Pride of a Nation

Pictured above- United States Armed Forces members march in  Gay Pride parade openly for the first time ever in 2011.
(Photo taken from CNN.com)

     It was chosen one of the most powerful images of 2011 by CNN.com in a recent article both for its historical significance and the contrasts in opinion it inspires. We live in a landmark time in our country when soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coast guardsmen may now serve in their respective branches openly gay without fear of persecution or reprisal. This marks a dramatic pro-gay shift for the military whose recent "don't ask, don't tell" policy, while affording somewhat of an opportunity for  gay soldiers to serve discreetly, resulted in the firing of more than 13,000 during its implementation. 

          Even four years ago, such a dramatic shift in policy didn't seem feasible, but with the sweeping social changes that have rocked the political landscape since the 2008 Presidential Election, the progressive new policy should hardly come as a surprise. Many who feel conflicted about the controversial issue may be struggling for a way to comprehend the problem at its base level, but a logical induction can build the argument in this way: it is inexcusable to make an allowance for an acquired prejudice and not for a genetic predisposition. There is hope for a man (or woman) to wake up one day cured of the ridiculous and antiquated illness of homophobia, but there is no such thing as waking up one morning no longer attracted to the same sex if that's who you are, any more than there is such a thing as a heterosexual waking up no longer attracted to the opposite sex. These are simple laws of nature, no matter how furiously the tyranny of one's will attempts to oppose them. An additional example: a racist may be a no good bastard for life in a lot of people's eyes, but his odds of reforming himself are much greater than the person he hates to wake up one morning no longer of the same race. 

            "The policy is an absurdity and borderline on being an obscenity. What it does is cause people to ask of themselves that they lie to themselves, that they pretend to be something that they are not. There is no empirical evidence that would indicate that it affects military cohesion. There is a lot of evidence to say that the biases of the past have been layered onto the United States Army."

-General John M. Skalikashvili

             Which is a greater compromise to the values of our modern Army? Bucking the traditional outlook on a social issue and making an allowance for something once strictly prohibited, or falling behind the curve of the social progression of the very country it defends?  We are foolish if we do not recognize both the necessity of the former and the danger of the latter. It is unfathomable that this ridiculous "goal line defense" was waiting for decades to pounce on anyone under suspicion of homosexuality, a perfectly harmless activity which has resulted in the death of zero American soldiers, while a man like Nidal Malik Hasan went unnoticed for years, rose up to the rank of Major, and slaughtered thirteen people (wounding twenty-nine more) due to some misplaced sense of politically correct morality in the worst shooting on an American military base in history. What, did Hasan make a couple of homophobic cracks and convince anyone who was capable of stopping him that he was "one of the boys"?     

           Consider for a moment, if you will, the weight of a dishonorable discharge from the military. Consider what a potential employer might say to someone with this black mark on their record. It is not hard to conceive that for many, such a blemish would carry almost equal destructive potential as a felony. Now consider that since 1944, every American soldier who's been "found out" received such a discharge. It is something that is absolutely impossible to reconcile at this point, and in no way can it be made up to these people, who've been so callously persecuted through a systematic fear-based political agenda. What do you say to someone who hasn't been able to hold down a decent job in the last twenty years since getting the boot? How do you fix that? It's almost comparable to wrongfully imprisoning someone for that period of time. 

          Standing with a given majority at a given time in history does not necessarily mean standing for what is right. Many times in our own country's past, we have seen what was once written off as extremist become the norm. By any measure, most of America in 2011 lives at the incomprehensible extreme of 1911, even 1961. The picture posted at the beginning may inspire many different emotions and feelings and for many different people, but take a moment to think what the subjects of the photo must feel. Perhaps they feel pride in having to hide no longer, relief in not fearing that one wrong word could mean the end of their job, and even hope that their country, which they so valiantly defend, will now defend them. 

           That's it for tonight, folks! I am listening to an acoustic cover of Radiohead's "Let Down" by Eliza Lumley which you can see here. I'm watching Sherlock Holmes 2- great movie. I'm reading The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo by Stieg Larsson. Finally, your discussion question for the future of the blog: What *are* your most pressing social issues that need to be brought to the forefront of national debate, what's your position, and how are we going to solve them? See you next time.