Gay officer may be ousted after 18 years

[bobdina]

Gay officer may be ousted after 18 years

By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Friday May 22, 2009 16:54:42 EDT

Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach is a weapons systems officer. He has 18 years in and wants to retire in a few more, but he doubts he’ll get to.

Fehrenbach, 39, is gay, and the Air Force wants to dismiss him with an honorable discharge.

The Air Force declined to discuss Fehrenbach other than to confirm the action pending against him and to detail the discharge process.

If unable to finish out his career, Fehrenbach will lose $46,000 a year in retirement pay as well as medical benefits, according to pay charts. He would get a lump sum of about $80,000, half of standard involuntary separation pay for an officer of his years, the charts show.

“I was devastated, absolutely devastated,” Fehrenbach said, describing his reaction to being charged with violating the ban on homosexual behavior. “The Air Force has been my life.”

Born into an Air Force family — his father was a navigator and retired as a lieutenant colonel and his mother worked as a nurse — Fehrenbach maintains he has been discreet about his sexual orientation; his parents didn’t know was gay until mid-May, just before he went public in hopes of spurring a change to the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law.

A year ago, though, his career came to a standstill when officials notified him that a civilian acquaintance had identified him as gay.

Fehrenbach’s experience as an instructor-level weapons systems officer included time in both the F-15E Strike Eagle and the EF-111 Raven. Missions took him over Baghdad during the 2003 invasion, above Afghanistan in 2002 and into the Balkans for Operation Allied Force in 1999. He has 2,180 flying hours, nine Air Medals — one for heroism — and five Air Force Commendation Medals.

At the time he was outed, Fehrenbach served as the deputy director of operations for the 366th Operations Support Squadron at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho. He was getting ready to deploy again overseas.

The investigation, though, grounded Fehrenbach and continued until September, when the Air Force formally charged him with damaging its good order and discipline.

Fehrenbach’s initial reaction was to resign.

“I wanted a quick, quiet, fair and honorable discharge,” he said.

Challenging the discharge
With a potential Obama presidency offering a change of policy, though, Fehrenbach decided to contest the charge that his presence hurt the service.

“I’ve been going to work every day and doing my duty with absolutely no impact on morale, discipline and good order,” said Fehrenbach, who continues to serve as deputy director of operations. Until he went public with his case, no one at Mountain Home knew he was in trouble except the 10 or so commanders, attorneys and investigators involved in the query.

In April, a review board at Mountain Home ruled against Fehrenbach, recommending his administrative dismissal.

Air Force Secretary Michael Donley can reject the recommendation, though Fehrenbach points out service secretaries have approved every dismissal request given to them in the last decade.

Fehrenbach could ask a federal court to step in, but he doesn’t know if he’ll take that option. Air Force Reserve nurse Maj. Margaret Witt is suing the service over her dismissal for being a lesbian, but her 2006 lawsuit has yet to reach trial.

On May 19, Fehrenbach appeared on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show” to discuss his case. Maddow, a progressive commentator and lesbian, has highlighted other service members who also have been dismissed or are facing dismissal for being gay, including 1st Lt. Dan Choi of the New York Army National Guard.

The week before Fehrenbach’s appearance, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that Obama recognizes the don’t ask, don’t tell law “isn’t working for our national interests,” but also recognizes he has only meager support from Congress to repeal the ban.

Changing rules, Gibbs observed, requires “more than the snapping of one’s fingers.”

[bobdina]

He didn't tell anyone till a civie outed him to his commander. I don't know if this is right or not. He technically didn't violate don't ask don't tell as he didn't admit it till he was told he was under investigation ,what do you guys think. Should he get his retirement or not?

[leahcimnosirrom]

18 years is a long time to put in serving this country. if he was outed because a civi exposed him.... well that sucks. if his service record is on par with others at his rank and has done his job to the fullest he should get his retirement. i am outside of the military community so my opinion dose not really hold wait in that circle. my opinion might not hold well with others but it is mine. i have respect to all that serve.

[sparkie]

If he is so deserving, why is he appearing on a show of a known lesbian?
Do I smell an activist??
A lt. Col. should have more sense than that, I say, let him burn.

[bobdina]

I gotta tell ya I think I would have more sympathy for him if he didn't go on T.V.. I just don't think that after 18 years though all of a sudden he's damaging the Air Forces good order and discipline. Now if those charges came after he went on t.v. i'd agree with them but they came before.I don't know about you guy's but to me to serve honorably for 18 years should count for something. If he came out on his own screw him then and take his medicine like a man but he didn't I think thats the big problem with don't ask don't tell

[nastyleg]

I had sympathized with him because he was outed by a civilian. He could of had a case to stay in because he technically did not out himself. However when he went onto that show he lost all credibility. So therefore I agree with Spakie and let him burn.

[bobdina]

I'm sure the gay and lesbian alliance or whatever it's called talked this guys ear off to be a poster child to allow gays in the military since there is a big push on that now that Obama is in . But you guys are right he did lose all credibility by going on that show. I think he was used to push there agenda to allow gays in the military. I think we just may find out the future of gays in the military on this case. If the administration steps in and stops this or allows him to retire then Obama will try and overturn don't ask. Of course thats just my opinion

[sparkie]

Yea,,,I was thinkin he is Obama's poster child. We will see. Wag the Dog.

[Sixx]

It's time for change anyway...Gay people can defend the country Just like us.
The problem lies with us "straight" people and worrying about sharing showers or sleeping in the same room with a homosexual soldier etc. It's just silly as hell.

I have encountered quite a few gay service members and even been deployed with a few that had my back and I could trust them with my life.

[nastyleg]

I believe the policy is in place not to protect the heterosexual soldiers from homosexuals as much as it to protect homosexuals from heterosexuals. Fear and misunderstandings have been the cause of many deaths. I personally do not care for ones sexual orientation as long as they can shoot move communicate and kill.

[sparkie]

Why is it always time for change? Why is the new way always better than the old way? Why is the next generation always smarter?
New reason always looses sight of the old vision.
Go ahead, change it,,,,I won't be there to care.

[Sixx]

I believe the policy is in place not to protect the heterosexual soldiers from homosexuals as much as it to protect homosexuals from heterosexuals. Fear and misunderstandings have been the cause of many deaths. I personally do not care for ones sexual orientation as long as they can shoot move communicate and kill.

Yeah I agree 100%






Why is it always time for change? Why is the new way always better than the old way? Why is the next generation always smarter?
New reason always looses sight of the old vision.
Go ahead, change it,,,,I won't be there to care.

Yes it is time for change. Do you know how much it costs to train an able bodied troop? Just to boot the individual out 10 years later resulting the loss of possible combat experience, Loss of man-power causing strain on others in the unit because they have to pick up the slack. It's just ridiculous to be honest...over some sexual preference.

The "new ways" are not always better than the "old ways"...However since you are a Marine I am assuming you have read Generation Kill, about the new generation of 1st Recon Marines Kicking ass in '03. It's a new world.

[sparkie]

No,,, I didn't read that shit, And don't ask me to justify the pervisions of some buttmonkey. Why do you friggin demand anything of me? So Mr. Buttmonkey can stand proud in the light? I don't fkn think so. You don't know shit of my Marine Corps.

Mods,,,Ban me before I get Pissed. I didn't sign on promisin a rose garden.

