January 10, 2013
HENRY McCULLOCH writes:
The Marine Corps has ordered Marine spouses’ clubs – which I should have thought were private, voluntary associations – to admit the same-sex “spouses” of members of the Marine Corps. Here’s NBC’s story on the decision.
While this little vignette of America’s social destruction speaks for itself, it still got me thinking. In addition to its inherent disordered weirdness, it is an example of what I believe (writing as a former Marine officer) is an historic weakness of the Marine Corps.
Partly to show that it is more hard-core than the three larger services, the Marine Corps is hard-wired to pursue any mission assigned to the max. It doesn’t matter how stupid or wrong-headed that mission may be, if it comes in the form of a legitimate order, the Marines are going to go Take That Hill, no matter what it costs. In the social revolutionary realm, we saw this when General James Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps – after expressing reservations on several occasions about “normalizing” homosexuality in the armed forces – as soon as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was “repealed,” turned sharply through 180 degrees and directed that Marine recruiters conduct special outreach to homosexuals to be the leading service in recruiting them. I can see only three possible reasons for this: (i) Amos is totally programmed and essentially no longer has a mind of his own; (ii) Amos really wants to destroy the Marine Corps; or (iii) Amos really wants to be the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
And now in its institutional drive to please Pharaoh and be the most homophiliac of the services, the Marine Corps is being more liberal than the Army! To its credit, an Army unit at Fort Bragg – XVIII Airborne Corps, perhaps? – had declined to order the Bragg spouses’ club to admit the “wife” of a lady lieutenant colonel there. In my old service’s typical way, some bone-headed Marines must have seen an opportunity to engage in an old Marine favorite: one-upping the Army, in this case by exceeding the doggies in homo-outreach.
Thanks a lot, jarheads.
The other thing that struck me about this story was the photograph of the Army “couple” that has precipitated this whole mess. Both of these women are at the vanguard of a wave of social destruction our forebears could not have imagined, yet they look depressingly normal, if a tad tubby (certainly Lt. Col. Heather Mack looks rather fleshy to be an active-duty field grade officer, even in the Army).
— Comments —
Lawrence Auster writes:
A question. We all thought that as a result of the homosexualization of the armed services, the enlistment of normal men, particularly of Southern white conservative men who are the backbone of the military, would drastically fall off. Has that happened? I have seen no news stories on how homosexualization has affected enlistement.
A good question, and I don’t know the answer.
All the services are turning away applicants in droves. They have the pick of the litter now. Recruiters with quotas are in heaven. Applicants who were officer material a few years ago are happy to get a regular enlistment. It’s all about jobs now. Homosexuals are everywhere. You can’t avoid them anywhere if you need employment. That’s what the military is now, employment. The younger generation could care less about homosexuals. Patriotism isn’t even on the list of reasons why they’re waiting in line. It’s economics. It has noting to do with America.
Posted by Laura Wood in Uncategorized