Why do we have 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Again?
Pic of the week via Towleroad, h/t Rev. Phat:
[British] Trooper Ben Rakestrow is speaking out about his time in the British Army and his service in Afghanistan, where he came out to his fellow soldiers... 'They couldn't believe it.' But Trooper Rakestrow, from Exeter, said it was the best decision of his life, adding that he was accepted and treated as an equal. He said: 'I get banter from them all the time, but it's good banter. They all want to know about my life, they ask a lot of questions. I don't find it hard to talk about it.'
You've gotta be really comfortable to be out and proud in the barracks with a Zac Efron quilt!
I really think we underestimate the generosity and humanity of ALL our military when we think they won't accept a fellow soldier for who he or she is. Ben Rakestrow is living, serving proof of that.
If gays are to be accepted in the military one must first get religion out of the military. As it is now, religion (evangelical christianity) dominates the US military.
Last night I was watching Wheel of Fortune - it's "heroes" week so it's all military playing all week. One of the player last night was a US Navy nuclear submarine Captain and I was shocked when he replied to a question about his service with "Yes Alec I'm an underwater Christian warrior" - that just about sums up the US military these days.
There are huge cultural differences between the US and Britain. Homophobia runs deep throughout all strata of American society, not so in England where the tradition of Public (read private) schools has, for centuries, ensured a great deal of exposure and experimentation with the same sex.
http://www.thealders.net/blogs
Just call me Dazed & Confused
I saw that too and couldn't believe that captain said that. I guess only Christians are on our submarines, and in the rest of our armed forces.
Fortunately the digital age with PVRs allow us to stop a live show and rewind as often as necessary to get it straight. It went by so fast that I started doubting what I'd heard immediately - thought maybe he wasn't the captain but the chaplain - laid those qualms to rest as soon as I replayed it.
http://www.thealders.net/blogs
Just call me Dazed & Confused
when i was in the military there were christians in the military they didnt get preachy. if they tried it they would get reported. proselytizing was strictly prohibited.
Then I guess we can expect the captain on Wheel of Fortune referenced in Doug Alder's post above to be discharged. I won't be holding my breath on that one. Unless he came out on Wheel of Fortune he was a "gay warrior" instead of a "Christian warrior."
...but it must have been some time ago since you last served in the military. The times, they are a-changin'! There are reports which indicate that within at least one branch of the US armed forces (the Air Force), proselytizing is not only tolerated but actively encouraged -- even staff members at the Air Force Academy (who you'd think should know better) have been engaging in it. Take a look...
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/03/airforce.rel...
If proselytizing is "strictly prohibited", then why has it been allowed to go on at the Air Force Academy -- and even more importantly, why have staff members (never mind cadets) been allowed to get away with it?
Never trust anyone who insists that patriotism requires you to blindfold yourself with the flag.
I was discharged from the Air Force back in 1982, and it was against the rules then.
Low church clerics were complaining that chaplaincies were going to high church clerics.
I do know that has been changed since primarily under ray gunn and papa boosh.
And it's the low churches who tend to be more evangelical.
And there have been proseltyzing scandals since then
Despite the UCMJ.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
don't they just extend DADT to cover religion too?
Catholic? DADT
Baptist? DADT
Muslim? DADT
Atheist? DADT
Gay? DADT
There. Problem solved. But that would be simple and obvious, and therefore completely against military protocol.
Because...Belief System is a CHOICE. Sexuality is NOT.
Why not have DADT for race then?
Because then they couldn't recruit using the "Christian Warrior" marketing tool. It's only the obvious solution if you don't have that agenda superceding the wellbeing of the whole military.
It's all grist for the miller.
...because the evangelicals would make the claim that DADT interferes with their Constitutional right to Freedom Of Religion by prohibiting them from "spreading the gospel" (despite the fact that technically, the First Amendment only prevents Congress from passing laws which favor one religious belief over another -- and the fact that many evangelicals themselves don't appear to see anything wrong with interfering with other people's beliefs as long as they're the ones doing the interfering!)
Never trust anyone who insists that patriotism requires you to blindfold yourself with the flag.
Religion is a destructive, divisive force and has NO place in the U.S. military. That it is permitted and that it and its parasitic "chaplain" promoters are financed and endorsed by the military is a blatant violation of the separation of church and state.
The only folks who have an issue are the homophobes.