[Sixx]

No,,, I didn't read that shit, And don't ask me to justify the pervisions of some buttmonkey. Why do you friggin demand anything of me? So Mr. Buttmonkey can stand proud in the light? I don't fkn think so. You don't know shit of my Marine Corps.

Mods,,,Ban me before I get Pissed. I didn't sign on promisin a rose garden.

This is a Discussion forum, You know....to discuss things. Hard to believe adults act like this.
Everyone is entitled to discuss things in a civil manner.

[Stark]

No,,, I didn't read that shit, And don't ask me to justify the pervisions of some buttmonkey. Why do you friggin demand anything of me? So Mr. Buttmonkey can stand proud in the light? I don't fkn think so. You don't know shit of my Marine Corps.

Mods,,,Ban me before I get Pissed. I didn't sign on promisin a rose garden.

sparkie nobodies getting banned here - we don't ban people I think it's cheap and to easy - you're not gettingt that easily away :D

Anyways - listen you guys have a good thing going here - not everybody has to agree with everything this is what these places are for?

I actually agree with both of you and Sparkie know I don't really do that usualy :D I have my opinion I stick to it.
But Sparkie is right I don't think everything should be changed for the sake of change - woman don't need to be always present in every job just so we can say we have now our first Delta force female member - now if the wish is 1000% legit and she is not doing it for the reason the be "simply" the first female delta operator well than I say lets go with it.

Same for this guy - he's gay - he's taking it up the ass- he's sucking dick - and he probably has a lisp - but who the fuck cares?
I'm sure when he be able to make decission that save our troops and kill the enemy as easy as a straight person can.

And this is where I agree with PzychoSixx - We should really fucking put a stop to make a big deal out of the sexuality of people - unless they fuck kids or donkeys or like to rape I really lean to the side of - I don't give a shit.

[idasam]

Who gives a shit whether hes gay or not? What the fuck does that have to do with anything. It didn't affect his ability to serve his nation honorably and with distinction. But that's all irrelevant right?

[Sixx]

Same for this guy - he's gay - he's taking it up the ass- he's sucking dick - and he probably has a lisp - but who the fuck cares?


The lisp made me laugh, hehe funny stuff.....

[bobdina]

Who gives a shit whether hes gay or not? What the fuck does that have to do with anything. It didn't affect his ability to serve his nation honorably and with distinction. But that's all irrelevant right?

I"m a little old school like Sparkie is, not as old though joke sparkie. I have read a lot on this issue and some of the most recent polls done in the military the majority of service members are against this. Now I think there are 2 reasons to this, the old school military and the new guys 17-21 yoa, I do have to agree with an earlier poster I think they would be in harms way of OUR service members for the first couple of years if this is to be reversed. Especially in the combat arms area.Non-combat arms are a little more diverse already having women serving in them for a long time now . Do I think every qualified U.S. citizen or resident alien should serve yes I do . Do i have a hard time allowing gays to serve, well believe it or not yes. I think it should go slow and non-combat arms at first. Now people are going to say there is no such thing in todays wars and their right. However in training and on post/base you are separated from non-combat arms at least where I"ve been stationed. Now again this is only my opinion and I do want to thank all the posters. I had no idea this would spark the kind of debate it has. All this being said I have also served with a couple of gay people who trusted me not to say anything and I didn't. One of them is one of my daughters Godfather so you guys now where I stand in my personal life.

[sparkie]

I just posted that stuff to see if there was any warm blood 'round here. Pzycho,,,,, I would be proud to call you a friend,,,since you're thinkin,,,,,,,,,,,
As I love this semi-old internet saying,,,, I will repeat it.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics,,,,,,,, Even if you win,,,,You're still retarded.
Stark, I don't care what a man, {Or hot Dyke} does in their spare time ,,,,,,,
I will NOT be cohersed into JUSTIFING their lifestyle. That is what this is about.
Gay marriage,,,, Gay military,,,,,,,All the same. They Want Me to Justify Their Sin, So they 'FEEL' O Friggin K' I have plenty o sins of my own,,,,but I do not expect anyone to join me so I'll feel better.

Stark,,,,,,,You should really think 'bout banning me,,,,,,,,I don't suck up well,,,,,,,,,

[Sixx]

I just posted that stuff to see if there was any warm blood 'round here. Pzycho,,,,, I would be proud to call you a friend,,,since you're thinkin,,,,,,,,,,,
As I love this semi-old internet saying,,,, I will repeat it.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics,,,,,,,, Even if you win,,,,You're still retarded.
Stark, I don't care what a man, {Or hot Dyke} does in their spare time ,,,,,,,
I will NOT be cohersed into JUSTIFING their lifestyle. That is what this is about.
Gay marriage,,,, Gay military,,,,,,,All the same. They Want Me to Justify Their Sin, So they 'FEEL' O Friggin K' I have plenty o sins of my own,,,,but I do not expect anyone to join me so I'll feel better.

Stark,,,,,,,You should really think 'bout banning me,,,,,,,,I don't suck up well,,,,,,,,,

Hehe, I never heard that saying before.....

But honestly sorry if I pissed you off, wasn't my intentions...I just wanted a little debate and hear your point of view, Not change it.

If you ask me if I think homosexuality is right and that gays should be allowed to get married...I would say hell no, It goes against my beliefs....The military gay issue with me is all about manpower. I have been bent over in the past and had to pull crazy shifts because the Commander booted some gays out of our unit resulting in manning constraints.

And nobody wants to see you get banned...for real, You seem like a cool dude.

[sparkie]

Hehe, I never heard that saying before.....

But honestly sorry if I pissed you off, wasn't my intentions...I just wanted a little debate and hear your point of view, Not change it.

If you ask me if I think homosexuality is right and that gays should be allowed to get married...I would say hell no, It goes against my beliefs....The military gay issue with me is all about manpower. I have been bent over in the past and had to pull crazy shifts because the Commander booted some gays out of our unit resulting in manning constraints.

And nobody wants to see you get banned...for real, You seem like a cool dude.

What makes you think you pizzed me off???? My skin is as thick as a pineapple grenade,,,,,,,
Manpower?? The Marines have plenty. Recruiting has never been better,,,,Why you think that is?? Marines don't need 'gays' for posterity,,,,,, Old Time TRADITION,,,,,,,,,

[sparkie]

Bobdina,,,,,,,," I had no idea this would spark the kind of debate it has",,,,,,,

Just hang on,,, You ain't seen nuthin yet. I love the smell of a good scrap in the mornin,,,,,,,,

[bobdina]

Bobdina,,,,,,,," I had no idea this would spark the kind of debate it has",,,,,,,

Just hang on,,, You ain't seen nuthin yet. I love the smell of a good scrap in the mornin,,,,,,,,

can't wait and don't pull any punches.

[leahcimnosirrom]

Bobdina,,,,,,,," I had no idea this would spark the kind of debate it has",,,,,,,

Just hang on,,, You ain't seen nuthin yet. I love the smell of a good scrap in the mornin,,,,,,,,

damn sparkie... all this passion you are showing is turning me on :excited: i'm glad you want to share more than your opinion :evilgrin0039: why all the talk about getting banned from the gym's showers anyways?

[sparkie]

damn sparkie... all this passion you are showing is turning me on :excited: i'm glad you want to share more than your opinion :evilgrin0039: why all the talk about getting banned from the gym's showers anyways?

