Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Pentagon cites 'uncertainty' about future of 'don't ask'

By Ed O'Keefe

There is uncertainty about the future of the military's gay ban, the Pentagon's top personnel official said Friday in a memo to senior military leaders. Troops also should not alter their behavior as the policy remains in limbo, the message said.

Despite any uncertainty and confusion regarding the future of the "don't ask, don't tell" law, military leaders must comply with a federal judge's order to cease investigations and discharges of openly gay service members, Defense Undersecretary for Personnel Clifford L. Stanley said in a memo sent to the secretaries of the military branches.

District Judge Virginia A. Phillips ordered an immediate end to the "don't ask, don't tell" law Tuesday, catching the Obama administration off guard as she rejected government claims that an injunction would impact military readiness.

The Justice Department asked Phillips to stay her injunction Thursday and said it plans to appeal her decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Pentagon meanwhile vowed to comply with Phillips's injunction.

But Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates blasted the decision, saying an immediate injunction would have "enormous" consequences on the military. He did not provide examples of how the military might suffer, and gay rights groups have asked Gates to clarify his remarks.

Despite Gates's statements, "It remains the policy of the Department of Defense not to ask service members or applicants about their sexual orientation, to treat all members with dignity and respect and to ensure maintenance of good order and discipline," Stanley said.

But, he wrote, "a certain amount of uncertainty now exists about the future of the don't ask, don't tell law and policy."

The memo warns service members not to publicly come out or alter their sexual behavior as the issue remains in legal limbo. Doing so, "may have adverse consequences for themselves or others should the court's decision be reversed," Stanley said.

The Pentagon said Friday that it would not comment further on Stanley's memo.

Leave your thoughts in the comments section below.

By Ed O'Keefe  | October 15, 2010; 1:53 PM ET
Categories:  Military  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Estimate: Government to make 125,000 new hires
Next: Social Security decision affects federal retirees

Comments

What is the uncertainty? It's just a simple rules change: DON'T FIRE PEOPLE FOR BEING GAY!

They are already at their posts, have been there for some time already, and now no longer have to live in fear. DADT was not specifically supposed to ban witchhunts against gays, but since that's what they did anyway, they don't seem to know how to call of the dogs.

The Federal government provided job protection for gays with a simple executive order. Why the military pretends that this is like converting the Army into the Navy is beyond me. Isn't this the same organization that planned D-Day in a few months?

Posted by: AxelDC | October 15, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

What's in the cards for DADT? Hopefully maturity and 21st century thinking. Get rid of it. If you can't handle gay folks in the military, don't enlist. If you're not going to join, what the hell do you care? They serve, die, and save the lives of their teammates, but God forbid they tell you they're gay. Grow-up America.

Posted by: jckdoors | October 15, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Let me get this right. We could have cross dressing drill sergeants? If so I'll be betting on the Taliban

Posted by: twharvey1 | October 15, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Why does no comment ever talk about the diseases and AIDS, and disgusting practices of "bugging,fisting,golden showers, and feltching (google these words)of sodomists who claim special rights for their non-immutable sexual orientation?
Speak the truth!

Posted by: lyn3 | October 15, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Now, at a time when our military is as heavily engaged as it has been for more
than forty years, at a time when individual troops are ordered to repeated
deployments to the war zones, now in a time of military uncertainty and maximum
commitment, is the wrong time for our politicians to advocate for a social-
engineering experiment by endorsing an end to the current don't ask, don't tell
policy.

Neither the president nor an overwhelming preponderance of those in Congress
have served a single day in our country's military. For them now to pander to a
vocal minority seeking a liberal interpretation of society's rules is disturbing and quite revealing as to the total lack of any consideration of the residual effects of their actions. To politicize our military in a time of war is as incredibly contemptible as it is indisputably ignorant of the military as an institution, a separate and distinct body tasked with the most crucial tasks of
defending our nation in a time of war.

To our politicians I say: Tinker with the civilian world if you must; do not
impose your liberal agenda on America's military for the purpose of vote
gathering.

Are there gays in our military? Certainly and always has been. "Don't ask, don't
tell!"

