Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

770 Specialists Discharged for Being Gay
Yahoo ^ | Sun Jun 20, 7:39 PM ET | BETH FOUHY

Posted on 06/21/2004 2:03:44 AM PDT by Finally_done

SAN FRANCISCO - Even with concerns growing about military troop strength, 770 people were discharged for homosexuality last year under the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, a new study shows.

The figure, however, is significantly lower than the record 1,227 discharges in 2001 — just before the invasions of Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Iraq (news - web sites). Since "don't ask, don't tell" was adopted in 1994, nearly 10,000 military personnel have been discharged — including linguists, nuclear warfare experts and other key specialists.

The statistics, obtained from the Defense Manpower Data Center and analyzed by the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military at the University of California, Santa Barbara, offers a detailed profile of those discharged, including job specialty, rank and years spent in the service.

"The justification for the policy is that allowing gays and lesbians to serve would undermine military readiness," said Aaron Belkin, author of the study, which will be released Monday. "For the first time, we can see how it has impacted every corner of the military and goes to the heart of the military readiness argument."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; newbieposting; newbiezot; prisoners; vkpac; youagain; zot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last
To: Finally_done

Does the "journalist" have an opinion?

Sheesh.

Dan


41 posted on 06/21/2004 8:24:01 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EvilEd
Rape, however done, is, of course, rape. But when it's same-sex rape it is ALSO an homosexual act.

The definition of homosexual behavior does not require love and/or reciprocity!

42 posted on 06/21/2004 8:30:58 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Finally_done

What a waste, they should have sent them all into Falluja.


43 posted on 06/21/2004 8:35:29 AM PDT by Delbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob
Why are civilians compelled to entertain and coddle individuals with a well documented mental illness?

You're not. In most states, it is still legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation. Nobody requires you to "entertain" homosexuals, whatever that means.

44 posted on 06/21/2004 8:39:58 AM PDT by Modernman ("I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members" -Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: weegee
College kids at some schools already have unisex bathrooms.

We had that in the dorm at U of Michigan. No big deal, except you could never find a free sink since the chicks were always primping.

45 posted on 06/21/2004 8:41:31 AM PDT by Modernman ("I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members" -Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bobby Chang

Precisely my point.

The military is not some kind of feel good equal right experiment.

And the folks in charge need to take a solid stance on that. If a mission gets jeapardized because of tensions about gays, then somebody has failed. And it becomes self-serving, and defeatist for gays to insist they be allowed some kind of "opportunity".

If they want to do something to contribute, do it here. By insisting they be allowed in uniform, they risk losing the very rights they so desperately say they want to protect.


46 posted on 06/21/2004 8:49:58 AM PDT by djf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: EvilEd; Admin Moderator

Finally_done, is that you?

EvilEd: Since Jun 21, 2004


48 posted on 06/21/2004 9:03:46 AM PDT by weegee (Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them. ~~Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

You are going to drive the guys in our data analysis and statistics unit completely crazy. (a short drive, I admit)
While I am admitting that you have a point, using a behavior-only approach to determine someone's sexuality leads to problems. Is the aforementioned rapist to be labelled as homosexual from now on? (what if it was "rape by instrumentation>?) And if HE is now to be labelled homosexual, what about a (previously) homosexual man who engages in a heterosexual act? Is he straight from now on?

Most "experts" in the field will agree that rape is not a desire-linked crime, but a violence and power-linked crime anyway.
I would think that the whole gays-in-the-military issue would apply to men who are gay most of the time, rather than to part-time homosexual rapists.

My original point was that the men who committed "homosexual" atrocities in Iraq were probably "previously heterosexual". They probably still think of themselves (however wrongly) as heterosexual.
Our armed forces are obviously NOT trained to be a band of rapists, but rather to be honorable defenders of our liberty. It seems obvious that no rapist (gay or otherwise) belongs in our armed forces. Connecting the issues of rape in the military and gays in the military just clouds the issue(s).


49 posted on 06/21/2004 9:06:53 AM PDT by EvilEd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
A person in either of those situations is a high risk for blackmail.

Some suspect that this man changed his tune because he was blackmailed over sexual activities:


50 posted on 06/21/2004 9:07:51 AM PDT by weegee (Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them. ~~Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
Well, when al-Qaeda detonates a nuke in New York City because we had one too few linguists to defuse the plan, I think that will hurt a little bit more than just morale.

I say good riddance. Since homosexuals are <3% of the population, they should be extraordinarily easy to replace for any skill set.

51 posted on 06/21/2004 9:16:41 AM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
Since homosexuals are <3% of the population, they should be extraordinarily easy to replace for any skill set.

