| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:14 pm Gay Soldier Who Won Purple Heart Wants to Serve Openly |
|
| Quote: |
Gay Soldier Who Won Purple Heart in Iraq Wants to Serve Openly
Thursday, April 07, 2005
WASHINGTON � An Army sergeant who was wounded in Iraq wants a chance to remain in the military as an openly gay soldier, a desire that's bringing him into conflict with the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Sgt. Robert Stout (search), 23, says he has not encountered trouble from fellow soldiers and would like to stay if not for the policy that permits gay men and women to serve only if the military and they aren't causing any harm," said Stout, who says he is openly gay among most of his 26-member platoon, which is part of the 9th Engineer Battalion (search) based in Schweinfurt, Germany.
Stout, who served in Iraq for more than a year as a combat engineer, said by acknowledging he is gay, he could be jailed and probably will be discharged before his scheduled release date of May 31.
"The old armchair thought that gay people destroy unit camaraderie and cohesion is just wrong," Stout said. "They said the same things when they tried to integrate African-Americans and women into the military."
Before the "don't ask, don't tell" (search) policy, enacted in 1993 under the Clinton administration, the Pentagon had explicitly barred gays from military service. At least 24 countries, including Great Britain, Germany, France, Australia, Canada and Israel, allow gays to serve openly.
In an e-mail following the AP interview, Stout said he had been ordered not to speak to the media. "I guess they found out somehow that I was talking to the press and now they are having a fit. I will try to get everything straightened out," Stout wrote.
Martha Rudd, a spokeswoman for the Army at the Pentagon, said soldiers who are discharged under "don't ask, don't tell" typically receive honorable discharges, although the timing would be up to the individual's commanding officer. She declined to comment about Stout, saying the Army doesn't comment on specific cases.
The issue of whether gays should be allowed to openly serve in the military has received increased attention in recent months as the Army has struggled to meet its recruiting goals. Twelve gays expelled from the military sued the government in December, citing a Supreme Court ruling that declared unconstitutional state laws against homosexual sex.
The Bush administration has asked a federal court to dismiss the lawsuit.
Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey has said he opposes changing the policy, although Pentagon figures show a sharp decline in the number of U.S. military members discharged for making it known they are homosexual, falling from 1,227 in 2001 to 653 last year.
A recent congressional study on the impact of "don't ask, don't tell" said that hundreds of highly skilled troops, including many translators, have left the armed forces because of the rule, at a cost of nearly $200 million, mostly for recruiting and training replacements for 9,500 troops discharged between 1994 and 2003.
Gary Gates, a statistician at the University of California at Los Angeles, estimates there are about 65,000 gays and lesbians currently serving in the military, accounting for about 2.8 percent of all personnel. He estimates that at least 25 gay soldiers have been killed in Iraq.
Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, a conservative advocacy group that opposes gays serving in the military, said a better way to avoid the cost of replacing soldiers who are discharged for being gay is to make it very clear to people who enlist in the military, including Stout, that they are ineligible to serve if they are gay.
"I honor and respect his service to this country, but the fact that he's wounded really doesn't change the underlying fact. ... He is not eligible to serve," Donnelly said, adding that there are many reasons why people aren't eligible to serve. "This is just one of them."
Stout said he suspected while in high school that he was gay but didn't acknowledge it until later. "Then I noticed that it wasn't a phase or anything. This is me," said Stout, who enlisted in the Army after graduating in 2000.
"The 'don't ask, don't tell' policy, when it first came out, was a good stepping stone, but it's outlived its usefulness," he said. "We've progressed past it both as a military and as a society."
Recent media polls indicate some increased public acceptance for allowing gays to serve openly in the military, with more than six in 10 Americans supporting the idea while about half supported it a decade ago. An Annenberg poll taken last fall among members of the military showed a majority opposed to such service, though half of junior enlisted personnel said gays should be allowed to serve openly.
SEARCH
Click here for FOX News RSS Feeds
Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.com and FOX News Radio
Jobs at FOX News Channel.
Internships at FOX News Channel (Summer internship deadline March 1, 2005).
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to
[email protected]; For FOX News Channel comments write to
[email protected]
� Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Copyright � 2005 ComStock, Inc.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright 2005 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.
|
|
|
|
Zeke Zabertini
Captain
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 4832
|
| Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:26 pm |
|
They let women serve in the military, why not homosexuals? Goodness. The only posible reason I can see that makes any sense is bathroom/shower issues. Seriously though, if we're entrusting this person with leadership of a platoon and a gun, I should think he has enough self-control to avoid that being an issue. He's right about one thing: the same arguments being used against admitting homosexuals have been used before. Funny how prejudice is like that.
