[EdnBama]

I guess I'm just not seeing any real difference between certain jobs in the military (regardless of branch) and the level of risk with police officers.

If anything, police might be considered to have more significant risk since they have potential to deal with problems everyday rather than just when called to active duty.

And I certainly don't believe that just because the policy is what it is that no one should question it or that people should assume it won't change.

There should be an open dialogue and, if change is worthwhile or warranted, it should be implemented. But likewise, if change is problematic, it should be avoided.

However, the status quo shouldn't be maintained merely because it is the status quo ... and people shouldn't find artificial reasons (or prejudicial reasons ... or ignorant reasons) for limiting people with diabetes from being public servants ... especially at a time when we are being told there aren't enough people in the service to properly maintain proper troop strengths and guardsmen/women are being called for extended periods of deployment.

And frankly, although we all know that there won't be a case where every single armed forces member is called to a combat zone, if they were ... then we'd probably be in a heck of a mess and will be glad to have anyone and everyone capable of holding gun -- military or civilian -- diabetic or non-diabetic -- taking up arms to protect our interests.

--Ed