NOVEMBER 22, 2009
   Login or create a new account  ?
Join Washington Blade on FacebookJoin Washingtonblade on MyspaceJoin Washington Blade on Twitter!
MORE INFO
John Shields is a local writer and can be reached at Captain_Shields@me.com.
RELATED STORIES
Still serving in silence
12,000 flags on National Mall to honor those expelled under ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’

‘Don’t Ask’ is our fault?
Angry Clinton points fingers, revises history in Netroots outburst

‘Don’t Ask’ is our fault?
Angry Clinton points fingers, revises history in Netroots outburst

 
MOST VIEWED
 
Seize the moment
End military’s gay ban because courage is what counts on the battlefield, not sexual orientation

HOME > VIEWPOINT > EDITORIAL

Mar 13, 2009  |  By: John Shields  | COMMENTS      Printer Friendly Version

JUST BECAUSE THE flight engineers joke with you because you don’t date women doesn’t mean you have to leave the military,” my squadron commander said to me in June 1990.

I told him that wasn’t the only reason I needed to leave. I “figured out” I was gay while in the military and the institution’s gay ban precluded me from even displaying a photo of a partner on my desk.

That was more than two years before Bill Clinton was elected president, promising to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military — and the day I submitted my papers to resign my officer’s commission.

That was also two months before Saddam Hussein rolled his tanks into Kuwait. Months later came Operation Desert Shield, followed by Desert Storm, followed by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
And “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” didn’t exist.

I was what they refer to as the “top of the pyramid,” training and evaluating aircrew members in what was called “The Purple Force,” an elite special operations unit comprised of members from across the military spectrum. We were testing GPS systems while most Americans barely knew what a mobile phone was. We were readying the United States military to fight the wars of the 21st century.

Back to reality: According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was enacted in 1993, more than 12,500 service members have been discharged from the United States military for being gay or lesbian.

Bill Clinton’s inauguration brought feelings of good will from many gays, partly because of his promise to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military. He forgot one thing, a concept from the ancient Chinese strategist Sun Tzu: Keep your friends close, and your enemies even closer.
Clinton’s good intentions were torpedoed by the likes of then-Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) and then-chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell.

Both Nunn and Powell now say the United States should “revisit” “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” That’s Washington-speak for “We screwed up, it should be rescinded.”

WHERE DOES THAT leave us today? Shorthanded and out-manned by our own bigotry and prejudice. Nations from Argentina to Great Britain and Colombia to Australia have found that gays serving openly in the military do not, in any way, compromise unit integrity or the mission.
Numerous studies have concluded that gays and lesbians openly serving do not undermine unit readiness, troop morale or national security.

I sometimes wonder, as I watch and write the news, if Sept. 11, 2001, would have happened if the Pentagon would have allowed the dozens of gay and lesbian translators in the military do their jobs, openly and proudly. Experts, including those on the 9/11 Commission, have identified the shortage of Arabic translators as a contributing factor in the failure to thwart the attacks. 

Maybe just one or two of those gay translators could have deciphered the intelligence before terrorists hijacked four aircraft and used them as missiles to take out the World Trade Center towers, a chunk of the Pentagon and kill thousands. We will never know, as they were discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

AND NOW THE Obama administration is considering a “study” to analyze whether the law should be overturned. It is the only federal or state law that requires employers to fire employees for being openly gay or lesbian.

We have fought this fight — there is no need for contemplation or for a “study.” Most Americans agree, as do most members of the United States military that the policy is outdated and must go. One Washington Post poll shows 75 percent support a repeal. It does not matter what the sexual orientation is of our fighting men and women — it’s what they bring to the fight. Courage, honor, integrity and bravery are what count.

It is time to end this. Enough is enough. Not after we get the economy back on its feet, not after we
end conflicts across the planet, not when a sensible health care policy is enacted.

I’m not suggesting the Obama administration tackle this nightmare in the next few months. But waiting until 2010 (another election year) is a recipe for a political disaster.

SLDN says there is a “window of opportunity later this year” for the Obama administration to end the ban. I would suggest the administration seize this opportunity and make good on its promise.

