On Friday The Washington Times compared letting gays serve openly in military to letting the elderly and handicapped serve. Adam Serwer wants to tear his hair out:
The idea that homosexuality is akin to a physical disability is self-evidently absurd -- the military doesn't prevent gays and lesbians from serving, just serving openly. The question of whether or not gays and lesbians are physically capable of doing so isn't even at issue. It's not just the Times making this silly argument either--Republican Sean Bielat, who is challenging openly gay Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank using a blatantly homophobic ad campaign, recently said "I don't see anybody protesting" the fact that men under 5'2 aren't allowed to serve.
... The Washington Times isn't making an empirical or rational argument, it's just counting on the reader being as frightened and hateful as they are.
There's no response to that, other than disgust.