Last updated: May 14, 2014

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (Guest Post)



The following is a guest post from Von Munchausen (@Von__Munchausen).  It follows up my How Homosexuals Athletes Are Ruining Sports piece from ROK which can be seen here.  If you want to submit a guest post, get in touch.

The policy of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) was put in place in the mid-nineties as an intermediate step towards allowing homosexuals to serve in the military. A little over twenty years ago, my recruiter asked me a question from an official screening form; “Are you gay or bisexual?” I was such a naïve kid; I had no idea what bisexual meant. I actually asked my recruiter what it meant and how to answer. I thought it was an “either/or” type of question.

Personally, I could give a bowl full of dingleberries what people do with their genitalia. Regardless, the main argument presented against the policy was simple: Homosexuals shouldn’t have to hide who they are in order to serve in the military. Forcing people to hide portions of themselves is always oppression. Despite the reasons, doing so is a display of fear that weakens any arguments made by the oppressors. More importantly, such policies are the opposite of freedom.

The repeal of DADT was hailed as progress. It was almost universally accepted as the correct thing to do. Unfortunately, current trends show the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction. The same people who have fought for the right of the gays to be open about their sexuality are demanding that other beliefs and thoughts be silenced. Worse still, they fail completely to recognize their own hypocrisy and desire to oppress.

An example of the desire to suppress thoughts comes out of Hollywood. Sean Penn is well known for his liberal beliefs. It’s stunning that a man who believes in equal rights would advocate the commitment of people he disagrees with. In his interview with lefty high priestess Piers Morgan, in regards to Tea Party Congress members:

“This would be solved by committing them by executive order, I think. Because these are our American brothers and sisters, we shouldn’t be criticizing them, attacking them. … This is a cry for help.”

It’s ironic it was only 40 years ago homosexuality was removed from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Yet, now a prominent member of the liberal elite believes a process to assign “mentally disordered” status to those he disagrees with is, not only prudent, but moral. Sean’s statement could easily be chalked up to narrow minded far left nonsense. It is tempting to dismiss such narrow-minded words. However, recent government moves show a frightening policy shift in the same direction.

The Pentagon recently released a statement suggesting they would begin prosecuting people that proselytize their faith to other military personnel. More recently, the pentagon has started to relax rules on wearing religious garb. The interesting thing here is that there is no formally recognized Christian “garb” for day to day wear. What the combination of these two rules suggests is that freedom of religion is fine, as long as Christianity isn’t included.

I will not add my voice to the debate about Christianity’s validity. However, I will submit that the reason for this attempt to silence Christians is because traditional Christian values present a threat to leftist policies in general. The simultaneous empowering of other religions amounts to another DADT policy where instead of the gays being silenced, Christians must refrain from revealing themselves. Worse yet, similar to a homosexual in the 80’s, a Christian will now be court martialed for revealing himself.

In a similar sense, feminists abhor and ridicule women who desire the traditional role of mothers and wives. One would hope that articles like Amy Glass’ are just large scale trolling of America at large. However, her sentiment is quite common:

“Do people really think that a stay at home mom is really on equal footing with a woman who works and takes care of herself?”

People like this increasingly believe that women who choose to be wives and mothers first are not the equals of career women. This implies that traditional values are shameful, and should not be encouraged. The writer even said that such thoughts make her want to vomit.

Imagine someone were to state the opposite? What would people say if I said women who worked full time and used child care to help raise their children made me want to vomit? While this is not the case, imagine for a moment that I used a national media outlet to tout such an opinion. The reaction would be immediate and visceral. I would be vilified for my lack of “acceptance” and labeled a misogynist. Yet it is widely held to be perfectly acceptable for vile humans like Amy Glass to shout their twisted views to the world.

Perhaps her opinion is allowed because it fits the feminist narrative that women should work and not depend on a man. Maybe Christianity is a threat to liberal policy making. Either way those that shout down opposing voices do so out of fear. It’s telling that the same people who have spent decades crusading for “equal rights” have no problem enforcing an informal and unspoken version of DADT on society at large.

If you are Christian or believe in traditional families and values, remember, Don’t Ask, and Don’t Tell. You might upset the delicate balance of bullshit meant to subjugate us to the ideas of elite thinkers.

If you liked this post, you'll also like...

Rocket German Review • Is It The Best Way to Learn German?

Brazilian Girls | Everything You Possibly Need to Know

How to Get Laid on OkCupid

Quick Guide On How To Date Jamaican Girls

Leave a Reply

  1. “People like this increasingly believe that women who choose to be wives and mothers first are not the equals of career women”

    I agree with her. I don’t think they are equals. But I suspect she wouldn’t appreciate my opinion on which of those two groups of women have the greater value.

{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}