Joseph Sarandos
Head Administrator
Global user
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Gays and Lesbians are CHALLENGING the requirement to "stay hidden" in the Military
As you read the following article, remember that Bill Clinton had catered to and solicited the financial support of America’s Gay/Lesbian Community in his first election campaign, and remember the television coverage of the Gays and Lesbians celebrating his election, with shouts of; “Were here, we’re Queer, and we’re going to the White House!”
So, although Clinton was certain that neither the Public nor the Military would stand still for his re-paying “the Queers” by allowing them to serve openly, he did “the next best thing” for them by ordering the Pentagon, with help from outside contractors and advisors, to craft the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that he then signed into law.
My personal opinion is that Gays and Lesbians should not be exempted from military service, which would be another reward to them for their inherited or chosen sexual orientation (along with the financial advantages that they enjoy in the civilian sector as an “oppressed minority”), but that they should not be condoned or allowed to disturb the consciousness of heterosexuals in and outside of the Military, by openly flaunting and celebrating their life-style as they prefer to do (but heterosexuals do not).
My own suggestion and recommendation (having served for more than ten years in the Navy) would be for the Military to keep Gays away from “straight men” and Lesbians away from “straight women,” by assigning Gays to female units and Lesbians to male units, so as to eliminate the “gawking and trolling” factors that are highly prevalent and deeply resented under the current arrangements. “Too drastic?” Well, before Clinton’s time in office, the “usual” treatments that were afforded to “gawking and trolling Gays” in the Navy had resulted in their being physically bashed while ashore and “lost overboard” while at sea.
Joseph
----------
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0703130169mar13,1,5722276.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
Don't drop `don't ask, don't tell,' Pace says
By Aamer Madhani
Tribune national correspondent
Published March 13, 2007
Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Monday that he supports the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" ban on gays serving in the military because homosexual acts "are immoral," akin to a member of the armed forces conducting an adulterous affair with the spouse of another service member.
Responding to a question about a Clinton-era policy that is coming under renewed scrutiny amid fears of future U.S. troop shortages, Pace said the Pentagon should not "condone" immoral behavior by allowing gay soldiers to serve openly. He said his views were based on his personal "upbringing," in which he was taught that certain types of conduct are immoral.
"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts," Pace said in a wide-ranging discussion with Tribune editors and reporters in Chicago. "I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way.
"As an individual, I would not want [acceptance of gay behavior] to be our policy, just like I would not want it to be our policy that if we were to find out that so-and-so was sleeping with somebody else's wife, that we would just look the other way, which we do not. We prosecute that kind of immoral behavior," Pace said.
The "don't ask, don't tell" policy caused an uproar in the military when signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. At the time, supporters of the policy inside and outside the military argued that it was essential for the cohesion of combat units, not a question of morality.
Under the policy, gays and lesbians may serve only if they keep their sexual orientation private and do not engage in homosexual acts. Their commanders may not ask about their orientation.
Charles Moskos, a military sociologist at Northwestern University who was instrumental in helping the Pentagon craft the "don't ask, don't tell" law, said it is unusual for a top commander to use morality as a justification for the policy. But he said he has repeatedly heard enlisted members use that reasoning when opposing gays in the military.
"With the enlisted, it's a question of cohesion, but morality is something they always bring up," said Moskos, who declined to comment specifically on Pace's remarks.
...
The "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which gay-rights advocates and other critics condemn as discriminatory, has come into question once again as the Bush administration, the Pentagon and Congress grapple with a military that commanders say has been stretched too far by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A 2005 government audit showed that about 10,000 troops have been discharged because of the policy. Among those discharged were more than 322 linguists, including 54 Arabic specialists, according to the Government Accountability Office report.
The U.S. military, like the nation's foreign service and intelligence community, faces shortages of foreign-language specialists.
"The real question is: What is moral about discharging qualified linguists during a time of war simply for being gay or lesbian?" said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay-rights advocacy group.
About 23 percent of troops know someone in their unit who is gay or lesbian, according to a recent Zogby International poll of troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
About 55 percent of troops who know a gay peer said the presence of gays or lesbians in their unit was well known by others.
Last month, Rep. Martin Meehan (D-Mass.) revived the debate in Congress by introducing legislation to reverse the military's ban on openly gay service personnel. Meehan's proposal has 106 sponsors, including six Republicans.
