Recently I was handed a promotional brochure created by the Center for Military Readiness, an organization that is adamantly opposed to the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy enacted during the Clinton Administration more than 15 years ago.  It was signed by dozens — maybe hundreds – of retired flag and general officers who support keeping the policy intact.  It made me laugh.  I recognized many of those names and admire many of the men who contributed their names to this campaign.  But, it would have had a much more significant impact if it had been signed by veterans of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom — 20-somethings who have recently served and can actually attest to the impact of the repeal on unit cohesion, morale and military readiness. 
 
I would assert that today’s youth share few opinions with their grandfathers on this issue — and the men who signed this document are almost two generations removed from the majority of today’s soldiers and Sailors.  They are, indeed, grandfathers to this generation.  It reminded me of a conversation I had with my own grandfather more than 20 years ago. Like these men, he was a retired flag officer and grew up in a vastly different America than the one that raised me.  He was an intellectual giant (in my opinion) and a decorated WWII hero – I beamed with pride at being introduced as his granddaughter.  But, he gave me pause one day when we were discussing gays serving in the military.  I assumed he was against it, but I had never heard him tell this particular story before he and I sparred that day on the issue. He admitted to me that his Naval Academy roommate was court-martialed in the 1920s for homosexual behavior and this former roommate asked my grandfather to serve as a character witness at his trial.  My grandfather refused, the man was convicted and thrown out of the Navy. He later committed suicide, and my grandfather angrily said, “If I had had a gun, I would have shot him myself.”  I furrowed my brow and said, “Why?  Why woudn’t you serve as a character witness for him?  Wasn’t he your friend?”  He responded, “He was a great roommate and friend. He used to make my bed in the morning when I didn’t have time.  He was a very talented naval aviator. I was so angry at him when I heard the news.”  I looked at him and said, “You just attested to his character, Grandaddy. You just told me what a great person and friend he was.”  Grandaddy was speechless and this legend in my eyes suddenly looked very small.  After a pregnant pause, he responded: “Well, I guess you just can’t teach an old dog new tricks.”  
 
I bring up this sad, personal story because the opinions of retired flag and general officers on the issue of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are irrelevant and remind me of my grandfather’s attitude.  Today’s generation of youth — those who are joining and serving in the military today — have grown up with openly gay individuals.  I found online some results of a Zogby poll from December 2006 which concluded that 72% of returning Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are “personally comfortable” with gays.  An Annenberg poll from 2004 concluded that, a majority of junior enlisted personnel favor letting gays serve openly. They don’t see homosexuals as predatory threats; on the contrary, they see them as fellow professionals and friends. They expect them to be held to the same fraternization standards as heterosexuals. Simply put, their presence is not an issue. Organizations like the Center for Military Readiness — groups that profess to be strong supporters of the troops, should spend some time in uniform and spend some time with gay and straight soldiers and sailors to find out what issues are really important to them. Serving together is not one of them.



Posted by The Bunny in Uncategorized
Tags: ,
Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    Fascism: The forcible suppression of opposition.

    “objections and archaic beliefs of old men”
    “ignorant, backward”
    “Intellectual bankruptcy”
    “corrupt argument employed by bigots”
    “go to your graves gnashing your teeth. Sad.”
    “vast majority are evangelical Christians or ultra-Catholics”
    “HYPOCRITES!”
    “All stem from personal smallness and deep bigotry.”
    “It’s impossible to look at an injustice being sanctioned by others without noting this is bigotry.”

    Overdone? Hmm. And by the way, those are the answers I got. Seems one might be entitled to their own personal or religious views and values, as long as they don’t make a peep about seeing them violated, with the sanction of the government and the military they serve.

    You might want to re-examine Hayball’s questions. He asked for some details for implementation and posited some situations likely to need addressing. The silence was deafening. Except, of course, for the shouts of the above comments.

  • Jay

    URR — What you have consistently failed to do, is to show how your personal or religious views or values would be “violated”.

    I am not aware of any religious prohibition against working alongside, for, or having someone who is gay working for you.

    Hayball’s questions are mostly unanswerable, at this point. I am sure the implementation plan will address many of them.

    Stand by for news…

  • UltimaRatioReg

    “show how your personal or religious views or values would be “violated”.

    First, the views aren’t necessarily mine. But that has been lost in the shouting. But there are those who believe the lifestyle and behaviors to be aberrant and immoral.