I can be a real pain in the azz,,,,{no sexual content suggested]. comes from bein 'round the bush 1 too many times. You tryin to say sumpthin? Spit it out,,,,[No sexual content suggested]. LMFAO.

[bobdina]

I just found some interesting numbers form 1998 to 2004 6,416 people were discharged for don't ask don't tell violations . that equates to 1069 a year . That is a microscopic number for the size of the military. If this is the case and these are DoD numbers I think people are making way too much out of this. With all the publicity this is getting I really thought the numbers would be a lot higher. If revoking this is anyway will hurt morale as more than one poll taken of active duty troops has said it will it needs to stay in place.

[Sixx]

I just found some interesting numbers form 1998 to 2004 6,416 people were discharged for don't ask don't tell violations . that equates to 1069 a year . That is a microscopic number for the size of the military. If this is the case and these are DoD numbers I think people are making way too much out of this. With all the publicity this is getting I really thought the numbers would be a lot higher. If revoking this is anyway will hurt morale as more than one poll taken of active duty troops has said it will it needs to stay in place.

1994-2006: 11,694 troops discharged for violating the policy.
113 coast guard
655 marines
2,626 Navy
2,583 army
2,139 air force

236 gays ousted since Obama was sworn in.

President Barack Obama has stated that he plans to repeal the policy and allow gay and lesbian people to serve openly in the armed forces, agreeing with Gen. Shalikashvili and stating that the U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops expelled from the military, including language experts fluent in Arabic. In November, 2008, Obama advisers announced that his plans to repeal the policy may be delayed until as late as 2010, because Obama "first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus, and then present legislation to Congress.

In December 2007, 28 retired generals and admirals urged Congress to repeal the policy. They cited evidence that 65,000 gay men and women are currently serving in the armed forces, and that there are over 1,000,000 gay veterans.

1,454,515 total active serving in the Armed Services as of 28 February 2009.

Gays need to keep their mouths shut.... a bunch of silly bastards, thinking the military is like the Ellen Degeneres Show.

[bobdina]

you reminded me of south park at the end there ,I have a hard time believing 65,000 are active but hell I've been wrong about a lot just look at this thread I must have changed my mind 3 times since beginning it.

[Sixx]

you reminded me of south park at the end there ,I have a hard time believing 65,000 are active but hell I've been wrong about a lot just look at this thread I must have changed my mind 3 times since beginning it.


Yeah it's hard to imagine that high number..I never encountered more than 5 gays (or suspected) in my military career...which was 10 years then I got disabled.

I really don't trust that much of information on the web...numbers could be inflated by gay rights activists.


Can you imagine the shitstorm that will happen if the policy does change and they decide to let gays openly serve....seeing dudes kiss in the PX parking lot and shit. It would be some crazy shit.

[nastyleg]

Hahahaha goes to show you that the Navy still is the BUTT of all thegay jokes for a reason!!!!hahaha....calm down and use preperation H if you got butt hurt.

1994-2006: 11,694 troops discharged for violating the policy.
113 coast guard
655 marines
2,626 Navy
2,583 army
2,139 air force

236 gays ousted since Obama was sworn in.

President Barack Obama has stated that he plans to repeal the policy and allow gay and lesbian people to serve openly in the armed forces, agreeing with Gen. Shalikashvili and stating that the U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops expelled from the military, including language experts fluent in Arabic. In November, 2008, Obama advisers announced that his plans to repeal the policy may be delayed until as late as 2010, because Obama "first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus, and then present legislation to Congress.

In December 2007, 28 retired generals and admirals urged Congress to repeal the policy. They cited evidence that 65,000 gay men and women are currently serving in the armed forces, and that there are over 1,000,000 gay veterans.

1,454,515 total active serving in the Armed Services as of 28 February 2009.

Gays need to keep their mouths shut.... a bunch of silly bastards, thinking the military is like the Ellen Degeneres Show.

[bobdina]

Supreme Court rejects challenge to gay policy

The Associated Press
Posted : Monday Jun 8, 2009 10:51:29 EDT

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has turned down a challenge to the Defense Department policy forbidding gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, granting a request by the Obama administration.

The court said Monday that it will not hear an appeal from former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo II, who was dismissed under the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

The federal appeals court in Boston earlier threw out a lawsuit filed by Pietrangelo and 11 other veterans. He was the only member of that group who asked the high court to rule that the Clinton-era policy is unconstitutional.

In court papers, the administration said the appeals court ruled correctly in this case when it found that “don’t ask, don’t tell” is “rationally related to the government’s legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion.”

During last year’s campaign, President Barack Obama pledged to overturn the policy, but he has made no specific move to do so since taking office in January. Meanwhile, the White House has said it will not stop gays and lesbians from being dismissed from the military.

Last year, the federal appeals court in San Francisco allowed a decorated flight nurse to continue her lawsuit over her dismissal. The court stopped short of declaring the policy unconstitutional, but said that the Air Force must prove that ousting former Maj. Margaret Witt furthered the military’s goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.

The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was the first that evaluated “don’t ask, don’t tell” through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.

The administration did not appeal that ruling to the Supreme Court and Witt’s lawsuit is ongoing.

The appeals court in Pietrangelo’s case also took the high court decision into account, but concluded that it should defer to Congress’ determination that the policy fosters cohesion in military units.

[Stark]

I just posted that stuff to see if there was any warm blood 'round here. Pzycho,,,,, I would be proud to call you a friend,,,since you're thinkin,,,,,,,,,,,
As I love this semi-old internet saying,,,, I will repeat it.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics,,,,,,,, Even if you win,,,,You're still retarded.
Stark, I don't care what a man, {Or hot Dyke} does in their spare time ,,,,,,,
I will NOT be cohersed into JUSTIFING their lifestyle. That is what this is about.
Gay marriage,,,, Gay military,,,,,,,All the same. They Want Me to Justify Their Sin, So they 'FEEL' O Friggin K' I have plenty o sins of my own,,,,but I do not expect anyone to join me so I'll feel better.

Stark,,,,,,,You should really think 'bout banning me,,,,,,,,I don't suck up well,,,,,,,,,

what gave you the impression I ask for anybody to suck up to me :) - no pun intended - and yes I am married :D

[Sixx]

Hahahaha goes to show you that the Navy still is the BUTT of all thegay jokes for a reason!!!!hahaha....calm down and use preperation H if you got butt hurt.

Heheh.......


Supreme Court rejects challenge to gay policy



Yeah just saw the news this morning.....funny because we were talking about it.

[bobdina]

Congress delays debate on gay ban

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Jun 26, 2009 11:59:11 EDT

Congress seems intent on delaying any debate on repealing the military’s ban on open service by gays until next year.

As the House passed its version of the 2010 defense authorization bill, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee talked about having hearings later this year on the possible repeal of the so-called “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” policy that has been in effect since the Clinton administration.

The House Rules Committee blocked consideration by the House of Representatives of two amendments to the defense bill that would have attempted to change the policy, which prompted Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., to promise there will be hearings on the issue.

