It can’t. But if gay soldiers testify before the Armed Services Committee they’ll be outing themselves, a.k.a. “telling,” and then they’ll be discharged under DADT. So how can Congress get currently serving gay and lesbian soldiers to testify? Offer them immunity.
Gay service members who reveal their sexual orientations during congressional testimony would be immune from forced discharges under a bill introduced Wednesday, as lawmakers prepare to consider repealing the ban on gays serving openly in the U.S. military. The legislation’s author, U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., said the bill is needed to ensure that Congress has reliable and relevant witnesses at its disposal if the House holds hearings next year on the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
The bill also would protect from retaliatory personnel actions any members of the military who testify for or against lifting the 16-year ban.
Gay members of the military have been discharged at the rate of two a day since Barack Obama took office. Obama could suspend enforcement of DADT while Congress debates its future, just as his head of the Department of Homeland Security has suspended enforcement of the widow’s penalty while Congress “works on a solution.” That would make it possible for gay members of the military to testify before Congress without fear of being discharged. Not holding my breath.
I’m sure all of the chickenshit democrats in the house will be lining up to support this bill. That is, quickly cutting and running the second a baptist screams “But what about the children!?!?!?”.
there are a lot of pressing issues facing our nation.
this isn’t one of them.
@2 This is pressing. Our military needs all the competent personnel it can get. And it’s destructive to so many people’s lives.
@2. Well, if you feel the war in Afghanistan is a pressing issue of our nation then DADT is VERY important since we are gonna need all troops.
What more do you expect from bigots who freak out at the very hint of homosexuality? If you bring one to Congress, they’ll probably think they’re going to catch the “homosexual disease”. Given how many backwards states we have, I’m surprised homosexuality isn’t a crime punishable by death. Bigotry runs rampant in this nation and historically it always has.
3
4
we need to get out of afghanistan.
and if there is a pressing need reinstate the draft.
5
yes
this is a bigoted nation.
try uganda, instead.
or saudi arabia.
or iran.
or indonesia.
or….
7,
Honestly, one could live a decent life in some of those countries. At least there I’m not exploiting others and destroying countless lives whom I’ll never meet. I can’t say it’s the same for the US. Here we can only maintain real pride in our nation through ignorance, be that ignorance of the third world, ignorance of our racism, etc. I am continually ashamed to be called an American.
That’s a trojan horse right there.
“How can congress debate DADT without hearing from gay soldiers?”
Easy. Hear from gay former-soldiers. There are thousands and thousands of us. And now that we’re no longer serving on active duty, we have nothing whatsoever to fear from testifying before congress. I’d be happy to testify. Where do I sign up?
And you don’t need to rely on old-timers like me who have been out of the service for 20 years. By your own count, there have been hundreds of gay service-members kicked out since Obama was inaugurated. None of them have anything to fear by testifying now either.
I totally think we should get rid of DADT. It was stupid from it’s inception. I was in D.C. in 1993 protesting when they started it. But this idea of giving a few gay soldiers immunity to allow them to testify is a silly and pointless waste of time. Just start the fucking hearings and repeal the fucking law.
The moment Congress starts granting ‘immunity’ to some others instigated by gay groups will start to litigate for the same.
This is just another way that has been concocted by those that want to find a easy way for this without letting those that deal with these sort of issue in a battle ground (the generals) have their say in this.
@11 and what exactly would that issue be Loveschild?
@13 Unit cohesion in closed quarters, in a battlefield, in a foxhole, Akbar.
Not something that you would know that much about, I’m sure.
@13 – And you do? How many times have you been in a foxhole in Akbar? Do you think about the bullshit you type at all before you post it? Better trolls, please.
Why don’t you ask Lt. Dan Choi about unit cohesion.
So they are gay. BFD. Sexuality has NOTHING TO DO with being a solider. None what soever. There doesn’t seem to be a problem with female soldiers working the front lines with fellow male soldiers.
What exactly are you trying to insinuate there with that last line? Are you trying to say I have never served in the military? So by that logic you have no experience in Gay Marriage so you should just shut your bigoted mouth about it.
@10 That’s a great idea. We already have former service members sharing their stories with the media after being discharged under DADT. Why not have those folks testify before Congress?
I’m all for reinstating the draft. That’s one of the only things that made America wake up during Vietnam. Do you really think the protests would have been half as effective and passionate if the majority of the protesters lives didn’t hang in the balance?
@15
Yeah, silly me….i forgot that most of the recruitment numbers in the U.S military come from places like Capitol Hill or the Castro where your type of comfort/carelessness concerning open homosexuality prevails the most.
@13 Good thing we don’t allow blacks in the military right? Otherwise we could really reduce the moral and unit cohesion of racist soldiers.
Loveschild, I live in Capitol Hill and play on the gay friendly rugby team- Many of our players came from some sort of military background. Not that it should matter, but most of them could easily pass for straight.
So, that being said- could you please try not to be such an ignorant bitch all the time? Thanks.
@13: Except that both open and closeted gay soldiers have fought, bled, and died in trenches, formations, wars, and battles for millenia.
Loveschild, I’m a 26yo straight Navy veteran. I couldn’t possibly care less about the sexual orientation of someone that I served with. One guy that I served with had a sex change after he was discharged. All I cared about is that he had my back and I had his. You’re making the same argument that used to be made against blacks in the military. Yeah, that did upset group morale. Then everyone got over it.
@21 Not openly in the U.S military and there’s a reason for that.
For example I thank Lt Choi (which Akbar brought up) for his service but the U.S military is not a place for experimentation, especially not in a time of war. He knew that when he decided to make his sexual proclivities public. Now as a regular citizen he can do so, but once you sign those papers you literally are giving up many freedoms of choice you have as a private citizen and you make a conscious decision to observe the code of conduct and regulations of the military.
