The Predictions of Military Experimentation are Hardly Exaggerated

By Tom Stark, 05/26/2012

army logoBefore the final repeal of the notorious Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) policy put into place by the Clinton administration as a means of coping with homosexuals in the military, many among us predicted that doing so would open up a can of worms when it came to issues like “right of conscience” for military chaplains, sexual conduct disruptive to good discipline and order, etc.  We were scoffed at and ridiculed as bigots, Neanderthals, and the like.

But here we are post-repeal and many of our predictions have been realized.  Gary McCaleb writes on Townhall.com that while opponents were “mocked like Orville and Wilbur Wright” for protesting that chaplains would be faced with conflicts over redefining marriage on military installations, just such issues are now coming home to roost.

The House of Representatives attached amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act (HR 4310) that would protect chaplains’ rights to refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies and also protect them from adverse disciplinary or career repercussions from doing so.  Now, who could object to these simple statements of logic that fall wholly in line with our First Amendment rights to believe as we choose and be protected from government sanctions?  Apparently, President Obama does.

According to McCaleb,

“So far, the administration is defending its opposition to the language in H.R. 4310 by saying the legislation contains ‘unnecessary and ill-advised policies that would inhibit the ability of same-sex couples to marry or enter a recognized relationship under State law.’ ”

So much for “no repercussions.”   Many claimed that there would be no disruption – the military would “adapt.”  Apparently, this, too, has been a failure.  Bob Unruh, writing for wnd.com quotes statistics from a report by Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness,

“Among the details in the reports:  While, since 2006, 5 percent of the violent sexual assaults have been against men, recent reports now put that figure at 12 to 14 percent.”

The Unruh article also points out that non-consensual sodomy attacks for fiscal 2011 totaled 7 percent of the nearly 2,500 attacks cited on one military report.

The extensive statistics cited in the article point us in the logical correlation between the repeal of DADT with these significant increases in the male-on-male sexual assaults being seen since July 2011.  How the administration will explain these facts away in light of their present policies remains to be seen.

The third and last bit of experimentation is equally disturbing, particularly to those of you who have young daughters who might be considering a career, or at least enlistment, in the military service.

The Army Times recently reported on a statement from General Ray Odierno informing of a new plan by the Army to increase combat roles for females that will place them on the front lines with infantry units and effectively erase the gender distinctions in assignments within the Army.  While admittedly, this is a preliminary “experimental” program, how many of these kinds of experiments have resulted in pre-determined outcomes and permanent policies that support the effort regardless of overall effectiveness?

There are physical and psychological difference between men and women.  This is indisputable and the way God intended it to be.  Men and women have different roles in society and women were not intended to be the warriors.  While some might be capable, does it represent what is best for our society as a whole to subject them to such stresses?

The objections we should have to these illustrations of tinkering with our military are particularly strong in three respects:

  • First, the defenders of our country should not be the laboratory for social experimentation of any kind, most pointedly where it impacts combat readiness and combat strength.
  • Secondly, when the military is being managed by a civilian Secretary of Defense who has strong ties to many communist associations (as Leon Panetta has) for an administration that is bent on reducing our country’s stature in the world it is not a stretch to believe that the three things cited above all have one thing in common – the weakening of our ability to remain a leading force for freedom in the world.
  • And last, but not least, that these policies continue to erode religious freedom, religious beliefs, and the God-given roles we are blessed with that should not be altered by man.

All of these situations should cause us to be very concerned about the direction of our military and our country.  Much of it can be corrected at the polls in November if we remember one thing.  It is our duty to elect righteous, God-fearing leaders if we are to remain under God’s protection.  Without His protection our country cannot survive.  It is as simple as that.

 

About Nathan Cherry

Nathan Cherry is the chief editor and blogger for the Engage Family Minute blog, the official blog of the FPCWV. He serves also as the Regional Development Coordinator as a liaison to the pastor's of West Virginia. He is a pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-religious freedom conservative. He is also a husband, father, pastor, author, musician, and follower of Jesus Christ.

Investing in the Family

The Family Policy Council of West Virginia is supported by the faith-based giving by families like yours.  We welcome your financial partnership through our online giving center.  When you invest in the Family Policy Council of West Virginia, you ignite a catalyst for change in today's culture.  With your partnership, we will confidently pursue our passion of advancing, defending, and equipping West Virginia's families through policy, politics, and preparation.