My view is, don't ask, let them choose whether or not to tell.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Thu Apr 07, 2005 10:47 pm |
|
Don't ask, don't tell. He told. 'Nuff Said.
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 2:39 am |
|
That's just discrimination, in my eyes. Although that exists in the military over here (women not allowed to be marines, because the majority of women couldn't cope with the training, although there are one or two female green caps) gays are not allowed to be discriminated against, and haven't been for a few years.
If anything, this guy has proven that being gay doesn't prevent you being a good soldier.
|
|
|
Zeke Zabertini
Captain
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 4832
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 8:21 am |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | | Don't ask, don't tell. He told. 'Nuff Said. |
Is it? Why should the military be allowed to discriminate against homosexuals? I'm not contesting that the policy is there, I'm contesting that it's a stupid, discriminatory piece of junk. No matter where you stand on how moral it may or may not be to be gay or if you (like me) think morality has nothing to do with it and it's just the way some people are, I can see absolutely no practicable reason why homosexual people shouldn't be allowed to join the armed forces. What is there to be afraid of?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 8:59 am |
|
^If I'm in the military, and most people, I believe, I wouldn't want the risk of a man doing something to me when I'm focussed on the war, and I don't think that troops should be distracted knowing that the person is a homosexual. They should be focussing on the task at hand.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Zeke Zabertini
Captain
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 4832
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:22 am |
|
In a war I should think that the miniscule risk that the person next to you is both a homosexual and a sexual predator should be the least of your worries. Besides, with the current policy you're not barring gays. As far as I'm concerned, a homosexual who joins the military openly is probably less likely to take advantage of someone than one who comes in "in the closet." It's out of character for me to give any credence at all to long-defunct social prejudices like those against homosexuals, but since I'm speaking to a conservative audience about a conservative organization I'll be tolerant.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 11:00 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | ^If I'm in the military, and most people, I believe, I wouldn't want the risk of a man doing something to me when I'm focussed on the war, and I don't think that troops should be distracted knowing that the person is a homosexual. They should be focussing on the task at hand. |
He has already been in the military for a while. Has he done anything that made anyone concerned for the entire time he was in there? Clearly not, the only reason this has become an issue is because his sexuallity has now been made public. Does that suddenly change who he is? No, he is still the same person he was as when he was allowed to join the military.
Besides, I am sure that our soldiers are more mature than that, to be worrying about whether or not the man or woman next to them is gay or not. If they are worrying about the gay guy next to them, who has done nothing at all to concern them, more than they are worrying about their duties, then they clearly don't have the maturity to even be where they are.
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 2:00 pm |
|
i don't really care if he is gay, or a Gay soldier or wounded, he should still stay in the military. He has experience and a medal and everything.
But, he is going against the policy thats going too cause a lot of trouble for him.
But then again, policies and laws are meant too be fought. I think he should go all the way and fight for his right.
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:11 pm |
|
Indeed. War is often a brutal, hellish experience. In this case, perhaps ignorance would have been bliss. But if these soldiers are mature enough to deal with the horrors of war, I think they can deal with the knowledge of their comrades' sexual orientations.
I like the "don't ask, choose whether or not to tell," policy too. 
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:46 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | ^If I'm in the military, and most people, I believe, I wouldn't want the risk of a man doing something to me when I'm focussed on the war, and I don't think that troops should be distracted knowing that the person is a homosexual. They should be focussing on the task at hand. |
I don't understand your post. I don't think anyone is having sexual thoughts in a time of WAR.
|
|
|
madlilnerd
Duchess of Dancemat
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 5885
Location: Slough, England
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:48 pm |
|
If no one he's working with has a problem with a gay soldier (which they shouldn't) then I don't see the problem. Over here (in England), I think women are not allowed in the marines or the SAS because the weight they have to carry and the jobs they do would actually be too much strain on the female body.
But gays, I don't see how they can distract others around them any more than a sexy girl would, so if the people around them are good soldiers, everything should run smoothly
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:55 pm |
|
^ well put. Being gay should not be an issue. I'm sure there are lesbians in the service, But people do not have an issue with lesbians because they think it is simply "sexy".
|
|
|
madlilnerd
Duchess of Dancemat
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 5885
Location: Slough, England
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 5:00 pm |
|
I think that the stereotype of gay men is one of guys in pink shirts drinking cappuchino and saying things like "oh behave!" over and over, but the stereotype of lesbians is butch women or *beep* stars. Maybe that's why the US wont let gay men in, they think they'll be making their army "weak" by putting in "flowery little numbers"
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 5:04 pm |
|
Well, not exactly. I have come to learn taht here in southern california, a lot of straight men wear pink and drink cappuccinos. lol.
