The new litmus test for 2012 presidential candidates: Reinstatement of “DADT” (Part 1)

The lifting of the U.S. military’s ban on open homosexuality in our armed forces now joins the enactment of Obamacare on the list of policies that need to be reversed once Republicans control both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” must be reinstated, and Obamacare must be repealed.

And like the rescinding of Obamacare, the restoration of the common sense ‘DADT’ is now a litmus test for Republican candidates – especially those running for Congress and the White House in 2012. If those purporting to represent the party of traditional values can’t grasp the importance of those values, they have no business holding public office.

The actions of the lame duck Congress this month have been reprehensible on many fronts, but nothing that they’ve done is as bad as their weakening of the U.S. military by allowing open homosexuality. If Republican candidates cannot understand the inappropriateness of this act, their moral judgment is so impaired that they cannot be trusted with power.

What remains unclear to this writer is how many other sexual predilictions are now to be accepted in our fighting forces. After all, the GLBTQ community locks arms with not only homosexuals but with bisexuals, transgendered, and those who are “questioning.” In case that’s a new term for you, those troubled individuals are not sure which of their parts they want to put where when it comes to sexual conduct.

For the record, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association – ever in thrall to homosexual activists – distinguishes between “sexual orientations” and “paraphilias.” These distinctions will likely remain only until it’s no longer politically necessary to keep them and until paraphiliacs – like homosexuals – make a big enough stink. Here’s just a sampling: Autogynephilia, Coprophilia, Exhibitionism, Fetishism, Frotteurism. And for the record, here are three with their definitions:

  • Gender Identity Disorder – a strong and persistent cross-gender identification, which is the desire to be, or the insistence that one is, or the other sex, “along with” persistent discomfort about one’s assigned sex or a sense of the inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex.
  • Transgenderism – an umbrella term referring to and/or covering transvestitism, drag queen/king, and transsexualism.
  • Transsexual – a person whose gender identity is different from his or her anatomical gender.

That’s enough. You get the picture. Some human beings are subjected to all manner of odd compulsions. The sign of a civil society, however, is when the vast majority of the population recognizes that not everything that’s desired should be pursued. And when human frailties get the best of some people, the existence of a healthy social fabric demands that some failings be kept in the private sphere. Closets exist for a reason.

This column is not alone in its coverage of perverse human sexual impulses. Throughout history and across the web, warnings can be found that free and stable societies are not possible without morality. Morality is not possible without religion.

While the wishful thinkers would like to believe that the handful of deists found among the Founding Fathers were socially liberal, alas, even they realized that humans are sinful and God ordained a moral law. That’s right, even those who weren’t orthodox Christians knew that moral law, or natural law, must inform civil law if a culture or a nation is to survive.

What our lame duck leaders in Washington, D.C. did this weekend must be undone in 2013 once Republicans hold both houses of Congress and the White House. Proponents of normalizing sexual depravity and immorality would have you believe they’re advancing “civil rights,” but nothing can be further from the truth.

Up next: Part 2.

©2010 John Francis Biver