Barack Obama promises to remove barriers preventing homosexual men and women from serving in the armed forces, while John McCain wants to preserve Bill Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, columnist Rowland Nethaway wrote. Meanwhile , the House Armed Services Committee’s Military Personnel Subcommittee held a recent hearing on the policy. One person who has changed his mind is John Shalikashvili, the retired Army general who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when the current “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was adopted. Shalikashvili now believes that allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military “would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces,” Nethaway wrote.
“He based his opinion in part on a 2007 Zogby poll that reported 75 percent of the troops interviewed who served in Iraq and Afghanistan said they were comfortable around gay men and lesbians and did not believe morale would be hurt.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
37 Comments
No doubt the anti-military Republicans hate this study. But rest assured there is no recruitment problem for the military since they had no problem kicking out thousands of gays from the military, even those desperately needed Arabic translators.
Just another example why conservatives and their immoral Christian fundamentalism is harmful to America.
I have no objection doing away with the old policies.
Sexual misconduct is already addressed in the UCMJ and it can apply to both preferences if necessary.
Good order and discipline controls the issue.
DADT always was a stupid fix for the problem of gays in the military. It did nothing to change the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The main way gays were discharged before was through an administrative discharge because of Art. 83
ART. 83. FRAUDULENT ENLISTMENT, APPOINTMENT, OR SEPARATION
Any person who–
(1) procures his own enlistment or appointment in the armed forces by knowingly false representation or deliberate concealment as to his qualifications for the enlistment or appointment and receives pay or allowances thereunder; or
(2) procures his own separation from the armed forces by knowingly false representation or deliberate concealment as to his eligibility for that separation;
shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
Part of the recruiting procedure you were asked if you were a homosexual or if you ever had a homosexual experience. Later if caught you were punished/discharged for lying on your enlistment. DADT did away with this but it didn’t do anything about Art 125:
ART. 125. SODOMY
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.
(b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
Therefore, it was OK to be gay and be in the military, just against regulations to be open about it. If you knew of someone that was gay you had to report them before and after DADT. DADT did nothing about Art. 78:
ART. 78. ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT
Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
Clinton’s action with his implementation of DADt was merely pandering to the gay and lesbian lobby and was worse than doing nothing. Congress has to change the UCMJ.
Should be interesting.
I’ve heard there’s a Facebook site for 600 gay military service members who are serving openly in there units. Kinda begs the question, DADT whom?
This is clearly a failed policy. Keeping it is a bigger threat to good order and unit cohesion than the gays who are already serving openly in the military.
The Zogby poll indicates that 75% of military personnel who’ve served in Afghanistan and Iraq don’t have a problem serving with gays. K. For the 25% who do have a problem, who would be the threat to unit cohesion and good order, let them go. Why should the military and the government maintain a less good military by pandering to them? That would be stupid.
The new ACU’s are FABULOUS!
I am a man so every gay is attracted to me right? I am also heterosexual so that means every woman I see I am attracted to right? That’s the way it work is it not? I watched part of that hearing and there was a Marine who testified. When I say Marine I am not just referring to the branch of service but he demonstrated everything that you would think of as a Marine. He was gay and a hero to the men in his unit, wounded he fought on and even helped other members of his unit who were also wounded.
Men and women can work side by side and now suddenly fell to the floor in a pile of carnal lust.
Gay men and gay women are not different when working with straights, attraction and responding to the attraction is not simply a matter of someone being the right gender.
For most normal people sexual orientation isn’t a factor in the work place. The only questions that should affect the work place are such as: Is everyone capable of performing their job duties, trained, competent, willing, with an attitude that fosters good working conditions? Then let’s get to work. What kind of jobs does the military perform where “sex” or “sexual orientation” enters the equation? What competent employee takes “sexuality” to work with them (outside sex-based business which I’m hoping our military isn’t!)? Most adults know the wisdom of “You don’t s**t where you eat.”
Has anybody looked at those sailor suits the Navy wears? Bell-bottoms, plunging neckline, coy little scarf and that cunning little round hat?
“FAB-ulous!”
This is one issue I wll freely admit I was wrong on. I thought DADT was a reasonable compromise, and that openly serving gays were a detriment to unit cohesion and combat effectiveness.
I was wrong. ( BTW – See how easy that is, Chas?)
Eliminate the policy, and amend the UCMJ to eliminate the restrictions. It simply has no place today, if it ever did. As noted above, there is a policy and procedure for dealing with and prosecuting same.
It’s long past time. History will remember the 20th century as an odd time, with so much modernizations yet so many ideas that hailed from the Dark Ages.
Oh well.
Armed Forces Subcommittee Hearings at You Tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua3ZncXyDqI&feature=related
It’s about 2 hours. I watched the entire video. Major General Vance Coleman, US Army Retired, was brilliant. For the most part, I enjoy watching congressional proceedings. I have since I was a kid. There’s real intelligence in statesmanship. I think that has waned in the past 7 years (Remember the “nuclear option” and the threat to destroy comity in America’s representative government?), but I hope we return to it. It is something to be proud of as an American and for our country.
Armed Forces Subcommittee Hearings at You Tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua3ZncXyDqI&feature=related
It’s about 2 hours. I watched the entire video. Major General Vance Coleman, US Army Retired, was brilliant.
