Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

An Intolerant Minority - Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 01:03 PM
Original message
An Intolerant Minority - Don't Ask, Don't Tell
-snip

Congressional support to eliminate the ban came from several prominent Democrats, and one highly-respected Republican -- Sen. Barry Goldwater (1909-1998). Goldwater, a pilot who retired as an Air Force major general, had numerous times had spoken out against the emerging dominance of the Religious Right in Republican politics. Although there is no clear-cut evidence that President Bush is homophobic, there is significant evidence that the continuation of the ban against gays in the military has been strengthened by the resurgence of the influence of the religious right wing during the Bush–Cheney Administration.

Because the military is a hierarchy, with constant jockeying for duty stations and promotion, there is no question that the Chairman’s views about what he believes is the immorality of homosexual behavior will influence every person in his command.

About 65,000 gays, lesbians, bisexuals, or transgenders now serve in the military, all of them officially hiding their non-military lives, according to the Urban Institute and Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN). Almost 9,500 members of the military, including hundreds in critical combat specialties, including 50 Arabic language specialists, have been forced out of the military between 1993 and 2005, according to SLDN.

In 2003, on the 10th anniversary of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr (USA-ret.), RADM Alan Steinman (USCG-ret.), and Brig. Gen. Virgil Richard (USA-ret.), in a signed op-ed column in the New York Times, all stated they were gay. In an op-ed column for the New York Times, Gen. John M. Shalikashvili, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he believed “if gay men and lesbians served openly ... they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces.”

State and federal laws prohibit discrimination against a person’s sexual orientation; the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, Drug Enforcement Agency, and National Security Agency all have openly gay agents. The armed forces, says Gen. Wesley Clark, former NATO commander and Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, “are the last institution in America that discriminates against people; it should be the first that doesn’t.”

-snip


http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar07/Brasch18.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Truthseeker013 Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. An Intolerant Minority - Don't Ask, Don't Tell
If this isn't the most clueless piece of legislation ever forged...

Hypothetical situation- a Naval officer, grade O-4, is a closeted homosexual. He/she is spotted out and about by an agent of a foreign power, and that officer is offered the choice, between being outed and destroying his/her naval career and divulging any and all information the officer is privy to. Isn't *that* a greater threat to the security of the nation than any possible incident stemming from that officer serving as an openly gay person?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
2. Clark: "The United States Armed Forces is not a moral enforcement agency."
Edited on Mon Mar-19-07 08:31 AM by WesDem
CarolNYC, Tom Rinaldo and demokitty were at a young Dems event in NYC on 3/14 where Wes reacted to Gen. Pace's remarks.

There's no transcript I've seen, but CarolNYC had the exact quote:

Well, I think that he’s way out of line talking about that. I mean, what he considers moral and immoral, that’s his private judgment. The United States Armed Forces is not a moral enforcement agency. The United States Armed Forces exists to serve the needs of this nation. (big applause) The rules that govern the United States Armed Forces were put in place by Congress. They are utilitarian rules. They are designed to produce an effective fighting force. There were many issues back in the early 90’s when the don’t ask don’t tell policy was adopted. Those issues are mostly gone now. Attitudes have changed and I see no reason why that policy shouldn’t be thrown out and replaced by a much better policy. (applause)




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. "not a moral enforcement agency"
You know, it's kind of funny how whenever progressives want the military to adopt policies that reflect more modern thinking, the right-wingers whines about letting "social engineering" (never mind that the military has historically been used as a mechanism of social change) take precedence over military effectiveness.

Yet here's a case where conservatives openly admit that their social concerns are more important that keeping trained and talented soldiers, especially in a time when we desperately need more people in the ranks.

There ought to be a way we can turn that back on them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllegroRondo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
3. We can give convicted felons waivers to allow them in the military
but somehow homosexuals are "too immoral" to serve?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. I think Republicans are too immoral to serve.
Oh, but wait... most of them should be convicted felons, so maybe that's redundant.

I'm joking, sort of, but only because I'm so horribly outraged at what people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and, sadly, Pace have done to MY Army.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. Richardson then and now
Bill Richardson was one of only a handful of lawmakers to vote against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Governor Richardson was Congressman Richardson back in 1993, when lawmakers were debating "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and wading through a swamp of anti-gay sentiment on Capitol Hill. But Richardson stood out even then as a champion of lesbian and gay service members. He was one of only a handful of lawmakers to vote against the law, advocating instead for the right of gay personnel to serve openly.
http://citizenchris.typepad.com/citizenchris/2007/01/another_bill_be.html

From Day 1, Richardson made clear that anything less than full citizenship for gay service members was simply unacceptable.

Today, Governor Richards continues to support open service, and a repeal of the ban. This entry from The Bill Richardson Blog also points out that the Governor is an outspoken advocate on other issues important to the LGBT community, too.
http://billrichardsonblog.com/?p=214

http://freedomtoserve.blogspot.com/2007/01/bill-richardson-long-time-champion-of.html


03/15/2007
Richardson calls for repeal of ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy
http://www.kobtv.com/index.cfm?viewer=storyviewer&id=31086&cat=NMTOPSTORIES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC