American Legion opposing DADT repeal

Earlier today, I posted the op-ed from Iraq War Vet Patrick Murphy, the House sponsor of DADT repeal, which stated unequivocally that arguments against repeal are "weak and outdated."

Today, the American Legion announced its opposition to repealing DADT in the Defense Authorization bill. No surprise, the group offered those same old "weak and outdated" arguments we've been hearing for years (i.e. we're in two wars and unit cohesion.) Unfortunately, too many members of Congress still believe those arguments. And, of course, the American Legion wants to wait until the Pentagon's study is completed (just like Secretary Gates.)

We knew opponents of repeal were gearing up. The anti-gay forces are always ready for battle. So, it's game on. Next week, we should see repeal votes in the Senate Armed Services Committee and on the floor of the House.

Anticipating the anti-gay onslaught (because it always comes), yesterday, SLDN sent an action alert titled "Push Repeal to the Finish Line." to its members and supporters urging them to call Congress.

At this point, all supporters of DADT repeal should be in battle mode. There's no reason to wait. The other side doesn't hold back -- ever. Now is not the time for advocates (real advocates anyway) to sit around and play an inside game.

So, it's game on. Make your calls. The main switchboard at the Capitol is 202-224-3121. Those on the other side is making their voices heard.

And, I love the first comment to the American Legion's post:

It's not 1948 anymore

It's time to get rid of outmoded thinking. There have been sufficient studies done to show that serving troops are not concenred about someone's sexuality. They're smart enough to know that if someone is doing a good job, then they're doing a good job. Hanging on to DADT serves no credible purpose.

It's not 1948 anymore. Or 1993. Read More...

Servicemembers United criticizes White House, HRC

Signorile interviews Alex Nicholson of Servicemembers United:

A lot of controversy had surrounded HRC regarding what was said to HRC and others in that Feb 1 meeting. Rather than sounding the alarm that the White House was not committed to repeal this year, HRC came out of that meeting still defending the president and confident that repeal would happen. HRC downplayed what was said at that meeting after it was reported on in April.Nicholson, however, said the outcome of the meeting should have been cause for alarm, that the White House has indicated,including at that February 1 meeting, it would be a "passive" supporter of repeal this year:

"Our sense in leaving the meeting was that it was going to be a difficult battle to get them to do what we wanted them to do, and that included putting repeal language in the [Defense] Authorization bill...I certainly left that meeting with the impression that they weren't going to help us.. I left with the impression, honestly, that there was still a realistic chance we could move them if we applied enough pressure...I still believe they were and are still susceptible to pressure, and that's where I've been disappointed in some elements of the community, that that pressure has not been applied."

"I'll say, honestly, first of all, that I don't think HRC has done everything they could have to put pressure the WH. I believe there are some there who believe they have done everything they can...I think there are others who may have other agendas and professional careers and things like that to worry about. I have been begging HRC to scale up their operations on don't ask, don't tell since early last summer...Realistically, I do think there was more they could do earlier this year, and I think there was more they could do last year...I would have loved to have seen the ramping up going on a year ago. You can't build the infrastructure...in a matter of two months...That needed to happen last summer."

Read More...

Rep. Patrick Murphy: arguments supporting DADT are 'are weak and outdated'

The sponsor of the House bill to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell has an op-ed in Politico today. Next week, Murphy will be offering a DADT repeal amendment to the House version of the 2011 Defense Authorization bill.

Murphy is an Iraq Vet and he speaks with authority on military issues. He's the right guy to be leading this battle in the House. The post begins with a scene from his service in Iraq -- and the reality of how DADT impairs the security of our troops and our nation:

It was 138 degrees in summer 2003, as my lead Humvee roared through the middle of Baghdad. I was a captain with the 82nd Airborne. Temperatures and tension ran high.

As we drove through the dusty streets, I kept a vigilant lookout for roadside bombs. Suddenly, we spotted an agitated crowd of Iraqis at a gas station. As our vehicles pulled up, the crowd turned to us with anger in its eyes and began shouting furiously in Arabic. I felt the tightness of fear rise up in my chest as the crowd closed around us.

But we had no clue what they were trying to say.

My paratroopers and I tried to calm them down. I knew I had to control the situation somehow. But the tension mounted. The Iraqis couldn’t understand us, and we couldn’t understand them.

Out of the corner of my eye, I saw my Humvee gunner move his hand to the trigger of his machine gun. The situation was about to explode, and I didn’t know what was going to happen.

America is currently engaged in two wars. Our military is stretched thin. Yet we have removed more than 13,000 honorable men and women — including 60 Arabic speakers — from our armed forces. They were removed from our military’s ranks not for any misconduct but simply because they are gay.