The Democratic chairman and ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, speaking at a Thursday press conference about their committee’s version of the 2010 bill, said they didn’t think Congress should address the military’s policies on gays until service members are surveyed on their attitudes about serving alongside gays and lesbians.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the committee’s ranking Republican, said a survey should be conducted under authority of the joint chiefs to determine if troops and military leaders are more accepting today of gays in the ranks. But Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the committee chairman, said a survey alone wouldn’t be enough to make a change in law. “It is going to take some persuasive leadership,” he said.

A repeal of the military’s gay ban is under consideration because it is one of the pledges made by President Barack Obama during the presidential campaign. Obama did not promise an immediate change because the president doesn’t have the power to change a law.

Seventy-seven members of the House of Representatives wrote Obama last week asking that he, at least, stop discharging people for homosexuality until Congress addresses the repeal. However, White House officials said the administration intends to keep enforcing the law as long as it remains in effect.
ttp://armytimes.com/news/2009/06/military_dontask_delay_062609w/

[the_fat_gunner]

I don't have a problem with gays serving if they do what this officer did for 18 years, its when they are public about it that i care, I don't want to see that nasty ass shit of 2 guys kissing i'll pull a M9 and end that shit real quick.

[Cruelbreed]

Think there are any gays in our special operations forces? I think if the person is capable they should be able to serve. It's pretty simple if you are gay just keep it all to yourself. The civilian element in this story is unfortunate but simply having this discussion shows that for some subordinates having a knowingly gay superior leads to obvious issue. One publically gay superior could lead to hundreds of demoralized subordinates. I don't give a duck about the morality of the policy as it has a very proper function. I feel for this guy and I have nothing against gays but this new revelation makes him less effective in his position. I personally he should get what he earned and perhaps put in a less obvious position for the remainder of the term so he can get his retirement at a lower rank. This is an outsiders perspective.

[nastyleg]

Think about this....the dont ask dont tell policy was put in place to protect the gay service member from soldiers who would do them harm......

[bobdina]

Gay Guard officer could be discharged

The Associated Press
Posted : Tuesday Jun 30, 2009 9:43:23 EDT

SYRACUSE, N.Y. — A hearing is under way in upstate New York for an Army National Guard officer who publicly announced he was gay to protest the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

A military board in Syracuse could decide if Lt. Dan Choi should be the first New York National Guard member discharged for violating the military's policy against homosexual conduct.

The hearing is being held Tuesday morning in Syracuse because it's the headquarters of the 27th Brigade Combat Team, which overseas the 28-year-old's National Guard unit.

Choi, a 2003 West Point graduate, announced in March that he is gay. The California native served in Iraq with the 10th Mountain Division based at Fort Drum.
http://armytimes.com/news/2009/06/ap_gay_soldier_063009

[Crashingwater]

It's time for change anyway...Gay people can defend the country Just like us.
The problem lies with us "straight" people and worrying about sharing showers or sleeping in the same room with a homosexual soldier etc. It's just silly as hell.

I have encountered quite a few gay service members and even been deployed with a few that had my back and I could trust them with my life.

First of all, the number of homosexuals in the military is so small to be almost pointless to have a debate on this issue. If you have met "quite a few" gay service members, you are either lying, or you sought them out. "The problem lies with us "straight" people". really, so all this time, from 1775 until now, we straight people are the problem with the military, and we are the ones who are creating dissension in the ranks? Man your deluded as fuck, blinded by your own agenda. We have never needed to bolster our number with gay men and women because we dont have enough people, that argument is a lie. The idea of having a military that openly condones sodomy has larger ramifications than just the gay service member. We have Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the military. Do you understand the problem with homosexuals serving with members of the abrahamic faiths? Do you see the problem if for example, we had coed infantry units, or sodomy inclusive infantry units? If you dont see the problem to good order and discipline than youre not looking, or dont want to because you want us to swallow this garbage, politically motivated agenda.

[bobdina]

Board: Gay Guard Lt. should be discharged

By William Kates - The Associated Press
Posted : Tuesday Jun 30, 2009 20:43:43 EDT

SYRACUSE, N.Y. — A military administrative board recommended Tuesday that a National Guard officer who publicly announced he’s gay should be discharged for violating the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

Lt. Dan Choi would be the first New York National Guard member discharged for violating the policy against homosexual conduct, said Lt. Col. Paul Fanning, a spokesman for the New York Army National Guard.

Choi, 28, appeared in Syracuse before a Federal Recognition Board, a panel of four military officers, which deliberated four hours before deciding to recommend the Army no longer recognize him as an officer. In essence, that amounts to a discharge, Fanning said.

Choi, a combat veteran, said it amounted to firing him “for nothing more than telling the truth about who I am.”

“I’m a leader. A setback is an opportunity to keep fighting, and I’m going to do that through my actions,” said Choi, who on Sunday was a celebrity grand marshal in San Francisco’s Gay Pride Parade.

The recommendation must be approved by the First Army commander and the chief of the National Guard Bureau before Choi is discharged, a process that could take anywhere from a few weeks to a year, said Maj. Roy Diehl, who represented Choi. Until then, Choi remains an active member of the National Guard, he said.

“It’s a recommendation, not a completed act,” Diehl said, adding he hoped military commanders would reconsider Choi’s value as a soldier.

Choi likely will receive an honorable or a general discharge and could lose some of his veteran educational benefits, Diehl said.

“They are taking effective troops ... and kicking them out, removing them from the force just as effectively as if al-Qaida was blowing them up,” said Diehl, who claimed the military is more tolerant of drug abusers, malcontents and adulterers.

Choi, a 2003 West Point graduate, outed himself in March in the Army Times newspaper and on a nationally broadcast MSNBC show to protest the military’s policy, which he said forces soldiers to lie.

“It’s an immoral code that goes against every single thing we were ever taught at West Point with our honor code,” Choi said at the time.

His declaration was part of the launch of Knights Out, the first association representing gay and lesbian alumni of West Point. Already, Knights Out has at least 50 members who have publicly identified themselves on the group’s Web site. Choi is the only one still active in the military.

The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was put in place in 1993 by former President Bill Clinton and forbids military recruiters from asking someone about his or her sexual orientation, but it also prohibits a service member from revealing if he or she is gay. About 10,500 military personnel were discharged for violating the policy between 1997 and last year, the Department of Defense said.

President Barack Obama has pledged to work to end the policy, but he has made no specific move to do so since taking office in January. The White House has said it won’t stop the military from dismissing gays who admit their sexuality.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down a challenge to the Pentagon policy forbidding gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military. The court refused to hear an appeal from former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo II, who was dismissed under the military’s policy while in the Vermont National Guard in 2004.

Fanning, the New York Army National Guard spokesman, said the law is the law.

“The military has no choice but to follow it,” Fanning said. “We don’t pick and choose what regulations to enforce.”

At West Point, Choi, a native of Tustin, Calif., majored in Arabic language and environmental engineering.

He served in Iraq with the 10th Mountain Division for 15 months in 2006 and 2007, leading combat patrols through a region called the Triangle of Death and serving as a translator and language instructor. He also helped rebuild schools and hospitals.

In 2008, he left the Army and joined the 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry of the New York National Guard, based in Manhattan.

The closed hearing was held in Syracuse because it is the headquarters of the 27th Brigade Combat Team, which overseas Choi’s National Guard unit, Fanning said.