Traditions, whether right or wrong, are steered like battleships — over time.

It is time to steer this particular battleship. It is time to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” And it’s time to let service members, straight or gay, place a picture of a loved one on their desk, whether stationed in a foreign land, or in an office at the Pentagon.

It is time to end this. Otherwise, we are only fighting ourselves.



email       password


Please review and follow Washington Blade’s current Comment and Discussion Policy. Guidelines updated as of August 22nd, 2009. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Sanchez
Laurel, Md
0
As the economy worsens and if the ban is lifted, the last thing we need is a bunch of femmie twinks running around base so they can watch the guys and get a paycheck. We're talking about our Nation's security. Commission a study, and let's see where it goes...

Posted 3/13/09 - 7:12 PM


jeri .
0
the DADT policy is a national disgrace. period. discrimination is always wrong. disrespect and discharge our heroes, no matter how exemplary their service, solely because they are gay? shame on Congress, and shame on the American people for allowing this to continue. you support our service men and women who sacrifice on behalf of our nation...unless they are gay? shame on you all...especially you, sanchez.

Posted 3/13/09 - 10:26 PM


leocorb
0
Sanchez, hmmm, if I were a bigot like you I might say, "Is that an American name? Perhaps we should commission a study of whether Hispanics are loyal to America. Did you know a Spanish accent could be misunderstood in battle and get someone killed?" Luckily I am not narrow-minded like you. I've met some gays and lesbians who I am sure you would not want to meet in a dark alley. Get with the 21st century and realize that LGBT are everywhere. Your characterization of us as "a bunch of femmie twinks" is so out of step with the times. Come out of your closet. I'm asking, go ahead and tell.

Posted 3/13/09 - 11:49 PM


Equalnotspecial
Sonoma, Ca
0
Studies have been done, books have been written, military leaders have admitted there is no excuse for this publicly funded discrimination. Its existence only serves to perpetuate the stigmatization of gay people. There will never be a convenient time for homophobes to grant equal treatment under the law.

Posted 3/14/09 - 9:55 AM


Ye Olde Fart
Phoenix
0
You are right, it's courage that matters on the battlefield, not sexual orientation. But, some people worry about what happens in the barracks. I don't think it's a valid issue, but it is nonetheless an issue.

Posted 3/14/09 - 11:29 AM


ffejretsof
san francisco, Ca
0
Bravo Captain John. The military needs more men and women like you. DADT is a complete policy failure with more gay and lesbian service members being kicked out than ever before. As for this Sanchez person, I know a lot of gay military people who would like to show you just how femmie they are. You sir, would get you ass kicked!

Posted 3/14/09 - 8:27 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Given Sanchez' unbelievable homophobic statement (i.e., referring to servicemen as "femmie twinks"), I think he should be renamed, "Phyllis Schlafly." From now on Sanchez, I am going to refer to you as Phyllis. Anyone else want to join me?

Posted 3/15/09 - 4:45 PM


jeri .
0
LOL, count me in WJF.

Posted 3/15/09 - 4:55 PM


Doctor Whom
0
http://heterodoxhomosexual.blogspot.com/2009/03/dont-ask-dont-tell.html

Posted 3/16/09 - 2:15 PM


Doctor Whom
0
P.S. My partner was in the military, and I'd very much like to see you call him a femmie twink to his face.

Posted 3/16/09 - 3:30 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Part 5 (Sanchez continued) So Sanchez, I repeat what I have said before: since the Blade so offends your dogmatic principles, stop read it. Turn your attention to Concerned Women of America and Focus on the Family. Start posting to website supportive of Phyllis Schlafly, Rush Limburgh and Ann Coulter.

Posted 3/16/09 - 4:29 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Part 4 (Sanchez continued): And all of the above is just from one issue of the Blade! To quote from the New Testament, “you very words convict you.” You consistently oversimplify and overgeneralize issues. Attack is the solace of the weak mind. Your comments are of those who hate us, speaking of “special rights” and numerous and repeated homophobic pronouncements.