Those are 60 linguists who could be out with our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, helping them avoid situations like the one my men and I found ourselves in. That’s 60 translators who right now could be interpreting intelligence that could prevent the next Sept. 11.

The arguments for keeping the misguided 1993 law that prohibits gays and lesbians from serving openly — known as “don’t ask, don’t tell” — are weak and outdated.

Murphy has been a fierce advocate.

Murphy is doing his part. We all need to help him make this happen: Call your member of Congress at 202-224-3121. They need to hear from our side. Read More...

A letter about DADT to Obama from an Active Duty Marine

Here's the latest letter to the President in SLDN's series, “Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama.” Today's letter is from a Marine who is currently serving his country -- and who wants to keep serving "honestly, openly, and with integrity."

May 21, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

On November 4, 2008, I spent the evening at the Democratic Headquarters of a small town. I watched anxiously as election results poured in from across the nation, nervous and hopeful that enough Americans had believed in the change you promised to bring.

Then it happened. The broadcaster announced that the network was declaring you the winner; the tears welled up in my eyes. Cheers erupted and I turned to hug the person standing closest to me, as we all did.

Balloons and confetti flew, and photographers began snapping pictures. One aimed his camera at me and I turned away. After another attempt, he asked if he could take my picture. I said no. I couldn't risk having my photo appear in a newspaper because I am a Marine, and the person in my arms was my boyfriend.

We had met nearly three years earlier while I was in Marine officer training. He was working in a clothing store near a bar I went to on the weekends. I wanted a reason to stay and talk to him, so I bought a pair of shoes I did not need. We went on our first date the next weekend, and the rest was history. I was later stationed across the country and we flew cross-country to see each other. When I found out I was being deployed, he came with my family to see me off.

It was my first deployment, and I had no idea what to expect. It is a strange feeling to say goodbye to someone you know you might never see again. When have you hugged enough? How do you know when to let go? How many times do you tell them you love them? How do you convince them everything will be fine when you are not sure it will be?

I looked at my mom and dad, my sister and nephews, and my boyfriend, trying to burn their images into my mind so I would not forget them.

As I looked around the parade deck and saw my fellow Marines kissing their wives and girlfriends goodbye, I felt crushed. I could not kiss my boyfriend of two years goodbye. Worse, he was afraid to even stand too close to me for fear of anyone getting the wrong idea. I was willing to risk it out of my love for him, but he – like the rest of my family – feared being responsible for doing or saying anything that could have jeopardized my career.

Several years earlier, sitting in a Marine recruiting office, my recruiter asked me if I was gay. He had been trying to explain DADT to me and was frustrated by how long it was taking. He said it only mattered if I was gay, so he asked. It was the first time I was confronted with DADT, but it would not be the last.

When you ask a straight Marine if he is gay, he says no without hesitation. When you ask a gay Marine, he either lies or cites DADT and declines to answer. You can sacrifice your integrity or invite suspicion.

When I returned from Iraq, I had trouble adjusting to being home. Like many of my fellow Marines, I had trouble reconnecting to my friends and family. I did not know how to relate to my boyfriend. I had trouble being intimate, trouble sleeping, trouble expressing my feelings. Our relationship suffered.

I became depressed, and we grew apart. I could not seek counseling because my relationship with him was against the law. Talking to a counselor about my relationship would have resulted in my own discharge. I suffered alone and in silence.

When he finally left me, I was devastated. My other half – my partner through school, transfer, and deployment – was gone. After four years he had grown tired of living with the shades closed in the apartment, afraid that neighbors would see us sitting beside each other on the couch. My work suffered and my colleagues noticed a difference in me, yet I had no choice but to lie and cover it up, insisting that I was fine.

Every day, gay and lesbian service members suffer and our loved ones suffer. We are forced to lie to our brothers-in-arms and our units suffer. We lie about our relationships, and our families lie to protect us.

The law renders us second-class citizens by prohibiting us from having or forming relationships – the same type of relationships our straight counterparts form that are hailed as vital to the health and success of our Armed Forces.

While they have family housing, family counseling, family readiness officers, and key volunteers, we serve alone. We are denied access to services and support created specifically to help us with family issues and stress – much of which results from the very policy that prohibits us from seeking help in the first place.

The sacrifices gay and lesbian families make just to get through each day are more than most people can even fathom, and we do it in silence. I live every day with the knowledge that I could be fired simply for being honest about who I am. I lie about my loved ones and myself in order to survive.

Still, my sense of duty and patriotism drive me to serve despite the restrictions this law imposes on my family and me.

Please, Mr. President, work with Congress to end this discriminatory law.

Let me serve honestly, openly, and with integrity.

Semper Fidelis,
A U.S. Marine

(The writer is currently serving and unable to identify himself publicly.)

Read More...