[bobdina]

Nice flags

[bobdina]

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday he wants to make the law prohibiting gays from serving openly in the armed forces “more humane” until Congress eventually repeals it. He said he has lawyers studying ways the law might be selectively enforced.One of the things we’re looking at is, is there flexibility in how we apply this law?” Gates said.

more here
http://armytimes.com/news/2009/06/ap_gates_gay_rules_063009/

[bobdina]

Will gay lt. colonel be saved by policy review?

Officer sees hope in Gates’ decision
By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Jul 3, 2009 9:43:46 EDT

A gay Air Force officer is hoping his 18-year career will be saved by a review of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy ordered by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, an F-15E Strike Eagle weapons systems officer, is facing separation after a civilian acquaintance outed him to the Air Force more than a year ago.

After a months-long investigation, Fehrenbach is facing an honorable discharge for violating the ban on homosexual behavior and damaging the good order and discipline of the Air Force.

The review, conducted by the department’s General Counsel’s office, will determine whether there is “flexibility” in how the law is applied, Gates told reporters June 30.

Specifically, Gates cited service members outed by someone else.

“Do we need to be driven when the information to take action on somebody, if we get that information from somebody who may have vengeance in mind or blackmail or somebody who has been jilted,” Gates said.

Today’s regulations require commanders to investigate allegations brought by anyone. Once a commander determines that a service member is gay, there is little legal leeway in stopping the discharge process.

“That’s the kind of thing we’re looking at to see if there’s at least a more humane way to apply the law until the law gets changed,” Gates explained.

Gates’ comments heartened Fehrenbach that the policy might be changed before a final decision is reached in his case.

“I was very surprised and happy,” said Fehrenbach, who is assigned to Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho.
A costly dismissal

After being evaluated by his chain of command, Fehrenbach’s dismissal is pending with the Air Force Personnel Review Board. The board is expected to reach a decision in about five months; Air Force Secretary Michael Donley must review the finding.

If unable to finish out his career, Fehrenbach will lose $46,000 a year in retirement pay as well as medical benefits, according to pay charts. He would get a lump sum of about $80,000, half of standard involuntary separation pay for an officer of his years, the charts show.

The day before Gates announced the review, Fehrenbach attended a White House reception hosted by President Barack Obama marking Gay Pride Month.

Fehrenbach said he intended to wear his uniform, standard military attire for an official event attended by the commander in chief, but opted for civilian clothes after learning from an Air Force lawyer that he faced disciplinary action because the service viewed the gathering as political.

During the reception, Obama discussed restrictions on gays in the military.

“I believe don’t ask, don’t tell doesn’t contribute to our national security,” Obama told the audience. “In fact, I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security.”

After speaking, Obama stopped to talk with several people in the crowd, including Fehrenbach.

Fehrenbach said he briefly told Obama about his situation.

“He looked me in the eye and said, ‘We’ll get this done,’ ” Fehrenbach recalled.

[bobdina]

National tour to repeal gay policy begins

By William H. McMichael - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Jul 8, 2009 18:36:32 EDT

Two groups hoping to overturn the law banning open military service by homosexuals launched a national tour in Washington Wednesday aimed at raising awareness of the issue and building public support for change.

The tour, a tandem effort by the activist groups Human Rights Campaign and Servicemembers United, will feature gay, lesbian and straight speakers, all veterans whose service either was ended as a result of the law known as “don’t ask, don’t tell” or who want to speak out on behalf of gay service members.

The tour will begin with a program in Philadelphia slated for July 21. Stops are scheduled for Trenton, N.J.; Virginia Beach, Va.; Phoenix; Kansas City, Mo.; and Orlando and Tampa, Fla. Planners say they hope to add more cities and extend the tour into October, according to Trevor Thomas of Human Rights Campaign.

“Our troops are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and are stretched dangerously thin,” said Rep. Patrick Murphy, a two-term Pennsylvania Democrat, Iraq war veteran and former West Point professor, who came to the National Press Club in Washington to announce the tour launch. “These men and women in our military understand what it takes to serve our country — and the values that our military and our nation holds dear. They take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.

“Yet, the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy … has discharged over 13,000 troops — honorable men and women,” said Murphy, now chief sponsor of a House bill, the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, that would repeal the law. “That is the equivalent of 3½ combat brigades. They have been discharged not for any kind of sexual misconduct, but because of their sexual orientation. The policy is not working for our armed services. And it hurts our national security.”

Referring to recent polls, Murphy said attitudes in the military and the public at large have softened over whether to allow open service by homosexuals.

Proponents of change often point to critical skills, such as language translation, they say the military has lost as a result of the law. Human Rights Campaign estimates that at least 323 linguists have been discharged since 1993. One such troop was Alexander Nicholson, who was discharged in 2002 after his sexual orientation was uncovered.

“I was trained by the Army as a human intelligence collector, one of the most critical intelligence fields within the U.S. military today,” Nicholson said Wednesday. “And I speak five languages, including Arabic. Yet this law forced my command to fire me, and barred me from re-entering the military, depriving our armed forces of yet another critical asset, when that asset was needed most.”

Army Staff Sgt. Genevieve Chase, an intelligence specialist and reservist not currently activated, said she has served with “countless gays and lesbians” during her six years of service, which included a 2006 stint in Afghanistan with the 10th Mountain Division.

“Our team consistently functioned effectively and cohesively, even when [it] included openly gay soldiers,” said Chase, who describes herself as heterosexual and will take part in the tour along with Nicholson and others. “Those who oppose repealing the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy have taken that phrase, ‘unit cohesion,’ and turned it into something that did not match or align with our generation’s understanding of cohesion in our modern military.”

[Cruelbreed]

Good article you posted last Bob. If these people are highly qualified to get the job done, then come on we HAVE to use them. We're just discouraging able bodied individuals from helping our country. While I feel some form of don't ask don't tell needs to be in place, I don't believe we should immediately just dismiss someone. I'm not military but I do believe there's a proper solution to this issue.

[sparkie]

Good article you posted last Bob. If these people are highly qualified to get the job done, then come on we HAVE to use them. We're just discouraging able bodied individuals from helping our country. While I feel some form of don't ask don't tell needs to be in place, I don't believe we should immediately just dismiss someone. I'm not military but I do believe there's a proper solution to this issue.

The solution is do your job, and keep your mouth, and rear shut.

[bobdina]

The solution is do your job, and keep your mouth, and rear shut.

hahahahahahahahaah

[sparkie]

You know. Bob,,,,,,, I ain't on much 'cause every time I show up, My brouser has a 'Problem' and needs to close. I was thinkin it was just a problem with you pervs, but tonite,,,, it ain't actin up.

[nastyleg]

The solution is do your job, and keep your mouth, and rear shut.

too funny sparkie

[bobdina]

Allies’ stance cited in gay debate

By David Crary - The Associated Press
Posted : Monday Jul 13, 2009 9:54:49 EDT

NEW YORK — When it comes to dealing with gay personnel in the ranks, the contrasts are stark among some of the world’s proudest, toughest militaries — and these differing approaches are invoked by both sides as Americans renew debate over the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

In the U.S., more than 12,000 service members — including dozens of highly trained Arabic linguists — have been dismissed since 1994 because it became known they were gay. Current targets for discharge include a West Point graduate and Iraq war veteran, Army National Guard Lt. Dan Choi, and a veteran of combat missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach.