You can read my complete article here:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5815772/dont_ask_dont_tell_and_the_foll
y_of.html?cat=9

Posted by: denniscopson | October 15, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

To DennisCopson, twharvey1, and lyn3, you are all bigots and need to enter the 21st century. What are you afraid of happenning when they repeal this thing? They are already serving! you think the guys are going to all throw on dresses or something? The ignorance in these posts is mind boggling. Where do you people live? Lyn3, do you actually think that only gay people do crazy things in their private time? if so you're an idiot. Why don't you all move to a country that is more homogenous, may I suggest China? I think their ways of being are more closely aligned to your closed mindedness. Take Sarah, Sharon and Christine with you.

Posted by: WasGOPnowFree | October 15, 2010 5:24 PM | Report abuse

lyn3 may wish to employ spell check or a dictionary before suggesting one google certain words. 2 are spelled incorrectly. As for comments by dennis, it is not a liberal agenda, you pompous twit. It is progressive thought at its best. Equality is a very American ideal; you may wish to read treatises on our history and political thought in our country.

It may be time to begin reading books thay have words with more than two syllables. Ah, the illiterate and ignorant attempt to justify their diminished intellect and bigotry.

Posted by: louis-michel | October 15, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm still annoyed. I want to know why Lyn even knows about these acts she think are so prolific among the gay population. By the way I know couples (straight) that are into things way wackier than anything you have listed there. I love it when people make these sweeping generalizations (uh all Muslims hate America?). What about all those straight people that practice incest - well all straight people must do it, right? maybe we should label everyone as sex offenders until proven otherwise?

Posted by: WasGOPnowFree | October 15, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Obama should "man up" and end the "uncertainty" by dropping the legal challenge/appeal and ordering the Pentagon to comply with the judge's order. Period. Where would we be as a nation if Harry Truman had dithered and given credence to the military's "surveys" in the 1940s when 80+% of officers and 75+% of enlisted said the military shouldn't be integrated? The military should apply discipline based on conduct, not sexual orientation. That would address the "concerns" about "cross-dressing drill sergeants" and any other homophobic fears.

Posted by: jwmorrison | October 15, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely nothing would please me more than for gays to be accepted in any and all areas of life on grounds equal to straights. Unfortunately, in this issue, what I want has no real meaning.

When there is real military work to be done, the world tends to depend upon the US; and, unlike Israel, we have an all volunteer army. Will the young men - and it is largely men - who make up the infantry forces that the US depends upon continue to sign up and stay? The answer is 'we don't know'.

If the true answer is 'no', will gays and those supporting the repeal of DADT sign up in the numbers needed, especially in the infantry? The answer is almost certainly 'no'?

Will we then go back to a draft? Who knows? But it may be the only way to implement the integration of gays into the military. You can't force volunteers to sign up. And remember, there was a draft when Truman integrated the military.

Don't waste your time calling me a bigot. I'd love to see gays in the military but this may have a price tag that is extremely high.

Wouldn't it make more sense to take a long hard look before doing anything?

Posted by: dflinchum | October 15, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Gates is out of touch with his comment about enormous consequences. The troops have said that they don't care if a gay serves or not, so why can't some old farts with a lot of stars hear that and say that it is OK to end DADT? Pure stupidity on their part. We need those people back in the service, not out washing cars.

Posted by: ronjeske | October 15, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Why does no comment ever talk about the diseases and AIDS, and disgusting practices of "bugging,fisting,golden showers, and feltching (google these words)of sodomists who claim special rights for their non-immutable sexual orientation?
Speak the truth!

Posted by: lyn3 | October 15, 2010 4:43 PM

I really don't want to hear about your sick heterosexual habits.

Posted by: msmith371 | October 15, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Why does no comment ever talk about the diseases and AIDS, and disgusting practices of "bugging,fisting,golden showers, and feltching (google these words)of sodomists who claim special rights for their non-immutable sexual orientation?
Speak the truth!

Posted by: lyn3 | October 15, 2010 4:43 PM

I really don't want to hear about your sick heterosexual habits.

Posted by: msmith371 | October 15, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

In other words, the Pentagon knows that eventually the radicals will be thrown out, and a more sane policy will be implemented. The Democratic Party is really a mongrel party. It is nothing but a collection of deviate special interest groups.


