Is the military prioritizing political correctness and inclusivity and diversity over its main goal, which should be to protect and defend the U.S.? Perhaps not throughout the entire military, but there certainly appears to be a public relations effort on the part of military leadership to signal as much, and it’s right to ask why.

There are about 1.4 million people in the armed forces, most of whom are likely focused on just doing their jobs. But there does seem to be a clear effort on the part of the upper ranks to make sure the military appears as diverse and inclusive as possible when it comes to minorities, the LGBT community, and more.

Last year, for example, the Department of Defense came under fire for releasing an article detailing the views of Bishop Garrison, the senior adviser to the defense secretary for human capital and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), who said DEI in the military is essential for the U.S. Garrison also said the military must attract minority groups to retain a competitive edge.

Just a couple of weeks ago, the U.S. Navy’s social media accounts posted LGBT and Pride-friendly content. Without explanation, the content was taken down .

And a few days ago, a local Maryland news source detailed the story of the first transgender pilot in the Navy. “Winning With Inclusion And Respect: First Transgender Naval Aviator Regains Flight Status,” the headline reads .

Why do the public relations wings of the armed forces care so much about political correctness? And given the military’s current recruitment woes, why is it that leadership appears to only care about recruiting from certain segments of the population, namely minorities and the LGBT community? Shouldn’t the goal be to draw in as many young, qualified men and women as possible, regardless of their skin color, sexual orientation, or background?

The military should have one focus: to protect and defend the United States, to strike fear into the hearts of our enemies, and to boldly protect our own soil. Everything else should come second to that goal. The military is not a private corporation and does not have a similar function, nor should it operate by similar parameters. This is often why the public is upset when the U.S. Navy tweets about inclusivity. It’d be like McDonald’s only advertising their new healthy salad instead of a Big Mac. It’s just not what we want from McDonald’s.

If hiring minorities and LGBT people helps attain hiring goals, and those people can do everything that is required of members of the military, by all means, they should be thanked for their willingness to serve.

But the standards must remain high. There are a variety of conditions a person can have that can prevent them from being included for military service, including something as small as persistent plantar fasciitis . Insofar as wellness issues affect anyone, but particularly transgender people, who experience body dysphoria, the military should not bend or break regulations to honor the lesser goal of inclusivity. The same parameters for wellness should apply to all demographics of people, whether they are white, black, LGBT, or anything else.

And above all, inclusivity and diversity should be second to the military’s goal of protecting and defending the U.S. at all costs. This is the military’s primary purpose and mission; anything else risks distracting from it.

Nicole Russell is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog. She is a journalist in Washington, D.C., who previously worked in Republican politics in Minnesota. She is an opinion columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.