Which ones to discharge?

Are we being naive and too easily dismissive of problems on military bases when gay men and women are allow to serve openly? Other nations have eliminated the discriminatory ban, and it seemed to be no big deal.

A news item on Huffington Post brings this into focus:

Two Marines have been arrested for allegedly beating a gay man in Savannah, Georgia. Keil Cronauer and Christopher Stanzel are accused of attacking Kieran Daly so badly that he suffered bruises on his brain. . . . In addition to the bruises, Daly suffered two seizures immediately after the attack. His friends performed CPR. . .

The soldiers were caught running from the scene in Savannah's Johnson Square early Saturday morning.

While Cronauer and Stanzel told police that Daly was harrassing them, Daly explained that the two were mad because they thought that he had winked at one of them.

"The guy thought I was winking at him," Daly said. "I told him, 'I was squinting, man. ... I'm tired.'"

Along with others, I have scoffed at soldiers quaking in fear that a gay man might look at them in the showers. But maybe our American macho men are just too insecure to tolerate this stimulation of their homophobic anxiety. (I've turned macho into an acronym: M.A.C.H.O. = "Masking Anxiety Caused by Homo Obsession.")

This attack occurred off base and had nothing to do with Don't Ask, Don't Tell. But some will use this incident to say, 'See, that's why we need to keep DADT."

But suppose Daly had also been a Marine? Which one(s) do you think would have undermined unit cohesion? The one who winked, or the ones who beat the winker into convulsions? Which one(s) should be discharged as unfit for military service? IMO, if the Marines really must have fighting animals, they should keep them in cages between battles.

The problem is not homosexuality; it is homophobia.

Ralph