In Britain, on the other hand, gay and lesbian service members marched in crisp uniforms in the annual Pride London parade July 4. Gay Australian soldiers and sailors had their own float in Sydney’s Gay Mardi Gras parade. In Israel, the army magazine earlier this year featured two male soldiers on the cover, hugging one another.

America’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy — which prohibits gays from serving openly in the armed forces — is the target of intensifying opposition, and President Barack Obama says he favors lifting the ban. But he wants to win over skeptics in Congress and the Pentagon, and a fierce debate lies ahead that will inevitably touch on the experiences of allied nations that have no bans.

U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy, the first Iraq war veteran elected to Congress, has just launched a campaign for a bill to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell.” He observed British troops in Iraq operating smoothly with a serve-openly policy and bristles at the contention that America’s armed forces would suffer morale and recruiting problems if they followed suit.

“I take it as a personal affront to our warriors,” said the Pennsylvania Democrat. “To say that other countries’ soldiers are professional enough to handle this and American soldiers aren’t is really a slap in the face.”

Those seeking to preserve the U.S. ban question whether the allies’ experiences have been as smooth as advertised and depict America’s military as so unique that lessons from overseas should be ignored anyway.

“We are the military leaders in the world — everybody wants to be like us,” said Brian Jones, a retired sergeant major who served in the Army Rangers. “Why in the world would we try to adjust our military model to be like them?”

With such polarized views as a backdrop, Associated Press reporters took an in-depth look at how the militaries of Israel, Britain and Australia have managed with serve-openly policies, and interviewed partisans on both sides of the debate in the U.S. about the relevance of those experiences.

• Israel: A nation in a constant state of combat readiness, Israel has had no restrictions on military service by gays since 1993 — a policy now considered thoroughly uncontroversial.

Gays were permitted to serve even before then, but not in certain intelligence positions where, at the time, they were deemed possible security risks vulnerable to blackmail. Now, gays and lesbians — among them several senior officers — serve in all branches of the military, including combat duty.

“In this regard, Israel has one of the most liberal armies in the world,” said Yagil Levy, a sociologist from the Open University of Israel.

The army recognizes the partners of gay officers as their bereaved next-of-kin after their deaths, eligible for benefits. Gay officers at promotions and other ceremonies often have their partners by their sides.

Maj. Yoni Schoenfeld, a gay officer who is the editor of the military magazine, Bamahane, said there was very little friction in the ranks related to gay soldiers.

He served as a combat soldier and as commander of a paratrooper company, and said his sexual orientation — though known to fellow soldiers — was never an issue. Gay jokes would sometimes surface, unusually not malicious, he said, while receptiveness to gays in combat units could vary.

“If you’re gay and live in the ‘manly’ world, there are no problems,” he said. “Those who are more feminine in their speech and appearance have a harder time fitting in.”

He sympathized with gays in the U.S. military who don’t enjoy the same liberty he did.

“There shouldn’t be a problem with it,” he said. “It’s the nature of man, and when you allow it to happen (serving openly), it’s not a problem anymore.”

Schoenfeld’s magazine has reflected the evolving attitudes. In 2001, it was shut down briefly after featuring an interview with a retired colonel who had come out of the closet. Yet this year, there was no adverse reaction to the cover picture of two male soldiers embracing.

A gay magazine, meanwhile, named a major as its “man of a year” a few years ago; he continues to serve without harm to his career.

The military also provided the backdrop for Israel’s precursor to “Brokeback Mountain” — the 2002 movie “Yossi & Jagger” about two Israeli combat soldiers who fall in love on the front lines. It was a hit with critics and the public, and was even screened on military bases.

• Australia: Back in 1992, Anita Van Der Meer was threatened with discharge from the Australian navy for being a lesbian. She denied the charge to save her job — and later that year the military’s ban on gays and lesbians was lifted.

This spring, Van Der Meer marched proudly with more than 100 other service members in Sydney’s annual Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Parade under an Australian Defense Force banner. Even a general joined the march.

Now a chief petty officer, Van Der Meer was a junior sailor in 1992 when someone reported she was engaged in a same-sex relationship.

“It was very traumatic for me, but I still had the cooperation of my supervisors and my peers,” said Van Der Meer, 41. “In the end, I had more support than I expected.”

Chief Petty Officer Stuart O’Brien, who joined the navy 19 years ago, said being openly gay has not been an issue, even when working alongside U.S. military personnel in Baghdad in 2006.

“They valued the work that I did and that’s all that it comes down to at the end of the day,” O’Brien said. “Sexuality has nothing to do with anything any more within the services.”

The lifting of the ban on gays was preceded by years of heated debate, yet the change itself was relatively uneventful aside from a few unexpected coming-outs of high-profile commanders.

“Everyone said, ‘Good heavens, that’s a bit of a surprise’ and after five minutes the conversation reverted back to football,” said Neil James of the Australian Defense Association, a security think tank. “After a while it was met with a collective yawn.”

Among opponents of the change at the time was Australia’s main veterans group, the Returned and Services League, which has now withdrawn its objections.

The league’s president, retired Maj. Gen. Bill Crews, said concerns about lowered morale and HIV transmission on the battlefield had proved ill-founded.

“I was there in the early days of it. ... I thought there’d be a continuing problem because of prejudice that exists in parts of the community,” Crews said. “I don’t see any evidence now that homosexuals are in any way discriminated against. ...A homosexual can be just as effective a soldier as a heterosexual.”

Some skepticism lingers, however.

Brig. Jim Wallace, who commanded an elite Special Air Service mechanized brigade until retiring in 2000, argues that gays and women should be barred from combat roles.

“Do you want an army which is already likely to be outnumbered wherever it fights to be fighting at its most effective or its least effective?” Wallace asks. “If you want to sacrifice fighting effectiveness for political correctness, then all right, go ahead.”

He referred to the traditional 10-soldier units commonly deployed in Australian combat forces.

“Now if you introduce into that 10 men a love or lust relationship, you immediately damage the phenomenon of mateship,” he said. “There is some discrimination that has to be done to maintain the effectiveness of society or the effectiveness of fighting units.”

• Britain: British policymakers had been wrestling for years with whether to scrap a long-standing ban on gays in the military — but the pivotal decision was made abroad, by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.

The court ruled in 1999 decided that Britain had violated the rights of four former service members who were dismissed from the military for being gay and lesbian.

King’s College professor Christopher Dandeker said there had been significant opposition to the change among military officers. There were predictions — not borne out — that unit cohesion would suffer and that large numbers of personnel would leave the military if gays could serve.

Once the ban was lifted, Dandeker said, the opposition dwindled, and the government of Prime Minister Tony Blair embraced the chance to be seen as a beacon of tolerance.

Lord Alan West, former head of the Royal Navy and now Britain’s terrorism minister, served before and after the ban was lifted.

“It’s much better where we are now,” West said in an interview at the House of Lords. “For countries that don’t do that — I don’t believe it’s got anything to do with how efficient or capable their forces will be. It’s to do with other prejudices, I’m afraid.”

As for Britain’s trans-Atlantic ally: “I think the Americans really need to make the move,” West said.

Peter Tatchell, a London-based gay-rights activist often critical of the government, praises the military’s handling of the change.

“Since the ban has been lifted, there hasn’t been a word of complaint from senior military staff,” he said. “They’ve said that having gay and lesbian people in the services has had no damaging effect at all.”