    The school system, public organizations, etc., are being required to recognize the “equality and legitimacy” of homosexual marriage, turning such “equality” into open advocacy, at taxpayers’ expense. When one will have to sit through the inevitable mandatory lectures about serving next to homosexuals, they will hear that it is just as legitimate a lifestyle as heterosexual couples.

    Their children, in DoD schools, will hear much the same, and parents will be having to explain why there are two mommies in the house next door, or two daddies. When the child asks “how come?”, will the parents be able to tell them they believe it to be wrong or immoral? If so, will the child be ridiculed, or worse, punished, for expressing that opinion in school? Will the early learning textbooks include “My Daddy has a Boyfriend”?

    The above has already occurred, and continues to, in NY and MA, and other places where homosexual advocacy has driven it. That will be the case in DoD, as well.

    Hayball’s questions are unanswerable? Don’t think so.

  • RickWilmes

    URR, what is wrong with two mommies or two daddies living next door? Why is that different than a Jew, a Muslim, a Japanese or a black person living next store?

    Why should two mommies or two daddies be denied base housing?

  • Byron

    Rick: He isn’t talking about who lives next door, he’s talking about who’s in the rack above you. Read.The.Post.

  • Byron

    Oh, and nice try at confusing the argument, but it ain’t gonna fly far with this crowd.

  • Natty Bowditch

    Byron: I get the sense you’re confused. RWilmes asks a valid question. The fact is there are currently gay sailors in the racks above and below you, so that bit of fearmongering is misplaced.

    Hayball’s questions are irrelevant and unanswerable. Re his ‘Navy isn’t fair’ silliness–is he serious? If he is (and I wonder what Navy he served in), then the Navy has far bigger problems than gays serving. According to him, the Navy is one humongous dysfunctional organization and its a wonder any of our ships make it past the sea buoy without catastrophe.

  • Jay

    URR —

    You are still getting off track (almost as much as Hayball…).

    Again — you (or *whoever*) can teach your kids whatever moral code you want/believe in. But you (or *whoever*) don’t get to bring that set of rules into work and attempt to force them on your co-workers, shipmates, etc. Just that simple.

    Re: schools, children, etc. You are confusing equality with advocacy.

    Will the child be expressing his or her own opinion? Or just parroting that of their parents? I wonder which your hypothetical parent wants…

    Moreover — what will happen to the *parents* if the child grows up & forms his or her own different opinion? Oh, horror!

    The idea that a book like that would be a textbook is not that scary. More than likely, it would be just one of many books in the library.

    It is 2009 already, for Pete’s sake.

    (Byron — you are in time out) :-)

  • Byron

    Jay, are you willing to say that the military has a culture of it’s own?

  • UltimaRatioReg

    “you (or *whoever*) can teach your kids whatever moral code you want/believe in.”

    -Not when the state mandates otherwise.

    “You are confusing equality with advocacy.”

    -I am not. But to the DoD, overrun with activist pressure and media coverage, there will be no difference.

    “Will the child be expressing his or her own opinion? Or just parroting that of their parents?”

    -It makes no difference. Punishment will likely follow ANY opinion that is not in line with the state-mandated party line.

    “The idea that a book like that would be a textbook is not that scary.”

    -It is a moral outrage and religious affront to many to have such textbooks as I mentioned for children’s use. But since it doesn’t offend YOU and people who think like you, it must be okay. Which is my whole point.

    Beware the law of unintended consequences.

  • Jay

    Byron — No. I am always quick to point out to any of my mil friends who want to take on some “Praetorian Guard” idea that they are separate from, or better than society, that that is exactly *not* the case. The military is a subset of society, draws from it, and reflects it.

    The military (more the Army) may have had its own culture 70 and + years ago (regular army, not national guard…) — when the force was much smaller, the bases were far apart & isolated, the pay was so low that commissaries and other on-post facilities were the only way to survive economically. The Navy normally always located near commercial seaports, and due to worldwide travel, had a more cosmopolitan flavor.

    After WWII, that insularity has eroded so much, that it really isn’t there anymore.

    On other blogs (this one?) when talking about the all-volunteer force vs. draft, etc. I think one of the problems with the AVF is you do get almost “too much” similarity, which leads to group think, which is why I think CDR S’s constant probs with diversity on his blog are misguided.

