Military Gays

July 17, 2008

One of our membners has requested that the following news report be posted for PFLAG supporters to read::

Study: Military gays don’t undermine unit cohesion


Associated Press Writer

Congress should repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law because the presence of gays in the military is unlikely to undermine the ability to fight and win, according to a new study released by a California-based research center.

The study was conducted by four retired military officers, including the three-star Air Force lieutenant general who in early 1993 was tasked with implementing President Clinton’s policy that the military stop questioning recruits on their sexual orientation.

“Evidence shows that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline or cohesion,” the officers states.

To support its contention, the panel points to the British and Israeli militaries, where it says gay people serve openly without hurting the effectiveness of combat operations.

Undermining unit cohesion was a determining factor when Congress passed the 1993 law, intended to keep the military from asking recruits their sexual orientation. In turn, service members can’t say they are gay or bisexual, engage in homosexual activity or marry a member of the same sex.

Supporters of the ban contend there is still no empirical evidence that allowing gays to serve openly won’t hurt combat effectiveness.

“The issue is trust and confidence” among members of a unit, said Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis, who retired in 1993 after working on the issue for the Army. When some people with a different sexual orientation are “in a close combat environment, it results in a lack of trust,” he said.

The study was sponsored by the Michael D. Palm Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara, which said it picked the panel members to portray a bipartisan representation of the different service branches. According to its Web site, the Palm Center “is committed to keeping researchers, journalists and the general public informed of the latest developments in the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy debate.” Palm himself was “a staunch supporter of civil rights in the gay community,” the site says.

Two of the officers on the panel have endorsed Democratic candidates since leaving the military — Army Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, who supports Barack Obama, and Marine Corps Gen. Hugh Aitken, who backed Clinton in 1996.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Robert Minter Alexander, a Republican, was assigned in 1993 to a high-level panel established by the Defense Department to examine the issue of gays in the military. At one point, he signed an order that prohibited the military from asking a recruit’s sexual orientation.

Alexander said at the time he was simply trying to carry out the president’s orders and not take a position. But he now believes the law should be repealed because it assumes the existence of gays in the military is disruptive to units even though cultural attitudes are changing.

Further, the Defense Department and not Congress should be in charge of regulating sexual misconduct within the military, he said.

“Who else can better judge whether it’s a threat to good order and discipline?” Alexander asked.

Navy Vice Adm. Jack Shanahan said he had no opinion on the issue when he joined the panel, having never confronted it in his 35-year military career. A self-described Republican who opposes the Bush administration’s handling of the Iraq war, Shanahan said he was struck by the loss of personal integrity required by individuals to carry out “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

“Everyone was living a big lie — the homosexuals were trying to hide their sexual orientation and the commanders were looking the other way because they didn’t want to disrupt operations by trying to enforce the law,” he said.

___


Why Marriage Matters

July 7, 2008

California is a long way from Alamance County–but two parent-members of PFLAG Alamance have posted this message about the significance of legal marriage in California.   If you would like to comment on this posting, email info@pflagalamance.org.  

“Why Marriage Matters– in California and Elsewhere

   “On June 17, 2008, they–two people very dear to us– were legally
married by the clerk of court because their church ceremony in 2005,
like all church weddings, was not a legal ceremony.  Most church
weddings are followed by the couple and their minister and witnesses
doing legal paperwork because everyone knows that the church wedding alone confers no legal rights.
    “Now that they are legally married, they can expect the same legal
rights as other married couples, i.e., the right to make medical
decisions for each other, the right to visit each other in the event
one of them is hospitalized, the right to inherit real property from
each other in the event of death, the right to joint parentage of any
children born to them.  Other rights too numerous to mention in this
short writing are theirs now–but only as long as they are in
California.  No other state in the USA is compelled to recognize their
marriage as a legal union.  Whether their marriage is called a marriage
or a civil union, it is legal only in California because theirs is a
same-sex marriage of two women who are committed to each other as life partners. 
    “Their commitment to each other and to any children either of them
should bear will not be legal in North Carolina, a state that would
recognize without question a heterosexual marriage certificate from any state in the country.  No matter how brilliantly they perform their
daily work in the professions they have chosen, no matter how kind they everyone they meet, no matter how dutifully they obey all the
other laws of NC, their marriage is not legal here–no matter how many
churches recognize their union.
    “Same-sex marriage is not about religious beliefs except in the sense that religious beliefs–notably Christian ones–espouse the Golden Rule to treat others as we would wish them to treat us.  Same-sex marriage is about civil rights and social justice-allowing all people to choose their life partners and conferring on that choice equal rights and responsibilities for all couples.”