In answer to Dr. J’s question, while the Volgi isn’t strapping on the leather and garters like ’Puter, nor can he rouse himself to great indignation about the repeal. He has two observations, though.

First, it’s curious how DADT quickly went from a pro-gay measure (compared to the status quo ante) to a terrible offense against them, and the way that “hypocrisy” or “forcing them to live a lie” (which our grandparents might just have approvingly called “discretion”—not just about homosexuality, but about a lot of things) was perceived as a terrible injustice trumping the morale and readiness concerns that the combat branches kept expressing. Identity politics has penetrated our culture much more deeply than we realize.

Second, Confucius worries about the way repeal proponents have portrayed it as a costless good. While it may well be a good, nothing is costless. Everything has tradeoffs, even if we can‘t see them. What worries me is that we didn’t even bother looking for them (or perhaps ignored them if the combat-branch opponents mentioned above were presenting them). Moreover, one can reasonably fear that when they crop up, because of the political nature of the decision, they’ll be swept under the rug. Any time Congress passes something that makes your Facebook status feed light up with ejaculations of self-righteous satisfaction, you gotta worry that emotion, not reason is driving the decision.

Still, overall, the Volgi will wait and hope he’ll be allowed to see the evidence, good and bad.

Confucius, Œc. Vol.

Don’t ask impertinent questions like that jackass Adept Lu.