An instrument of social change
I’ve been looking at some of the YouTube clips from the Republican debate last night, and I have to say there were some great questions asked. When a retired gay brigadier general asked the candidates why they thought U.S. soldiers weren’t professional enough to serve with openly gay people, Rep. Duncan Hunter essentially said he didn’t want to offend the conservative sensibilities of soldiers. Poor babies.
That reminded me of one of my favorite exchanges on “The West Wing,” where Percy Fitzwallace (John Amos) wandered into a meeting where they were discussing the role of gay people in the military.
MAJOR TATE
Sir, we’re not prejudiced toward homosexuals.FITZWALLACE
You just don’t want to see them serving in the Armed Forces?MAJOR TATE
No sir, I don’t.FITZWALLACE
Because they pose a threat to unit discipline and cohesion.MAJOR TATE
Yes sir.FITZWALLACE
That’s what I think too. I also think the military wasn’t designed to be an instrument of social change.MAJOR TATE
Yes sir.FITZWALLACE
The problem with that is that’s what they were saying to me 50 years ago. Blacks shouldn’t serve with Whites. It would disrupt the unit. You know what? It did disrupt the unit. The unit got over it. The unit changed. I’m an admiral in the U.S. Navy and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff…Beat that with a stick.
When I was younger, I wanted to be in the Navy. (I was serious with those fantasy job choices yesterday) I don’t anymore. It has nothing to do with me being gay, and them not wanting me. I’ve just moved past that. Mostly at least. If my country needed me, and called me to service, I would gladly go into the Navy. I think I could be a good naval officer. It upsets me to think though, that if my country needed me, and I was willing to serve, they might not want me. It upsets me even more that there are thousands of men and women out there, that do want to serve their country. But their country’s military don’t want them.
I understand that the military was not meant to be a vehicle for social change. That is a perfectly valid point. But who the hell cares? What is supposed to be a vehicle for social change? And shouldn’t social change be at least a little disruptive? Isn’t that the point, to disrupt the status quo? And it going to happen eventually, already has to a point. Might as well get it over with.