Why the push for DADT repeal?
It is no secret that the U.S. military tends to be conservative. I am not saying that we do not have left leaning members, but the portion of voting conservatives is noticeably greater than the general population. Recently, groups such as Oath Keepers have worried many leftists. Such a military would be a huge obstacle to their vision becoming reality.
I think the recent push to repeal DADT is intended to drive social conservatives out of the military, especially people with strong religious convictions. It will be a lot less complicated to have soldiers destroy churches (as did the Soviet Marxists) if the ranks have been drained of people with strong moral opposition.
The Logistics nightmare
One of the many reasons I am opposed to this process is the logistical problem it creates. The military is not like other workplaces. It is often living in close spaces, and in many cases, there are group showers. Because of this, males and females live in separate rooms and areas, with separate shower facilities. Even with this separation, sexual harassment and sexual assault, has been a huge problem in the military. As a result of this problem, we receive hours and hours of training about the subject. Now you want to inject open homosexuality into the equation? How is this not going to cause immense problems?
A lot of us have a strong moral objection to showering with openly gay people. It is not about being homophobic; I would have the same objection if they wanted to put males and females together in that way. Do you solve the problem by giving gay people there own facilities? How is that supposed to work on submarines that are not designed for such a thing? Even if you can give gay people separate (it would cost a lot of money) facilities; do you think it is a good idea to have gay people living and showering together in isolation for months at a time? The STD rates (already a huge problem in the military) would likely increase greatly.
Anyway you figure this, it's going to cost a lot of money and impede mission readiness.
The Muslim world
We are at war in several Muslim nations; I’m in one of them. We are fighting what I fear will be a very long and costly fight against militant Islam. The war with militant Islam cannot be won with bombs and bullets alone. If we are to win this fight, we will need the support of a majority of the people from the Muslim world. Only when Muslims take to streets in mass and protest acts of Islamic terrorism, will our enemy be defeated.
Why have the majority of Muslims remained silent about the evils of terrorism? I think SOME of the fault, is our own. Put yourself in the shoes of an average Muslim family living in Middle East. You have three choices
1. Join the Jihad and commit acts of violence.
2. Help and become like America, whose chief export is our often morally reprehensible media. If you do choose to help the Americans, the militant Muslims may target you and your family.
3. Keep you mouth shut and live your life the best you can.
Honestly, if you were in their shoes, what would you do?
It does not matter what we do, the terrorists are always going to hate us. However, if we cleaned up our depraved media we might have a better chance to actually win hearts and minds. I have heard many say that the way to win the Muslim people is to give them Playboy. Agree with it of not, to these people their religion is more important than life itself. Now you want to force them to except openly gay military personnel patrolling their streets? This will only serve as to hinder our efforts.
Remember the dream of Marx and the Frankfort School includes the end of nations. What better way to speed this process up than insure that our current wars will be long and costly.