Please disable your Ad Blocker in order to interact with the site.

Hollywood can discriminate based on anything. “Sorry, but you’re too black.” “You’re good, but you’re too fat.” “I like you, but you aren’t pretty enough.” Hollywood can pick whomever they want, for whatever reason, and with no repercussions. Discrimination for the sake of art.

So the military, the people who protect the nation can’t choose who they want,  because gays got their win with the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.  Now they can be openly gay. What exactly is openly gay anyway?

Gays are individuals, not defined by their sexuality—at least not the smart ones. So there is a wide spectrum to being gay.

When I think of being openly gay, I think about the black folks who say to me that I don’t “act black.” Sure I do. I am openly black, but being black doesn’t define me. Being American does, as does being human.

I believe that most gays in the military could care less about exposing their sexuality and are content to just do their jobs. I say this, because I don’t walk through life being black.

Unlike Hollywood where being gay or bi considered a la mode, the job of the military is to create military ‘personnel,’ regardless of sexual orientation, ethnicity, creed, or whatever. Black soldiers are not walking around saying, “I’m a black Colonel.” All the military cares about is the “Colonel” part; truth be told, the military is more concerned with one’s competence. The same would be true of “gays,” as most military men and women don’t care what type of sex[1] another soldier is having, as long as that sex doesn’t infringe on them.

I suspect that the military has a much better “gaydar” than gays think. Their peers either know who is gay in the military or they have their suspicions. There are high ranking gays in the military now. The woman who filed the suit to repeal DADT is a retired Colonel, I believe. I’d be willing to bet you that most of the people who promoted her already knew she had her penchant for the ladies.[2] Her gayness apparently didn’t negatively affect her career. It would appear that the only people who were concerned about her gayness was her.

So what Liberals have done for the military is what they have been doing to all of America for decades; infecting the military with cancer. Soon promotions will be measured by how many “gays” we have at a certain rank, or “I didn’t get this promotion or billet, because I am gay.” Gays will require their own facilities, and they could end up where black people were in the ‘40’s…segregated.

What’s interesting about DADT when compared to blacks being in the military is that blacks had to endure a very different form of discrimination. Discrimination against blacks was called “Don’t Ask, We Already Know.”

Blacks have been discriminated in the military for decades. Be it military or civilian, with rare exception,[3] people already knew who the blacks were in the military. Yet somehow in what Liberals believe is the most racist country in the world with the most heinous military, blacks managed to get a black Commander in Chief[4], and a black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[5]

It has been argued to me that DADT is needed so that gay military personnel could invite their significant others to events. Not true. Gay military personnel could have appeared with their same sex partners, and under DADT nobody could question either of them. It was just two buddies hanging out, or “girl’s night out” as far as DADT regulations were concerned.

But don’t expect bases to look like the Mission District of San Francisco, because as for showing affection towards one’s “partner,” PDA[6] is forbidden by everybody, gay or straight. No fraternization or ‘sororitization’ either.

I’m not sure what this new development will do to morale within the military. I do believe that there will be an “us versus them” mentality amongst homosexuals, which cannot be good for anybody, especially the military.

The military who is supposed to protect us now has become a victim of the Liberal agenda. Go ahead; declare your open gayness, whatever that means. But don’t expect the military to act according to the gay agenda like the civilian world.

Legislating based on sexual proclivity is wrong. Few jobs require knowledge of one’s sexual nature, and most that do are located near Hollywood. Repeal of DADT is just the Liberals’ way of attacking an institution, an institution that was not discriminating against gays.  The military is like Hollywood, in that they have a set of guidelines they felt made them more effective.

Turnabout is fair play, however. I say we attack their institutions—the media, Hollywood, Academia. Let’s sue them for discriminating against Conservatives, straights, Republicans…those are creeds!

Let’s show Liberals that we really understand the art of war.

That’s my rant!

Kevin Jackson is author of The BIG Black Lie and The Black Sphere blog.

[1] Unless good sex counts

[2] Licker License

[3] There were a handful of blacks who could ‘pass’ as white.

[4] He’s still a sissy

[5] Colin Powell

[6] Public Display of Affection

Leave a comment

Please disable your Ad Blocker to leave a comment.

Share Now

Enjoyed reading? Share it with your friends!
So you liked it enough to share it? Well, don't miss out on anything else! Follow us!