Just listened to this All Things Considered story ( via Amanda). A few immediate thoughts:

1. People this dense and bigoted should not be allowed to serve in Congress.

2. People this dense and bigoted should not be allowed to serve in the military.

3. Gay men and lesbians are already serving in the military. Officially labeling them as gay men and lesbians is not going to change anything.

4. The most common (and probably the most logical, actually, if there is any logic to this) argument against repealing DADT is that there will be sexual tension among soldiers and that this will prevent them from doing their jobs properly.

So, since Duncan Hunter and Melissa Block are both heterosexual, there must have been some sexual tension there, right? The interview seems to have gone just fine. What’s the problem? Another example: I work with people of the opposite sex all the time in my lab, and I have done plenty of experiments without being bombarded with sexual fantasies involving them. Maybe I am singular in having had this peace of mind, but I doubt it. The heterosexual people in the military who are making these claims shouldn’t be so quick to flatter themselves.

I would much—much—rather have a gay man or lesbian serve in Congress or in the military than someone who is honestly afraid of the looming transgender and hermaphrodite infiltration. If anyone is not doing his or her job properly, that is the reason.