Posted 3/16/09 - 4:30 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Part 3 (Sanchez continued): Nine: Regarding the explosion of HIV in the District, you state that people who get it, desire it and report that you went to the Crew Club last Saturday to do “research” on people practicing unsafe acts. So, just from the above, you disparage women, transgender persons, gays and lesbians serving in the armed forces, gay and lesbians who want to marry, Gay Pride, Ashton Kutcher, President Obama (“The Messiah” as you refer to him), the appointment of openly gay and lesbian people to the new Administration, Rep. Jared Polis, and those who contract HIV.

Posted 3/16/09 - 4:30 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Part 2 (Sanchez continued): Seven: You criticize the reporting of a lesbian to the Obama Administration as unimportant. Eight: Transsexuals have earned a special place for your distain with comments like “if you don’t like what God and nature gave you between your legs and (sic) change it with your YOUR bucks, not mine;” you defend the attack on transgender persons as the natural reactions to “freaks of nature.” Eight: While the community is proud that Rep. Jared Polis joins Congress as another out member, you compare him to “wide-stance” Larry Craig.

Posted 3/16/09 - 4:31 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Part 1: Sanchez: you are the poster child for anger management. Let’s review your posts, JUST in the current issue of the Blade. One: You refer to women as “twats,” and gay service men as “femmie twinks.” Two: You ridicule California’s gay marriage initiative, hoping that the California Supreme Court sustains Proposition 8. Three: You ridicule Ashton Kutcher's support for GLBT people implying that he must be gay. Four: You consistently attach the management of the Blade. Five: You defend Vermont Governor’s opposition of gay marriage. Six: You attached gay pride as a “freak show.”

Posted 3/16/09 - 4:31 PM


Sanchez
Laurel, Md
0
wjf: As I wrote in an earlier post, I'm impressed. I agree with that guy, Sanchez. Would you like to join his fan club? You seem to be an avid supporter and know all his talking points. Would you care to be his press secretary? He could use a reliable spokesperson who totes the party line correctly. Occasionally, you'll need to bring him coffee, but the pay is great!! Would you like an interview? Clothes are optional.

Posted 3/16/09 - 7:19 PM


Sanchez
Laurel, Md
0
Doctor Whom: My partner was in the military, too. 20 years, and is now retired. His superiors gave him no flak about his sexuality because he acts like a man. Those who act risky attract attention, and that's what would be potentially damaging to unit morale, cohesion, and our Nation's security. DADT should stand, with subtle changes. Period.

Posted 3/16/09 - 7:23 PM


leocorb
0
Phew! Sanchez is going kind of Klinger on us -- perhaps trying for a section 8.

Posted 3/16/09 - 11:14 PM


leocorb
0
Let's get this thread back on track. It is about DADT! That IS serious stuff. It has been established that Sanchez has no credibility. So what do we do to ensure DADT is history?

Posted 3/16/09 - 11:24 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Leocorb: I absolutely agree that DADT is very serious. Sanchez/Phyllis (Schlafly) is becoming such a distraction that he had to be dealt with, and hopefully marginalized (I have no illusions that my one post will succeed). Regarding DADT, Nathaniel Frank has just released, "Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America." Dr. Frank is a Brown-educated historian and is considered an expert regarding this important issue to our community. Unlike 1993, the country has a better appreciation for the contributions of gay service men and woman.

Posted 3/17/09 - 8:00 AM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez / Phyllis (Schlafly): what a stupid, bigoted post regrading DADT! Your comments are full of hateful, homophobic assumptions (e.g., "acts like a real man"). Follow the websites of Concerned Women for America or Focus on the Family since their principles are much more consistently with your own. The Blade is about advancing the rights of the GLBT community, which obviously you don't support.

Posted 3/17/09 - 8:52 AM


jeri .
0
i just KNEW you had a husband phyllis! i mean sanchez - i know, you are afraid of letting people know who you are...poor child! why don't you go get a pedicure? that is what i do when i get upset. I find it relaxes me. and you need to get off these blogs. they aren't helping you. you just don't think the way other people do. you're causing a distraction and getting hysterical. please, PLEASE, see a mental health counselor? maybe you can get back to being your sweet self, and let serious people discuss the serious issues. ta-ta dear. and oh, DADT is a national disgrace.

Posted 3/17/09 - 9:40 AM


Sanchez
Laurel, Md
0
leocorb: DADT IS serious stuff. It's about our national security. If we fail to adequately protect it, then we have nothing. Open gays in the military will be at a minimum a distraction, and at worst, a major contributor to lack of discipline and cohesiveness. Open gays will be subjected to barrack/alley beat-ups by those who resent them being there. The military doesn't attract open-minded, liberal thinking people. The enlisted corps attracts largely hardened, street-smart people with, at best, a high school diploma. Contention & distraction will prevail; wrong for the USA.

Posted 3/17/09 - 6:07 PM


leocorb
0
Gays in the military don't frighten me. It seems that the military has another REAL issue to deal with - straight guys in the armed forces. It seems that assaults by straight men on female soldiers is a real issue (and currently on the rise) and the good o'le boys in charge just don't want to be told about it I guess you can be an ostrich, rapist, but not gay. There is a pattern here that must be broken. The military MUST be a reflection of the best attributes of our nation or we run the risk of empowering those who don't have a place in our civil society. DADT is corrosive to civil society

Posted 3/19/09 - 12:23 AM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 4: Outside of outright bigotry, there is no reason to continue the ban against gays and lesbians serving openly in the U.S. military. Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) , I know that it is a challenge for you, but we make our decisions based on fact and reason, not mindless prejudice. As I have recommended before, Dr. Nathaniel Frank has just authored an excellent book on this important issue titled, “Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America.”

Posted 3/19/09 - 10:20 AM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 3: Of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, two (United Kingdom and France) allow gays and lesbians to serve. Countries that do not allow gays to serve openly are China, and Russia; certainly these countries would not be our model for social policy. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that allows gays and lesbians to serve openly. Again, these countries have had no difficulty incorporating gays and lesbians into their military.

Posted 3/19/09 - 10:21 AM


Truth Monger
0
It's not the same thing you homophobic *?&@! scumbag. As always you miss the BIG picture and know not what you talk about. You thrive on posting anything that may demoralize or condemn GLBT Americans. I hate you for it. Since the  Blade won't do anything about your incessant attacks on this community, I think you're fair game to all of us.As for your statement, Homosexuals have few places where they can go and be themselves without being judged while heterosexuals have the world! Gay bars are one of those few places. Homophobes come to gay bars deliberately looking for trouble and have been doing so for decades! We don't go to str8 bars and make fun of them for being str8 either like they do to us. This is one incident where gay people fought back by "invading" a str8 bar for a change! Good for them. Heteros can be themselves without prejudice in our bars but we're not welcome to do the same in theirs? Hell....NO! It's high time they get to know what it feels like to us and learn to deal with it the way the expect us to do in our bars.

Posted 3/19/09 - 10:21 AM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 1: Your arguments against allowing gay and lesbians to serve openly in the military were the very arguments made against admitting blacks and women in the U.S. military. After these bans were lifted, the armed services had no problem incorporating either group. There is no reason to believe that this would not be the case for gays and lesbians. We are fortunate to have excellent comparative data from other countries that support the acceptance of gays and lesbians into the U.S. military.

Posted 3/19/09 - 10:21 AM


leocorb
0
Sanchez & wjf, was it your intention to hijack a serious discussion of DADT with your personal catfight? Are you working for Rush & the RNC? Perhaps the Blade should limit the frequency of posts. Meanwhile DADT continues to be another vehicle of institutionalized hatred supported by religious extremists, right wing nut cases, and other bigots. It IS time to give equal treatment to the LGBT community.

Posted 3/19/09 - 11:00 PM


Spacer
Spacer
Spacer

Washington Blade Window Media CONTACT US: E-mail | Masthead | Location and Directions
© 2009 | A Window Media LLC Publication | Privacy Policy
Advertise with us!