This comment from Andy over at This Ain’t Hell says all that need to said about the broader aspects of the subject.
What people fail to appreciate is that the Constitution does not provide a citizen the right to serve in the Armed Forces. Military service is, to borrow an analogy, like a professional sports team. “Not all need apply and very few should expect to join. Any shortcoming in performance should threaten a soldier’s place on the team.” (Rethinking the Principles of War)
It is a person’s inability to separate, in this case, their sexuality from their duty to follow orders that is the reason for their denial of admission/dismissal from service. Furthermore, those individuals who enlisted/were commissioned with full knowledge of the rules governing homosexual acts and then violated the orders are most certainly not the sort of people that should serve in the Armed Forces. They should not serve because their loyalties are obviously split between following orders and indulging in sexual activies in violation of DADT. Additionally, they have violated their oath to obey the orders of those appointed over them and are only partially dedicating themselves to the service of their country. They are in essence saying, “I will obey these orders, but not those. Oh, by the way, you have to keep me in your Armed Forces, never knowing which other orders I might fail to follow.”
People are not being dismissed from the military because they are gay, they are being dismissed because they failed to follow orders and that behavior is not in keeping with the level of honor, courage, and committment that is demanded of service members by their countrymen.
This argument applies equally to those who fail to pay bills, commit adultery, assault another person, are disrespectful to a superior, etc….