The Dan Choi case is intriguing. I hadn't heard about it before.

On the one hand, I understand his concerns.

On the other hand, "the army's controversial "don't ask, don't tell" policy" seems like a pretty sensible idea to me, and here's why.

Why should anyone be asked BY anyone else what their sexual preferences are? That's entirely their own business.

And why should anyone make a point of telling everyone else about their sexual preferences and thereby turning it into a public issue, when it's a private matter and nobody else's business?

If they do choose to make their sexual lifestyle a public issue, then they are going to probably arouse opposition in some quarters, specially if they directly challenge a bureaucratic organization like the Army or the Police. Such organizations do not like being challenged by a member of the rank and file, and their normal reaction to such a challenge is to penalize, demote, or expell the member.

So, seems to me that Dan Choi has deliberately waved the red flag in the face of the bull...and the bull, not surprisingly, has charged...and Dan Choi feels hard done by on account of that. What did he expect?

Who is responsible for Dan Choi's problem then? The Army or Dan Choi?

Is he a martyr to a noble cause, or is he a person with somewhat of a chip on his shoulder, and out to prove a point, and bringing unnecessary trouble on himself by so doing?

That will depend on whom you ask...Dan Choi or the Army. ;-)

Like I said, I can sort of see both sides of the coin on this one. I wonder why anyone, though, wants or has to be seen and recognized "officially" as being heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual, polysexual, asexual, or any other darn choice they make? What for? It's nobody else's business anyway.

There ya go, Amos. Real comment. ;-)