-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2009/01/obama-recommits-to-repeal-dont-ask-dont.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
And true colors (!) are shown.
"In 1948, President Harry S Truman's Executive Order 9981 ordered the integration of the armed forces shortly after World War II, a major advance in civil rights. Using the Executive Order (E.O.) meant that Truman could bypass Congress. Representatives of the Solid South, all white Democrats, would likely have stonewalled related legislation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desegregation
Again, not an attorney and Clinton's torpedoed efforts leading to the current policy might have thrown a monkey wrench into a simple executive order that could be signed now, but I don't see the difference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_ask_don%27...
Servicemembers Legal Defense Fund also provides information on the subject:
http://www.sldn.org/pages/survival-guide
The core issue is that the Congress enacted the policy into law. It's not just a military regulation.
Also, I would add as to Truman desegregating the military (although I am hate to admit it) the real change apparently did not come into full affect until Eisenhower. Apparently, there were a lot of things that had to be worked out. My point here is that even after getting rid of the law and changing the regs, there will be years of problems ahead in terms of integration.
I was hoping I could gather more information from you in a polite conversational manner, since you seem to be such an expert on the issue, but I'll pass on the snarky attitude and do my own research. Thanks.
girls, repealing DADT is a start -- now when can i get married. i want ALL my constitutional rights - not just some. let's keep the pressure on!!!!
I certainly join a lot of people in being upset about Rick Warren, but at the same time many on our side seem to be forgetting about the big, substantive promises Obama has made on LGBT rights. The repeal of DADT is just one of them.
So we've got to keep the pressure up on him and our representatives in Congress. Hear that non-DC people? Call your congresspeople. I'm going to have to wait until DC gets voting rights, but that's another thing altogether...
he already got my vote.
the ball's in his court.
This is the kind of change that should be done quickly, in the first year. Former opponents of gays in the military have moved on, and it won't be nearly as big a deal as some people think. I also think it will be a key moment for gay equality when the first openly gay servicemember dies for his country. At that point, how can the military-loving far right still treat them as inhuman?
I know, they still demonize blacks and Latinos even though hundreds have died in Iraq, but it does make it a bit harder.
I see that you were aboard submarines. I was in the Navy too. CTM. This DADT is such a crock, isn't it? Gay folks have always served.
Yes, gays have always served and served with dignity and honor. Its too bad the military doesn't value serving HONESTLY and OPENLY.
I was a communications technician who maintained the equipment. It was advanced for its day. Now it's a joke. ;0) Ultimately I was in crypto. For a time I was aboard one of the USS Pueblo's sister ships. She had just been captured by the North Koreans.
Very interesting about being on USS Pueblo's sister ship.
I turned myself in for being gay. Back then they had recently stopped giving dishonorable discharges for gay servicemen who came forward on their own, so I ended up getting all my veterans benefits, not that I've used them. I turned myself in because at the age of 24 I just couldn't stand living the lie any longer. I'd already left Catholicism and gone through a born-again phase in which I'd had "demons" cast out in an attempt to cure me of homosexuality. Those people I met in that Christian ministry were the sickest people I've ever encountered. Once I finally made up my mind to be true to myself I knew I had to get out of the Navy. I was part of CINCPAC Fleet, so when I told my commanding officer, he sent me to meet with the Commander In Chief of the Pacific. Telling people that I was gay was still something very new to me, so this meeting with the Admiral was pretty tough. He didn't believe me. lol. He thought I was lying to get out of the service. But they immediately pulled my security clearance and put me to work in the Admiral's car wash. LOLOL. I was sent back to my duty station to pick up my things. It required a Top Secret clearance with Special Intelligence Access to get inside. When I arrived several guys I'd been working with for almost a year greeted me with weapons drawn. LOLOLOL! They'd already been notified that I'd lost my clearance, and they thought I'd been caught selling secrets to the Soviets. LOLOLOLOLOL! In order to let me inside to get my things they had to go through the entire security process for uncleared personnel. They had to shout out "Uncleared Personnel", and everything sensitive inside had to be covered with tarps. I kid you not. I'd been in there working on that stuff just days before. But here they were escorting me around and shouting "Uncleared Personnel!.... Uncleared Personnel!!...." And the LOOKS I was getting from my friends and colleagues! I had to resist the urge to shout "Unclean!!... Unclean!!!"
While working at the car wash I was sent to a psychiatrist for an evaluation to see if I was gay or not. That was the biggest joke of all. The poor shrink didn't seem to know what to do. I actually got him laughing (intentionally) with some of my answers to his questions. Maybe he was gay himself? Back then being gay was still considered a psychiatric illness. I don't think he could directly determine if I was gay or not, but he concluded that I wasn't lying. So after working in the car wash for two months I got my discharge with honorable circumstances. I promptly got on a plane for San Francisco and never regretted my decision. I'm sure the Navy didn't regret their decision either, since they believed gay people in sensitive security positions were vulnerable to Soviet blackmail. Seems to me I've read that such a thing has actually never happened. In fact I had been approached once in Japan by a guy with a Russian accent who seemed to know what our ship's mission was, and he wanted me to "come byack to moy pllayce". It was too funny because it was a warm summer day, and he was wearing one of those Russian fur hats. I concluded he was one of our own intelligence operatives doing his job very poorly, and told him to get lost. ;0)
Most of my time in the Navy was spent in shore duty in some pretty exotic places. As for being on that ship, it was only for a few months, but it was very interesting. It took me throughout the west Pacific, including Cambodia and Viet Nam during the war, though we were never under fire. Its primary mission is no longer classified. In fact, what our missions were became public many years ago. The Soviets used to test their ICBM's by launching them and bringing them down in the middle of the Pacific. The Pueblo, and its three sister ships took turns waiting for the Soviets to launch. We would sit at ground zero ( sounds pretty dumb, huh?) and wait for the missile to come down. We would communicate with it in space, and after the blackout period as it reentered. It was all spy stuff. Our poor dinky little destroyer escort was so top heavy with spy equipment that it used to roll 45 degrees. We had a rollometer in our compartment, and once we measured 52 degrees. The ship seemed to just hang there for the longest time. It was actually easier to stand on the bulkhead than on the deck. Rumor had it that we could not go past 53 degrees without capsizing. So I guess you could say I was only one degree away from the Poseidon adventure. LOL.
btrw - interesting stuff, Ritorna.
I got outted because I had been honest to my ex-wife before marriage. Was silly enuf to think "marriage" would "fix it." Yep - young and naive - both of us.
This is not the UK. We have a much larger uniformed service. Much more powerfull.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_...
Gay people can serve honestly, openly and professionally in every area of the military.
The American opinion has changed to where it is MORE CONTROVERSIAL to pretend gays can't serve in the military than it is to lift the ban. The one word answer was totally appropriate considering Americans are READY for this change and polls prove it. Pretending the American people agree with bigotted Republicans that it shouldn't change is just giving them ammunition they shouldn't have.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/0...
"Three out of four people in a Washington Post-ABC News poll believe openly gay people should be allowed to serve in the military, up from 62% in early 2001 and 44% in 1993.
Former President Bill Clinton faced resistance 15 years ago today when he introduced the controversial policy encouraging homosexuals to stay mum about their sexual orientation.
But since then, approval of gays in the military has begun to cross party lines."
Times have changed. Opinions have changed. Take advantage of it, and use the FACTS to our advantage!
It would be different if polls showed Americans are for keeping the policy. They aren't. Its less controversial than we are making it out to be. Lets not give conservative bigots talking points with the lie their argument is on equal footing with ours. Americans are READY for change, and the polls prove it. Bring out the FACTS and make the policy change.
And let's remember, the man isn't even resident yet. We'll know better how he will govern soon after Jan 20. No point for him now to start tipping his entire hand.
Once the CONservatives start to whine and bitch, Obama needs to turn on the IGNORE button and move to other matters.
That's certainly a way of him "solving" the Warren FIASCO.
Otherwise, Obama pretty much has a lot of the GLBT vote, money $$ and help that he will need in 4 years.
It's very simple, as a first pass, eliminate DADT in the air force and replace it with
"Homsexuality in of itself is not a disabling condition from service in the Air Force".
The Air Force is a civilian service that delivers bombs, most of the service members live in bases,
and they rarely endure field conditions. This in of itself will eliminate the blow back in regards to
"Foxholes" and "Trenches" and "Field Showers".
A gay man or Lesbian can turn a wrench, fix an electronics system or repair a vehicle as easily
as any straight man or woman.
After you fix that, consider fixing the policy in the Coast Guard and then the Guard/Reserve.
That means Obama thinks we're good enough, while openly serving in the military, to die for our country.
Now, let's hope he thinks we deserve the same opportunity to live equally in the country he's willing to give us the chance to die for.
also, Elaine Donnelly can fuck herself straight to hell on this one. She has no experience or background in the military or of gay people, so she can eat hot death.
Doesn't impress me one bit. Now, if they answer the question "Are you going to push ENDA through Congress and sign it within your first year?" is another simple "Yes", THEN I'll be impressed.
now what about a difinitive "YES!" on repealing DOMA?
And if they don't?
You care to give me a good way to impliment and enforce order and discipline with open sexuality that is not managed by controlling space in a military setting?
How does DADT make it so gays can't serve? I have never understood that mentality. If what you are looking for is to flaunt who you are, well, I understand why the military doesn't want you then. If you want to serve, go to it. I did, and I never told anyone about any part of my sexuality.
The difficulty I have is not that the far left even would have any interest in serving, but rather, that they constantly re-define history to suit their own minds desire. Cruising a site not long ago, I saw in a post at http://the41stvote.org/wp/2009/01/troll-alert-a...
The post itself showed that truth and understanding, like the kind you would need to accurately understand and reiterate to others what DADT really means, was not a strong point of the left.
"I was over reading “Liberal New Year Resolutions” at Conservative Oasis. Two comments there show that the trolls are very active indeed. One from Tang, is one of the sickest rants I have seen so far"
Additionally, "the slaves were freed by the party of northern urban liberals, the Republican Party of 150 years ago."
Slaves? Freed? By liberals, with guns?
Everywhere I turn, I hear revisionist approaches to some of life's simplest terms, history, etc...
"Any person ... 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."
i've read opinions that this provision (article 125) applies "evenhandedly" because it limits both gay and straight people to vaginal intercourse (with humans). so removing the ban is going to inflame a bunch of morons. get ready for it.
This is just foolish. It is exaclt how Bill Clinton got off on the wrong foot with members of our armed forces... a complete lack of understanding of the job, and the nuances that make the job different from every other job in the United States. Sexuality is controlled in our military. That is just a fact. They do not let male and female soldiers share a tent or a bathroom. Using rules to out gays and kick them out of the service is wrong... and perhaps the service should chage the rules on marriage to support a gender nuetral system that does not create a known gender of the spouse.. but this is just nuts. It means a complete revision and re thinking of military regulations in regards to gender seperation and sexuality... huge mistake.
Is that your argument?
Got any real answers other than "order them to do it and it will be ok"...? Let me know.
Is your argument that young men haven't yet determined their sexual orientation and that Gay servicepersons are predators?
You got how much expereince managing members of our armed forces?
That is what I thought... ZERO, NONE, ZIP. This will be recieved like a bad of crap by 90% of the active duty force, and play into every negative Democrat stereotype the republicans have been pushing for years... not to mention it will create a lower level managerial nightmare. You want Obama starting out instantly untrusted by our military because he pushes this nonsense ....
Look... I consider myself to be an ally. I fully support gays in the military, as well as gay marriage... but this is a disaster... it is not just like ordering people from different ethnicities to live together anf fight, you are pushing sexuality into the picture... keep sex and sexuality out of it. If we could have every woman serving pretend not to be a woman so it would not create issues... the military would. You all are not dealing with the realities of what you are asking for.
How about reality. How do you propose members of our armed forces manage the sexuality issues that this policy wll bring? You seem to be forgetting that memebrs of the armed forces are ordered to shower together... ordered to sleep together... sexuality is managed by keeping members of the opposite sex in seperate iving quarters.... how exactly should we manage openly gay or lesbian people? What about trans gender? Who do they shower with, exactly?
You can force gay people to leave their sexuality out of the military... it has been done for centuries...
You all have not given me one good method of physically managing the sexuality issues involved if open gays, lesbians,and trans gender people are allowed in the service. Not one.
You are not offering one single concern that wasn't brought up by those who fought to keep our armed forces racially segregated. AND YES, showeres and sexuality WERE brought up as concerns.
Somehow we were able to get through that without our military collapsing. I feel confident we will get through this too. I also feel confident that we will one day look back at this discussion and shake our heads in disbelief at the ignorance just as we now do about the ignorance of segregationists in the fifties.
God... the blacks in the 50s thing? This is not the 50s, and we are not talking about race. We are talking about sexuality...
You can feel confident all you want... but you know damn well, this will hurt Obama with people in uniform. Not to mention the managment mess you will be handing every NCO in the service.
But go ahead and throw the blood and guts out there if it makes you feel better about it.
You are living in fantasyland.
It's YOU who needs to do more research. YOU need to research the Israeli Defence Force, the British Military, the German Military, the French Military. Even the commanders who were against opening their services to gays have come around in ALL of those countries.
