In answering the question of whether or not homosexuals should be allowed in the military it is necessary to first resolve the question of whether or not this action compromises the military's effectiveness or the abilities of those involved. A major claim seems to be that homosexuals do compromise the army and it's members, and therefore should not be allowed to enlist. However, if this logic is sound and is the basis for decision-making, it follows that if homosexuals do not compromise the army and it's members then they should be allowed to enlist.
On one side there are those who believe that having homosexuals in the ranks would create an uncomfortable atmosphere with anxiety and sexual tension, thus undermining troop morale and combat effectiveness. However, the issue seems not to be about denying homosexual's their rights, but rather protecting the rights of scared or "homophobic" straight people. If you ask the general public whether homosexuals and straights should have the same civil rights, a large majority will answer yes.
If you rephrase the question and ask if straights should be forced to share a bedroom (like army barracks) with a homosexual, probably a large majority would answer no.
The myth is that homosexual men can't control their sex drives and would molest or seduce straight men. But homosexual men seek social companionship from homosexual men, not heterosexual men, in the same fashion that straight men are only attracted to the opposite sex and then still aren't attracted to every woman they come across. Most homosexual men would never come out to their comrades until there was a certain level of pre-existing trust to begin with. Therefore in any setting, uncomfortable feelings due to homosexuals are either unwarranted or can be defined as sexual harassment, same as any unwanted...