Please login to continue
Forgot your password?
Recover it here.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up Now!

You are now logged into your account.

Sign Up for Free

Name
Email
Choose Password
Confirm Password

Menu
Posted on Oct 22, 2008 Print this Article

Should Generals Confer With Gay Activists?

The UK Telegraph reported on October 12 that the chief of the British Army's General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt, "made history" by addressing the Army-sponsored Fourth Joint Conference on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transexual Matters. The Telegraph quotes General Dannatt, who is described as a Christian, saying that his "Equality and Diversity Directive for the Army sets the standard that we must live by, and, importantly, it communicates that standard to everyone in the chain of command."

General Dannatt's Directive mandates "respect for gays, lesbian, bi-sexual and trans-sexual officers and soldiers," as a "command responsibility" that is vital for "operational readiness." To demonstrate "tolerance," the UK Ministry of Defense also hosts an LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) Forum on its website.

Since Colin Powell has endorsed Barack Obama, it is fair to ask: Should American Army generals have to go to gay activist conferences in order to show support for professed homosexuals in the military? If we follow the lead of Britain, such meetings and consultations with gay activist groups are very likely, in order to make the new policy "work." (CMR President Elaine Donnelly mentioned this type of "sensitivity training" in her testimony before the House Armed Services Committee on July 23. See page 10 of the Summary, linked here.) And what about those who disagree with the new policy on personal, moral, or religious grounds? As CMR President Elaine Donnelly stated in her July testimony before Congress, under such "directives" or policies, the presumption of guilt of harboring "anti-homosexual" attitudes would strongly deter anyone who disagrees with the new policy from filing a complaint. (See testimony summary, pages 6-8).

General Powell is certainly entitled to support the presidential candidate of his choice, but his personal political preferences should not result in greater strains on unit cohesion, morale, and discipline in our military. Surely Gen. Powell knows that conditions of service for our volunteer men and women are already demanding enough.

* * * * * * *

Interested readers, including members of the military, are invited to comment through the "Confidential Contact" site on this website, www.cmrlink.org. Nothing in the CMR SITREP Blog is intended to aid or hinder elections or the passage of legislation before Congress.

Posted on Oct 22, 2008 Print this Article