Word came today that the U.S. Navy has decided to relieve Capt. Owen Honors of his command of the U.S.S. Enterprise, the world’s first nuclear aircraft carrier and internationally recognized symbol of United States power.
It recently came to light that when Honors was second in command of the Enterprise in 2006-2007, he participated and starred in several lewd videos which were broadcast on the ship’s closed-circuit TV system. Ostensibly, they were intended to provide a few laughs for the troops and help morale.
Having served in the military for 10 years, I have no small understanding of proper military behavior and conduct.
While there is nothing in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the military’s law book, which says “commanding officers may not make funny videos,” leaders must always remember the importance of maintaining good order and discipline. This doesn’t mean our military folks can’t have a much-needed laugh from time to time, and it doesn’t mean leaders cannot joke and share a laugh with their subordinates sometimes.
But from what I’ve seen, while perhaps well-intended by Honors to help troop morale, Honors central participation in them may violate Article 133 (Conduct Unbecoming an Officer) and Article 134 (the “General Article” which includes “all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline” and “all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces”).
I believe Capt. Honors displayed poor judgment by starring in these videos, displaying silly behavior which could degrade respect for his rank and position.
But there are some other important facts concerning this controversy that must not be ignored.
If you are astute, you have probably noticed by now that the majority of the angst over these videos is over the “anti-gay slurs,” not their generally lewd nature or most importantly the appropriateness of such behavior from a commanding officer.
According to reports, this happened 3-4 years ago. Three to four years ago. And only now, within two weeks of our Leftist congress’ repeal of the 234-year prohibition against homosexual conduct in the military, does this come to light?
The timing is unmistakable. It can be nothing other than the inaugural sacrifice to the PC gods, as Daniel Foster at the National Review put it. This release and subsequent controversy is transparently designed to send a message: all will bow at the PC altar to render the required respect and admiration for homosexual behavior–with blasphemers cast into outer darkness.
While I don’t sanction the general use of slurs, if you think one man sticking his penis into another man’s anus is normal, morally upright behavior that should be defended, then you definitely have some mental and moral issues that desperately need to be dealt with.
Of course, none of this is a surprise to anyone knowledgeable of this issue. In addition to the many practical problems we knew this would cause for our men and women in uniform, we knew it would end up bringing an assault on some of the most fundamental freedoms of many of our soldiers. Chaplain foreign exchange programs with nations that have already lowered their standards revealed that military chaplains will have to choose whether to obey the gods of political correctness or the God they have sworn to serve.
Democrat politicians have also made it very clear that they would rather have immoral homosexual soldiers in the U.S. military than solders with a good moral compass, calling for soldiers who understand that homosexual behavior is immoral to be punished. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has also made it clear that when it comes to a choice of soldiers who understand the proper use of their sex organs and those who don’t, those who don’t will be preferred.
And a Department of Defense working group has recommended that heterosexual soldiers be forced to bunk with and shower with homosexual soldiers.
It’s not like we didn’t know we were risking this when we put the morally bankrupt Democrat Party in power, either. Bill Clinton tried to force open homosexuality on the U.S. Military back in 1993. He failed only because the moral character of our had not been sufficiently corrupted by our decaying culture and the “mainstream” media, settling for his asinine “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” compromise policy of ignoring homosexuals in the military as long as it didn’t come boldly out into the open. Candidate Obama also made it clear in 2008 that he wanted to force open homosexuality on the U.S. military (as well as repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act which protects states from being forced by other states to call homosexual unions “marriage”), as did the 2008 Democrat platform.
Many certainly wanted our nation to aim for the lowest common denominator, but still others were naive enough to think it really wouldn’t come to this. Still other conservatives were too lazy to make a phone call or send an email to their representatives, and allowed it to happen through their inaction.
If we refuse to put this prohibition back in place, we’ll have to live with the avalanche of consequences. We’ll all have to live with the consequences of our sloth and moral bankruptcy as we watch our military become a place where immoral behavior is championed and morality is openly opposed, where privacy becomes a casualty, and moral chaplains are rejected in favor of immoral ones.
Before long, our nation will be facing the consequences of producing a military no better than other mediocre nations in the world, and we had better be prepared to accept the cost in blood to our soldiers, and the cost in blood to the civilians that our military once uncompromisingly protected.
Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.