And WHERE is it exactly that you heard or read that ending DADT would mean that the service would be opened to open Trangenderism or transvestisism? NO ONE has called for that and it isn't even being considered. That's a whole other issue that will be fought at another time but it's not right to deny gay people admittance because you fear that it will lead to transgenders joining at some point in the future.
Oh, and since you asked? YES I DO have experience managing members of our armed forces. I was a Captain in the USMC for over a decade. I have commanded many platoons including combat tours.
The Israeli defense force operates in an area the size of New Jersey, is largely full of reservists who live at home, and would not last two days in a war with the US Armed Forces. In fact, none of the militaries you mentioned holds a candle to the US Armed Forces… Britain and Germany do not have the same culture and military regs that we have in America… you are comparing apples to oranges.
If it is not partially about sexuality… then why are there separate berthing and heads for women? Why no women on subs?
This has next to nothing to do with what your level of management on the ground was when you were a Marine. Were you an infantry officer? Then you know, you would not be the one trying to enforce all these “same” regs. You would not be in charge of keeping good order and discipline, or what would result from lifting the current ban. What would your gunny say now?
You were a Captain for over a decade in the USMC? That makes no sense to me at all. I have never heard of anyone spending over 10 years at 0-3. Even a mustang. I am willing to believe you, to which my response is- why the denial? You know that the vast majority of the USMC would be strongly against open homosexuality in our military, and it would kill Obama with the Marines politically, before he even got started. I mean seriously Captain… give me the SWAG on what % of your infantry Marines would be fired up to lift the current restrictions? 10%? 20%? Hey, I admit that has something do to prejudice. People do not want to be ordered to live with others who have openly alternative sexual lifestyles. Nor do most leaders want to try to manage that mess.
This thread most certainly does get into a discussion of the current situation in terms of lifting the transgender ban. What is your problem with that? You got a problem with Transgender people or something? Oh wait… it may cause a problem because of... well… not sexuality... err... I mean… err… the county is not ready... err. Semper fi!
Whatever. Obama pushes this and his reputation is toast with the vast majority of the people wearing the uniform. His reputation with our military will be screwed before he even gets to issue the order to escalate in Afghanistan. That will be especially true with men in combat units. But hey, you already know that. You must believe this is a civil rights issue that supersedes moral and Obama’s and the Democrats reputation and ability to lead men in combat during two wars. Fair enough… but then why not the same absolute standard for transvestites and transgender people?
Gays and lesbians have served honorably in our military since its inception. They continue to do so. Injecting this into the ranks right now makes no sense at all. People blogging here have even recommended therapy for Marines who refused to accept gays and transgender people living with them … I mean come on Captain… which Corps were you in, anyhow?
My mind is not in the gutter. How about a little dose of reality? The military seperates people because of sexuality... berthing and bathrooms are both seperated for a reason. Care to explain to me how this will be managed if we add open homosexuality and trans gender to the mix? It is very easy for you to come up with sweeping changes... given that you do not have to face the reality of managing them.
every other miltary in the civilized world allows gays to serve openly. it has not been a problem. for that matter, it has not been a problem in our own military to have gays serve their country alongside straights. sex-related problems in the military involve heterosexuals getting pregnant or jealous or beaten up by spouses or sex partners.
Anyhow- If you all truly believe it is worth going to the matt so that the 10% of the 10% of the gay people in Uniform can come out... and transgender people can enlist, I get it. We disagree.
My advice to gay service members is to keep their sexual lives private. That is my advice. Don't ask, don't tell. I have not heard of a single service member who has been thrown out of the uniformed services if they did not come out.
Lousy deal... I know... but you are asking Obama to hurt his reputation with the vast majority of service members over this. Just as long as you understand that... ok. We disagree.
We have a winner!
(Mista Cowboy sheaths sword, bows low)
I get the sinking feeling that a bunch of G&L folks are jumping on a support bandwagon that is going to actually hurt "us" in the end. After talking to folks at the SLDN table at Pride, I feel like anyone that supports repealing DADT without having a Hard Line, Approved Alternative on the table, is about to shoot themselves and the G&L movement in the foot. Last time I checked, an alternative to DADT hasn't been approved so I am quite content to hold onto the small amount of protection I have been afforded.
There are a lot of Certified Public Accountant organizations who are against simplying the tax code... I'm just sayin'
Congratulations I guess.... I hope it is worth it for the guys that want to come out that are in the service...
It didn't provide an AMAZING amount of protection for those of us discharged for being open and honest about our sexual orientation.