military are "conservative" and subscribe to "Judeo-Christian values".

That's garbage.

Most of the people who join the military are minorities and poor people. There are campaigns used by the military to draw them in, promises of college funds and benefits. Many people see it as a way out of poverty and that's an entirely valid reason to choose it.

Why not present it that way? Honestly.

When social conservativism becomes nothing more than a tool to marginalize and discriminate against members of the population, whether it be religion or s*xual orientation, it is wrong and loses its credibility. It is a misapplication of the entire concept. Social conservatism is about traditional values which has almost as many definitions as "blue". What are "traditional values"? Whose values?

Do those values really represent a majority of people in the community? I would say not. If traditional values would loosely be defined as "character, commitment and courage", how can it be seen as courageous, good character or a sign of commitment to imply that an entire segment of the population is lacking those things so completely that they should not be permitted to serve?

Not only is that infantilizing, it is bigotry. The implication then is that gay people are unable to understand appropriate behavior, that they can not control their s*xual impulses enough to work in a group with those who are unlike them. It also perpetuates the idea that gay people want to "recruit" straight people as though it is some bizarre competition where those with the most members at the end wins?

I call that "ignorance". It is no more and no less ignorant than creating social policy based on ethnic stereotypes.

What say you?
~*