The Patriarchal Pseudoscience Council. . . I mean the Family Research Council. . . Tried another hand at upholding DADT by saying we'd be putting soldiers at risk of STD and psychological problems if we let gays serve openly. Except there are server logical problems too this. And it's very revealing.
The argument they use is that homosexuals are at a greater risk of HIV and other STDs and they might spread it to other soldiers. Now think about this. When you're in the military, sex should be the least of your concern. If you're in for the sex, you're doing it wrong. The only way STD would grow rampant is if the military is one huge orgy already. It also implies that our service men and women don't have self control. Finally, why would straight soldiers be having gay sex anyways? On another level, it's a requirement to obtain physical and mental checkup in order to enter and be in the military, so that already reduce the risk of any psychological and physical problems. Finally, there are already gays in the military deal with. Research shows that being in the closet is detrimental to their health, so letting them serve openly will actually improve their mental health.
All this anti-gay rhetoric about DADT is actually rather insulting to all those who serve in the military when you think about it. Notice that FRC focus so much on sex. More than even normal gay people. It's like they're not getting enough. hmm