Is cross-dressing in fatigues next?

Why is it so important to Obama to have homosexuals openly identified as such in the armed forces? Sexual orientation is a basic foundation of compatibility in battle. This is not a small issue. It will literally destroy the integrity of combat units, whether they be in the field, onboard ships, in airplane cockpits or in submarines.

A reader who is in a position to know told me that the "last survey among military folks [revealed] that 25 percent won't re-up if this happens. This means that to allow [the] 2 percent of those out there who choose this lifestyle into the military, we'd lose 25 percent of the experienced military folks who have morals."

So, why is it now such an imperative that homosexuals in the military be openly identified and recognized as such? Will it boost morale amongst the troops? Will it make those opposed to such behavior, based on their religious or personal convictions find homosexuality more acceptable? How will deconstructing established and understandably necessary military protocol – for the purpose of a social-engineering agenda being forced by extremists – provide for a stable military environment?

What happens if a soldier doesn't knowingly want a homosexual doctor/medic doing his personal examination? How long before the military is expected to make special provisions based on sexual preference? How long before lawsuits begin?

Don't tell me it's even remotely similar to blacks finally being recognized and accepted in the military. There is nothing black persons can do to change or conceal the color of their skin. But specific to that point, if I don't tell you I like Rachmaninoff and Toby Keith, you wouldn't know it – unless you heard it on my iPod. If I didn't tell you I don't eat chicken (and I don't) you wouldn't know it. Could you be certain beyond any measure of doubt that I am a Christian just because you see me reading a Bible?

My point should be obvious – being recognized as a openly homosexual doesn't make a person a better soldier. But being identified as openly homosexual would be a destabilizing poison to the morale of persons for whom said is vital.

The idea that homosexuals are denied the right to serve in the military is a fabrication designed to obfuscate and mislead. The truth is that homosexuals can serve just as anyone else – they are just restricted from openly identifying their sexual preferences for reasons that are logical and should be abundantly clear.

Openly homosexual personnel would have a pernicious effect resulting in the delegitimization of the finest military in the world.

If, as Obama would have us believe, "Gitmo" and the trying of enemy terrorists by military tribunals are being used by terrorists as "powerful recruiting tools" – what does he envision a "boy-boy" military will do? What are openly homosexual personnel going to do in the Middle East, or does Obama not understand what Ahmadinejad meant when he stated during an interview, "In Iran, we don't have homosexuals like in your [America]. We don't have that in our country. In Iran [and the entire Muslim world], we do not have this phenomenon."

Obama's casting an openly homosexual military as being about integrity is the height of dishonesty. It is about deconstructing the finest fighting machine in the history of the world. It is about forcing an Erebusic agenda and behavior into an environment that is morally and socially incompatible with it.

Regrettably, Obama is the commander in chief of the armed forces of America, and this is a reflection of his values. It has been said that "the value of a leader is directly proportional to that leader's values." There is no ambiguity pursuant to Obama's values. He pledged to "fundamentally change America," and he has been nothing if not consistent in attempting to honor that pledge.

True leaders have morals, integrity and the best concern in mind for those who are dependent upon them. Obama's values are to increase the murder of the unborn, union giveaways and paybacks, class conflict and promoting the homosexual agenda. Bill Clinton's Pentagon brought us Jamie Gorlick's wall between the FBI and CIA, and a host of immeasurable problems that not only persist today, but also have allowed for the Malik Nidal Hasans and other problems. But even Clinton stopped short of advancing the celebration of a homosexual military.

I suspect there are some who know Obama's true motivations for supporting the compromising of troop morale and the true values of our country. Said not withstanding, the situation demands that we challenge his value as a leader and strenuously oppose his attempt to deconstruct our military.