NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/personal/26842

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-28 | 5.3 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!rtech!sgiblab!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi.oar.net!hyperion!desire.wright.edu!mwheeler
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: alt.personals
Subject: Re: Gays in the Military
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 27 Jan 93 22:14:05 EST
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization:  Wright State University
Lines: 95

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Andrew  Infante) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> nobody writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>>|> I was wondering.....how do the people feel about Gays in the Military?  I mean
>>|> I have my views about the issue but, I was wondering what others think.
>>|>
>>|> Teg
>>
>>Funny, we were just wondering what you think!  What I mean is, shouldn't you
>>say first what you think about it before asking us?  But anyway, here is my
>>opinion.
>>
>>Here are some of the problems I see arising.  How would a heterosexual male
>>feel about sharing the showers with a homosexual?  How would a homosexual feel
>>about it?  Would there be punishments for gays harassing men?  Would the gays
>>be safe, considering that homophobia is pretty strong in the military?
>
> How abouthaving _four_ types of showers rather than two (male/female),
> i.e. gay males anf females and straight males and females.  With all the
> money that the military gets, I'd think that they could hire consultants
> to work out the bugs quite efficiently so that there wouldn't be such
> rampant hate going around.
>
>>
>>The bottom line is: the military's purpose is defence.  Would its efficiency
>>be affected by admitting gays, because of the problems this would generate?
>>Can a country take such a risk with its defence system?
>
> Why would it generate problems.  The only problems would be those already in
> straight peoples's minds.  I just saw on CNN a straight army man who
> was being interviewed about his views on gays in the military and his
> ignorance was absurd.  He had concerns about blood.  About having to take
> orders from a gay man (or woman).  Why does it matter if a gay man or
> a straight woman are commanders?  I have yet to see nay women with these
> paranoias.  As for blood, how about mandatory testing, say, once a month,
> like most homosexuals already do.  But, doesn't the military already
> test soldiers extensively.  I would hope so.  Especially with them
> all coming back from third world countries that do not have vaccinations for
> diseases that haven't existed in this country for decades.
>
>>
>>Basically, I agree that gays should be admitted in the military.  There is
>>even a precedent since women are admitted.  But that's an idealistic measure,
>>and I can see the point of those who oppose it.  And maybe the world is just
>>not ready for this yet.  Maybe other changes have to come first to prepare
>>our society for it.
>>
>>--
>>Dan Perl    [phone]
>>Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa
>
> the world may not be ready for it, but it better get ready.  What kind of
> problems do other countries have?  I've yet to see anyone post from
> other countries about their rampant homophobia (maybe 'cause it doesn't exist)
>
> Anyone there?
>
> l
>
> a

 There is a very good discussion of this issue in "U.S.A. Today" (1/27/93).
Some of the problems discussed is the SO of the military, Would he or she
qualify for dependant status and benfits? How will the governmnet support all
of the AIDS cases at military hospitals? As far as the blood tests go. Once
every 2 years is current policy. If this is changed to once a month or even
once every 6 months, who would pay for it? We are talking big bucks here.
What if gays qualify as a minority, would they then get preferential (sp?)
treatment such as hiring and promotion?

Since the policy change is coming the government is seeking the answers to
these questions. Also the military is now all volunter, and those that don't
like the new policy can always get out. Gen. Powell has indicated that he will
do so. Many of our best troops and leaders may also resign. We may end with
an all or majority gay military.

The Defense Department has said that it may differentiate between ORIENTATION
and actual CONDUCT. The ban against gays is POLICY and can and will be changed.
The ban against conduct is LAW and can only be changed by an act of Congress.
It is  against the law (Uniform Code of Military Justice) for any member of the
military to engage in Sodomy (as defined by Congress to include anal
intercourse and ORAL SEX  by  homosexuals or hetrosexuals, married or not, on
base or off base, on duty or off. I have the feeling that a great number of our
military are breaking the law.

I am a straight member of the military (Army Reserves) and was activated for
Operation Desert Storm. I would feel uncomfortable going into combat with
soldiers that I could not trust throughly. In combat, your life is in your
buddy's hands, and his in yours. If there is antimosity between them there is
likly to "friendly fire" accidents or fraging incidents as in Viet-Nam.

As you can see there are a number of problems that need to be
resolved.  Sorry for the long post, but this is a HOT topic in the military.

Mogan L Wheeler