The Democratic Party:


1. Socialists
2. Environmental Fascists
3. Gay Marriage, and otherwise Homosexual activist organizations
4. Black Nationalists
5. Open Borders, America has no sovereignty types
6. Union thugs
7. Government workers who add nothing TO, but drain billions of dollars FROM the economy.
8. System gamers AND/OR
9. Welfare recipients
10. Convicted felons seeking the ability to vote again
11. Ambulance chasing trial lawyers
12. Activist Judges who seek to re-write both common law and the Constitution.
13. Far left wing media outlets such as the Washington Post and New York Times.
14. Abortion rights activists.
15. College kids old enough to vote, but illiterate of the issues.
16. Illegal immigrants who would rather be thought of as “undocumented workers” and who Democrats want to be able to vote in our elections.

Posted by: FormerDemocrat | October 15, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse


There is no constitutional right to join the armed forces. Congress has the constitutional authority to decide who can join the military and they did just that.

If you can't stand gays being excluded from the military the don't enlist.

Posted by: screwjob22 | October 15, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

(this reminds me of the scene in Vegas in the movie Why Do Fools Fall In Love where she says)

"Excuses! Excuses! Excuses!"

...

Excuses won't cut it. DADT is bad for operational efficiency, as any military person knows.

Posted by: WillSeattle | October 15, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

"There is no constitutional right to join the armed forces."

Posted by: screwjob22 | October 15, 2010 7:11 PM

---------------------------------

This is certainly true, but as an organization of the federal government, the Constitution prohibits the military from denying people equal protection under the law.

Its actually very simple.

Posted by: AhhYes | October 15, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

"Excuses won't cut it. DADT is bad for operational efficiency, as any military person knows."

Posted by: WillSeattle | October 15, 2010 7:53 PM

---------------------------

As a former Marine and son of a career Marine, I disagree.

Posted by: AhhYes | October 15, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

+++the diseases and AIDS, and disgusting practices of "bugging,fisting,golden showers, and feltching+++

I'd like to point out Mr/Miss/Mrs/Ms. commenter the above mentioned practices are to be found also widely among straight couples and people, you do some Googling.

Posted by: mail19 | October 15, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

+++the diseases and AIDS, and disgusting practices of "bugging,fisting,golden showers, and feltching+++

I'd like to point out Mr/Miss/Mrs/Ms. commenter the above mentioned practices are to be found also widely among straight couples and people, you do some Googling.

Posted by: mail19 | October 15, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Pentagon: Gays do not come out just yet. We know you're serving our country honorably now, and we really need your service, but there is this election and if everyone found out that there were gays in the military it would look so bad for the GOP. So please, stay in the closet and continue to lay your life down for America, as these Tea Party Members who never served a single day in their life chastise you and use your service to gain some political points....

Posted by: waxtraxs | October 15, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

+++the diseases and AIDS, and disgusting practices of "bugging,fisting,golden showers, and feltching+++

I'd like to point out Mr/Miss/Mrs/Ms. commenter the above mentioned practices are to be found also widely among straight couples and people, you do some Googling.

Posted by: mail19 | October 15, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Dear Pentagon: Blow me.

Posted by: WickedRose | October 15, 2010 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Congress has the sole right to make that determination. Want to repeal DADT? Come up with the votes in both houses of Congress. The Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions that soldiers operate under the UCMJ not civilian law. The Supreme Court also threw out a constitutional challenge to DADT last year.

In three weeks there is going to be a large GOP majority in the House and a closely divided Senate that could go to either party. There is not going to be a repeal of DADT in the next Congress.

Posted by: screwjob22 | October 15, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Some 33 countries allow homosexuals to serve openly in their military services. The leaders and the citizens of these countries are concerned about the morale issues, joint or separate sleeping areas, joint or separate toilets and bathing facilities, etc. They moved well beyond these trivial issues.

Unfortunately, too many American leaders and citizens remain paranoid. That is the reason for the "study" inserted into the repeal bill passed by the House and awaiting action in the Senate.

It is time, past time, to end this paranoid B___ S___ and move to repeal preferably by Congressional action but, if necessary by judicial action.

Posted by: pbarnett52 | October 15, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

There's something to be said for a situation where the DoD has gone from irrational `queer fear' to one of `hey don't needlessly get yourself in trouble'...

Posted by: Nymous | October 15, 2010 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Treat all members with dignity and respect! And then issue a memo saying hide who you really are. Enormous consequences, yet Gates can't name one. Obama is a lying liar. He pandered to the GLBT community to get their votes, and he betrayed them. DemocRATS do not deserve votes from the GLBT community. Republicans have shown more respect than those lying DemocRATS.
Its high time we stopped voting for lying liars.