---------------------------------
|
|
3/13/2007, 12:56 pm
|
Send Email to Joseph Sarandos
Send PM to Joseph Sarandos
|
insider3
Senior Member
Global user
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Gays and Lesbians are CHALLENGING the requirement to "stay hidden" in the Military
Wow Joseph!
As if there were not enough "uproars" going on about the conditions, circumstances and systemic problems within the "all volunteer Military" under Bush's command.
I remember quite well the points that you brought up in your preface, and I must say that I was totally against Clinton's decision to allow Gays into the military, in my knowledge that he was doing so as a political favor in return for their help in getting him elected. It raised my hackles to see them on TV shouting "Were here, we’re Queer, and we’re going to the White House!”
The opinions, suggestions, recommendations and explanations that YOU added will surely be ignored, if not viciously attacked, so I'm afraid that the only "choices" are between supporting the current policy and fighting against a policy that would allow the Gays/Lesbians to "come out of the closet" while serving in the military, in which case I would prefer the former to the latter.
My higher wish is that this question were not posed at this particular time, but "Its here, its queer, and its going to the White House" after all! lol
Bob
(Just a little bit "homophobic" at the moment)
|
|
3/13/2007, 1:34 pm
|
Send Email to insider3
Send PM to insider3
|
NamVet2
Senior Member
Global user
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Gays and Lesbians are CHALLENGING the requirement to "stay hidden" in the Military
You're right Bob,
This is a very unfortunate and inopportune time for this question to be raised, and I'm going to do my best to not get distracted by it (which is probably the real motive for raising it), what with very much more important issues on the table. I wish that others will try to do the same, but most people like these "hot button" issues with moral and religious underpinnings.
--------------------------------
Don't take this wrong, Chief,
I think you were correct in calling attention to this crappy situation as soon as possible, and for speaking your mind about it, since it is obviously not about to go away soon.
Best regards to all,
Greg
|
|
3/13/2007, 2:03 pm
|
Send Email to NamVet2
Send PM to NamVet2
|
Incog4
Senior Member
Global user
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Gays and Lesbians are CHALLENGING the requirement to "stay hidden" in the Military
Bob and Greg (you too Joseph),
If you’ve read my other topics in this section of TFTF, then you already know how I feel about queers in general, and especially about queers in positions of power.
In my religion there are no excuses for homosexual acts, and in my Army experience I was physically disgusted to see queers “hitting on” straights even in the trenches and “gawking” at us in the showers.
Although I never engaged in such, I saw queers getting beat-up royally by straights who caught them in their filthy “affairs” between each other, and I could never work up any sympathy for them.
Joseph said that some queers in the Navy “got lost overboard,” and I know that some queers in the Army got “fragged” in their tents.
Shortages of troops or not, queers do not belong in the Military, possibly unless under the circumstances suggested by Joseph, apart from straight men and straight women, and with the proviso that they get severely penalized or discharged for either “hitting on” straights or for performing their filthy practices where they might get accidentally seen by straights.
As I understand the term, “homophobic” means “having a fear of homosexuals”. In my case, I am not even “a little bit homophobic”. I don’t fear them, but immensely dislike and disapprove of them.
Having said this piece, I’ll add that I also agree with Bob and Greg that this is a “distractive” issue, intended to start a “blazing trainwreck” for onlookers, apart from the severe blows that Bush and his administration are taking at home and abroad at the moment.
Aaron
-------
|
|
3/13/2007, 3:57 pm
|
Send Email to Incog4
Send PM to Incog4
|
Joseph Sarandos
Head Administrator
Global user
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Gays and Lesbians are CHALLENGING the requirement to "stay hidden" in the Military
Well Gentlemen,
Judging from the number of "first-day-hits" on this thread (way over 200 already), it looks like this well-timed distraction is going to have its intended effect on the public.
Greg, please let me know if this becomes a matter of broad discussion in your ring. My feeling is that you and yours will be keeping your eyes on the real ball (of wax) in DC, instead of on this "blazing trainwreck" as Aaron put it. 
Joseph
--------
|
|
3/13/2007, 5:59 pm
|
Send Email to Joseph Sarandos
Send PM to Joseph Sarandos
|
Add a reply
Powered by AkBBS 0.9.5b - Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
Click here to get your own free message board
|
You are not logged in (login)
Board's time is: 11/25/2009, 9:43 am
|
|
|
