Curious, particularly because this is the newspaper for the Marines . . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/comm..._gibbs_070423/
It's time to allow gays to serve openly in the military
By Josh Gibbs
Last month, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, compared homosexuality to adultery in an interview with the Chicago Tribune. “We prosecute that kind of immoral behavior,” he said.
You can be punished for adultery and stay in the service. For homosexuality, the punishment is cut and dried, and years of honorable service are ended.
The common perception is that the “don't ask, don't tell” policy is necessary because straight service members will not be able to do their jobs properly if gay men and women are allowed to serve openly alongside them. Some people also say gay service members would not be able to control their homosexual urges. Proponents of this argument make it seem as if gay service members will immediately try to strike up romantic relationships with every man or woman within arm's reach.
Am I the only one who feels that, of all the arguments, this one is a little too chauvinistic? Or am I wrong to assume that no one, regardless of gender, could ever resist the allure of a man in a foxhole who hasn't showered in three days?
Why do we still cling to the as-yet unproven notion that if gay men and women are allowed to serve openly, unit cohesion and morale would suffer? This assertion is an insult to the professionalism of the U.S. military and an affront to our Constitution.
There was a time when allowing blacks to serve in the military was considered prejudicial to good order and discipline. That time has passed, and it is hard to imagine our military without their sacrifice and dedication. There was also a time when the idea of women serving the military in any capacity was unthinkable. Today, women are viewed as equals to men in all but the most physically demanding military specialties. Yet we still drag our heels over the matter of sexual orientation.
Many military members worry that if the ban on homosexuals is lifted, violence against gay and lesbian service members will increase. These fears seem to show concern for the welfare of gay soldiers, but remain unsupported by evidence.
It's hard enough being gay in an already intolerant world. Recently, Army recruiter Sgt. Marcia Ramode, with the Brownsville Recruiting Station in Brooklyn, N.Y., contacted and tried to sign up a man by the name of Corey Andrew Powell. He asked if the Army would accept him despite the fact that he is gay.
Ramode allegedly responded via her military e-mail address that he could not join because “being gay is disgusting and immoral” and added “you must be a total idiot and so stupid to presume that you do not know what gender you are” and that he “should leave the United States.”
The two allegedly traded barbs for several days. Ramode has been suspended from her recruiting duties pending an Army investigation.
It is this intolerant attitude that has been allowed to flourish within the military and prevents capable men and women from serving their country. Within the microcosm of the military, many gays and lesbians who are the victims of harassment or assault often dare not report the incidents out of fear of being ejected from the military. This sounds eerily familiar to the equally reprehensible act of rape.
We should not claim that the banning of homosexuals is designed to keep the military virtuous or pure. If you have been in the military long enough, you know someone who has cheated on his or her spouse and, more than likely, gone unpunished, though adultery is an offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. If the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution are allowed to be the protector of some, but not all, Americans, then democracy has failed.
Retired Army general and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili recently had his own experience with gay and lesbian service members. He said, “Last year, I held a number of meetings with gay soldiers and Marines, including some with combat experience in Iraq, and an openly gay senior sailor who was serving effectively as a member of a nuclear submarine crew. These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers.”
The archaic “don't ask, don't tell” policy serves only as a victory for partisan politics and is an affront to our most sacred of institutions.
The justification for this policy has never had anything to do with the military abilities of gay men and women. The “don't ask, don't tell” policy has always and will always be about punishing gay troops for the prejudice exhibited by their straight peers. And if hard-nosed service members choose to leave the military rather than serve alongside their gay and lesbian counterparts, then I say good riddance. Their overbearing intolerance and misdirected hatred has no place in my military.
Many other nations, including our most important military allies, have successfully integrated openly gay and lesbian service members. The military forces of Britain, Australia, Israel and Canada seem to be able to do their jobs without discriminating against homosexuals, but Congress still insists that I cannot. I find this notion insulting.
Throughout history, America has been at the forefront of the war against intolerance. We have become a beacon for other countries to emulate. Why, then, have we not led the charge in this fight?
Despite our Constitution's claim of liberty for all, as well as the Declaration of Independence's claim that all men are created equal, we have seen fit to exclude those who are more than capable of serving honorably simply based on matters concerning their private lives.
There comes a time when people must stand up in the face of intolerance and push this country forward for the good of future generations. Now is the time to stand. Now is the time to push.
...........
The writer is a captain with the 8th Marine Corps District in Fort Worth, Texas.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Tock