Posted by: AnnsThought | October 15, 2010 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Women have not been successfully integrated into the military. Blacks have. Blacks sleep, bathe, and dress in the same areas as whites, but women do not sleep, bathe, and dress in the same areas as men.

With recent hate crimes against gays in the news, I'm certain it was easy for a federal judge to order an end to DADT. I'm sure she felt morally superior and courageous. But in fact she placed the rights of a small few to be openly gay and lesbian over the rights of the vast majority to privacy and safety.

Gays and lesbians can serve openly in the military, as soon as the military builds private sleeping, bathing, and dressing areas for each individual soldier. Why can't a federal judge order equal protections for all?

Halliburton can build it. Congress can add it to its deficit.

Posted by: blasmaic | October 15, 2010 9:15 PM | Report abuse


Hello,everybody,the good shopping place,the new year approaching, click in. Let's facelift bar!

http://www.famalegoods.com

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30

BOOT $50

Nike (R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $33

Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $33

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
2
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $12

New era cap $9

Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18

FREE SHoPPING

http://www.famalegoods.com

Posted by: f89afdhajk | October 15, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

===== http://www.1shopping.us/ ====

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30

Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $35

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $15

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,A r m a i n i) $15

New era cap $12

accept paypal or credit card and free shipping

====== http://www.1shopping.us/ ====

Posted by: oneshopping29 | October 15, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

That's nice and the 33 countries' armies that are manned by homos cannot fight their way out of a paper bag. Ask Putin or Wen Jiabao how soon they plan to let gays in their army and they will laugh and tell you to get lost.

Posted by: screwjob22 | October 15, 2010 9:23 PM | Report abuse

That's nice and the 33 countries' armies that are manned by homos cannot fight their way out of a paper bag. Ask Putin or Wen Jiabao how soon they plan to let gays in their army and they will laugh and tell you to get lost.

Posted by: screwjob22 | October 15, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

It is time for the president to take command of the Justice Department and order them to NOT appeal the judges ruling or at least play a bureaucratic game that will delay the filing til after the first of the year. He has tremendous power as president he should use it. Too wishy-washy. Also should use the Congressional interim to make the 700 plus appointments awaiting confirmation.
Come on show some initiative.

Posted by: nybill1 | October 15, 2010 9:29 PM | Report abuse

It is very very simple why the big Brass doesn't want to comply with the judges cry's for equality.. It will cost the brass $$$$$$ and lots of it. They will also have less people under their thumb to control.

The brass in the Military is control crazy. They have been since the old farts were young boys and got someone to do what they wanted.

Jeezzz, It We the people waited around for the congress and teh military brass to "DO a survey"... that survey would take 10 years, then it would get lost in some congressional committee for another 10 years.. all the wile the brass and congressional idioots would be telling us Real Americans(U. S. Veterans) that we have to wait longer for a effing decision!!!!

Send all of congress and the brass over to the front lines, give them all a rifle and say "GO get'em boys". Those lazy Bastar&s will freeze and piss their pants.


As long as Gays do the job they are ordered to and they have been for decades!!!!!!! They are fine in my book. I"m NOT afraid of someone who like the gender i am at all. I like females. I dont understand why the dumber straight men always seem to think that every gay man will want their skanky straight hillbilly redneck sarah loving ass anyway LOL

Posted by: mikey1871 | October 15, 2010 9:35 PM | Report abuse

According to this court order, being gay is not going to get a person booted, but under the UCMJ, the military law that all military abides by, it is a crime to commit adultery or sodomy. They are both courtmartial offences.

Posted by: pzstout | October 15, 2010 9:45 PM | Report abuse

If a few military personnel find they need separate showers, sleeping quarters and latrines when the same personnel they have been serving with serve openly, then the only discharges after that day will be much needed and appreciated by all. It won't be an honorable discharge to say you cannot do your job because you are afraid to shower. And you will smell the same, with or without a shower. Good riddance. Grow up.

Posted by: ldfrmc | October 15, 2010 9:52 PM | Report abuse

The world’s Biggest enemy right now is Islamic Terrorism. Thus, we need ALL the talents and brains in the military to defend us, including gays.

