Don't ask, don't tell, don't experiment!
Let’s look at why women are not allowed to serve in combat arms. Aside from the fact women are susceptible to types of torture when captured that men are not, there’s the social/male/female interaction factor. If men and women serve in the front lines together, the possibility of relationships between those men and women is highly likely. Those types of relationships and the breakdown of those relationships interfere with the function of the closely knit combat units. Trust between these soldiers, sailors, operators, etc. is mission critical and can mean life or death. You put your life in the hands of those in your small unit and in those who support your unit. There is no room for personal relationships between these men and women. Leadership must be absolute and often decisions must be made in a split second and must be almost instinctual.
Personal relationships between men and women in the same unit clouds judgment, impairs thinking, and undermines authority. I’ve personally witnessed this in non-combat units where split second decisions do not have to be made. Even when there is time to analyze decisions, those decisions are often poor and ill advised. This is why many businesses prohibit personal relationships between employees.
In the same way, having homosexuals in a front line combat unit, destroys the function of the small that unit. If one soldier is more concerned about another individual soldier than other soldiers, thinking becomes clouded, judgment impaired, trust is lost and cohesion fails. Without these you have a group of disparate individuals instead of single unit. They cannot function as a single entity, thus becoming useless for military purposes. Even outside the military the stable homosexual relationship is a rare thing. How can an unstable relationship contribute to stability within the small unit?
The facets of military life affected by homosexuality that the liberal mindset ignores are morals and discipline. Even many conservative civilians have trouble truly grasping the meaning of morals and discipline. These are highly important precepts of military service that are often minimalized or completely discounted by civilians, especially left leaning civilians. The homosexual lifestyle is completely counter to these two aspects. Homosexuality in and of itself questions and disparages the very morals and discipline the military holds in high regard. How does the military function when told to disregard two of its most important principles when it comes to certain individuals? It cannot nor should it be expected to.
Lastly, Congress and the Whitehouse are failing to see the retribution incidents that will happen. Homosexuals in combat units will disrupt the morale of the unit and the responses will be both overt and subtle. Minor harassment will be the norm. There will be overt violence against homosexuals which the military will have to take severe disciplinary action against. The result from that will be an increase in combat and training “accidents” involving homosexuals. These overt and subtle incidents are precisely why homosexuals have previously been banned from military service. Then the military will have to institute sensitivity training which will increase the resentment and the problems will continue to escalate. The morale will continue to deteriorate. Problems not anticipated will arise. The path ahead is unclear and not good.
I hope I am wrong, but am pretty certain I am not. This is a dangerous path the U.S. Congress and Whitehouse are taking. It is clear they do not understand the U.S. military and it is clear they do not want to understand it. This isn’t like trying to make to high school boys get along or like desegregation. They are trying to force two disparate groups to integrate and the results are not going to be good. This will create problems, not solve them. The resulting problems will be much larger than anyone imagines… except those of us who’ve served in combat units and understand what is at stake here.