Except, of course, the vitally-needed "Combat Hairdresser" MOS...

52 posted on 06/21/2004 10:08:45 AM PDT by Poohbah ("Mister Gorbachev, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!" -- President Ronald Reagan, Berlin, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
The British military scrapped this policy years ago and haven't seen one blip of repercussions from it.

A few points, first, it was the European Court and the British leftist government which scrapped the policy (the Court decided that it breached 'human rights' and the government caved in); secondly, the scrapped policy was not don't ask don't tell' but was an all out ban; and thirdly, the British miltary never complain about things, they are dramatically underfunded, under-supplied, over-worked, over-stretched, and yet they appear perfect, and fight magnificently because they are brilliant.
53 posted on 06/21/2004 10:16:44 AM PDT by tjwmason (A voice from Merry England.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Skwidd

I had rainbow discharge once, but a shot cleared it up pretty quick.


54 posted on 06/21/2004 10:24:42 AM PDT by sharktrager (George Clooney has rubber nipples.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Finally_done

"Finally_done"

You may be finally right...
You ARE done.
Buh bye.


55 posted on 06/21/2004 10:50:28 AM PDT by Darksheare (Even as you read, my tagline army is invading your mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EvilEd
There were instances shown in pictures and films of "fondling" only.

It's still homo-erotic.

Now, concerning the "experts" a survey of rapists was done some time ago and their opinion (mind you it's only an opinion) was they commited rape for strictly sexual purposes.

This business about forcible sex being about power fails to recognize that unless you already have the power you are not likely to do it.

Having some familiarity with "gay" literature I have noticed they spend an awful lot of time contemplating "dominance" and "dominant positions". Might be that homosexuals think of sex in terms of "power", but everybody else thinks of sex as sex.

Concerning a homosexual who "reverts" and commits an heterosexual act, he's still a homosexual. It's kind of like being a little bit pregnant! You "is" or you "ain't". Most of us don't care about what you think either ~ gays could believe themselves to be canaries in cages, but that would have no bearing on what others see them as.

56 posted on 06/21/2004 11:44:13 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

The "experts" I was referring to were specifically from within the Correctional community. Their views are supposedly based on more than what the criminals had to say about it. (Any state's "offender version" file is usually an interesting read, and of course usually has very little bearing on what actually happened.)

The whole business about forcible sex being about power HAS to recognize the having of power. ALL of our rape felons found a way to seize the power to commit rape. ALL of our "internal misconduct" rape cases were because the inmate found a way to seize the power to commit rape.

From what the district attorneys and correctional officers and court appointed experts had to say, none of them would have committed the crime if he hadn't found a way to get access to a victim. (sounds like they were being kind of obvious to me - you can't steal something that you can't get near)

Meanwhile, the problem with using gay "literature" as a source is that it is mostly porn. If we look at the porn on our side of the fence, we find plenty of stuff that advocates bondage, wife-swapping and God knows what else.
I am sure that there are gay men who are not into bondage. (and that there are three or four straight guys who only read Penthouse for the articles) (I really do, Mom! I promise!)

I guess what I am suggesting here is that the most visible homosexuals are usually the ones who are easy to lump in with the rapists. It doesn't seem logical to equate the soldier who keeps his (gay) sex life a secret, and who serves with honor (other than the secret he's keeping), with a rapist who was "heterosexual" up until the day he got a chance to commit an atrocity.

The really scary thing here is in your last line: "... that would have no bearing on what others see them as."

I wonder how many straight men who happen to act a bit effeminate get bashed because of "what others see them as".

(btw, I am NOT suggesting that you would condone bashing)


57 posted on 06/21/2004 12:24:57 PM PDT by EvilEd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: EvilEd
You are trying to "flip" too many phrases to handle your response in just a few words.

However, if we go out and interview a thousand rapists and they tell us they did it for the sex, I'd say there's definitely a trendline there that we ought to pay attention to no matter what the expert facilitators might wish to tell us.

58 posted on 06/21/2004 12:37:01 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: EvilEd

As far as bashing gays because of effeminate behavior, it's not as common as you might believe.


59 posted on 06/21/2004 12:39:02 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Finally_done
Even with concerns growing about military troop strength...

Ah, the first fallacy. Now Air Force members face another upheaval as service leaders trim the force by some 16,000 personnel and reshape it to correct current manning and skill imbalances.

60 posted on 06/21/2004 12:45:10 PM PDT by TankerKC (R.I.P. Spc Trevor A. Win'E American Hero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson