Comments on: End Military Gay Ban, Lawmakers Told

By: matthew

matthew — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:20:23 +0000

You can watch or listen to the hearing at http://armedservices.house.gov/hearing_information.shtml

Wednesday, July 23, 2008 – 2:00 pm – 2118 Rayburn – Open

The Military Personnel Subcommittee will meet to hear testimony on
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Review.

* Subcommittee Chairwoman Davis’ Opening Statement
* Video Webcast
* Audio Transcript

Witnesses:

Major General Vance Coleman, USA, (Ret.) (pdf)

Former artillery officer and Division Commander

Captain Joan E. Darrah, USN, (Ret.) (pdf)

Former Naval intelligence officer

Staff Sergeant Eric Alva, USMC, (Ret.) (pdf)

Wounded Iraq war veteran

Ms. Elaine Donnelly (pdf)

President

Center for Military Readiness

Sergeant Major Brian Jones, USA, (Ret.) (pdf)

Former Army Special Operations and current business owner and chief
executive officer

By: Outersider

Outersider — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 12:25:14 +0000

I retired from the USAF, in 1993 knowing perfectly well that I was gay. When I entered the military in 1975 I did not know. Hiding whom you are is extremely stressful, especially others whom you’ve discovered are also gay are outed. It amazes me that those on the right are concerned about us being in the foxhole and being gay. Like we are going to even be thinking of sex when our lives are the line. I always rememeber the quote “they gave me a medal for killing a man, but gave me a discharge for loving one.” Tsgt Matlovich

By: Justin

Justin — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:54:27 +0000

The majority of excuses they use for having the gay ban with the military are just ridiculous. It’s nothing more then discrimination. I was honorably discharged while serving in Iraq for being gay. Like most of my friends in the unit said: “you don’t have to be straight to shoot straight.” If someone in the army had ever had to save someone’s life, the last thing that person would care about is the other persons sexual orientation. Unless you’re just a big homophobic prick. Which happens to pertain be lot of the people in the military.

By: Jason21 TX

Jason21 TX — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 07:31:54 +0000

What is the big deal, except that the country needs these people – how would you like to be on your 4th tour in Iraq? And Gay folks are willing to serve their country, despite those citizens and churches who would deny their their basic humanity. That is real dedication. Here at home have gay people in our health club, including the locker room, and some of us know them, and no one cares. Most of the younger people I work with (college students part time) have gay friends, and one even shares a college dorm room with a gay roomate, it is not an issue.

And General Morals (he doesn’t have any anyway) – Peter Pace, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff essentially got kicked out for his calling gay people immoral. The only sad thing about that scene is he probably got to keep his pension. He instead should have gotten a good kick in his butt by every gay solder and every other soldier who knowingly serves with gays, and cares only that gay people, like anyone else, do their job, for each person’s life depends on the other person, not superstitions and hatred handed down from time immemorial. But knocking down DADT will satisfy me, and help our nations security. And btw, what the religious right fears the most about ending DADT is that so many soldiers will discover that gay people are good people worthy of respect. And then the lies of the conservative churches will be seen as lies, and their house of cards, held together by lies will come tumbling down, and their power will be a thing of the past.

By: Bill Perdue

Bill Perdue — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 05:59:26 +0000

DADT is exclusively the responsibility of bigots in the Democratic Party. It was written by a bigot named Sam Nunn, one of Obama’s key advisors. Bigoted Democratic (sic) members of Congress joined Republicans in overwhelmingly voting it in. Then the same Dixiecrat right-winger who boasted on Southern religious radio stations about his signature on DOMA, Bill Clinton, signed DADT into law.
Our objection to DADT ought to be on the basis that it’s a bigoted law passed by a party of bigots that harms GLBT GI’s. We have to recognize that it’s a trap to link support for civil rights with support for the oil piracy in Iraq or the dangerous and deranged threats of Obama against the Pakistanis or of Clinton and McCain against the Iranians. They are not linked and have nothing to do with capturing the mass murderer Bin Laden. The vast bulk of US military activity is centered on acquiring hegemony over the regions oil resources not on capturing Bin Laden.
Just as we support the GI’s civil rights we should support the antiwar movement and let everyone know that we think that volunteering for ‘service’ in a period when the US military and their allies are murdering Muslims on a vast scale to steal their oil is volunteering for genocide. We should encourage everyone to stay 0ut of the armed forces.
We should be very clear that we join with our allies in the antiwar movement to demand that all US military, security and mercenary forces be withdrawn from the region and that the US cut the purse strings that finance the apartheid and ethnic cleansing policies used against Palestinians. We need allies to win our fight but we won’t get them if we’re seen supporting the Clinton/Bush genocide in Iraq by encouraging enlistment or re-upping.