However, since we are at war right now, it is prudent that we make any big changes slowly and surely.

I suggest that we make up a time table to transition gays to serve openly in the military: (1) the Air Force; (2) the Army; (3) the Navy & Coast Guard; (4) the female Marines. As far as the male Marines, I am not certain what we should do -- there is the complication of Navy medics serving with Marines in combat .....

This time-table transition method is only my humble suggestion; since I am not in the military, I don’t claim to know what is the best for the military.

p.s. I wonder how other countries overcome the complication of gays serving openly in the military?

Posted by: f16poor | October 15, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

I am not writing this because I am gay; I am not. I am writing as a concerned citizen. If this, or any, American Administration assumes the authority to selectively deny equal rights to any group of citizens, it can deny Constitutional rights to US all whenever it chooses to do so.

The United States was created to be a Government of the People, by the People and for the People. The People own the government. Elected Officials work for the People and it is their duty to serve US equally. Thomas Jefferson advised US that there would be times Freedom would have to be fought for again. This is one of those times.

Someone needs to ask President Obama, “Are we all equal citizens of the United States of America, or are there limitations to equality. Are some of US actually more equal than others”?
http://primitivepolitics.blogspot.com/

Posted by: friar1944 | October 15, 2010 10:23 PM | Report abuse

There is a reason why homosexuals (men) live, on average 23 years less than other Americans. Drugs, STD's, mental illness - it all comes with living the life.

Don't ruin the military with it too.

Posted by: pgr88 | October 15, 2010 10:32 PM | Report abuse

DADT is clearly unconsitutional and those who support it are unAmerican. Senior military officials who continue to enforce DADT should be summarily executed for failing to support the U.S. Constitution.

Posted by: SCOTTSCHMIDTT | October 15, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

This issue has been decided in court. The system worked. I don't get the hold-up. This nation is still so bass-ackwards in many ways.

Posted by: SmallBusiness | October 15, 2010 10:57 PM | Report abuse

That's nice and the 33 countries' armies that are manned by homos cannot fight their way out of a paper bag. Ask Putin or Wen Jiabao how soon they plan to let gays in their army and they will laugh and tell you to get lost.

Posted by: screwjob22

-----------------------------------\

And did you serve, tough guy? Do you know what a DD214 is without googling it?

Posted by: areyousaying | October 15, 2010 11:08 PM | Report abuse

lyn3 wrote:
{snip}Why does no comment ever talk about the diseases and AIDS, and disgusting practices of "bugging,fisting,golden showers, and feltching {snip}
--------------
Gee Lyn, you sure seem to know a lot about disgusting sexual practices. Why is that?

Posted by: bucinka8 | October 15, 2010 11:12 PM | Report abuse


There is a reason why homosexuals (men) live, on average 23 years less than other Americans. Drugs, STD's, mental illness - it all comes with living the life.

Don't ruin the military with it too.

Posted by: pgr88

----------------------------

And how did you pull this happy fact out of your teabagger ar$e?

Let me guess - Limbaugh? AEI? The Rassmussen Poll? Tony Perkins? Palidino? RNC Fox News? Leviticus?

This guy is an stellar example of the effects of Rove's propaganda and manipulation.

Posted by: areyousaying | October 15, 2010 11:12 PM | Report abuse


“Don’t Ask; Don’t Tell” raises a more complex legal issue

http://thinkpoint.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/dont-ask-dont-tell-a-more-complex-legal-issue/

Posted by: Thinkpoint | October 15, 2010 11:39 PM | Report abuse

"The troops have said that they don't care if a gay serves or not, so why can't some old farts with a lot of stars hear that and say that it is OK to end DADT?"

You must have been talking to a gay troop if you believe the troops don't care whether a gay serves or not. And how long were you in the military?

Posted by: gun313 | October 15, 2010 11:58 PM | Report abuse

One thing that is NOT uncertain is that in May 2008 the BUSH ADMINISTRATION did NOT appeal an appeals court ruling that it was unconstitutional to discharge someone solely for being gay, that it was necessary to show, on a case-by-case basis, that that person's sexual orientation caused a problem.

Another thing that is NOT uncertain is that since that court ruling, Secretary Gates has had over two years to develop policies that address the reality of openly gay people serving in an "orderly process" and, by his own admission, he has not bothered to do so.

