View more polls
October 14, 2010 - 3:12pmPermalink
I was shocked and dismayed at the number of homophobic members who said no to the big question.
When I fought it was for ALL people to have the same rights.
I fought with gays in Vietnam, and I will tell you right now I didn't care.
Nor did I care if they were Black, Chinese, Latino, or Purple for that matter.
All I cared about is that they were there to cover my back.
I fell I owe it to everyone who takes up arms for their country to be treated equally.
It is sad that so many veterans can carry such prejudice for so long, and just maybe not knowing that the person that saved their ass may have been gay.
October 14, 2010 - 3:47pmPermalink
The Military can not allow open sexual activity among homos or straight; it will drag the military down!
October 14, 2010 - 4:58pmPermalink
Seems this was the primary argument against Segregation too.
That proved false as will these claims.
We serve, they serve based on what's in our hearts, our love of country.
It doesn't matter if the guy next to me sleeps with his wife or boyfriend,
it matters that he shows up on time, does his job, and has my back when needed.
Gays have been serving in secret for many many years, is the military worse for it?
They should be allowed to serve, being who they are, what they are. Proud Americans.
I'm what would be called a straight, light green, male, retired Marine.
I've no issues with serving with gay men or women. Kill DADT, serve with pride.
October 14, 2010 - 3:50pmPermalink
The retention of DADT is fundamental to all civilizations. It is not a matter of civil rights, it is a matter of separation of the sexes. Should DADT be removed, it would authorize homosexuals and lesbians to live in the same community as men and women that are straight. If such a civil right is given to homosexuals and lesbians then the same civil right should be given to straight men and women. The American Civil Liberties Union would surely bring suit in favor of such equality. Were I on active duty today, I would look upon Congress to eliminate separation of living quarters among all persons and permit co-mingling of all four sexes in the same quarters.
October 14, 2010 - 3:51pmPermalink
LASH must have been in a fox-hole all his military career - if he was in the military at all !! I know in my 20 year career, of which were spend with 1 tour in-country and 3 in the Tonkin Gulf, that the Navy lives in close quarters, and too many problems would arise with an openly gay individual. Now-a-days, with AIDS so prevelant in the gay community, you want me to eat, sleep, work next to one ? I'm not homophobic, just don't want to worry that a sneeze, touching, etc would not endanger me. It's the same with a cold or VD, they can be caught and passed on.
October 18, 2010 - 8:27pmPermalink
The only thing DADT does is make who you're working with a secret. You're STILL working with gay people. It's hard not to look at you as having very little intelligence since you seem to miss this very obvious point: THOSE PEOPLE YOU ARE SO AFRAID OF ARE ALREADY THERE - YOU JUST DON'T KNOW THEY'RE GAY.
AND - you can't get HIV from a sneeze or touching. Are you sticking your tongue up your work-mate's butt? NO? Guess you're probably safe from getting AIDS then, whether your workmate is straight OR gay.
October 14, 2010 - 5:36pmPermalink
With 20 years in the military I always thought DADT was a waste of time and effort but it was better than what went on before. We need to give it a rest, its time is come and has been over for a while. the rest of the country is finally coming to the realization that homosexuality is no big deal. remember when segregation the norm in the military and how it was finally eradicated, the same with DADT.
October 14, 2010 - 5:40pmPermalink
I spent 7 years enlisted and 23 years as a commissioned officer. During that time I was aware of gay individuals serving along side of me. I was no more concerned about them then than I am now as a retiree. Everyone did their jobs and what was done on their own time was their own business. I don't believe that the Navy or anyone else for that matter suffered from this situation. As our society changes and gays have come out of their closets, the military needs to change to keep pace. DADT has always been flawed, since it really represented no change in the military's position on gays. We were tested annually for HIV/AIDS so those folks claiming that they do not want to get sneezed on are simply disguising their homophobia. There once was a time when blacks could not serve on an equal footing and Filipinos could only be stewards. So, since the Congress and the Pentagon seem incapable of doing away with DADT, kudos to the Calif. Judge who did.
Ron Kriel, CAPT USN (Ret.)
October 14, 2010 - 6:29pmPermalink
Hey Navy-Ret: guess what? AIDS is not a gay disease. In fact in our country HIV/AIDS is most prevalent among African-American women.
Viruses have no sexual orientation - nor has the oath of enlistment or the commissioning oath, nor have the wounds of body and mind our boys and girls in uniform suffer, and nor have the coffins in which our valorous fallen soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen come home.
October 14, 2010 - 7:57pmPermalink
I saw most of the comments I expected to see from many of the old pharts, but was pleased to see a more open set of comments from many of my fellow Viet Nam vets and most of the apparent younger members.
I never knowingly met or associated with a homosexual individual in my life until I had to file unsuitability charges on two of the men in the first infantry company I commanded. Except for their proscribed activities they were good soldiers but...
After I retired I had the opportunity get to know a few gay men and talk to them at some length about their lives. One stated that if he could be anything other than homosexual he would do so - its not a choice its genetic.
DADT is even less a legality than separate but equal was for dealing with race. It's even more rediculous than our approaches to females in combat - females and gays are already there and it's working. 67% of Americans now favor gay marriage alternatives. DOD has to get in step and obey the law.
October 15, 2010 - 9:21amPermalink
The unintended consequences of openly gay servicemembers are staggering. If additional accomodations (separate sleeping/showering areas) are provided would that mean that all servicemen and women would then be required to identify their personal sexual preferences in order to sort them out properly? I think some might prefer not to come out in the open no matter what happens to be the latest opinion of social scientists. Why should they?
October 15, 2010 - 11:02amPermalink
This policy has been declared unconstitutional, end of story.
Now, as to whether the recruits have to out themselves, not necessarily. There should be no requirement in todays military that you have to be hetro. Those who wish to defend this country should be allowed to do so.
This is a voluntary posistion. No one is drafted anymore, if they were we would not have invaded Iraq!
we would not still be in Afganistan.
October 15, 2010 - 3:36pmPermalink
I guess Commander Foster feels that he and the American Legion have their own set of good old boy rules. Law is law. If DADT is unconstitutional, then there is no need for a judge to wait for the DOD to come up with a new policy. When you are in combat, one does not worry about sexual preference. But then, combat never was a requiresment for the American Legion, so how would they know. Maybe it is time that we call for Foster's suspension, instead of the court's DADT ruling.
October 15, 2010 - 3:52pmPermalink
I'll give Commander Foster a pass on this one, because up until recently most of the comments from Legionaries on DADT have been in support of keeping it. I am really glad to finally see more intelligent messages coming out (no pun intended).
As has been pointed out, the arguments against homosexuals serving in the military continue to resemble the arguments against intergrated races and women in the military. It is really fustrating when a black vetern refuses to see it that way, but it is.
As for what the military will get out of allowing homosexuals to serve openly, for one, perhaps more volunteers, and for another, one less source of blackmail. Homosexuals who serve or have served in secret in the past can and have been blackmailed by people who discovered their secret. Removing this restriction will remove this potential threat to security.
October 16, 2010 - 10:09amPermalink
Whether you like it or not, the contributions of gays serving in all aspects of American life are real and valuable. In every military branch of our allies gays are allowed and do serve openly and proudly. So you're okay with our troops serving with gays in other military branches but not our own? That makes no sense, and DADT will be repealed. You'll need to prepare yourself for that eventuality.
October 16, 2010 - 9:49pmPermalink
If DADT is unlawful then it should be ruled that bringing charges against polygamists is wrong. While we are at it, throw out the laws against animal lovers, pediphiles(sp?),etc.. Just because we are against it does that mean it is wrong? What I am getting at is this. Leave well enough alone. I didn't like the DADT when it came out, but it is better than letting gays serve openly. I personally could not have respect for someone that I know is gay. And if a known gay puts a hand on me they are liable to lose that hand.
October 18, 2010 - 8:38pmPermalink
Just a few days ago there was a poll asking about "Jimmie" Foster whining about DADT being ruled UnConstitutional. The VAST majority of the responses were negative & took him to task for bucking the U.S. Constitution, our Commander-in-Chief, the Secretary of Defense, and the Joint Chiefs in reference to ending DADT.
In fact, I even went so far as to call him a traitor to this country and the Constitution, since he was advocating continuing a policy that was deemed unConstitutional, when he obviously had taken an oath and swore to defend & uphold that Constitution.
Now that article, the poll & all the posts have magically disappeared - to be replaced with yet another homophobically worded poll.
What's going on here fellow vets? Are our words being hijacked by ultra-conservative traitors to the Constitution? Is it that they can't stand to lose an argument, so they have to delete any traces of it? Guess that shows just how WEAK and PATHETIC their side is!
October 20, 2010 - 6:30pmPermalink
The American Legion position of 'not now' makes no sense. If not now, then when? The people running the Legion; NEC's are out of touch with today. This is not only not your father's army it is not your army. Today's recruits are infinitely more sophisticated than you are. They are more cosmopolitan and are accepting of differences and diversity.
Please come into the 21st century if you wish for this organization to grow.
You know it is dying; gone from the 3 million strong to barely 2.5 million.
October 21, 2010 - 1:06amPermalink
Are we still on this subject? So if you send a gay guy out on point and he gets killed is that gay bashing? I thought this was over and done with! So how do you pick your fire team half gay and half other?
October 23, 2010 - 3:59pmPermalink
If I may bring up a point I've not seen addressed?
One judge ruled in one case brought by a limited number of plaintiffs. As Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a policy of national importance, I am willing to wait until either the Supreme Court rules or Congress votes to overturn (with the president signing the bill). This is how a constitutional republic is supposed to work, not by the fiat of individual district judges.
Personally, I know that I served with homosexual men and women...didn't see any lack of ability to perform their duties.
I'm 53 and consider myself conservative. Part of my conservatism is keeping my nose out of people's private lives, so long as they are causing no harm.
As veterans, we swore to protect and defend, let's continue to do so in strength and wisdom.
More information about text formats