Mandy McBain joined the Royal Navy at age 19, in 1986, at the most junior rank possible. Now a lieutenant commander, she remembers what it was like to serve when being a lesbian had to be a secret.

“It’s exhausting,” she said. “It’s quite incredible to look back and see how much time and energy I spent leading a double life.”

In one past assignment, she processed the paperwork of comrades being dismissed because of their sexuality. “That,” she said quietly, “I found very difficult.”

Military expert Amyas Godfrey of the Royal United Services Institute, a London think tank, was serving with the British Army in Northern Ireland when the policy changed.

“I remember our commanding officer at the time called the entire battalion together and said, ‘This is how it is going to be now. We are not going to discriminate. We are not going to bully. If someone in your group says that he is gay, you treat them as normal,’“ Godfrey recalled.

“And that, really, was the implementation of it. For all the years I served after that, it was never an issue.”

• The U.S.: For those in the U.S. military community who oppose letting gays serve openly, there’s a widely shared sentiment that America has nothing to learn from the roughly two-dozen nations that have no bans.

“Who’s the only superpower military out there?” argued Maj. Brian Maue, a professor at the U.S. Air Force Academy, in a debate in June at the McCormick Freedom Museum in Chicago. “This is hardly convincing to say, ‘Ah, the others are doing it. We should too.’” Maue — who says he’s been speaking out on his own, not as a military spokesman — suggests that repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” would prompt straight service members to complain of privacy violations and “dignity infractions.”

“An openly gay military would be the heterosexual equivalent to forcing women to constantly share bathrooms, locker rooms and bedrooms with men,” he wrote in a New York Times online forum.

Retired Army Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis, another supporter of the ban, contends that some field commanders in nations that allow gays to serve openly have resorted to “tacit discrimination” — excluding them from front-line units for fear that problems would surface in rugged, close-quarters living conditions.

Maginnis also cited America’s multiple overseas missions.

“You have a large part of the world with no tolerance for open homosexuality, and if we were to deploy there, it would be a serious problem,” he said.

Repealing the ban would trigger the departure of some career service members who object to homosexuality and deter some people from enlisting, said Maginnis. “It doesn’t matter what general population thinks — it’s what the young people who have a propensity to enlist think.”

Prominent advocates of open service for gays and lesbians acknowledge there would be some hitches, but predict the overall change would be smooth and professional.

“There’s been very little trouble in the nations that lifted their ban on gays,” said Professor David Segal, director of the University of Maryland’s Center for Research on Military Organization. “My guess is there will be slightly more in the U.S. — we have a somewhat higher level of intolerance.”

However, Segal doubted the change would spur a large exodus from the military or hamper recruitment.

“There will be some gay bashing at the unit level, and that will be a problem in the short run for NCOs and junior officers,” he said. “But they will deal with it, just as they dealt with racial integration and gender integration.”

Nathaniel Frank, a research fellow at the University of California, Santa Barbara’s Palm Center and author of a book on “don’t ask, don’t tell,” says his studies of allied nations suggest that lifting the ban in the U.S. would not impair overall military effectiveness.

“There will be some forms of de facto discrimination and prejudice — a policy change is not going to wipe that out of people’s hearts and minds overnight,” he said. “But more and more people in the military are seeing it doesn’t serve them to have this policy in place.”

There’s no question, Frank said, that the U.S. military is unique — the most powerful in the world. But he said it should be embarrassing that “our allies can tell the truth about gay soldiers and the U.S. stands with China, Iran, North Korea among the nations that can’t.”

The key to a smooth transition, Frank added, is emphatic direction from top commanders and the adoption of a code of conduct that would deter disciplinary problems by spelling out unacceptable behavior.

Dan Choi, the gay lieutenant facing dismissal from the Army, says the current “don’t ask” policy is disruptive — forcing the gays who are serving to be furtive and dishonest.

“Closeting is what causes instability,” he said. “It’s the most toxic poison.”

As for the U.S. being different from its allies, Choi agrees.

“We are exceptional — because we take the lead on things,” he said. “To me, it’s an insult to the idea of American exceptionalism to say we’re somehow scared of gays.”

http://armytimes.com/news/2009/07/ap_military_gays_allies_071309/

[EXCONservative]

18 years is a long time to put in serving this country. if he was outed because a civi exposed him.... well that sucks. if his service record is on par with others at his rank and has done his job to the fullest he should get his retirement. i am outside of the military community so my opinion dose not really hold wait in that circle. my opinion might not hold well with others but it is mine. i have respect to all that serve.
Of course your opinion counts. You are an American right? Who pays for the military? You pay for it. The military must keep up with the times and must not discriminate against sex or race.
Not too long ago Blacks were not even allowed to serve simply because of their race. Woman were not allowed either. The military must not discriminate against those who do their job. I believe any American can serve so long as they can perform the job asked.
The military works for the American people and is made up of American people.
When the military can fund themselves without our taxes then that will be the day i will look past this outdated rule. Until then they hold little weight on telling Americans who can and can't serve based on race, sex, religionor sexual beliefs.

[bobdina]

Well actually until the rule is changed they hold all the weight to do whatever they want , including banning porn ,and tobacco. (all b.s. I might add) however you know what your getting into when you join. Unless your a dumbass who didn't to any homework before signing on the dotted line. And then that's on you.

[nastyleg]

Well actually until the rule is changed they hold all the weight to do whatever they want , including banning porn ,and tobacco. (all b.s. I might add) however you know what your getting into when you join. Unless your a dumbass who didn't to any homework before signing on the dotted line. And then that's on you.

like going to WestPoint graduating and then saying that you will not serve overseas because you dont believe in the war when its been going on the whole time you were in westpoint getting your degree and getting your commision......not going to name names here (cough Lt Watada). That is a different argument though but I was just relating it to Bobs point about being a dumbass.

[bobdina]

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Jul 27, 2009 14:43:06 EDT

The Senate Armed Services Committee will hold hearings this fall on the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law and policy on gays in the military that President Barack Obama wants repealed.

A date for the hearings has not been set, but it will be after the August congressional recess and probably after the committee completes work on the 2010 defense authorization bill.

The House Armed Services Committee also plans hearings later this year, according to its chairman, Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo.

Timing the hearings for after the major defense policy bill is approved, whether intentional or not, will delay until next year a decision about lifting the military’s ban on open service by gays and repeal of the controversial “don’t ask, don’t tell” law.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., made the announcement in a Monday statement, saying Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the armed services committee chairman, had agreed to hold hearings.

Levin spokeswoman Tara Andringa said the chairman has agreed to hold hearings but has not determined when, or whether, such hearings would be before the full committee or a subcommittee.

Gillibrand and Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., are the two lawmakers leading the effort in Congress to change the law.

The Senate Armed Services Committee created the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law, establishing a ban on open military service by gays but then devising a policy that allows gays to serve as long as their sexual orientation remains secret and they do not engage in any homosexual acts.

Gillibrand said 265 service members have been discharged for violating the ban since Obama took office in January. “This policy is wrong for our national security and wrong for the moral foundation upon which our country was founded,” she said.

Levin supports repealing the ban but said changing it is going to be up to Obama selling the idea and military leaders accepting it. He has backed the idea of surveying current service members on their attitudes about serving alongside openly gay or lesbian people.

“I think there may be a different response to such a survey than there may have been 10 years ago or 20 years ago,” Levin said at a June 25 news conference.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona, ranking Republican on the Senate committee, said he wants top military commanders involved in any discussion of changing the law.

