[Vision2020] Ex-Generals, Admirals: Repeal Policy on Gays

[Dan Carscallen]

I think you and Bill fail to see my point, Tom.

I don't care if you're gay, straight, bi, questioning, transgender,
whatever.

Clinton started the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, and while it was
relatively more inclusive than the policy before, it's a tad silly.

Were I President (I'd prefer "Benevolent Dictator", or at the very least,
"Illustrious Potentate"), I'd have a "We aren't asking because it really
isn't that big of a deal" policy.  Those who join are there to serve, and I
thank them for that.

DC

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Hansen [mailto:thansen at moscow.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 3:55 PM
To: areaman at moscow.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Ex-Generals, Admirals: Repeal Policy on Gays

Dan Carscallen stated:

"Does it matter?  Gay or straight, they made the supreme sacrifice.  Those 
names belong to Americans. And we honor them."

You fail to understand the spirit of my question, Dan.

My question is not meant to reflect on the nationality or patriotism of 
the 58,195 names as a whole.  They (each and every one of those 58,195 
Americans) gave their final full measure. The purpose of my question is to 
nullify the the ill-conceived "Don't ask. Don't tell." policy of our 
military.

To illustrate my point:

>From "A Soldier's Story" at

----------------------------------------------

A Soldier's Story
Making love while making war

by Scooper

(Dedicated to the memory of the late J. R.)

This is what happened to Russ in Vietnam. On R&R in Saigon, he and a 
beautiful Vietnamese woman fell desperately, and secretly, in love. After 
the madness was over, they would come to America and make a life for 
themselves. But for now, they would meet furtively, rarely, briefly. 
Nobody who knew either of them could know about both, because her brother 
was Vietcong. Technically, they were each sleeping with the enemy.

And then, at their meeting place, she didn't show.

"That one?" said one of his buddies casually, "They say she was killed by 
a mine two weeks ago."

The feeling of a kick in the stomach, the taste of acid on the tongue. And 
he had to hide it, to stay a soldier.

"Here today, gone tomorrow," he shrugged, feeling suddenly like a traitor -
- not to his country, but to her memory and to himself. But if he shared 
his grief with his buddies, they would say it was to his country, and he 
would be dishonorably discharged, at best. So he fought on, silenced about 
what was becoming an incurable wound.

Funny. Here he was depending for his life at times on people he couldn't 
trust. And ready to give his all for those who would turn on him if they 
only knew.

When he got stateside, he didn't try to replace the love he'd lost. The 
singles bar scene was all he wanted, and he went for it with abandon. 
Alcohol and casual sex were his anesthetics for a while. Eventually he 
gave them up, left the service, and settled down to a wife and a tolerable 
job. And though he looked good on the outside, he had two constant 
companions that were slowly killing him. One was depression, and the other 
was the virus he'd picked up during one of those dates after the war.

The story of Russ (not his real name) is true, mostly. Except that his 
lover was not the enemy. His lover was an American pilot who got his name 
put on the big, black wall in Washington for giving "that last full 
measure of devotion" while flying a combat mission in Vietnam.

So, when I think of the people who oppose liberalizing the US military's 
position on gay and lesbian soldiers, I think of Russ and how he suffered 
under that policy. I think about the statistics on homosexuality, and how 
they imply that, along with that of Russ' lover, the names of as many as a 
thousand homosexuals may be written on the Vietnam War Memorial.

Those homosexual soldiers fought, slept, ate, showered, and died as heroes 
alongside heterosexual soldiers. They knew how to handle themselves in all 
those situations. Their heterosexual buddies did not, forcing them to keep 
their secret, most of them to the grave.

Now we Americans are concerned about the effect of gay and lesbian 
soldiers on military morale and discipline. But a thousand names carved in 
stone say that's not a gay soldier's problem. It's a straight soldier's 
problem. People are concerned because that is the nature of homophobia - 
homophobia occurs when straights who have problems with gays try to make 
gays solve those problems for them - even if it's just by keeping their 
homosexuality a secret. A thousand names say the concern is based on 
mythology believed by straights who don't think they know any gay people.

Except for the concern about how the straight soldiers will behave. On the 
other hand, gay bashing is another form of sexual harassment, an area that 
the military needs to deal with anyway, as shown by the Tailhook scandal.

So, I think we should move forward on the legalization of gay and lesbian 
soldiers. Doing so will take courage and self-discipline, and a sense of 
security in our own sexuality. It will take, as a soldier might put 
it, "balls."

----------------------------------------------

So, you see, Dan.  Labeling them "Americans" is fine.  The label suggests 
infinite equality.  That equality must be enforced not only while in 
uniform, but forever after discharge; from the wedding chapels of San 
Diego, California to the hospitals of Bangor, Maine; from the court rooms 
of Anchorage, Alaska to the classrooms of Miami, Florida.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho





---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.com/