Lesbian sgt. discharged after police tell military

hosted. ^ | Mar 13

[JoeProBono]

Jene Newsome played by the rules as an Air Force sergeant: She never told anyone in the military she was a lesbian. The 28-year-old's honorable discharge under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy came only after police officers in Rapid City, S.D., saw an Iowa marriage certificate in her home and told the nearby Ellsworth Air Force Base.

Newsome and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a complaint against the western South Dakota police department, claiming the officers violated her privacy when they informed the military about her sexual orientation. The case also highlights concerns over the ability of third parties to "out" service members, especially as the Pentagon has started reviewing the 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" law.

"I played by 'don't ask, don't tell,'" Newsome told The Associated Press by telephone.

[TChad]

I guess if we just ignored all criminal activity it will just go away or never effect the rest of society. /s

Oh, it's going to be one of those threads.

[Cvengr]

Actually, for regular officers and enlisted , it was required to request permission to marry, at least in the 50;s and early 60s. I don;t know what the status is now.

[Cvengr]

Yes, one of those threads which support the rule of law and not ignoring perverted criminal behavior. If perverts want to ignore their criminal behavior, just like a murderer ignores his criminal behavior, they can still be hunted down and prosecuted for their criminal behavior.

The only thing sicker than their thinking is the inaction by those who condone and encourage their behavior as though it were an alternative mindset.

[Mr. Lucky]

You’re reading more into this than you should.
If the officers attempting to serve the warrant had discovered that the woman had been married to a man serving in the military, would it have been OK for them to contact the husband’s superior for help in finding the fugitive?

[heye2monn]

Thank you. I’d glad that you think that allowing gays to openly serve in the military is a terrible idea.

But I fear that some will want to throw the baby out with the bathwater because of media sob stories like this.

[Semper Mark]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2024261/posts

This thread, and I’ll send you another one, will help.

[Semper Mark]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1555762/posts

[Raider Sam]

How do we know she conducted herself honorably in the service? Have her records come available?

I do like the dynamics of this story though - a black lesbian living in South Dakota. Hollywood couldnt write that.

[Raider Sam]

It wasnt a third party outing. If they were lesbians with no “marriage” and someone said she was gay, they would have to prove it.

Here, the license proves it. The license is what outed her, and it probably has her signature on it.

[Semper Mark]

Thanks!

Thank you for your service to this country.

[ansel12]

[PapaBear3625]

In their sob stories about downtrodden gays, the media rarely explains why the laws were put into place. They fail to inform us why putting men (or female-craving lesbians) in women’s barracks is not a good idea. And why putting women (or homosexuals) in men’s barracks is not a good thing, either.

It's also not a good idea to be in combat with somebody who you have sexually rejected, in an environment where everybody's lives depend on each other.

[PapaBear3625]

If the officers attempting to serve the warrant had discovered that the woman had been married to a man serving in the military, would it have been OK for them to contact the husband’s superior for help in finding the fugitive?

More to the point, they would consider it a good idea to inform the base CO that one of his people was living with a fugitive, which would have base security implications.

[dools007]

I had a mixed reaction to this story. However, the Air Force sergeant was not cooperating with the police who were trying to apprehend her partner for theft.

Essentially “don’t ask, don’t tell” requires homosexuals to keep their sexual preference private. As long as they do that no foul, no harm.

In this case, the sergeant effectively breached the privacy pact when she refused to cooperate with the police. Ergo, she was obstructing justice and possibly harboring a fugitive. These are crimes for which she could be arrested. I doubt she could have kept her “marriage” secret in the course of a police investigation and that would have exposed her homosexuality.

And she had to know she was shacked up with an outlaw or she would not have impeded the police. I’m comfortable with the AF decision to discharge the woman. She was a security problem waiting to happen.

[heye2monn]

“It’s also not a good idea to be in combat with somebody who you have sexually rejected, in an environment where everybody’s lives depend on each other.”

Excellent point.

[Mr. Lucky]

Good point.

[fwdude]

The fact that this dyke has the gall to call on the forces of the Anti-American ACLU as her first line of defense tells me all that I need to know about her. She is anti-American, an enemy to the USA, and definitely doesn't belong in the military.

And I also agree that a fake "marriage" license IS a public declaration that one is homosexual.

[DMG2FUN]

I have no problem with booting out perverted homosexuals. This is a lifestyle choice these people make. They are not born that way. Because if they were every other disgusting lifestyle choice can defend their lifestyles.