Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 7:19 AM ET, 12/22/2010

With 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal bill signed, what do you think will happen next?

By Ed O'Keefe

Update: View the social conversation around 'don't ask, don't tell' here.

President Obama is scheduled on Wednesday to sign the bill repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" law. The stroke of Obama's pens will not immediately end the law, but instead begins the process of ending the ban on gays in the military -- a process that could take several months or years.

About 500 lawmakers, Pentagon officials, gay-rights activists, military veterans and other supporters of repealing the law will attend the bill signing, according to the White House.

It's a historic day, no matter what you think of the issue, and we want to know: How will the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" help -- or hurt -- the gay rights movement? Do you think the repeal will have a big impact on the military?

Share your thoughts in the comments section below or respond through Twitter using the hashtag #talkDADT. Responses will appear in the boxes below:

RELATED: Federal Eye coverage of "don't ask, don't tell"

RELATED: Ban on gays won't change immediately

CHAT: Former Lance Cpl. Danny Hernandez, discharged from the Marines earlier this year for being gay, will be online at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the bill signing.

Your Take: How will DADT's repeal help - or hurt - the gay rights movement? Do you think the repeal will have a big impact on the military?



By Ed O'Keefe  | December 22, 2010; 7:19 AM ET
Categories:  Military  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: What can you give the mailman for the holidays?
Next: 2010 Year in Review: Top Federal Eye posts

Comments

Now the Marine Corps needs a new Commandant, one who will wholeheartedly lead and enforce the new policy, not because discipline demands obedience but because the rest of the country and Congress and the Commander-in-Chief have recognized it's the right thing to do. General James F. Amos compromised his leadership and has set up the USMC to fail in its compliance. Our country makes an enormous investment in soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen, beyond their great value as human beings and Americans. We don't want any idiots fragging, harrassing, discriminating against or ostracizing any of our troops.

Posted by: JKGordon | December 22, 2010 8:22 AM | Report abuse

More pro gay rights advocacy from the Post.

Posted by: moebius22 | December 22, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

It isn't surprising to see how many people oppose to DADT, but It is sad to see comments such as the comment above.

I work in retail at the moment, the other day I had a young male come in in a marine suit. The customer behind him shook his hand and said "thank you". If there is so much American pride, and "Our colors don't run" how can you deny someone the privilege to fight?

I may not have as much American Pride as I should, but I definitely do feel anyone should be allowed to fight. We are the land of the free.

There are sexual perverts in the service. A very close friend of mine's friend was raped in the Navy only a couple years ago.

While some may feel gay service men/women are being protected by not allowing them in any type of armed services, not all gay men act "feminine".

Posted by: lpomponio0531 | December 22, 2010 9:10 AM | Report abuse

There will be the military equivalent of re-education camps, and lawyers will create harassment provisions which will lead to the disciplining or even court martial of soldiers uncomfortable with the new regime. All the weight of non-discrimination statutes will benefit homosexuals and those opposed will have to "get over it" or "just leave, the military will be better off anyway". Any opposition will immediately be tagged homophobia, as it already is.

For those guys waking up in some hell-hole tomorrow in Afghanistan, as if they don't have enough on their plate, we're sending them this big, fat Merry Christmas from your president and your congress.

Posted by: CraiginJersey | December 22, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

The Federal Eye will finally be renamed Gays in the Military Blog to more accurately reflect the blog's theme.

Posted by: getjiggly1 | December 22, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: getjiggly1
The Federal Eye will finally be renamed Gays in the Military Blog to more accurately reflect the blog's theme.
+++++++++

You said it.


Posted by: moebius22 | December 22, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Gay bashers are responsible for most of the violence in the nation, a homophobe today, could become a gay basher tomorrow. Fortunately homophobes make up only a small part of the population, but they must be identified and carefully monitored before they become gay bashers.

Posted by: morristhewise | December 22, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

For those guys waking up in some hell-hole tomorrow in Afghanistan, as if they don't have enough on their plate, we're sending them this big, fat Merry Christmas from your president and your congress.

