http://www.easternecho.com As President Obama’s first year in office comes to a close, many have analyzed what he has and has not accomplished in his first year as well as what he plans to focus on in 2010. en-us Gryphon 2.3.1-dsw (pewabic)/Foundry5 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 05:47:07 -0500 webmaster@easternecho.com http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/585 Yes, we do separate soldiers by sexual preference. Or has the military suddenly started to allow men and women to bunk together? Moreover, it makes sense to separate male and female soldiers on that basis. Even were we to assume that every soldier would behave in a respectful and professional manner, there is also the very real issue of privacy. All of which leads me to my second point. While I believe that DADT should be rescinded, certain adjustments will need to be made to address the privacy concerns of straight soldiers. Gay men are sexually attracted to other men. Sexual attraction is not simply some benign characteristic that we can be instructed to just ignore. For straight soldiers to be told to “suck it up” is neither realist nor fair. Why would one set of soldier’s sensibilities be respected and not another? Not desiring to share your private space with someone who could be potentially sexually attracted to you is understandable. If it weren’t, we would tell female soldiers to just “suck it up”. Unlike characteristics like race or religious convictions, sexual attraction has a tendency to grow with familiarity. Once you accept someone’s race or religious affiliation they pose no further threat to you. Conversely, merely because a person is not attracted to you today doesn’t mean that feelings won’t change tomorrow. This is why race, religion, and sex cannot be placed in the same category. In the end, unless the issue of privacy is adequately addressed with an eye towards respecting all soldiers, a change in this policy, will only breed ill-will and contempt. Sat, 13 Feb 2010 05:47:07 -0500 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/585