Millions of folks are all aglow now that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy regarding gays in the military has been repealed. While that may be a good thing in some ways, there will be some fallout we can expect, that some folks haven’t thought of. And that won’t be a good thing.

Folks who have read my blogs know that I supported the DADT policy, and thought it should remain. I don’t see straight people walking around announcing they are heterosexual. I don’t see the need for homosexuals to make such announcements. I don’t know how that advances the military. Meanwhile, gays have served proudly.

I have also written that I have no objection with open gays in scores of functions within the military. However, that’s different when it comes to the intimate quarters that prevail such as boot camp. Being an old timer with values that were ingrained during the “Grease” years, I would be uncomfortable sharing sleeping quarters, showers, etc., if I’m aware that my shower partner is gay. I would bet that thousands of straight soldiers today feel the same.

That aside, here’s what we can expect now that gays have a full and open voice in the U.S. armed forces.

1 – Gays in the military, now open and legal, will be empowered to establish minority status organizations within to ensure their rights are not violated, similar to blacks and females.

2 – If anyone says a derogatory word toward or about gays, they may be subjected to court martial for inciting “hate speech.”

3 – If and when a superior, i.e. boot sergeant, screams and hollers at a recruit who he knows is gay, the sergeant may be accused — and even disciplined — of anti-gay behavior. Civil suits are not out of the question.

4 – Will gays who are not promoted for legitimate reason file discrimination complaints and/or suits based solely on their sexuality. Will the Armed Services committees of congress now form statistical studies to ensure gays are being promoted at the same rate of heterosexuals? Will gays get promoted at a faster rate now, to make up for discrimination of the past?

5 – Will an officer’s negative opinion about gays be an impediment to his getting promoted in the future?

6 – What about gay partnership rights? Will they mirror marriage laws that apply to heterosexuals? Does the spouse of a married homosexual get an I.D. card, or qualify for “dependent” status? On base housing entitlements? Health care entitlements? Then again, what would be the definition of a “legal” partner?

7 – Will homosexual Marines be allowed to date each other, hold hands while on duty and on base?

8 – Will homosexual soldiers be assigned to countries where homosexuality is forbidden?

9 – Will gays who are HIV positive be discharged? Could that be a “service connected” illness?

Sure, other countries have openly gay service members serving in their military. But those countries don’t have the U.S. Constitution and it’s wake of liberalized interpretations, which have fostered law suits by the kazillions, especially by minority organizations on constant watch to demand equal rights.

I would suggest the items listed above are but the tip of the proverbial iceberg once this gets under way.

What’s most important now, is adjusting to reality. The law is changing, and people have to change with it.

It was President Bill Clinton, a very liberal Democrat, who first supported the DADT policy which went into effect during his administration. It was a good one, and it worked. It certainly did not mean that he — or any other supporter of the policy — was anti-gay.

I have a wonderful 23 year-old family relative who is bright, beautiful, cheery, exciting, and gay. I love her with all my heart, and she knows that.

But we must be aware of all the consequences of enacting new policies that are not in the best interest of the military armed forces, in general. And if it’s not in the best interest of our military, then it’s not in the best interest of national defense.

Click here: Most US Marines don’t want gay roommates: general

Click here: Marine general suggests repeal of ‘don’t ask’ could result in casualties

Click here: Officer won’t sign order for troop indoctrination