For the most part, I enjoy watching congressional proceedings. I have since I was a kid. There’s real intelligence in statesmanship. I think that has waned in the past 7 years (Remember the “nuclear option” and the threat to destroy comity in America’s representative government?), but I hope we return to it. It is something to be proud of as an American and for our country.
oops, sry for the double post.
Well, the video was removed. Unfortunate.
The irony, and ridiculousness, of this policy play out in the official “unofficial” way it’s imposed. Deployed gay and lesbian troops who come out or are outed are left deployed until their tour ends. Then, once they come home, they’re booted out of the military. This is the HUGE lie behind “unit morale.” If “unit morale” was such a problem, gay and lesbian troops would be sent home immediately.
A system that works only if people lie breeds lies of its own. It’s time to end DADT.
I really wonder how many heterosexuals admit to having anal sex in the military and how many have even been asked.
I don’t really care. I don’t think many people would either.
When they do allow homosexuals to openly serve, I think I can say that any discrimination would be dealt with too.
I am sure there might be some here and there, but for the most part, the military does a good job of cracking down on stuff like that if they want to.
I think the biggest issue might be logistics. Do you do anything different for training? Bathrooms? Sleeping areas?
Well, I certainly don’t ask, and since I don’t really care, I have no interest in “telling” or outing someone. And while I may have thought DADT was a reasonable compromise at the time, I see no reason to continue with it. Change whatever needs changing to allow those gay/lesbian military to serve without fear of being outed and busted. No need for it. ALthough I am uncertain as the need. When I served, most knew who was, and who wasn;t. Nobody cared. At least among the enlisted. But, whether or not there is a TRUE NEED to change it, what is right is right. Change the UCMJ.
I think the biggest issue might be logistics. Do you do anything different for training? Bathrooms? Sleeping areas?
The answer would be no.
So the military has a shortage of Arabic and other middle eastern languages critical to success in the war on terror. Then kicks out translators who can speak those very languages because they were gay. I wonder how many lives were lost because of that.
Why would their need to be a logistical change? Gays need their on bathrooms?
So then why isn’t the military cracking down on those who are discriminating against non-christians?
Logistics…no. No difference. Do you really need anything different now? How do you separate the gays if you don’t know who they are now?
TomPaine
Posted July 28, 2008 at 12:20 pm | Permalink
So the military has a shortage of Arabic and other middle eastern languages critical to success in the war on terror. Then kicks out translators who can speak those very languages because they were gay. I wonder how many lives were lost because of that.
____________________________
Those lost lives were the lives of the living, not the “pre-born” so they don’t have any value. Geez, didn’t you go to church yesterday? You secular humanist, satanist, heathen, communist, socialist, leftist, marxist, maoist, traitor, unAmerican, babykiller, …
Political_Mama,
The military is not “cracking down” on discrimination against non-Christians for a couple of reasons:
1. Your idea of what “cracking down” is absurd. You have stated that those who do should be discharged less than honorably for the slightest infraction.
2. There is not any rampant discrimination against non-Christians going on.
P-mom the Military might soon be forced to do something about discrimination http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/07/08/atheist.soldier/?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail
Weinstein said he’s been contacted by more than 8,000 members of the military, almost all of them complaining of pressure to embrace evangelical Christianity.”
Only 8,000 members of the military…no that’s not widespread at all.
ANy discrimination within our Armed Services is too much, bu 8000 among
ARMY — 512,400
(includes temporary 30,000 increase)
NAVY — 340,700
MARINE CORPS — 180,000
(includes temporary 5,000 increase)
AIR FORCE — 334,200
* For fiscal year 2007, the armed forces are authorized for the following number of selected reserve personnel:
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD — 350,000
ARMY RESERVE — 200,000
NAVY RESERVE — 71,300
MARINE CORPS RESERVE — 39,600
AIR NATIONAL GUARD — 107,000
AIR FORCE RESERVE — 74,900
COAST GUARD RESERVE — 10,000
852,800
1,367,300 active duty = 1/2 of one percent. There are probably at least that many of any kind of story you want to name. If you add reserves (included in force totals)that is 1/3 of one percent.
Too many, yes. Significant. Depends on how you like at it I guess.
Prosecute sodomy.
“Prosecute sodomy.”
Shut up, moron.
It should be noted that most conservatives even are not associated with the nasty views of that louse parkay.
Several here have expressed the hypothesis that parkay is the cockroach costume wearing loser Troy Newman.
I wonder if it’s true (and no, I will not demand confirmation of this hypothesis, it’s up to that loser parkay to grant that).
Prosecute sodomy? It’s more fun to persecute parkay, the imitation butter!
Poor Parkay. Never had good sex in his life. Probably bathes in rubbing alcohol after he partakes in the dirty deed and does Rosary before and after in a cold sweat.
I’d really like to delve into his mind for about an hour. I guess if he can’t enjoy sex, he’s going to be a buzzkill for those who can.
OMG I just had the worst thought…the person who has to …procreate with THAT.
Isnt Sodomy everything except missionary? and the Supreme court rightly did away with sodomy laws, they rightly figured courts and police had more important things to do than find out what position people fuk in
“I’d really like to delve into his mind for about an hour.”
EWWWWWWWWWWWWW!
P-Mom,
If the only person you had a chance with was ex-con clinic bomber Cheryl Sullinger, you’d be bathing in the rubbing alcohol too!
This article is attention-grabbing, thank you for the share!!