They need to get over themselves.
Our troops serve side by side with NATO troops who are out and about - no problem.
"I really think we underestimate the generosity and humanity of ALL our military"
I think you're right as rain. Well at least MOST if not ALL.
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
...stupid ass ideas.
The way things are going, Clenis is gonna be remembered as more Democratic than Obama.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
But seemingly true.
obviously, they don't encourage
minority abuse in england like
there is in America....land of the
worst fucking bigots, racists and
heterosexual pedophiles.
I'm afraid there are a lot of red necks in our military who might not be as understanding and accepting as the members of the English military are. And I agee with debaser71, as long as we have religion in the military that prohibits gay lifestyles, there could be problems.
I hope one day soon everyone will be welcoming and understanding, but sadly I'm afraid we aren't there yet.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
It's not important. They took AIDS coverage out of the healthcare bill to appease the Blue Dogs. We can't be subsidizing unacceptable life styles now can we.
So, we throw the homosexuaals out of the military, deny them coverage and hopefully they will die off.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
They make GREAT tie-die t-shirts.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
a mercenary sewing bee. I feel all fuzzy and warm.
Well, apparently the British have openly homosexual soldiers now and they didn't fall apart/rape each other like the conservatives said would happen. In fact, it's a bit of a positive moment in an otherwise dreary military campaign.
But this begs the question: why do we need to keep homosexuals out of the military when it's clear that the problem is with the religious homophobes already in the military? Why deny the right for a citizen to defend his country because someone else ignores his responsibility to his country intentionally so he can attack a fellow (albeit homosexual) soldier?
The homosexual is not a problem because s/he is a "distraction", that's blaming the victim. The problem is by lowering standards to allow racists, sexists and overall dicks who think they're on a holy war into the military. Frankly, in comparison to the British system, it makes Americans look like bigoted idiots who are scared of each other.
[EDIT]Of course, this argument is not new, but it's another chapter in this dark history.
Right?
jk
named Beverly
I thought Don't Ask, Don't Tell was the strategy to get progressive support on the healthcare bill?
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Seems to me since coming put he's gotten a lot more popular:)
when this guy has a quilt of Wolf boy from New Moon, then he can show his out and proud balls.
Bleah.
While an important issue...this is hardly the news of the day.
C'mon C&L where's the Clinton clip...calling out liberals to "get on board".
Where's this compromise that was worked on last nite?
You ran cover for the Administration last nite with your Axelrod conf call clip. How about clips showing what the UNIONS think.
The Democrats think they've dodged this bullet.
This isn't over. I will mobilize and call for mobilization of every Democratic and Democratic organization I know to unseat EVERY Democrat in the present Congress for delivering this big bag of shit to us and expecting us to eat it quietly.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
C&L shies away from heavy anti Obama and Dem articles. I spotted that Bubba rant about getting behind the Senate plan and cave in to the BS on Raw Story, but it disappeared. At least the Schultz show was picked up denouncing Barrack and calling him out. Good stuff to see the hack pres exposed. He is slippery but not enough. I see Pelosi is taking credit for a lot of things that got added to the Pentagon Warmonger Budget which the Repugs were not going to hold up anyway. Man is she sleazy. That Union push is great, they mean business.
But why EVERY time this or a gay rights subject is brought up you straights ALWAYS eventually wind up saying "this is hardly news" or "there are more important issues to worry about"? Let me ask...WHEN do gay rights become important? When every other problem on earth is solved?
Gay rights are always important. But this is not the first thread of the day on a day where the Democratic Party is supposedly imploding, AND a former President insults the base.
And my views on homosexual rights, women's rights and minority rights are well known in this blog. I resent even the intimation of being accused of either homophobia or short shrifting the issue.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Unfortunately, I don't share your opinion. Even though human beings seem inclined by nature to take comfort in self-gratifying illusions of all kinds, the fact is that history has shown time and time again just how foolish it is to assume that what holds true for one country must necessarily hold true for another. Although I could be wrong, as far as I am aware, evangelical and/or legalistic Christianity isn't as prevalent in the United Kingdom as it is here -- and over the last few years, several news reports have indicated that growing numbers of new recruits into the US military entertain far right political and/or religious beliefs. As much as I hate to say it, does that really sound like an environment in which one could expect to find much "generosity and humanity"? Frankly -- and I say this as someone with relatives who are proud to have been career military -- I'm not of the opinion that an industry which actively discourages individuality, which which regards weakness as something to either be vilified or exploited, and which typically refers to civilian deaths as "collateral damage" as a place where a person could reasonably expect to find much generosity or humanity to begin with. On the individual level, perhaps...but not collectively.
Never trust anyone who insists that patriotism requires you to blindfold yourself with the flag.
Why do he need to tell?
Seems the pink blanket is a tell all.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
I'd like to hear how he explained the dildo under the bed.
A cosh.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
and it should never have been put in place to begin with. It's time for the USA to get with the program when it comes to homosexuality and gay marriage.
Also in Towleroad, this article:
http://www.towleroad.com/2009/12/gay-canadian...
President Obama, keep your promise and end DADT.
.
...The Canadian Army had a recruiting presence out at the Pride Parade.
Make all the jokes you want, but it's a large community of healthy young men, and their sexual preferences don't affect their ability to shoulder a C7.
as things stand now, the military has lowered its troop standards in order to meet recruiting needs (I will leave the standing army criticisms aside for now), and there have been reports about increasing numbers of lower aptitude recruits--not to mention the criminals and white power assholes. [ex: About 17% of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems, including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight increase from last year, the Army said.]
yet, at the same time, the military is running out homosexuals.
the homosexual troops that the military is discharging are better soldiers in every single way than a lot of these moral-criminal waiver thugs they are now recruiting.
which is the greater delusion, hubris or hero worship?
A hero ain't nothing but a sandwich.
You want fries with that?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
side order of hot sausage.
We have DADT in this country because, unlike every other nation in the long history of mankind, we can afford to treat even something as deadly serious as our armed forces as just another stage on which to present yet another act in our right-wing's continuing culture war pageant of follies.
...one of our guys was a homosexual who came out to us during one discussion--and we all protected him. In those days, even a rumor that one was a homosexual could result in a Section 8 Discharge--Unfit for Military Service. Although we often teased him about his sexuality (and he teased us back), we liked and respected our fellow trooper and if necessary would have banded together to prevent the Army from taking any action against him because he was gay ("gay," by the way, was not equated with being homosexual in those days).
We left the kaserne every Saturday afternoon as a group to play in the city. When we got to town, we would split: our gay pal would go to "his side" of the town (there was a section devoted to gay bars), and we would go to hunt females in "our side" of town (again with a lot of good-natured teasing all the way around). Late Sunday night we would all meet up at the train station to return to the kaserne as a group. We always watched out for each other. That one of us was gay was never a problem.
Only those people who are uncertain of their own sexuality and who are guilt-ridden because of it, make an issue out of gays in the military as well as in society in general.
...but unfortunately, it doesn't do anything to alter the fact that according to the reports, the number of people who are "uncertain of their own sexuality and who are guilt-ridden because of it" (probably because of their religious upbringing) is growing.
Never trust anyone who insists that patriotism requires you to blindfold yourself with the flag.
...I blame the growth of the number of people who are uncertain of their own sexuality and who are guilt-ridden because of it strictly on religion. In our nation it is the perverted Christian religion that causes such great emotional and psychological damage to children who are indoctrinated into that hideous Middle Eastern delusional belief system by their well-meaning, but abusive and emotionally damaged parents. Like all child abuse, Christianity is a vicious circle.
Here's two excellent sites:
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com
http://www.charlesbelser.com
These cartoons speak for themselves.
http://reynaelena.com/wp-content/uploads/2009...
http://www.bartcop.com/gay-soldier.gif
I can only tell that, regarding the sexual orientation of a particular individual, my policy is "don't know, don't really care". It's a very relaxing policy. I recommend it.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
toward males in the military. We won't talk about all the raping that goes on. They're just such good boys, and you know- boys will be boys.
Uninformed people, top to bottom, assume gay men and women can not "take care" of themselves. I assure them, we can! And we have been doing so for thousands of years. We will continue to take care of ourselves, with or without "official" recognition.
I've heard that their menstruations attract bears.
Yeah "Old" Billy, we attract "Bears" and then we beat the shit out of 'em.
If I remember correctly, the progressives wanted to open up the military to full participation by people regardless of orientation, but Clinton thought that this feeble half measure would be a step in the right direction that could be built upon in the future - something like the Senate health care bill. That was 16 years ago, right?
Comments are closed on this entry