The Right Conservative News Site | Right Side News

Switch to desktop Register Login

Troops Oppose Gay Agenda for the Military

January 5, 2009
Military Times Poll: Troops Oppose Gay Agenda for the Military
by Elaine Donnelly
NRO online
The Military Times, a liberal Gannett publication favoring inclusion of professed homosexuals in the military, has just released an astonishing poll of active-duty subscribers.  Results of the 2008 annual survey indicate that success for that cause essentially would destroy the volunteer force.

As in previous years, the annual Military Times Poll (linked on Drudge January 2) reveals that approximately 58% of respondents are opposed to efforts to repeal what the survey described as the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy." The catchphrase incorrectly labels the 1993 law, Section 654, Title 10, which clearly states that homosexuals are not eligible to be in the military.

The 2008 Military Times Poll asked a new question that produced jaw-dropping results: "If the ‘don't ask, don't tell' policy is overturned and gays are allowed to serve openly, how would you respond?" The article emphasized that 71% of respondents said they would continue to serve.  But almost 10% said "I would not re-enlist or extend my service," and 14% said "I would consider not re-enlisting or extending my service." Only 6% expressed "No Opinion."  Before voting to repeal the law, Section 654, Title 10, members of Congress, and President-elect Barack Obama, ought to do the math.

If the opinions of Reserve and National Guard troops are similar to those of active-duty personnel surveyed in the Military Times Poll, and if the poll's findings approximate the number of military people who would leave or consider leaving if the 1993 law is repealed, combined losses (including Guard and Reserve forces) would be huge.

-A rough estimate using Defense Department numbers for all service branches and components, totaling more than 2 million, indicates that a loss of one in ten (almost 10%) would cost the military approximately 228,600 people - more than the active-duty Marine Corps (200,000).

-If an additional 14% decided to leave, the voluntary exodus would translate into a loss of almost 527,000 - a figure approaching the size of today's active-duty Army (more than 545,000).

-Estimates of losses in active-duty forces alone would range between 141,000 (10%) and 323,000 (23%).

The poll's findings are not an exact prediction, but they are significant and ought to be of great concern to President-elect Barack Obama and members of Congress who are considering a vote to repeal the 1993 law.  If that legislation succeeds, the Defense Department's new policy would be forced cohabitation with homosexuals, 24/7, in all military communities, to include Army and Marine infantry, Special Operations Forces, Navy SEALS, and submarines.

Corollary programs to make the new policy "work" would include professional "diversity training" to enforce acceptance, and "zero tolerance" of anyone who disagrees.  Dissenters would face discipline and be denied promotions, which would end their military careers. Incidents of misconduct would increase threefold, to include male/male and female/female misconduct that undermines discipline and demoralizes the troops.  These results would harm recruiting and retention, and effectively destroy the volunteer force.

Advocates of repealing the law always point to professional civilian polls that appear to support their cause, but they have been confounded by the annual Military Times surveys, which have always been more credible.

Professional pollsters recognize that survey respondents who think that a policy is already in place are more likely to favor it.  Military personnel, however, are more likely than civilians to know what the 1993 law actually says, and why.  Hence the disparity between the Military Times annual polls and several highly publicized civilian polls asking confused questions about Bill Clinton's convoluted "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.  Civilian polls, like the one done last July by the Washington Post, usually limit their inquiries to personal feelings about homosexuals (which are usually positive), or ask whether gays should serve openly or discreetly.

The December 2006 news release announcing the often-quoted Zogby Poll on this subject, which was paid for by the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (now called the Michael D. Palm Center), blatantly spun the story by omitting mention of responses to the key question asked - Should homosexuals serve openly in the military?  The 26% of Zogby respondents who favored repeal of the law could not compete with the combined 69% of people who said that they were opposed or neutral on that question.  This was hardly a mandate for radical cultural change in the military.

There is no record of any poll seeking to gauge opinions on the actual consequences of repealing the law: forced cohabitation with homosexuals in all military communities, 24/7, with "zero tolerance" of dissent.

The Military Times Poll also indicates that 60% of the active-duty troops surveyed are  "Wary of Obama." The newspaper's webpage posted a video of Obama talking about his intent to convince the troops that he knows what he is doing.  It does not help to know, however, that high-level members of Obama's Transition Team are meeting with leaders of the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered) Left to discuss administration appointments and legislative goals.

There is no "national security" argument for repealing a law designed to protect good order and discipline in military living conditions offering little or no privacy.  Federal courts have upheld the constitutionality of the statute several times, and it continues to enjoy strong support among military men and women.   Regardless of what it is called, the 1993 law, Section 654, Title 10, deserves continued support.

Contrary to some disingenuous news reports, activists for gays in the military are determined to impose their agenda on our military.  They are working with the incoming administration and pushing hard for repeal.  Members of Congress and the new Commander-in-Chief need to take this issue seriously, and see to it that activists demanding repeal of the law do not win.
----------------
The Center for Military Readiness is an independent, non-partisan 501(c)(3) educational organization formed to take a leadership role in promoting sound military personnel policies in the armed forces. CMR is a unique alliance of civilian, active duty and retired military people in all 50 states, and is the only organization that concentrates on military personnel issues full-time

You are now being logged in using your Facebook credentials