Posted on 01/02/2007 4:12:33 PM PST by RetiredArmy
General Shalikashvili: Let Gays Serve in Military
The Army general who was Joint Chiefs chairman when the Pentagon adopted its "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays says he no longer opposes allowing them to serve openly.
John Shalikashvili, who retired in 1997 after four years as the nation's top military officer, had argued that allowing homosexuals to serve openly would hurt troop morale and recruitment and undermine the cohesion of combat units. He said he has changed his mind after meeting with gay servicemen.
"These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers," Shalikashvili wrote in an opinion piece in Tuesday's New York Times.
His view could carry weight at a time when advocates of lifting the restriction on gay service members argue that the military - under the strain of fighting two wars - can ill-afford to exclude any qualified volunteers. It's not clear, however, how much enthusiasm Congress will have for pressing the matter. The current policy, based on legislation passed by Congress in 1993 after a firestorm of debate, states that gays and lesbians may serve in the military only if they keep their sexual orientation private.
Commanders may not ask, and gay service members may not tell. Over the years thousands have been dismissed under this policy.
Shalikashvili is not the first former senior military officer to change his mind about gays in the military, though he is perhaps the most prominent. John Hutson, a retired two-star Navy admiral who was the Navy's top lawyer, said Tuesday he thinks the nation has undergone so much cultural change over the past decade that allowing gays to serve openly in the military would enhance rather than weaken the cohesion of fighting units.
"I think it will absolutely happen," Hutson said in a telephone interview, but probably not during the Bush administration.
Shalikashvili said he expects fierce debate over gays in the military this year as Congress considers President Bush's call for expanding the size of the Army, which is stretched thin by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Shalikashvili cautioned, however, against pushing for repeal of the ban early in the new Congress, which he said should be focused on urgent priorities like developing a better strategy in Iraq and healing divisions over the war.
"Fighting early in this Congress to lift the ban on openly gay service members is not likely to add to that healing and it risks alienating people whose support is needed to get this country on the right track," he wrote in the Times article.
In explaining his shift on the issue, Shalikashvili also cited a new Zogby poll, commissioned by the Michael D. Palm Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara, of 545 U.S. troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. It reported that three quarters said they were comfortable around gay men and lesbians.
The poll, published in December, also said 37 percent opposed allowing gays to serve openly, while 26 percent said they should be allowed and 37 percent were unsure or neutral. Of those who said they were certain that a member of their unit was gay or lesbian, two-thirds did not believe it hurt morale.
C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, an advocate for gay rights, called Shalikashvili's article "enormously significant." Osburn said it reflects a growing trend of military leaders supporting repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
If he never served as an enlisted man then I don't care what he thinks on this issue. Last I looked Officers, especially General grade, typically have fairly nice, private digs...
How would you know all this, evening star?
"These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers," Shalikashvili wrote in an opinion piece in Tuesday's New York Times.
So his conversations with gays made him decide that straights would accept them?
Somehow that doesn't make sense to me.
There are gays already serving in the military no matter what does and what doesn't happen on this issue.
FWIW -
In his most powerful statements to date on issues involving sexual morality, Pope Benedict XVI said homosexuals end up destroying themselves so the Church has a duty to speak out on moral issues that affect the very spiritual and physical lives of man.
"In seeking to emancipate himself from his body (from the 'biological sphere'), [man] ends up by destroying himself," the pope told cardinals, archbishops, bishops and members of the Roman Curia last week in a traditional meeting overlooked by most of the world's press.
I do care, but don't ask don't tell seems to be a lot better than what is being suggested Shalikashvili. I guess he is a Bill Clinton fan.
If gays are "allowed to serve" , then everyone who registers as "gay" will have a way to attack disciplinary procedures in the service for prejudicial reasons.As amatter of fact, how would anyone prove they were gay? That means we would create a whole new class of soldier, one whose duty is sometimes avoidable.
