1,000 + Retired Officers

[Comanche Sun]

1,000+ Retired Officers Change Debate on Gays in the Military
by Elaine Donnelly

04/10/2009


Despite mixed signals from the Obama administration, a distinguished group of retired leaders called Flag & General Officers for the Military has taken a stand in support of the 1993 law stating that homosexuals are not eligible to serve openly in the military. That law, frequently mislabeled “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” has been upheld by the courts as constitutional several times. It enjoys solid support among active duty military men and women who recognize its positive effect on recruiting, morale and readiness.

Legislation to repeal the law (H.R. 1283) nevertheless has been re-introduced in the 111th Congress. That initiative prompted the release of an open letter (pdf) personally signed by more than 1,000 retired flag and general officers who support the 1993 law.

The list (pdf) of statement signers, which includes 47 four-star leaders from all branches of the service and has since climbed to more than 1,100, is posted under the banner Flag & General Officers for the Military. The group’s website also displays an Issue Overview setting forth reasons why the high-ranking retired officers have reason for concern. Recruiting, retention, and overall readiness would be undermined if Congress passes legislation to repeal the 1993 law, Section 654, Title 10, U.S.C.


http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31416

please read the copyright rules for posting articles on the board.
the first few grafs and a link, please.
thanks

 

[Comanche Sun]

No problem sonny.

 

[Toome]

The issue is a bit more complicated than simply repealing the 1993 law or instituting new policies that might allow gays to be more open. The policies regarding homosexual acts are based on the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This would literally take an act of Congress to institute any real change. Some aspects of the UCMJ are outdated anyway, so this might not be such a bad idea. Many of its regulations don't really apply to today's customs and morals. For example, oral sex is strictly prohibited. While this is the basis for banning homosexual behavior, technically, a Soldier, Marine, Sailor or Airman would be in violation of the UCMJ in the privacy of their own bedroom with his or her own spouse. Of course, this strict interpretation isn't enforced. However, this illustrates how the UCMJ is in need of being updated.

The focus should not be on homosexuality. Instead, it should be on those behaviors that are detrimental to the good order and discipline of the military. And a lot of those types of behavior, believe it or not, result from heterosexual misconduct. Take a look at all the misconduct that occurs at basic training installations with drill instructors having inappropriate relationships with recruits. That's inappropriate heterosexual behavior!

I don't have a dog in this fight. It doesn't matter to me if gays serve or not. I truly don't see the problem or concern. Having gays serve should not have any impact on traditional military standards of conduct and discipline.