- It's not the federal government's business to know what someone does in the privacy of their own bedroom.
- The arguments against gays in the military (morale, unit cohesion, etc.) sound an awful lot like the arguments used against racially integrating the military half a century ago.
To my first point, I always find it interesting that there are those who are opposed to a "big, intrusive" government but yet have no problem with that same government legislating morality. It's as if we have some people who mouth "small government" but actually want a big government, well as long as that big government extols certain values that they believe. As for me, I want a government that does what it's supposed to and stays the hell out of my personal life. To that end, one of the things the government is supposed to do is defend our borders. If someone want to help defend those borders...and they meet the physical and mental requirements for that kind of thing...then why should we care what their sexual orientation is?
Oh, but what if a male soldier "hits on another man"? Well the military already has rules in place to deal with that kind of thing between heterosexuals, so it seems to me that they could be applied in homosexual instances as well.
It's time to end legalized discrimination against gays in the military. I understand that some will be uncomfortable with this at first, however some were uncomfortable when President Truman racially integrated the military in 1948 and yet hindsight clearly teaches us that was the right thing to do. It seems to me that this the right thing to do as well.