Posted by: CraiginJersey

____________________


I find this comment so amusing. Down right amazing.

The gay guy next to the guy in the hell hole was gay before DADT was signed and he'll be gay after. They were both trying to save their lives before DADT was signed and they will still be trying to save their lives after.

If those two soldiers, airmen, marines controlled their behavior before DADT they will control their behavior after DADT. That's called being an adult.

I can only guess the above poster is just obsessed with sex. As someone who spent 24 years in the military I can tell you heterosexual men talk about sex constantly and graphically. Many of us were sick of it long ago. Maybe this is a new era of acting like adult human beings instead of children.

Posted by: arancia12 | December 22, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

As they say, you can't legislate morality, nor can you legislate it away. Behavior that was immoral yesterday is no less so today or tomorrow.

Posted by: thebump | December 22, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

I really don't feel a need to have some nasty little heterophobe watching my back.

They are the cause of so much discord in the world right now.

They will continue to find things to b**** about.

I tried to always be deferent to the military guys.

Now I'll ask if they are heterophobes (or gay or pansies or whatever) and if they are, I will not interact with them.

And that is my right!

Posted by: tjmlrc | December 22, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

I don't understand liberal logic. Could someone explain to me why elite liberal insitutions boycotted the military from recruiting on campus, despite DADT not being their policy, and was the policy of Congress, signed by President clinton, yet they didn't forbid Congress nor the Executive branch from recruiting on campus? can someone explain libby logic to me, or do I have to kill some brain cells first to be able to comprehend?

Oh, and trannies in the military. BRILLIANT idea, having incredibly mentally ill people in the MILITARY. Brilliant libs.. BRILLIANT. makes as much sense as allowing pedophiles to teach children, whichl will probably be your next cause anyways.

Liberal INSANITY.

Posted by: scoran | December 22, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Hopefully, and this is such a no brainer it ought not take Congress more than 5 minutes, we need to legalize gay marriage (NOT "Domestic partnership", please, which is an attack on the institution of marriage! That "separate but equal" nonsense didn't work so well for black civil rights, either.) Then, Congress needs to get busy and repeal Obamacare, force a balanced budget, get us the heck out of Afghanistan and Iraq, do away with TSA and Homeland Security, and put an end to "Free Trade". There is lots to do to get this country back. Lets begin by putting American's first and get back to genuinely conservative values.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | December 22, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully what happens next is that the Sodomites will repent of their sin. I'm sure the word sin causes a lot of you to giggle and chortle but that is what it is. And most normal people are repulsed by the very thought of homosexual behavior. It is selfish, self love. It's a sad, lonely "lifestyle" that poor, vulnerable and impressionable young men and women are seduced into. It is a lie that leads straight to the pit of Hell.

What these people need next is the Gospel-and freedom in Christ.

Posted by: Robster1 | December 22, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if marijuana users will ever get their right to equal status with alcohol users recognized. Cannabis users can no more switch to killer alcohol than gays can switch to straight.

Posted by: newageblues | December 22, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

The benefits of being married is that he will get BAH - Housing Allowance to provide housing for you or you qualify to live in military housing at the base he is stationed at. With housing you are not required to put in a security deposit and utilities are free except for phone, cable and internet, that is your responsibility. You are also under obligation to keep the housing in proper order such as mowing the lawns, weeding, etc...

With BAH it is going to depend on where he is stationed. For if he gets orders to Korea and you can't go then the BAH will be based on your zip code. If he gets orders to a base in the 50 states then it is based on the command's zip code. If he goes to a OCONUS location and you go then you live in military housing. All allowances are combined with Basic Pay, split in half and paid on the 15th and 1st of each month.

If he is in schooling, TAD, TDY or deployment for longer than 30 days then he will get Family Separation of $250 per month.

COLA - Cost of Living, there is 2 types, CONUS (Continental US - lower 48) and OCONUS (Outside US including Hawaii and Alaska). CONUS COLA it doesn't matter if he is married or not, it is about the same. OCONUS COLA is only if you are command sponsored (meaning military is allowing you to be there after clearing a medical & dental screening) and that will depend on how many years in, his rank/rate, # of dependents and whether or not he is in barracks. If he is on unaccompanied orders then he will not get COLA for you.

You will be entered into DEERS which means you can then get a military ID card and are automatically enrolled in Tricare Standard. With Standard there is a yearly deductible and a co-pay for each time you go to the doctor that you choose from a list of providers that are acepted by Tricare. You can change to Tricare Prime in whch there is no co-pay or deductible and you are seen at a base hospital or clinic. Prescriptions can be filled at base pharmacy for free or out in town at certain pharmacy's for a discount There is United Concordia Dental, it is $13 a month for 1 person or $29 for a family. This gives you 2 free cleanings a year, then partial pay on everything that needs to be done up to $1200 per year.

You get Life Insurance of 100K on yourself, which ranges in price depending on your age, usually under $10 per month. Children are covered for up to 10K free of charge

You can use the base facilities such as gym, pool, ticket office, Commissary, Exchanges, etc...

Posted by: LETFREEDOMRING2 | December 22, 2010 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Gay bashers are responsible for most of the violence in the nation, a homophobe today, could become a gay basher tomorrow. Fortunately homophobes make up only a small part of the population, but they must be identified and carefully monitored before they become gay bashers.

---

That is the STUPIDEST thing I have ever read. There is far more black on black urban violence than there is gay bashing, and you claim gay bashers are responsible for most of the violence in the USA? are you retarded?

Posted by: scoran | December 22, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Let's stop talking about Gay rights and talk about Civil Rights for Gays.

Posted by: jimhorn | December 22, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully what happens next is that the Sodomites will repent of their sin. I'm sure the word sin causes a lot of you to giggle and chortle but that is what it is. And most normal people are repulsed by the very thought of homosexual behavior. It is selfish, self love. It's a sad, lonely "lifestyle" that poor, vulnerable and impressionable young men and women are seduced into. It is a lie that leads straight to the pit of Hell.

What these people need next is the Gospel-and freedom in Christ.

Posted by: Robster1 | December 22, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

For those of who are veterans, we kept waiting for a group of mid-level NCO's to come out with a big endorsement that this would be good for the military and good for the country. Funny how that didn't happen.

I could care less what people do in their bedrooms, or what military people do in their off duty time. But there are some "inconvenient facts" associated with this issue that no one likes to talk about. I imagine one of the first things Congress will need to occupy its time with come January is changing the UCMJ so sodomy is no longer a court martial offense. Then, as CraiginJersey so accurately predicted, there will need to be some reeducation camps for everyone to go through, just like those we were subjected to after the Watts riots. It won't be long before someone runs into his or her commander complaining that someone said "that's so gay." And the personnel systems will all need to be modified so we can sort our sailors, soldiers, and Marines by sexual preference. If we don't do that, how in the world can the military insure the "correct" number of gays are being promoted? Of course, all of this is good for the country.

Posted by: Curmudgeon10 | December 22, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

DADT WAS A US CITIZEN CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE, THE RELIGIOUS SHOULD STAY OUT OF IT PERIOD


ACCORDING TO RELIGIOUS LAWS AND CUSTOMS, WOMEN CAN'T SIT AS JUDGES,ie SCOTUS 3 OF 9 ARE, THOSE RELIGIOUS FOREIGN LAWS ARE INQUISITIONAL AND JIM CROW LIKE IN ENFORCEMENT.

I DO NOT CONSENT AND WAIVE THE BENEFITS TO ALL IMF IRS 501 (c)(3) LLC- RELIGIOUS CORP. LAWS.
AS A US CITIZEN ,I AM ALWAYS *AMICUS CURIAE *A FRIEND OF THE COURT 264F.276,279,, 64N.Y.S.2d510,512, AND AS WELL AS *QUI TAM* 21N.W.2d287,289

RELIGIOUS (LEVITICAL/SHARIA ) FOREIGN LAWS ARE INQUISITIONAL , INEQUALITY NON-CIVILITY (NO CIVIL/BILL RIGHTS , ARCHAIC BARBARIC PRIMITIVE INJUSTICE AND JIM CROW LIKE IN ENFORCEMENT.
THE US CONSTITUTION IS THE ONE AND ONLY SUPREME LAW OF THE USA ART.6 CL.2, AND IN CL.3
THE RIGHTS OF USA CITIZENSHIP TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER ALL RELIGIOUS MEMBERSHIPS LAWS

FOREIGN RELIGIOUS COUNTRIES AND THEIR INHUMANE LAWS/CUSTOMS, REJECTS THE US CONSTITUTION, SO WHY SHOULD WE BEND TO THEIR ARCHAIC INHUMANE DEATH CUSTOMS AND LAWS, SUCH A SHARIA LAW WOULD PRESENT A " CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER " TO US CITIZEN AND ALLOW WARS IN THE STREETS AS IN OTHER COUNTRIES, IT'S NOT ABOUT PEACE, IT'S ABOUT PIECES

"COLOR OF LAW" THE MERE SEMBLANCE OF A LEGAL RIGHT/DUTY 202NW144,148, AN ACTION DONE UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW IS ONE DONE WITH THE APPARENT AUTHORITY OF LAW BUT ACTUALLY IN CONTRAVENTION OF LAW, A FEDERAL "CAUSE OF ACTION" MAY BE MAINTAINED AGAINST A STATE OFFICER WHO UNDER "COLOR LAW" DEPRIVE A PERSON OF HIS "CIVIL RIGHTS 42USCss1983


Posted by: shaiarra | December 22, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

RELIGIOUS (LEVITICAL/SHARIA ) FOREIGN LAWS ARE INQUISITIONAL , INEQUALITY NON-CIVILITY (NO CIVIL/BILL RIGHTS , ARCHAIC BARBARIC PRIMITIVE INJUSTICE AND JIM CROW LIKE IN ENFORCEMENT.
THE US CONSTITUTION IS THE ONE AND ONLY SUPREME LAW OF THE USA ART.6 CL.2, AND IN CL.3
THE RIGHTS OF USA CITIZENSHIP TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER ALL RELIGIOUS MEMBERSHIPS LAWS


ALL US CITIZENS HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHT IS SERVE IN THE MILITARY " USA OATH OF ALLEGIANCE," 8 C.F.R. Part 337 (2008)) THIS LAW SHOULD BE MOVED INTO THE NATIONAL SECURITY ACT ITSELF ASAP

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion;

THE US CONSTITUTION 11TH AMENDMENT, NO FOREIGN LAWS OVER US CITIZENS PERIOD

* allegiance to the United States Constitution,

* renunciation of allegiance and laws to any foreign country to which the immigrant has had previous allegiances to

* defense of the Constitution against enemies "foreign and domestic"

* promise to serve in the United States Armed Forces when required by law (either combat or non-combat)

* promise to perform civilian duties of "national importance" when required by law

Posted by: shaiarra | December 22, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

