Sir Brian,
I also agree with the "social circumstances" flamboyant homosexual that wishes to make some sort of point or has some sort of agenda. I have little tolerance for a person who feels that I must cater to them because they have a different sexual preference and feel as though they must shove it in my face or down my throat.
However, in the case of Captain Hopkins, I get the impression that he is not this sort of person and was in fact a true professional. These people I certainly have no problem with and have counted several as personal friends. Sexual preference is a private matter. If a person's private life does not interfere with a person's professional life then it should not be a case for that person's removal,
particularly in Captain Hopkins' case where it appears his only crime was being gay.
As Sir Edward pointed out it is very much like gender discrimination.