A group of former members of the armed forces who were discharged from the military for being gay have filed suit asking to be reinstated. The timing of this suit shows the lunacy of the military's policy of throwing gays out of the military. At a time when our armed forces are stretched so thin that they are extending tours of duty and even bringing middle-aged folks out of retirement to send them to Iraq and elsewhere, how stupid is it that we're simultaneously throwing some people out of the military solely because they're gay? The fact is that gay people can serve their country just as bravely as straight people can, and thousands of them have. But as this lawsuit points out, excluding them is not just discriminatory, it also hurts our national security.
- Log in to post comments
I doubt that this lawsuit is going to go anywhere, except into the dumpster, but, a few points
The US military claims that banning out gay people from serving in the US military is necessary for good order in discipline. They have several problems trying to justify that. Most of our Nato allies have gay people serving openly in their militaries (it's my understanding that only Turkey, of all countries doesn't). So, to the extent that US military personnel need to serve with military personnel from our Nato allies, they may very well be serving with openly gay people. And there isn't a whole lot that the US military can do about it. Moreover, one of the best militaries in the world, that of Israel, has openly gay people serving, apparently without any ill effects.
The US military inferentially gave lie to its claim that barring openly gay people from serving during the 1991 Gulf War. It was reported that, during the call-up for that war, a number of people (not a lot, but enough) claimed to be homosexual in order to get out of being called up. (I believe they were reservists and national guardsmen, and I have no idea whether or not they were really gay.) The military, instead of cashiering them then, indicated that they would have to serve, and that they would deal with them after the conflict ended. It strikes me as odd that, if self-proclaimed openly gay individuals serving in the military are contrary to good order and discipline, the military would want to wait until after the end of the conflict to deal with the people. One would believe that the military would want to deal with the issue beforehand, to avoid a problem with "good order and discipline."
The person who came up with the "don't ask/don't tell" policy in 1992-93, Northwestern University sociology professor Charles Moskos, has been quoted in recent years as saying that, if a draft is reinstituted, open gays should not be exempt from the draft. Which also strikes me as odd. If open gay people are a problem with "good order and discipline in the absence of a draft, how do they become "not a problem" with a draft?
As far as I'm concerned, the whole thing smacks of hypocrisy, and, yes, clearly homophobia.
We hate dem turrists but we really hate dem gays.
raj-
I agree with everything you said there. Pure hypocrisy.