But also, I feel some of our previous president's opinons and wants did not help the issue. Most republicans feel it is wrong to be gay. Look at George Bush. So of course, The national security will follow what their leader says on top of that.
Oh, and one more thing. My cousin took me down to Venice Beach a couple of days ago. There are so many gay men there who are so butch and tough, and BUFF. Not all are flamboyant. m/s. And I think it is terrible to judge someone by their race,sex,age etc. before you get to know them.
|
|
|
madlilnerd
Duchess of Dancemat
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 5885
Location: Slough, England
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 5:12 pm |
|
Yeah, I know lots of gay men who aren't flamboyant, simply because it's stupid to be like that. I mean, straight people don't run around shouting "Look at me, I'm straight! I act like this!" which is probably why must gay men don't.
Are repuplicans the annoying lot who encourage abstinance and hate abortion? Because people like that really annoy me. What I do with my body is my buisness!!!!!! Plus, abstinance programs fail a lot of the time and because they don't teach about contraception, people who pledge abstinance are just as likely to catch an STD!  
Stereotyping is the divider of worlds. Star trek has taught me that on more than one occasion. But then, Star Trek didn't have gays in, but Buffy had Lesbians, so I learnt not to judge others from that too.
|
|
|
zero
Rear Admiral
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 4566
Location: Texas
|
| Fri Apr 08, 2005 5:32 pm |
|
| madlilnerd wrote: |
Are repuplicans the annoying lot who encourage abstinance and hate abortion? Because people like that really annoy me. What I do with my body is my buisness!!!!!! Plus, abstinance programs fail a lot of the time and because they don't teach about contraception, people who pledge abstinance are just as likely to catch an STD! |
Yep, that is them.
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 3:36 am |
|
Not all of them are like that though,
Also a lot of them believe abstinance should be taught alongside contraception. Here in the UK there is only teaching about contraception, and they never mention abstinance, which is just as bad.
I think the part about gays serving and people disagreeing is the shower room or something like that. I wouldn't like to shower with someone gay. Not saying they shouldn't be in the services, just that I would find it not great.
((I personally don't think lesbians are sexy, but a lot of guys I know do.))
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 3:58 am |
|
Again, it's simply a don't ask, don't tell situation.
Nobody's said anything about discriminating against Gays, I'm against bringing sex into the process in ANY way. Why should anyone, straight or gay, bring it up? They won't ask you, you don't tell them.
That goes for both sides.
|
|
|
purple_kathryn
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 91
Location: Belfast
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 7:58 am |
|
In the UK where gay people can openly serve in the military there have been no cases where this has been a problem or an issue.
Humans have a hell of lot of growing up to do.
|
|
|
madlilnerd
Duchess of Dancemat
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 5885
Location: Slough, England
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 9:13 am |
|
/\ amen to that
|
|
|
Alucard
Vampire
Joined: 06 Nov 2004
Posts: 2780
Location: Caaaaaanada
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 9:14 am |
|
| purple_kathryn wrote: | In the UK where gay people can openly serve in the military there have been no cases where this has been a problem or an issue.
Humans have a hell of lot of growing up to do. |
I agree
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:08 am |
|
| madlilnerd wrote: |
Are repuplicans the annoying lot who encourage abstinance and hate abortion? Because people like that really annoy me. |
| madlilnerd wrote: | | Stereotyping is the divider of worlds. Star trek has taught me that on more than one occasion....so I learnt not to judge others from that too. |
It may just be me, but that quote seems an awful lot like stereotyping, seeing as how you are throwing a whole political party into one generalization as "the lot who encourage abstinence and hate abortion".
ster�e�o�type (stĕr'ē-ə-tīp', st�r'-) pronunciation
n.
1. A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image.
2. One that is regarded as embodying or conforming to a set image or type.
|
|
|
Zeke Zabertini
Captain
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 4832
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:27 am |
|
LightningBoy does have a point; I just don't think it's a realistic one. Anyone who thinks sexuality doesn't factor into the military... hasn't been in the military. Of course I heaven't either, but I know plenty of people who have. I just don't see why it should be a big problem. I know several male and female homosexuals perwsonally; and I don't think of them any differently than anyone else.
|
|
|
Captain Patrick
Commodore
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2421
|
| Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:32 am |
|
I think that the milarty should really not care about your sexual Preferences are as long as it does not create a problem. They should be glad that you want to serve for your country.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