Barak Obama only supports lifting the ban because he plans on continuing the war there indefinitely and he’ll need cannon fodder. He has the same perspective on Iraq as Bush, the Clintons and McCain. That’s why it’s unprincipled to support him.

By: John

John — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 03:42:29 +0000

The House of Representatives will vote to repeal DADT by a comfortable margin. Pelosi wouldn’t have even allowed a hearing if she doesn’t have the votes. That’s not how she operates. The outcome in the Senate, however, is far from certain. At least three of the six Democrats elected in 2006 (Webb, McCaskill, Tester) are either pro-DADT or otherwise non-committal.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:43:52 +0000

Clinton should have done it then, and Obama (if elected) should do it now: It’s time someone stands up to Congress about this issue and exclaim, “I’m the President, dammit!”

In the meantime, my… ambiguous other of great significance… (one of those kinds of relationships, I won’t bore you with the messy details) is in the army. We’re both hoping for a repeal of the DADT that allows gays to serve openly. If nothing else, it will drastically change his life stateside. At any rate, some of his brothers and sisters in arms already know, and they could care less.

I hope they reach the right decision…

<3 to those serving, and their families, gay, straight, or somewhere in between.

By: jonnielondon

jonnielondon — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 02:43:49 +0000

I’m proud to say that as a Canadian we do not have a DADT policy. The Canadian Armed Forces is an equal opportunity employer. At Toronto’s Pride this year we also hit a milestone with military personnel in full uniform marching with permission in the parade. To date I have not heard of any hanky-panky in the subs of the Canadian Navy, nor has being out undermined the morale of our troops. My hope is that our troops can act as a role model for other countries who do not yet allow this very basic right, and who still hold on tenaciously to myths, intolerance and stupidity.

By: James

James — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 01:01:16 +0000

Well of course I agree with Anthony’s comment that the “cramped submarine” concern is ridiculous. But the fact that we’re not sex-crazed lunatics, while true, actually misses the point. Gay men have been serving in cramped submarines for decades. Allowing them to now be open about it won’t suddenly cause them to be any less hard-working, effective and loyal, or serve with any less honor, than when they had to keep their sexuality secret. In fact, it would probably instill even more pride in their service to know that their country doesn’t think of them as something about which we must not speak. We have to admit, however, that to some crew members — at first — knowing that a gay man is lying near him in a bunk might make him uneasy. This is constantly used as an argument of how serving openly will impact morale, etc. But we’ve faced this problem before. The same prejudices existed among service men when they had to sleep lying near an African American. Just as it was crucial for our society to overcome those prejudices, the outrageous attitude of the military toward gay people must be abolished if gay men and women ever hope to rise above being considered and treated as anything other than second-class citizens. My hope and belief is that all unequal treatment of gay people will one day be seen as absurd and ridiculous as the way most people today see the former laws and policies which discriminated against other Americans who were simply born a different color. We must keep this in mind. Separate but equal is unacceptable. It was with respect to the races, and it is for us. We cannot settle for “civil unions” or special schools for gay children (e.g., Harvey Milk in New York), or a “special policy” of “don’t ask don’t tell in the military.” As long those arrangements/policies are considered acceptable, we are nothing but lower Americans.

By: vanndean

vanndean — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:23:15 +0000

That would come years later, when I realized that I had fought and nearly died to secure rights for others that I myself was not free to enjoy. I had proudly served a country that was not proud of me.
Staff Sgt. E. Alva
I think that it is time to end this discrimination against citizens of this nation. For our brothers and sisters to have fought and died for this country only to be treated as second class citizens is a sin against human beings. Gay people are citizens of this nation and they are the sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, cousins, aunts, and uncles of citizens of this country. They deserve to be able to PROUDLY serve this nation as members of her armed forces. They deserve to be treated as a full and equal partner in the defense of the American Dream. Repeal DADT-NOW!