I have long been a proponent and supporter of the very important work that Elaine Donnelly has been doing. First, with regard to the women in combat issue, and secondly, about homosexuals in the military.

I watched the testimony of both Donnelly and a former Army Ranger Sgt. Major Jones regarding the homosexuals in the military issue which came up recently when they went at the Congressional hearing that was revisiting this issue. Members of Congress and the press clearly “demonize as morally repugnant (bigoted, homophobic, or worse) anyone who dared disagree with the Democrats’ and homosexual activists’ point of view.”

The response from the homosexuals who are trying to shove their deviant behavior into our military culture was hysterical, but it always has been, as this article at WND attests.

A Washington Post smear of Elaine Donnelly

I noticed that the IrishTimes came up with an equally inflammatory article:

Crusader’s dire warnings about gays in US military backfire on grand scale

I don’t see how as the warnings have “backfired” on a grand scale. What I see is homosexual activism that is putting our entire military at risk by trying to insert spreaders of disease into military culture calling anyone who disagrees with it ‘homophobic’. What is “homophobic” about pointing something out that activists themselves have said?

The response to the very reasoned arguments against homosexuals in the military actually proves the points that Elaine and made.

Military ‘gay’ ban supporters demonized by Congress
‘Show hearing would have made Stalin proud’

members of Congress clearly intended to “demonize as morally repugnant (bigoted, homophobic, or worse) anyone who dared disagree with the Democrats’ and homosexual activists’ point of view.”

These were Donnelly’s points. If the 1993 law is repealed:

“The new policy will be forced cohabitation with homosexuals, 24/7, in all military communities, including Army and Marine infantry battalions, Special Operations Forces, Navy SEALS, and all the ships at sea, including submarines. This would be tantamount to forcing female soldiers to cohabit with men in intimate quarters, 24/7, with no recourse but to leave or avoid the military all together.

“Taking the ‘civil rights’ argument to its logical, misguided conclusion, the military will be required to give special rights to professed (not discreet) homosexuals, and enforce a corollary policy of ‘zero tolerance’ of anyone who disagrees. The military does not do things halfway. Commanders will not be able to improve the situation, since they might be accused of ‘intolerance’ themselves.

“Current incidents of sexual misconduct involving men and women will be increased three-fold, to include male/male and female/female issues.

“To make the new policy ‘work,’ valuable training time will be diverted to ‘diversity’ training reflecting the attitudes of civilian gay activist groups. This training will attempt to overcome the normal human desire for modesty and privacy in sexual matters – a quest that is inappropriate for the military and unlikely to succeed.

“Any complaints about inappropriate passive/aggressive actions conveying a homosexual message or approach, short of physical touching and assault, will be met with career-killing presumptions about the motives of the person who complains: bigotry, homophobia, racism, or worse. As a result, untold thousands of people to leave or avoid the all-volunteer force.”

Tommy Sears, the executive director for the center, agreed.

– Video-Statement of Elaine Donnelly

– Video-Statement of Sgt. Maj. Brian Jones, US Army, (Ret.)

Induction forms used to have the question “are you homosexual?” on the form. This is about eligibility.

The law is there to promote order and discipline.