The battle rages on - not on the front - but in the locker rooms on military bases around the globe.
Once again, the Government was pressured to re-visit the controversial - "Don't Ask - Don't Tell" - policy which has rankled many in the ranks from day one.
Under the current rule of Law, originally enacted during the Clinton Administration, Military officers are barred from asking service members about their sexual orientation (or trying to determine it by dubious means).
Likewise, the Military's charges are required by law to keep their sexual orienation to themselves (not flaunt it or openly practice their sexual preference on base).
Although Barack Obama made a promise to take a second look at the policy on the campaign trail - with the aim of ending an on-the-fence "wish-washy" concept (typical of Bill Clinton) many found ludicrous - the President has stopped short of fulfilling it.
This past week, the Government appeared to be going in that direction, when the Department of Defense implemented stricter guidelines in respect to the thorny issue of discharging gay and lesbian soldiers under the "Don't Ask - Don't Tell" policy.
In a nutshell, the changes (effective immediately) raise the standard for charging that someone is gay.
Now, only Generals have the authority to approve discharges.
Insiders note that the revisions are basically a "stop gap" measure designed to maintain the status quo until Congress has the opportunity to debate whether the "Don't Ask - Don't Tell" law (instituted in 1993) should be repealed.
In recent days, some officers (who spoke anonymously for fear of retaliation) complained that if an officer didn't "like you" - a rumor might be launched with military-style precision - with the ultiimate aim of ousting the "accused" unjustly.
Under the new guidelines, clandestine accusations from the shadows, would not hold any water.
Someone who charges that a service member is gay or lesbian must now testify under oath.
Only an officer can begin an investigation, lead one, and dismiss a service member if it is determined the allegations are true.
Under the old policy, Homosexuality (for either sex) was defined as "demonstrating a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts."
Now, the law stipulates that "the love that once dare not speak its name" arises from "engaging in or attempting to engage in a homosexual act or acts" or a statement by the individual that he or she is gay.
The changes apply to all "open cases" currently under review, too.
Since "Don't ask - Don't tell" went into effect military records reflect that thirteen-thousand members have left service.
"I believe these changes represent an important improvement in the way the current law is put into practice - above all - by providing a greater measure of common sense and common decency to a process for handling what are difficult and complex issues for all involved, " defense secretary Robert Gates asserted in a press conference on Friday.
Of course, the logistics of co-habitation - on the base and in the trenches - remains a touchy one for all military personnel.
Straight soliders complain about the prospect of having to share quarters with a homosexual.
And, likewise, have been quite vocal about their reluctance to shower with a soldier who is a sexually active gay man or woman.
Personally, I am inclined to take sides with the heterosexual soldiers when it comes to the issue of the body politic.
If I was a blond bimbo babe in uniform, I wouldn't warm up to the idea of showering with a bull dyke, for obvious reasons.
A straight solder also has a right to shower in privacy (or alongside a fellow straight dude) without fear that some gay guy is surreptiously stealing glances at his naked studly bod.
The situation is comparable to straight guys who constantly "cop feels" with women they're attracted to.
It's common sense!
If a male employee in a company in anywhere (USA) kept ogling the "boobs" of a secretary at the water cooler, he'd be brought up on charges of sexual harassment (I dare say!).
The critics who chuckle that straight soldiers need to "grow up" are the ones that are missing the point.
Even the military appears to hold the view that I do, when you consider the fact that an official put forth the notion that housing arrangements (two to a room), should be overhauled, too.
In fact, the top Officer at the Marines - General James Conway - announced this past week that he would not force Marines to share rooms with gay service members if Congress repeals the loopy "Don't ask" policy.
The General asserted for the record that an "overwhelming" number of Marines would be opposed to bunking with someone of a different sexual orientation.
Did he poll the officers or has he arrived at the numbers off-the-cuff, though?
"The Marine Corp may be inclined to phase out double-bed bunking accommodation in favor of single rooms for service members," he stated matter-of-fact with no qualms about it.
Conway has been an outspoken opponent of the call for a repeal of the "Don't ask - Don't tell" law.
Why?
"I think the policy works," he testified at the Senate Armed Services committee meeting last month.
3 Star commander Army Lt. General Benjamin Mixon was rebuked for urging service members and their family members to lobby their elected officials against the changes in effect now.
If my memory of history serves me right, the Greeks actually promoted the practice of "gays" in the military on the assumption that homosexual men would fight valiantly (and fiercely) to protect their country and their male lovers on the battlefield.
Conway, on the other hand, argued that Marines worried that allowing gays to serve openly would harm unit cohesion and discipline.
Personally, I hold the position that if a soldier can pass muster on his or her capabilities alone, he or she should be allowed to serve.
As is the case in the heterosexual community, sexual misconduct would not be tolerated in the "gay" ranks, and would warrant discharge if proven in a fairing hearing in a court of law.
Yeah, there's no life like it!