I think that there should be a gay test for all military personnel, but short of an outright admission, there just is no relaible test that I know of yet. That is the problem. So don't ask, don't tell, and the classification of homosexuality as a disorder by the military is what we are left with.In that sense, I do not care what a soldiers sexuality is, as long as duty is done.
"...even their women turned against God's natural plan for them and indulged in sex sin with each other.
And the men, instead of having a normal sex relationship with women, burned with lust for each other, men doing shameful things with other men..."
Romans 1:26,27 (Living Bible)
Over hill, over dale
As we sodomites hit the trail,
And the Caissons go rolling along.
In and out, hear them shout,
Counter thrust and butt about,
And the Caissons go rolling along.
Then it's hi! hi! hee!
In the field sexually,
Shout out your numbers loud and strong,
For where e'er you go,
You will always know
That the Sodomites go rolling along.
In the storm, in the night,
Erection left or erection right
See those Caissons go rolling along
Limber front, limber rear,
Prepare to mount your cannoneer
And those Sodomites go rolling along.
Then it's hi! hi! hee!
In the field sexually,
Shout out your numbers loud and strong,
For where e'er you go,
You will always know
That the Sodomites go rolling along.
Was it high, was it low,
Where the hell did that queer go?
As those Sodomites go rolling along
Was it left, was it right,
Now we won't get some tonight
And those Sodomites go rolling along.
Then it's hi! hi! hee!
In the field sexually,
Shout out your numbers loud and strong,
For where e'er you go,
You will always know
That the Sodomites go rolling along.
That the Sodomites go rolling along.
That the Sodomites go rolling along.
The general sees no problem with fruits in the military. He doesn't have to deal with it now. He doesn't live in that neighborhood any more.
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding-there's a post that cuts to the heart of the matter. We already make enormous accomodations for females in the ranks, God only knows what we would have to do to accomodate open homosexuals. Right now the policy encourages people to control their sexuality, a change in policy would remove that constraint.
It is why I am proud to be an American. We are not on that list.
Now, that's funny!
I can't stand to even read why he thinks this is a good thing. I'm sick of the "gay" agenda. It's time to bring back closets.
No, it's not normal. No, it's not natural. Nope, not inborn. Yes, they can change if they want to. Yes, they can and should control their urges. No, they shouldn't teach kids, adopt kids, foster kids, or have kids by hi-tech conception methods. No, they should not be allowed to marry or have domestic partner benefits.
Yes, people should be allowed to refuse to rent to them, hire them, and they should not allowed in the armed services. They should not be allowed to practice sodomy in parks and other public places. And anyone should be allowed to criticize homosexual practices and propaganda without fear of legal action.
It's also a matter of critical mass. As more and more gays assert themselves, fewer heterosexuals will be interested in military careers. If the military becomes a welcoming home for homosexuals, before long there will be a much larger percentage of gays in the military than are in the population at large. Somehow, I don't think that would be good for the military or the United States.
spewed beer up my nose on that one..............lmao
It appears that homosexuality may be a chemical imbalance that can be cured!
-- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1760458/posts--
"-Scientists are conducting experiments to change the sexuality of “gay” sheep in a programme that critics fear could pave the way for breeding out homosexuality in humans.-"
Gen. Patton would just unload a six-shooter into him.
Countries that ban homosexual people from the military
* Belarus
* Brazil
* Croatia
* Cuba
* Egypt
* Greece
* Iran
* Latvia
* North Korea
* Peru
* Portugal
* Saudi Arabia
* Syria
* Venezuela
* Yemen
Countries with other policies
* The United States of America has a highly controversial "don't ask, don't tell" policy, introduced during the Clinton administration and maintained through the Bush administration.
* In Russia, those alleged to have "sexual identity problems" are to be drafted only during wartime. "Well adjusted gays" are permitted to serve in a normal capacity.
You don't feel camaraderie with Australia, Israel, Poland, the United Kingdom?
His opinion is politically based, and therefore, it's crap.
Discipline, good order, and morale all say that gays should not be a part of the military.
And biology is definitely on the side of absolute prohibition...not just, don't ask/don't tell.
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.