To the extent that there is any "emergency," it is caused solely by the intentional indifference of the Pentagon to addressing its legal requirements. And I don't think that it says much about the military leadership when it claims, in effect, that it thinks that our fighting men and women are much more concerned about their sexual identities than are those in dozens of other militaries and that the Marines are the most scared. (I think that Israelis are pretty capable of fighting their way out of a paper bag.) It also doesn't say much for the military leadership when it claims that it is not likely to be able to maintain discipline.

Posted by: edallan | October 16, 2010 12:27 AM | Report abuse

For over 220 years gay and lesbian people have served our country honorably, including at least one commander in chief. Over the course of history gays have led and served in armed forces with few problems.

What is America afraid of? Do irrational bigotry and fear trump need and honor? Have our wars and defense needs become so insignificant that we can turn away trained and competent personnel over foolishness?

What freedoms have we to offer the world when our citizens--all of them--do not have equal rights?

Posted by: bagelbrookefarm | October 16, 2010 12:46 AM | Report abuse

screwjob22 tells us there is no constitutional right to bear arms?

no right to bear arms in a militia? no equality before the law?

a new and interesting notion.

in the case of the military, obligation might be a better phrase, in line with voting and paying taxes. but some folks don't get the concept.

and, yes, i am a veteran. is screw22?

Posted by: bagelbrookefarm | October 16, 2010 1:12 AM | Report abuse

As usual, we have too many comments from spectators-- like screwjob22, who know nothing about the Military. I personally know at least 3 gay heros that could break his neck in 4 places before he could open his mouth again, let alone react. If he had any real guts.. he'd serve instead of just running his mouth.

I spent 10 in the military and served with people I know where gay...but they were better Americans and more of a "man" than Mr. Screw will ever dream of being.

At least, perhaps, until he just comes out of the closet.

Posted by: MC41 | October 16, 2010 2:20 AM | Report abuse

4 sides in this debate it seems to me:

1. homosexuality is natural and normal and want gays to serve openly in the military

2. homosexuality is natural and normal but don't want gays to serve openly in the military because of bigotry

3. homosexuality is a malady (a physical illness) and want gays to serve openly in the military

4. homosexuality is a malady and don't want homosexuality in the military

Posted by: robert_curley_jacobs | October 16, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

screwjob22 wrote:
That's nice and the 33 countries' armies that are manned by homos cannot fight their way out of a paper bag.{snip}
------------------
Um, yeah, the Israeli army is a bunch of wusses. Riiight.

Posted by: bucinka8 | October 16, 2010 10:18 PM | Report abuse

To be clear, I am 100%, unequivocally opposed to homosexuality on personal religious/moral grounds. But, I see DADT ask a political "hot potato" and nothing more.

I am quite sure that the fighting Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen who serve this country care about neither the color, nor the age, nor the sexual proclivity, nor the gender, nor the religion or lack thereof of the person next to them on the battlefield when the bullets are flying and the bombs are exploding.

When fighting time comes the only questions are, "Are you friend or foe?" and "Can I depend on you to have my back?" Anything else is just mud in the water; extraneous garbage that they don't have time to deal with or be distracted by. When fighting time comes, it's kill or be killed and nothing else matters.

In light of that reality, and the fact that both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are in favor of overturning DADT, President Obama should direct his Justice Department to cease and desist with all the "challenge" and "appeal" foolishness and simply abide by Judge Phillips' ruling. After all, didn't he say he would repeal it if elected when he was a candidate? I'm sure a lot of folks voted for him because he had the fortitude and honesty to take that stance along with his other campaign positions.

The brave young men and women who are members of the nation's armed services will follow whatever lawful orders they are given by their superior officers and they will fight, with bravery and distinction, next to whomever has answered the aforementioned two questions in the positive. The fact that they all, homosexual and heterosexual alike, have volunteered to serve at the risk of life and limb is confirmation of their mutual commitment to the task at hand.

So, just get the politicians out of the way and let those who are willing to give their service serve. The nation should be thankful that they are there to do a dangerous job that most citizens are not willing to do or are not capable of doing.

To deny someone the right to obtain the honor and advantages associated with serving in the Armed Forces simply because of their sexual orientation is at once stupid and anti-american.

Posted by: vincent-cowherd | October 20, 2010 2:32 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company