« america supports ... who, exactly? | Main | PETA and their insane cult of bad-publicity worship »

don't ask, i'll tell ... and nothing happens

August 15, 2005

How very ... interesting.

ABC News: Gay War Veteran Confronts 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy

Sgt. Robert Stout of Utica, Ohio -- an Iraq war veteran and Purple Heart recipient -- visited Capitol Hill a few weeks ago to meet with his state's senators. Although Stout, 23, says the senators were called in advance of his visit -- something the senators' aides dispute -- neither Republican Sens. George Voinovich nor Mike Dewine would speak with him.

"I just said I wanted to introduce myself to my senator and discuss my state with him," Stout said.

But the fact that Stout is gay is the ultimate reason for his visit. He wants to lobby Congress to change the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which prohibits homosexuals from disclosing their sexual orientation or speaking about homosexual relationships, while serving in the armed forces.

Stout was in the Army for five years and served in Iraq as a combat engineer for about 10 months. In May 2004, he was patrolling an area about an hour southeast of Samarra when he was injured by a grenade blast. "The only thing I remember is I heard a loud bang," Stout said, "and it felt like somebody poured water all over my face." The "water" was actually blood, and after two months of rehabilitation, Stout returned to Iraq with some shrapnel left in his body.

"A couple pieces are still in the arm," Stout said. "Couple pieces in the neck, and I got a couple scrapes on my face and legs."

Stout says he was already sick of living a lie, and in April 2005, his wounds prompted him to out himself to The Associated Press. "The fact that I can fight, I can bleed, I can die just as good as every other straight man or woman in that military should not bar me from enlistment," he said.

Even though his admission violated "don't ask, don't tell," -- he quite literally and publicly "told" -- Stout was permitted to remain in the military until his normal discharge seven weeks later, as long as he signed a document. "I would go ahead and sign a paper saying I would not engage in homosexual acts, make homosexual comments, or engage in homosexual marriage, and they would let me discharge naturally," Stout said.

In fact, discharging soldiers for being gay is on the wane. What the military calls "homosexual separations" were at a high until 2001 -- the year the first of two U.S. wars began. By 2004, the number was about half that -- from 1,227 "separations" in 2001 to 653 three years later.

"The Pentagon, of course, has a great need for bodies to fight, a great need for manpower," said Aaron Belkin, director of the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military. "And in this war, just as was the case in Vietnam, and Korea, and Persian Gulf I, and World War II, the Pentagon is ceasing to discharge gay service members because it needs gays to serve in combat." Belkin points to a military memo from March 1945. In the thick of World War II, the secretary of war changed the policy so that "the mere confession .... (of) homosexual tendencies" no longer merited a discharge.

According to regulations from 1999 regarding soldiers in the Reserves, if a discharge for "homosexual conduct is not requested prior to the unit's receipt of alert notification, discharge is not authorized." In other words, gays stay in the military once their unit has been mobilized for action....

So let me get this straight-ish:

Gays in the military are harmful to morale ... unless you're mobilized for combat, in which case nobody cares who's gay; they just need warm bodies with guns.

... Well, all-righty, then! Nothing like a consistently articulated policy to make things clear as mud!

It will be interesting to see how great the pressure on the military will need to become before there's some sort of formal loosening of "don't ask, don't tell" -- especially since the third leg of that policy, "don't pursue" has never ever been consistently followed by the military. Whether or not you got pursued depended entirely on your commanding officers, which does not make for a consistently administered policy.

Posted by iain at August 15, 2005 11:17 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recent posts

PETA and their insane cult of bad-publicity worship

don't ask, i'll tell ... and nothing happens

america supports ... who, exactly?

truth vs the washington post

new york transit checks

circuits we may hear on high?

crime? what crime? WHICH crime?

it's all boston's fault

get out! get out of my life, and let me make a new start...

circumcision may reduce rate of hiv contraction

media relations: unwelcome neighborhood fear factor

too damn little, too damn late

media relations: and there she is!

uncoverup

media relations: there she ... ain't

zimbabwe

distressed damsels-r-us

house votes to restrict patriot act

nutcase at large

prom night

supreme court bitchslaps texas and the 5th circuit. AGAIN.

patriot act rides again

sexually tranmitted diseases and women in these united states

military recruiting becoming more problematic

Stanley Kubrick's Chicago