Gays In The Military/Gay Rights What You May Not Know

Nearly seventy percent of the Men and Women serving in the military say they would be comfortable serving with homosexuals/bisexuals. Every year on average we loose about four-thousand military service man/women because they cannot be open about their sexuality (“Johnny Symons”). The Homosexual community believes that the military is only refusing to lift the ban due to habit and nothing else; there is minimal to no benefit to the American military, or the comfort of the service men/women in the military. The assumption that if the service men/women would loose the ability to work together is false. The men and women that faithful serve their country who are homosexual/bisexual have had to lie and scheme to create their false guise. This forceful deception is the only issue related to homosexuality/bisexuality that creates less unity within the military. Therefore, I see there are only reasons to lift the restriction (open sexuality), in the military, to increase unity and concentration on the task at hand, instead of homosexuals/bisexuals service men and women focusing on how to guise their sexuality sexual orientation or preferences.

Homosexuals and bisexuals shouldn’t be discriminated against, restricted in the military or elsewhere simply because all cases homosexuality/bisexuality (according to scientific fact as listed on http://www.guardian.co.uk) are genetic and/or due to childhood experiences (it is not a life style), but for lack of better words a “condition”. Due to the fact this is not a controllable thing, it is incorrect morally to discriminate against homosexuals/bisexuals. This is similar to Adolph Hitler and the Holocaust, discriminating for an uncontrollable trait, race, or disability. Discriminating against anyone for any reason is unnecessary, immoral, and simply wrong. Also why discriminate against someone for sexual orientation when you would not want to be discriminated against for your own differences, whether it is being in an emotional support classroom, having metal or physical disabilities, or maybe even being a minority, or a Caucasian. Therefore we can conclude that discriminating is pointless especially in cases out of your control.

A piece of interesting information is that homosexuals/bisexuals are all around, as a matter of a fact the United States is home to twenty-five million homosexuals/bisexuals. This means that ten percent of the United State’s population is “gay”. Scientists and researchers say that about seventy-eight percent of the gay community is white, and state the rest consists of “minorities” (Blacks, Hispanics, Asian and so on). On average the sex that is most judgmental of homosexuals/bisexuals is the males (according to scientific fact as listed on http://www.guardian.co.uk). Males are specifically opposed to man and man relationships (using terms such as “Fagot” or “Flamer”), but when asked what they think of a female homosexual they say “That’s fine” or “That’s Awesome” or something of that nature. When a female is asked what she thinks of homosexuals their response is usually “Its all the same to me” or “Most of my friends are gay” or sometimes “Really me too!”. This is the appropriate way that the homosexuals in the military as well as the homosexual/bisexual civilians should be treated, not with arrogance or violence.

In general most homosexual/bisexual issues are considered non-issues, though many people agree that they defiantly are important (just as important as global warming in my opinion). The homosexual/bisexual citizens of the United States are entitled to everything good and bad that a straight person is, whether it is marriage, children, sex, freedom from persecution, and so on. What we need to realize is that the people of the homosexual/bisexual community are people too, and many have fought, and protected us as members of the military for years now. We frequently say that we “hate” terrorists, though there may or may not be seventy-percent “gay” soldiers, either way a good amount are homosexual/bisexual, and imagine what state the country would be in with the massive amount of soldiers that would not be enlisted due to the fact they are “disliked, or socially inappropriate. Without them terrorists, would have a much easier attack than if they weren’t discriminated against. And, imagine all of the other military matters, for instance do you think the little bit of change we have made in Iraq and the Middle Eastern countries would exist? It is best when thinking of homosexuals that you think of it as if you “gay”. Would you want to have to worry what someone else said or did as a result of how you live, especially if it was out of your control? Just remember treat others as you want to be treated.

On the religious aspect of it, think of the bible, which was written by man regardless of who/what “told” them it needed to be done. And, since the beginning of time and space, man has disliked homosexuality. So who is to say that all things in the bible can be considered completely factual? Unless it says and “God spoke” or “Jesus said” or it was some miracle who says it can be considered factual? Homosexuality is mentioned in Romans which says: “With his usual intolerance, Paul condemns homosexuals including lesbians. (This is the only clear reference to lesbians in the Bible.)” Romans 1:26-28. Also Romans states that “Homosexuals (those "without natural affection") and their supporters (those "that have pleasure in them") are worthy of death." Romans 1:31-32 (The Bible, http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/gay/long.htm). Neither of these is stated by God or Jesus, (Paul is neither) and therefore can only be taken as a grain or salt. For people who believe strongly that the bible is completely without flaw, than ponder this, if homosexuality is so terrible, why is it only directly mentioned once? So we simply imply that if The Bible references perversions that it is talking about homosexuality? We cannot go off on a tangent when it comes to the Holy Bible, we also cannot change the Bible to fit our needs, and it must be taken as it is, with no personal changes. This allows for the actual message to sink in.

Those opposed to homosexuality and pending “openness” in the military may argue that it is unnatural, or immoral. They say “why is it necessary for them to be open with their gayness”. They argue that open homosexuality in the military will promote less unity and make the soldiers uncomfortable. Also through “wisdom of the ages” they claim that straight or heterosexuals are a higher status. (Cameron) They argue to the homosexual supporters/community that;

1. Human sexuality is completely learned
2. Homosexuality is associated with many undesirable personality traits
3. Homosexuality does not provide the same range of possibilities for what might call “Moral Growth” (not Cameron, Allen Stairs)
4. Homosexual marriage is a defective counterfeit of traditional marriage, and that it poses a clear and present danger to the health of the community (Cameron).

Among other things, including the supposed fact that homosexuals/bisexuals make bad parents how serious can these statements be taken is all in the eye of who ever is reading it at the time. Those opposed to homosexuality also argue that homosexual marriages don’t last long, and therefore can expect many “divorces”. They also argue that homosexuality is hazardous to your health, especially in “married” gay couples more than the “single” ones. This considerably increases the spread of blood borne diseases I.e. AIDS and HIV. Homosexual marriage has the highest rate of domestic violence. Almost half of the homosexuals in the world are in violent relationship mostly females. (Cameron). That is their basic argument.

In conclusion, there are both good and bad in every situation. No orientation is without risk, and abstinence is the best route Dr. Paul Cameron has enlightened us on the medical risks and cultural defects in marriages, and Allen Stairs has presented his opinion on the matter. (According to my research) Their argument that sexuality is completely learned is false. Though some cases may be learned, most are either due to childhood experiences, or due to genetics, based off of race, sex, and family history. Dr. Paul Cameron also states “Although each of us could learn to be homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual, certain other facts about society and about males and females make it very likely that without considerable social pressure, most people would turn out to be homosexual.” Proving that even with his hypothesis that, homosexuality is completely learned, is uncontrollable, and (according to his statement) natural. Therefore I feel that even though many people are opposed to homosexuality/bisexuality, people should be able to love whom ever they desire to, with out ridicule or fear of discrimination. And, finally considering the opposition’s argument on health risks, isn’t it enough that they will have to deal with illnesses for something they can’t control? Would you make fun of a person with cancer, probably not, so why make fun of homosexuals, think on it.