I find it hard to believe that everyone is so stuck with their own biases that they fail to comrhend the REAL issues here. First, let me say that I served faithfully and although now gay, I agree that gays have, do now and will (and should) continue to serve. Second, DADT was a stop-gap to dodge the issue at hand. The issue is really how the military can allow openly gay individuals, you see simple logistics is the REAL PROBLEM. What I mean, is that something as simple as who is allowed in which restroom/locker room, is a major issue in the military. The military doesn't currently have a sufficient budget and you want them to redevelop all of their facilities to accommodate this requirement? No problem, really, just let anyone go into any locker room (will that really work?). Also, what standards of dress do they follow? What if a female wants to wear a buzz cut (not really a problem) and wear a male uniform? I mean, what if a male wants to wear long hair (i.e., transvestite)? Referring to TVs/TSs/??, what clothing allowance do they receive (females get more clothing allowace as they are REQUIRED to wear (and therefore purchase) bras. Simply stated, I believe the military will salute smartly and accept gays readily (although there will be the odd idiots who do something stupid and they will be punished as a result of their actions); but can anyone provide a solution to any of the issues I have raised?! I will venture a suggestion, change all the laws in the military to coincide with the new law, provide the military the funding to make all the physical changes to facilities (no discount here congress - fund the entire bill presented) and then allow gay personnel to openly serve. Now anyone who thinks any of that can happen; I bet you don't work in D.C.!!!

Posted by: WhatNow2 | December 22, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

I find it hard to believe that everyone is so stuck with their own biases that they fail to comrhend the REAL issues here. First, let me say that I served faithfully and although not gay, I agree that gays have, do now and will (and should) continue to serve. Second, DADT was a stop-gap to dodge the issue at hand. The issue is really how the military can allow openly gay individuals, you see simple logistics is the REAL PROBLEM. What I mean, is that something as simple as who is allowed in which restroom/locker room, is a major issue in the military. The military doesn't currently have a sufficient budget and you want them to redevelop all of their facilities to accommodate this requirement? No problem, really, just let anyone go into any locker room (will that really work?). Also, what standards of dress do they follow? What if a female wants to wear a buzz cut (not really a problem) and wear a male uniform? I mean, what if a male wants to wear long hair (i.e., transvestite)? Referring to TVs/TSs/??, what clothing allowance do they receive (females get more clothing allowace as they are REQUIRED to wear (and therefore purchase) bras. Simply stated, I believe the military will salute smartly and accept gays readily (although there will be the odd idiots who do something stupid and they will be punished as a result of their actions); but can anyone provide a solution to any of the issues I have raised?! I will venture a suggestion, change all the laws in the military to coincide with the new law, provide the military the funding to make all the physical changes to facilities (no discount here congress - fund the entire bill presented) and then allow gay personnel to openly serve. Now anyone who thinks any of that can happen; I bet you don't work in D.C.!!!

Posted by: WhatNow2 | December 22, 2010 9:32 PM | Report abuse

hello,Dear friends, Merry Christmas ! Christmas shopping season,
hard at the end of a year you need a reward yourself! And to the
people we love selected gift!Welcome to:[http://www.bizboysell.com ]
website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,
jordan,prada, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations.
We have good reputation, fashion products,favourable price.We accept
paypal payments, and delivery is free.Good news: shopping every full $200
will have to send gift ! Good opportunity not to be missed!
welcome to ::[ http://www.bizboysell.com ]

Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
New era cap $9
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Handbags(ed hardy,lv,d&g) $30
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $25
Sunglasses(Oakey,gucci,Armaini)$12
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $16

