-
Website
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com -
Original page
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/05/i-am-american-citizen-and-i-want-dan.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
This is an inhuman policy ... Yeah, there are the small minority of screaming bigots out there baying to the moon about how this will destroy cohesion in the military. To which, we can naturally say; bullshit. All the other militaries of the developed world have easily included LGBT service-people into their ranks, with no change at all in the performance of their militaries, aside from perhaps an increase in performance of those that are not told they have to hide.
Are the bigots honestly saying that the American military are somehow not as strong as these militaries? That there is something intrinsically weaker about the American military? What contempt must you hold for the US armed forces to think that they need this policy to protect them.
Removing this policy, aside from the basic freedom and equality it gives to LGBT service-people, makes, simply, for A BETTER MILITARY.
And in those seventeen years since? It's been completely legal to be gay in the CF. It's not always easy - any hyper-masculine life is going to be somewhat tough on queerfolk, for some years yet, I'd bet - but it's legal. It hasn't interfered with our ability to put good, well-trained, disciplined troops on the ground where needed (leaving aside the question of whether our continuing presence in Afghanistan re-learning the Soviet/mujahadin lesson is a good idea).
I hope your Prez does the right thing here. Bravo to Lt. Choi for his bravery, both in service and personally.
Mr. President, please get rid of this terrible policy.
There's video at the "May 2009" link.
No apology necessary. I just wanted to point to where people could find it! :-)
and this is where there such a rift in the generations. as mine (gen X & Y) comes of age and into power, we see more and more of this "live and let live" approach to things like this. but there are still so many of the old guard at the highest levels that it's hard to get any real changes made.
lt. choi, i would be proud to have you serve in my military. please keep fighting for your rights as you protect ours.
President Obama and Staff,
I know that you have a lot to deal with right now and I am very happy with everything that you have done (even my Republican parents have a hard time arguing with me now), most recently the cutting of Abstinence Only Sex Education from the Budget.
However, the one thing that I have been most disappointed on is the continuance of DADT. I realize that to completely remove the legislation it will need to be approved by Congress. However, with executive order you CAN suspend the further firings of service members who are or are suspected of being homosexual. I have close friends who are serving or have served in Iraq and I want them to have the best support and intelligence that can be given to them. However, I feel DADT actually prevents that through losing many of those who are extreme assets to our military. We can ask them to die for us but they can't ask us to let them be who they truly are at heart?
Also, with the increasing legalization of same sex marriage and civil unions you are perhaps preventing spouses of those in the military from receiving the benefits of those they love who are serving our great country. This prevents them from living on base with them as well and removes a very important support system by making them hide their feelings and relationships. None of that seems like the land of the free and the brave. It seems like the land of the hidden and downtrodden.
Please deeply consider the executive order suspending the firing of those affected by DADT. We need all of our best men and women out there and if they want to go they should be able to go in the right and safest state of mind, which includes not having to hide a huge chunk of their identity.
Thank you,
Natalie Muskin-Press, MA
Don't ask don't tell is a terrible policy and needs to end. I admire his courage to stand up and be who is in the face of such institutionalized bigotry.
This is totally not directed at all at you, Bob; it's directed squarely at Obama: WIW to me right now is fuck all. Because there's no reason to wait, except that it's politically expedient. And guess what? Six months from now it will be politically expedient. Oh, and hey, guess what else? It will still be politically expedient a year from now to put DADT on the back burner. It's always going to be easier to kick the can down the road than to do the right thing.
That ain't exactly the spirit of "Yes We Can," Mr. President. Just. fucking. do. it.
*makes note not to be IWC (Incoherent Whilst Commenting) in future*
larkohio, why should we give him time? Why should we believe it will change, when he's been quite consistent so far? How much time should someone who's claimed to be a "fierce advocate" for GLBT equality and who promised repeatedly that getting rid of DADT would be a high priority be allowed before we conclude those claims and promises were hollow? To paraphrase what Deeky said on another thread, it doesn't take much time to issue a press release urging Congress to change the UCMJ, or applauding the Iowa court and the Maine legislature. Those wouldn't be much, but they'd be more than he's doing now.
Fix it, Obama.
Just give him time... No, that's so unfair to people who are suffering NOW from his actions/inactions on the gay political arena.
Major Tate: Sir, we're not prejudiced toward homosexuals.
Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: You just don't want to see them serving in the Armed Forces?
Major Tate: No sir, I don't.
Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: 'Cause they impose a threat to unit discipline and cohesion.
Major Tate:Yes, sir.
Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: That's what I think, too. I also think the military wasn't designed to be an instrument of social change.
Major Tate:Yes, sir.
Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: The problem with that is that what they were saying to me 50 years ago. Blacks shouldn't serve with whites. It would disrupt the unit. You know what? It did disrupt the unit. The unit got over it. The unit changed. I'm an admiral in the U.S. Navy and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff... Beat that with a stick.
You weren't IWC at all, Bob. Like I said, I wasn't directing my ire at you in the slightest! I was just letting loose on WIW to me for Obama's edification (not that he'll ever read it, but you know, lol). :-)
No.
Sorry, we backed him BIG-TIME, and really what the fuck has he done? Nothing. On anything gay rights related.
We're not asking for the country to be changed into all pink flying unicorns farting gay rainbows all the time overnight, we're just asking for some small, over-due, changes that are easily in his purview. It's not like Obama hasn't already been using the executive powers that Bush gave POTUS, so to then claim it is not appropriate to use such for a an obvious travesty like this (hell, just a putting of the damn policy on pause, on hold, till the full congressional revocation can occur), is hypocritical at best.
