# Don't ask, don't tell: don't really care

Now all the media is finally settling over the DADT situation, it's time to hop on the "so what?" bandwagon, and in places attack it altogether.

When gays are allowed to marry, and legally call it marriage to reap all the legal benefits thereof (such as taxes), that will be a day where a small step toward further equality is taken. When they can adopt kids as easily as married husband and wife, that will be another day of equality. From a perspective of individual "fairness", I'm willing to call the DADT repeal useful, though, and a minute step for fulfillment of contract, because now openly (or found-out) gay soldiers can get their crack-money scholarships and veterans benefits and so on.

My views are similar to those expressed in the linked post. I have no problem with gays serving in the military, I have a problem with serving in the military, and I have to wonder at the intelligence of anyone who chooses to do so, especially these days. No, I take that last bit back, there are plenty of rational reasons to join, depending on your own ethics, personality, and definition of winning. Some may want power (becoming a general's a great way to become President), some may want to kill, some may want the benefits like a free college education they use to lure new recruits in, some may just like playing with big toys. I hope there aren't many who believe they're defending the country from invasion or something, others might believe it's God's will, perhaps they hate Middle Easterners (or just Brown People, and Mexico's next), they might not know why the hell they're fighting but just keep doing it like so many others do with their crappy day-jobs, and will latch on to any of these reasons when presented to them as an excuse.

Before I turn this into another rant on soldiers, I'll again say I have no problems with soldiers as people. I had a nice conversation with two of them on a plane flight a couple weeks ago. (Those blue uniforms suck in ways I hadn't thought of.) The system just depresses me so much and I struggle to empathize with any human volunteering themselves for it. I have no problem with women serving in military either, but why, girls, why? Become an engineer or something, you don't need to try and prove you have a penis too.

The step against religious bigotry is the other thing I'll give this repeal. It's depressing how so many of us fear and sometimes loathe love, and even pleasure; we feed on hate and violence. Separating archaic, brutal, inhumane religious ideas from our governments and their systems can only be a good thing.

Apart from those? There's no reason to rejoice this. Would we rejoice if they lowered the drinking, voting, and serving in the military ages down to 16? I wouldn't, though I think 16 year olds certainly are capable of making such decisions at that age, it would be a "Libertarian victory". Another Libertarian victory would be child labor, which may actually come about since America is out of options for sustaining its economic empire. (We already work 40 hours a week, both couples in a relationship usually work, wages aren't rising and families are shrinking and the middle class is being destroyed with the majority seeping into the lower class.) I can't say I'm against letting children work with parental consent, and I'm not against letting people sell their spare organs, but I don't like the systems where such acts are desirable or necessary. Everyone 16 or older should be able to serve in the military, but no one should want to, and ideally the military shouldn't even exist. I remain an optimistic idealist for that last bit, hopeful for the future of our species and hopeful for the capabilities of molecular nanotechnology.

#### Posted on 2011-01-03 by Jach

Tags: government, soldiers

LaTeX allowed in comments, use $\\...\\$\$ to wrap inline and $$...$$ to wrap blocks.