“I’d like, among other things, to have the chairman of the Joint Chiefs conduct an in-depth study and come up with recommendations,” McCain said at the same news conference.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen have been in discussions with the White House about the possibility of lifting the ban. Those talks reportedly have focused in part on how and when the ban could be lifted, but no recommendations have been announced.

http://armytimes.com/news/2009/07/miliyary_senate_dontask_072709w/

[nastyleg]

Spinning thier wheels in the mud.

[Lex]

Touchy subject...not that way though.

Allow openly gay persons to serve the next step will be letting cross dressers and transsexuals serve. My opinion is they are all pervs. Keep'em out.

There may have some but I didn't know about any homosexuals in my first squadron but, the first female allowed in my squadron was out in the parking lot at chow time everyday banging a Marine. His wife must have been some kinda ugly to rock his van with that gal.:freakout:

[bobdina]

Since this is now back in the news figured I'd update it.

'Don't Ask' More Likely to Target Women
October 09, 2009
Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO -- Pentagon officials won't speculate why women in uniform are more likely to be discharged from the armed services under "don't ask, don't tell," but critics of the policy say that new figures reflect deep-seated sexism in the armed forces.

Government statistics show that more than 619 men and women were discharged last year because of their sexual orientation. Of those, one-third were women - even though they account for 15 percent of all active-duty and reserve members.

"It's very clear the military comes down harder on women than on men, but the question of whether they come down harder on lesbians than on gay men is harder to answer," said Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center, a University of California, Santa Barbara, center specializing in gays and the military. "We don't know whether the statistics reflect lesbian-baiting or just a higher rate of lesbians in the military."

The Palm Center obtained the statistics from the Pentagon and released them Thursday.

Pentagon spokeswoman Cynthia Smith said officials will not look into the matter because even inquiring about it might violate the 1993 policy, which says gay men and lesbians in the military cannot be investigated or punished as long as they keep their sexual orientation to themselves.

"If we did investigate it, we would have to ask questions, and we aren't supposed to ask any questions," Smith said.

On Saturday, President Barack Obama is scheduled to deliver the keynote address at a fundraising dinner for the nation's largest gay rights group.

Activists have begun to step up pressure on Obama to sign an executive order repealing the gay ban in the military. A White House spokesman said the president "is intent on making progress" on the issue.

In the Army, women accounted for 14 percent of personnel and 36 percent of the "don't ask, don't tell" discharges in 2008; in the Navy, it was 14 percent of the personnel and 23 percent of the discharges, and in the Marines, 6 percent and 18 percent.

The disparity was particularly striking in the Air Force, where women represented 20 percent of all personnel but 61 percent of those expelled. That is a significant jump from the previous year and marks the first time women in any branch of the military constituted a majority of those dismissed under "don't ask, don't tell," researchers said.

In 2007, 49 percent of Air Force personnel discharged for being gay were women.

Some women who served in the military said the gap could be a result of "lesbian-baiting" rumors and investigations that arise when women rebuff sexual overtures from male colleagues or do not meet traditional notions of feminine beauty.

"Often times the lesbians under my command were under scrutiny by the same men who were also sexually harassing straight women, so it was this kind of sexist undercurrent of 'You don't belong here,'" said Anuradha Bhagwati, a former Marine who founded the Service Women's Action Network, an advocacy group.

Julianne Sohn, the lone female Marine officer discharged under the policy last year, was a lieutenant who had served a seven-month tour in Iraq as a reservist when she received a telephone call at home from a lieutenant colonel informing her she was under investigation for being a lesbian.

The call was not a surprise. Some of her fellow Marines, who knew about her sexual orientation, had given her a heads-up a few months before.

Sohn had been speaking publicly about her experience as a gay officer as part of an organized effort to spotlight the costs of "don't ask, don't tell." She said she could not respond honestly when colleagues wanted to know why she did not have a boyfriend, and said she asked her brothers to contact her girlfriend if she were killed in Iraq because she did not want to list a woman as her next of kin.

Sohn, 33, who now works as a police officer in Los Angeles, said hearing the investigating officer read her the military's equivalent of a criminal suspect's Miranda warning over the phone was a fresh insult.

"The way I look at is, all I've done is tell my story," said Sohn, who did not fight the inquiry and was honorably discharged. "I wanted to serve, and I did serve."

[nastyleg]

Obama will not and can not ban gays. He is looking at the same problems Clinton did during his purgury fill term.

[Dr_Chagas]

Sparkie,,,,,

[Sixx]

Sparkie,,,,,

Finally you make me smile.

You are still a felcher though.

[joedan]

I think the question of overall morale of the troops should be considered. Should the entire Armed Forces of the United States of America be subjected to this change if it is going to be detrimental to the overall morale of the majority of our troops? If the answer to that question is yes then why upset the balance for a small percentage of the overall forces? Of course we all know it's political in nature and therein lives the dilemma. Our troops serve civilian masters but should they sacrifice confidence and mental well being to serve them?
I served eight years in Field Artillery, last duty was B 1/75 FA in Bamberg, Germany in the mid 70's. If there were any gays in our battery I wasn't aware of it. I've known very few gays in my life and that's probably the problem with most people. All the straight people I know, including myself, don't hang out with gays. We don't know them, nor anything about them, so trust becomes a volatile issue. The only benchmark I have is the few I've known and all but one of them had serious personal issues, and I'm not talking about their sexual orientation. The ones I've known were prone to depression, admitted by themselves, and were subject to all sorts of unpredictable mood swings, difficult to communicate with, stubborn, and had a giant chip on their shoulders. I could have never served in combat with these few I've known since we had to baby sit them at work most of the time.
I can't think that a sane Commanding Officer of any unit would want to risk the well being of their entire command just to accommodate this small percentage of their troops.
Add to all this is the fact that there are vast numbers of Christians in our Armed Forces, thank God, and as God has declared homosexuality an abomination so do most conscientious Christians.
I have nothing against gays personally. Their choices are between them and God, but I wouldn't risk the well being of my Command just to satisfy them. But that's just me.

[Pizza N Beer]

It's time for change anyway...Gay people can defend the country Just like us.
The problem lies with us "straight" people and worrying about sharing showers or sleeping in the same room with a homosexual soldier etc. It's just silly as hell.

I have encountered quite a few gay service members and even been deployed with a few that had my back and I could trust them with my life.

you damn right im worried about sharing showers and sleeping in the same room with someone that is constantly staring at my ass or fascinated in any part of my body. Including coming from another man. Yeah, we all know that sexuality shouldnt matter.. But if you are around men for months at a time, i dont want to be thinking that the guy sleeping near me is ready to lube up somebody's asswhole. and the dumbass shouldnt of went on the show. He got himself in trouble there..quite frankly i think homosexuals should stay out of the military. The military is a society within itself, and laws that have been there since the begginning should stay there..

Just my opinion

[Sixx]

Add to all this is the fact that there are vast numbers of Christians in our Armed Forces, thank God, and as God has declared homosexuality an abomination so do most conscientious Christians.





I hear ya......But I have seen plenty of these so-called Christians get hooked up by the UCMJ for adultery, Rape, Child porn possession, and various other crimes.

And people say homos are twisted......


Bottom line....humans are humans.