    The military has practically every flavor of American in it, with the few exceptions. (Immediately the few exceptions that come to mind are the very elderly, or those who can’t meet a minimum physical qualification stanard, etc.)

    URR — you really are confusing equality with advocacy. Unless you have something firm (pehaps a townhall.com headline, “Massachusetts and Vermont children forced into mandatory reeducation camps against their parent’s wishes”?) I am unaware of the states doing anything more than recognzing relationship equality. If that is advocacy to you…well, ok.

    I guess the folks who are morally outraged…are just going to stay outraged. For a while. Likely, over time, they’ll come around.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    “Unless you have something firm”…

    ‘MONTPELIER, Vt. (BP)–A group of Vermont parents met at the State
    Capitol in Montpelier Tuesday to protest what they see as promotion of the homosexual agenda in schools by state and local educators, according to CNSNews.com

    Tuesday’s protest was sparked in part by an incident at a local school where a student said he was exposed to “homosexual harassment” in the classroom.

    In a study of genealogy, a teacher said that homosexuality was
    inherited, putting forward a controversial thesis that has never been proven. When the student questioned the teacher, the teacher asked the student if he was “homophobic” or “had problems with his sexuality,” the student said in an affidavit. The teacher is a facilitator with the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.’

    You mean, like that?

  • UltimaRatioReg

    *Burma Shave*

    And your idea that people will “just have to stay outraged” until they are forced to give up their beliefs is, well, more than a little fascist.

  • Jay

    URR — The facism card again. Well played. I guess if you are the first to use it…it sticks? Prob is, if you use it too much, or too often, it loses whatever power the word once had. Good luck with that.

    Never said anything about them being forced to give up their beliefs. They are welcome to them. They are welcome to keep them. But, they don’t get to impose them on others. And, I still think, eventually, most will come around.

    This part in the tidbit was particularly interesting: “protest what they see as promotion of the homosexual agenda in schools by state and local educators”

    The homosexual agenda? Is that some sort of sinister UN-backed plot? Please. What’s next, the evils of flouridation a la Dr. Strangelove?

    The only thing more interesting than that is the…byline. CNSN news.com? Really?

    Next time, please try harder for a news outlest with an established reputation for presenting facts, not just outrage headlines/soundbites.

    Now, back to the drawing board you go…

  • RickWilmes

    My understanding of history is that fascists persecuted homosexuals?

    Equating fascism with openly gay service members is a stretch or more confusion about the issue.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    Well, Jay,

    So, the opinions and views of the people protesting are also to be discounted? Not many count, do they? I mean, outside of yours, of course. The affidavit is public record.

    A news outlet that has an established reputation for presenting facts….. hmmmm… maybe CNN. Or MSNBC. Or CBS. Dan Rather always has facts galore.

    Or, perhaps you prefer Howard Dean’s sponsorship of a bill in VT in 1999 mandating education for all public school students in “Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning Youth”? That is one I will let you look up, as I have a paper copy. Also public record. The “education” included classes on the lifestyles and the sensitivities of “GLBTQ”.

    Sponsorship by many middle and high schools in MA of “youth gay pride” days?

    Or how about this?

    The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force sponsors a conference called “Creating Change.” The November meeting in Milwaukee included workshops entitled “Bringing Homosexuality Out of the Closet and Into the Classroom;” “Drag 101: How to Turn Kids in Makeup Into Kings and Queens;” and “Advocacy in Action: Getting Your School on Board”. Guest speaker? Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis. Lesbian activist.

    Unless, of course, you are going to claim that none of those happened, either.

    You asked for one, you got many. Not much of a drawing board required. Though it is likely hardly noticeable in the schools, in between the anti-war (Vietnam and Iraq), anti-gun, global-warming political indoctrination.

    Advocacy will be the result in DoD, as it often becomes in the schools. Activists and the risk-averse politically correct senior officers will bring that about.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    Rick,

    I termed it “intellectual fascism”. Fascism: The forcible suppression of opposition.

  • RickWilmes

    “Intellectual fascism” sounds like a package deal. I need to think about “intellectual fascism” some more before I can comment further.

  • Pingback: Obama Delaying Repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell «

  • Pingback: Maritime Monday 160

Subscribe

Get blog posts delivered to your inbox
* = required field

video title