I am really bloody well sick and tired of being told time after time after time that we just need to wait, that we shouldn't expect windfalls overnight. Yes, I know he has a lot on his plate right now ... but you know what? So does Lt. Dan Choi.
Fuck this back of the bus shit.
OK, I mean, it's The West Wing. I love a lot of episodes.
Mr. President and Staff,
First, thank you for the excellent job you are doing on so many topics, such as dropping the Abstinence only education from the budget.
However, after watching the New England states advance in gay and lesbian rights, it is particularly disheartening to hear the story of Lt. Dan Choi, the West Point graduate and Arabic translator fired from the military because he is gay. Why is the President stalling on the issue of DADT? That policy does nothing but hurt our military and that hurts our nation. I expect more from President Obama. Even if Congressional action is necessary to completely repeal DADT, an executive order by the President could stop the unnecessary, harmful firings of the brave men and women in the military whose only "fault" is their sexual orientation. We know from other countries who have legalized gay and lesbian inclusion in the military that doing so only strengthens it. Please, stop DADT.
Obama is not doing anything about this because he is afraid of 1/4 of the country's response to this.
I'd love to see him pull the goddamned "National Security" card and play it here. To help bring down part of homophobia FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTRY, and listen to the pundits choke on their own spit trying to claim that he's made us less safe by increasing the number of highly-qualified soldiers we've got.
(Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...)
Yes. This. Exactly this.
This weekend, when I have some time for coherent thought, I will be writing President Obama and urging him to shitcan DADT and to do everything in his power to make sure Lt. Choi and others who have been dismissed from service for being gay are reinstated.
Very good post, Liss. Watching his interview with Rachel Maddow last night I was equal parts angry and heartsick, all the while thinking that Lt. Choi is my hero.
That said I'd like to know where the Democratic Congress is on this. I'm all for busting Obama's chops on LGBT issues but I also voted in a democratic majority that seems to not be doing much either.
And the military's response. Despite there being wide support for the repeal of DADT among the rank and file, among the brass, there is still a lot of support for keeping the policy in place.
Would you support a temporary hold on investigations of LGBT service-people as an executive order? Just until the official change is made by Congress? Like you I'm uncomfortable with the amount of power Bush gave in regards to executive orders, and rewriting the UCMJ would be a step too far for me as well, as much as I detest this policy.
But a temporary suspension of investigations till the details of the congressional repeal are done? That I'm inclined to think is easily within his purview.
Suspending investigations sounds good at first glance. I worry about the independence of the JAG corp and stepping on officer discretion (my father is a commanding officer and has often decided not to pursue particular investigations against his soldiers when it is his right to). But those worries are outweighed by the need for action. So, from a legal standpoint I'd be ok with suspending investigations, but officers can still bring charges without JAG investigation, if my understanding of the UCMJ is correct so I'm wondering what other kinds of orders would need to be issued.
Either way, there will come the moment when the President meets the hard wall of the above officer discretion and some part of the military will make a fuss. I'm hopeful that that portion is now a minority but I don't know.
The people on that subcommittee are: Chairwoman Susan A. Davis, D-CA, Ranking Member Joe Wilson, R-SC, Vic Snyder, R-Arkansas, Walter B. Jones, R-North Carolina, Loretta Sanchez, D-California, John Kline, R-Minnesota, Madeleine Bordallo, D-Guam, Tom Rooney, R-Florida, Patrick Murphy, D-Pennsylvania, Mary Fallin, R-Oklahoma, Hank Johnson, D-Georgia, John Fleming, R-Louisiana, Carol Shea-Porter, D-New Hampshire, David Loebsack, D-Iowa, Niki Tsongas, D-Massachusetts.
DADT has got to go. It is ruining lives, and I can tell you it is costing way more money than most people suspect.
But then, I'm Australian, and I've never understood the whole fascination with sexuality as a major issue that appears to happen in the US. Over here, "none of your business" is a perfectly acceptable response to questions about sexuality and sexual practice. Heck, the only time I feel questions about sexuality are actually merited is when someone is asking you whether you'd like to have sex with them; in which case, yes means yes, no means no, and never the twain should be mistaken for one another. Possibly I'm weird.
That's not even all that new, is it? I've had family members in the military going back to WWII, and they all tell about knowing that so-and-so in the unit "played for the other team" but as long as he did his job, who cared? Seems like the whole line about cohesion of the unit is so much bunk. Professional conduct is professional conduct.
Under DADT, if you even suspect that someone might be gay you are supposed to let a superior know so that an investigation can begin. Investigations begin informally at the lowest possible level so that a person might not even know they are being investigated. Soon all of your Shipmates and Battle Buddies are being brought in to your immediate supervisor, who might only be a pay grade above you or a year longer time in service. Your entire service history and personal life are open to scrutiny long b/f you ever find out what is going on.
I think it's only a matter of time b/f Big Brass change their views as well, as more and more retired officers are coming forward out of the closets, and there are more gay upper enlisted people than I think most current leadership realizes. Were DADT repealed I think people would be surprised how commonplace it already is.
The military is pretty sound in many areas of equality (but not perfect by far). They are culturally and ethnically diverse throughout the ranks and overt racism of any kind will land you in some serious trouble (simply using a racial slur will get you thrown out of boot camp, end of story), and sexual discrimination is making headway more and more. I know few jobs where promotion is so blind that people are lifted to higher rank more evenly among race, class and gender. They need to repeal DADT to prove that they are indeed committed to equality. And the UCMJ needs a serious overhaul in the process.
Personally...I need this policy repealed NOW. It is ruining my life NOW. I don't have time for chickenshits to diddle themselves over it, and neither do LT's Tsao and Choi. This shit has to stop NOW.