Marine Corps Times Insults the Corps

Posted: September 14, 2011 by ShortTimer in Marine Corps, Military, political correctness, Progressives and Left, US Military

235 years of tradition, and this is what we get.

Let’s see… stupid Marine vs Bear garbage, even stupider story on the SERPA holster (which tens of thousands of law enforcement officers use daily), and stories of how to pull pilots off active duty… and…

Oh, yeah, and, a week after September 11, the Marine Corps Times going “we’re gay”.

Apparently, they do, apparently, they are, apparently, looks like they are the kind without the damn common courtesy, apparently, they can.

Looks like they’re going to issue these:

Along with these at recruit training:

There, every bit as much tact as the Marine Corps Times.

This revives the discussion about gays in the military to begin with.  Gays who are just gay, who don’t bother anyone, and who do their own thing, weren’t really bothered by “don’t ask, don’t tell”.  People who need to know, know.  People who don’t, don’t.  People who know don’t care, people who don’t know aren’t bothered.

This new way, confrontation is forced between gay special priviledges advocates against the military.  When the military says “we can’t have gay Marine security guards at Riyadh or Cairo or Amman”, gay advocates will sue to force the military through legislation or lawsutis into being something that it isn’t.  Gays who are held back for incompetence will cry and file EEO complaints, and incompetent gays will be promoted into positions they don’t belong in.

Are incompetent people promoted anyway?  Sure.  But do they need another avenue of promotion by claiming discrimination?  No.

Does this in any way help to  promote the military’s one function – that of defense of the US?  No.

Does the Marine Corps Times echoing a gay priviledges campaign help the Corps?  Does it help the gays by having them come across with an attitude, insulting the Corps and basically forcing themselves on the Corps through dictate made by politicians?

Remember the last time politicians ran the military into the ground?  At least one stands out pretty clearly.

Of course, there are the current three wars, wherein we’re telling the enemy how long they have to hold out, etc… but that’s another topic.

Then there’s also the political points promotion of gays into new positions.  Same thing happened with promoting women into roles they don’t belong in.  Forcing women into military positions they didn’t belong in killed Kara Hultgreen.  She wasn’t ready for flying on carriers, but she was promoted into it so some cocktail party Ruling Class general could brag about how progressive he was to congressmen and senators he hobnobs with.  When she plunged into the water and died, she did so because someone had to make her into something she wasn’t supposed to be yet.

She might’ve been a fantastic carrier-based pilot, but the political rush to make her The First killed her.  A good pilot was killed due to some political general and politician’s ambition.

The next wave of, as it was somewhat disparagingly in the 1990s called “fags in foxholes”, is going to lead to the same mess.  Gays who would honorably serve, and serve without insulting their own nation’s forces, may well be promoted into billets they don’t belong in yet in order to be “The First Openly Gay ____”.  Opportunist scumbag lifers who happen to be gay will EEO their way into billets they don’t belong in.  Straights will have to undergo sensitivity training – while gays won’t – the straights they unnerve with their presence in showers, during hygiene inspections, while in line “nut to butt”, etc., will just have to “get over it”.  The priviledged minority now dictates to the majority.

Yeah, this is going to go over well.

But the problem here isn’t gays in the military – and it’s worth it to say it again.  Gay troops have been serving honorably for years.  The problem is gay activists, the gay activist politicians, and the gays who seek priviledge and power over institutions for their own group’s gain.  It’s about forcing another institution to bend to their will.

As society cares less and less about homosexuality, it would naturally fade as the opinions of society fade and change.  Forcible introduction (no gay pun intended there) isn’t going to earn any points with anyone.  It’s not going to assist groups getting along by saying “we’re here, we’re sodomites, you need to suck it up”.  Chaplains of all faiths have been having issues with it, as well as troops, but they’re being forced to submit to the will of gay politicians.

“This is already an assault and a challenge on individual conscience and some soldiers may think it’s forcing them to abandon their religious beliefs or being marginalized for holding to those beliefs,” said Douglas E. Lee, a retired Army brigadier general and chaplain, whose signature was the first on the letter.

But as the Marine Corps Times story says:

For straight Marines, this will bring changes, too. “That’s gay” — a pervasive phrase used throughout the Corps to express dislike for almost anything — will no longer be tolerated. Equal treatment will be a must. And yes, some gay Marines will bring dates to the Marine Corps Birthday Ball in November.

That’s gay.  That’s oppressively gay.  That’s totalitarian speech codes gay.  That’s “gays will get better treatment” gay.  That’s insulting military and martial traditions gay.  That’s gay.

Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center at the University of California, Los Angeles, which pushed for the repeal, said the Department of Defense has made it clear that there will be no change in the way chaplains conduct their business once the ban is lifted.

“This is yet another example of people with traditional and, quite frankly, anti-gay views demanding protection for something that doesn’t need protection,” he said.

Ah, a social engineer, telling you that your traditional views don’t need protection.  But when implementation comes around, you can’t say “that’s gay”.  Your speech has been curtailed.  But it’s all in the name of social progress, so you will submit to the will of the party and the directives written by dictators in office, even if the entire nation rejects them.  Just like when Woodrow Wilson forced the military to segregate against society’s own mores, today’s progressives force the military to accept gay culture, against society’s own mores, and no matter the consequences.

Gays who would become naturally accepted (like those mentioned in Steven Zeeland’s book “The Masculine Marine”), are going to be forced on their comrades before society has accepted them.

The Marine Corps Times insulting the Corps doesn’t help gays, and doesn’t help the Corps, and doesn’t help anyone.  It just shoves the Corps face in the newest regulation written by people who hate the military to begin with – remember these are the people who said to pay for war wounds with personal insurance, whose political mentors tried to kill US troops at NCO dances, and who are so divorced from the military that they can’t even pronounce their titles – nor do any of their assistants know how to pronounce it.

It also puts gays who aren’t confrontational assholes into the position of being that way.  Those who are gay and don’t make a big deal of it are being shanghaied by gay priviledge advocates.  This helps no one, but displays a monumental lack of class from the Marine Corps Times editors at Gannett – it insults the Corps, Marines, and the nation.

  1. […] Gannett-Owned “Marine Corps Times”, previously noted for their ability to insult the Corps here, had this piece on the scout sniper issue: “On behalf of the Marine Corps and all Marines, I […]

  2. […] the insulting leftist social-engineers at  Gannett Marine Corps Times: The Marine Corps school that produces infantry combat officers […]

  3. No more lies. Now we can actually practice integrity instead of lie. This aauthor shows the stupidity of some straight dumbasses.

    • “Libertarian values” my ass. Straight Soldiers and Marines shoot the bull about their girlfriends and wives. No “band of brothers” military flick is complete without a straight soldier looking wistfully at a picture of their sweetheart a day before they’re shot/blown up/the ship sinks. That’s “privilege” (and spellcheck your damn posts).

      • ShortTimer says:

        If you served/serve, you know the military is not a democracy, it is not a republic, it is a mostly benign tyranny where you voluntarily cede some of your rights when you sign up. It functions as an autocracy in order to preserve the rights and freedoms of those who it protects.

        Disrupting the military by politicians (or in this case through Gannett’s inflammatory title) was the problem. As society changes, people care less and less, and that includes within the military, and without interference, military culture would also change.

        This was also 5 years ago. People were becoming more accepting, but when cocktail party social justice socialites come up with new rules for people in a regimented society so they can fawn about how they shoved those neanderthals in the military into the 21st century, they willfully ignore the negative impacts it has on the military that are in fact dictates that are prejudicial to good order and discipline (as the saying goes)… and then of course there’s the slippery slope.

        Again, that story was 5 years ago.

        Today, if you want to voluntarily amputate yourself because you really believe pedophile John Money’s theories were right (and you didn’t listen to abuse victim David Reimer’s warnings) and you want to get the taxpayers to cover the bill, you can.

        But if you’re a vet who’s been mangled overseas, you’re put on a death list.

        This is where that has led – prioritizing social justice activists over actual servicemembers.

        If you’d read past the initial paragraph in the original post, you’d see the issue isn’t so much gays in the military as it is activist politicians using the military as a social experiment because the nature of the military in the US requires it follow civilian authority. Thus every “good idea” they desire they can manifest, regardless of whether it’s foolish and destructive.

        Your attempted condemnation by “libertarian values” is intentionally myopic. This isn’t a measure of economic/personal/social values outside of the military. Inside the military, the world is different, and in order to function, it needs to be.

        The military, for instance, has tattoo policies. You have face tats, neck tats, offensive tats, you can be disqualified from serving. Doesn’t mean you shoudn’t be able to get them, or that having tattoos means you’re less or more of a person, just means in the military your’e disqualified. Ink isn’t a crime, but it’s something the military says is prejudicial to good order and discipline – because it can be.

        “Band of Brothers” should be capitalized. Soldiers should not be capitalized.

        And no, I won’t spellcheck my privelidge.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s