It’s a discipline that all soldiers choose to observe before they enter the service nobody forces them to and when they disregard those disciplines and conducts then the military has every right to address them according to their laws.
I say we just start by drafting all the kids and grandkids of millionaires and exempting them from DADT rules until they’ve served two tours in Afghanistan.
Small steps.
@23 I assume you’re talking about the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which among other things, bans blowjobs.
The Cap Hill gay Rugby Team?! As a shout out from Denver Wildfire, see ya at Bigham!!!!
And what of the other countries who’ve let gays into their militaries, loveschildreninthewrongway? These other countries who’ve been around a LOT longer than ours and have military traditions dating back centuries or so? Have their military forces fallen into such sad states that they’re being invaded all willy nilly?
As for that discipline, find all the videos of the military hazing on youtube and talk about how disciplined they are.
@22
First of, I thank you for your service. Second, I’m glad that the guy was able to direct his the efforts in a way that could resolve his issues physically, but do you believe that if he instead had that sex-change during his time of service there wouldn’t have been any disruption or problems as a result between his peers?
Third, being African American is not an act i engage in, or a decision i can make to alter my physical appearance.
“Third, being African American is not an act i engage in, or a decision i can make to alter my physical appearance”
And there is the one thing that you will apparently NEVER EVER FUCKING GET.
Being gay is NOT A CHOICE. It is as inherent as the color of your skin.
Akbar, my German’s Chocolate Cake loving friend @ 28,
You will get a more rational argument from a bottle of lube. This individual states that they have a family member in country, thus if gay marriage = their marriage being threatened then gays openly in the military = their family member being unable to focus. See, it’s always about them and their fears.
Ps. Hi, Jason @ 14,
@29
I know Kim. I should know better but her ignorance just bugs me way too much sometimes to ever just ignore her/he/it.
I s’pose it’s asking way too much to expect that “loveschild” (which, btw, is a euphemism for “bastard”, isn’t it?) has ever even slightly explored this issue.
For those who care to know more, pick up Nathaniel Frank’s book, “Unfriendly Fire”.
Lots of servicemembers are out, now and in the past. I was out to several of my enlisted infantryman buddies. Coming out deepened our bond of trust, and made us a more effective fighting team on our next tour in Afghanistan.
In fact, over two-thirds of soldiers know or suspect that someone in their unit is gay, with no measurable effect on their morale and cohesion. (Cite.)
DADT will go away soon. Over 75% of Americans want it to go, and the vast majority of active duty military belongs to a generation that doesn’t give a shit about a person’s sexual orientation. (Cite.) Most of the civilian leadership (e.g. Obama, Gates, McHugh) are committed to repeal, and most of the top military brass (except Conway) are on board.
The only real stumbling-blocks left are:
1) the middle-managers (operational commanders) who are suspicious of change and are afraid that repeal will cause administrative problems. (It won’t – if anything repeal will lower the administrative burden by eliminating the bureaucracy of DADT enforcement.)
2) religious fanatics and their captive politicians.
@ 18 – So, because many US soldiers come from backwards, red-neck states where the majority doesn’t like gays, that’s a good reason for keeping DADT? Is that seriously the argument you’re making? If this country had used your logic in the 60s, there would NEVER have been a civil rights act for black people. All those redneck crackers who hate gays certainly hated (and mostly continue to hate) black people too. But luckily for you, LBJ didn’t buy that horseshit, and insisted Congress enact his civil rights bill, because he knew that if it was left up to the states, or if he were to “let the people have their say”, as you so constantly advocate here, then the civil rights bill would never have passed. Period. You well know that. But because of your deep, abiding hatred of gay people, you don’t care. As long as you can screw gay people out of their inalienable rights, you will literally say anything, whether it’s true or makes sense or not. Like most fundamentalist zealots, you are a pathological liar. Stay classy.
@ 28 – Hi Kim!
@32 for the actively serving win.
It’s really only the old fogies in the military that actually care. And the Talibangelists – but they hate America.
Riiiight, give them immunity during their testimony. And then watch as their performance reviews suddenly take a drop, they become subjected to harassment from their superiors, and they mysteriously begin to be discharged for apparently unrelated reasons.
America is the only remaining western country that maintains a ridiculous ban on openly gay people serving in its military.
loveschild, you’ve never served in the armed forces, and thus have no knowledge of it, so SHUT THE FUCK UP. you’re not a very convincing black woman, either, you dumb fucking honky.
@22, didn’t the bigots try to use the exact same arguments in opposing Truman’s integration of the Armed Forces…that it would be harmful to “unit morale and cohesiveness” and thus would be harmful as a whole?
Funny, it seems that the military turned out all right after 1948.
27 And being gay is something I can’t change either, idiot
If it’s supposedly such a threat to unit cohesion…has any attempt at surveying the actual *units* and seeing how the majority of service members feel?
@39: Yes.
See for example this 2006 Zogby Poll: “Majority of troops would welcome gay soldiers.”
Or this 2003 Gallup Poll: 91% of Americans aged 18-29 support open service. Six years later, assuming support for gays has been stable (actually it has risen), this is now true of people aged 18-35, i.e. the overwhelming majority of military-aged Americans.
More data here.
Oh, and don’t forget the 1993 RAND study commissioned by the Pentagon. It concluded that openly gay people in the U.S. military at the time did not negatively impact unit cohesion, morale, good order, or military readiness, and recommended a plan for full integration of gays.
Congress ignored the data, and passed DADT anyway.