New DADT Injustice
Having to pay back Your ROTC scholarship.
5:11 PM, May 7, 2010 • By JOHN NOONAN
Liberal bloggers are making a fuss over this story, which means that -- despite Secretary Gates's temporary redirect on an issue that has nothing to do with winning the war -- DADT is being debated all over again:
A product of ROTC myself, a few things are worth mentioning. First, and most importantly, Ms. Isaacson signed an official, legally binding contract with the United States Army. The agreement is simple: Uncle Sam foots the bill for your education, you serve 4 years of active duty. By signing, you become an employee of the Department of Defense, and you are thus held accountable to military standards, from dress and appearance to official DoD policies such as DADT. These stipulations are simple, direct, and made clear when a scholarship agreement is signed.
I don't question the fact that the young lady in question acted according to her conscience and understanding of things -- but terminating that contract -- any contract, really -- means consequences. The military held up their end of the bargain, covering almost all her tuition plus a monthly living allowance. She reneged, and so the DoD rightfully expects those taxpayer dollars returned, where they'll to be used to educate another aspiring young officer. Ms. Isaacson will be put on a loan payback plan which is both fair and reasonable, where she's allowed to live her life as she chooses while making modest monthly payments at minimal interest.
So the left is playing this up as some sort of grand martyrdom case and a perfect example of the metaphysical wrongness of DADT, but I'm having a tough time finding the injustice here.