http://www.bizboysell.com

▍ ★∴
   ....▍▍....█▍ ☆ ★∵ …./
   ◥█▅▅██▅▅██▅▅▅▅▅███◤
   .◥███████████████◤
 ~~~~◥█████████████◤~~~~


Posted by: itkonlyyou429 | December 22, 2010 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Mr. O'Keefe,

Thank you for actually asking what's next. I've read in the NYT and elsewhere that marriage is our next priority, but without really asking anyone.

Personally, marriage equality is the most important of the gay civil rights issues, but it seems a little out of reach at the moment, at least on the federal level (go Maryland!). I would like for us to focus on a trans-inclusive ENDA. I urge you in your continued (and excellent) coverage of LGBT issues that you start asking people about ENDA.

Posted by: DCCharles | December 22, 2010 11:50 PM | Report abuse

This ruling will negatively impact the military. When we give deviant behavior a pass all the deviants will clamor to have their way as well. Homosexuality is a thought disorder in-spite of the majority of people wanting to give it a pass. When we say that it is acceptable to have a thought disorder concerning one's sexuality, it gives way to other areas of ones life whether it's business, social, employment and etc. It will soon or a later hamper one's ability to think clearly.

Posted by: debjam93 | December 24, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

This ruling will negatively impact the military. When we give deviant behavior a pass all the deviants will clamor to have their way as well. Homosexuality is a thought disorder in-spite of the majority of people wanting to give it a pass. When we say that it is acceptable to have a thought disorder concerning one's sexuality, it gives way to other areas of ones life whether it's business, social, employment and etc. It will soon or a later hamper one's ability to think clearly.

Posted by: debjam93 | December 24, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Now everyone used all this energy for the gay right, lets get prayer back in the schools. Prayer comes from the bible and gay lovers do not. I really do not care if a women want women or men want men, but lets be realistic. It is not in the bible and prayer should be on everyones mind. In the war zone, yes the men are not worried about if the man next to him is gay or not, he shouldn't worry. When you are out of war zone and have to be in the shower room with a gay man lusting over a straight man or a gay woman lusting over a straight woman, that sickness.
It's okay to pass that bill but let's concentrate on another bill.

Posted by: hendersoncy | December 27, 2010 7:23 AM | Report abuse

I think the military will now implement the law in its usual, too detailed, manner, but it will be implemented. I also think the Marine Corps Commandant will do his duty without any prejudice; if he can't do that, I believe he then will resign. I do caution, however, that we already have laws in place regarding sexual harassment and assault, and it really makes no difference whether such behavior is committed by heterosexuals or homosexuals; is is a crime and should be prosecuted as such under existing law.

I also think that gay marriage will be legal in all US states and territories eventually, but it may take more years for people to come to grips with it, since marriage is such an important social and cultural ritual for most Americans, regardless of their religious persuation. Again, we already have laws in place governing marriage and civil unions, so legalizing it for gay people is not such a big deal logistically; this is much more troubling to most Americans emotionally.

However, I think universal marriage/civil union laws will be passed in the next 10 years.

Posted by: shayladane | December 27, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Ed, Are you gay? The question is relevant as this seems to be a slanted question.

Posted by: chargersix | December 27, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

O.K. now you've come to your senses belatedly with regard to homosexuals. Now why don't you turn your attentions to the abominable treatment women get in the armed forces? There are many accounts published of sexual harassment of varying degree where the victim felt unable to complain because she was assaulted by someone of higher rank. In some cases she was removed from her post and transferred elsewhere, or given duties that could well be described as punitive. Many cases are on record of the complaint being ignored by higher authorities. The whole problem should be open to public discussion, along with the way that junior servicewomen are often treated by incompetent seniors.

Posted by: bstephens1 | December 28, 2010 7:43 AM | Report abuse

"With 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal bill signed, what do you think will happen next?"

Hopefully the federal eye will shut up about it! Hopefully the wapo will stop the anti-govt worker baloney!

Posted by: spankyfrost | December 28, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

I fully support DADT repeal...who the hell cares what one's sexual orientation is for any job...what I take issue with is the necessity of a military in the first place...really do we still need human beings trained to kill other human beings in the name of some imaginary being or because some politician from one country offended a politician from another country...if we are to survive as a species...we really should begin to dismantle the neo-colonial corporate greed mentality and press for more political attention to the global environment with universal food and health security...in short, a more egalitarian world...

Posted by: kmdyson | December 29, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

What idiotic moron raised this issue in the first place?

There has been homosexuals and sexual harassment in the military for as long as this country has had any branch of military service. What difference does having homosexuals in the military make? If they're willing to serve, and give up their lives for this country, who are we to judge?

You can't hide or remove gays from the military any more than you can hide or remove sexual harassment.

If we haven't prioritized and fixed the latter in the last 200+ years, then we have our priorities screwed up.

Posted by: grumpfish | December 29, 2010 11:06 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company