foundit66

WASHINGTON (AP) — Even if no one is asking, Army Sgt. Darren Manzella has been telling anyone who'll listen that he's gay — without serious retribution so far from the military. Manzella, a medic who served in Iraq and Kuwait, has acknowledged his sexual orientation in national media interviews and again on Tuesday in a Washington news conference.

"This is who I am. This is my life," said Manzella, who received a combat medical badge for his service in Iraq. "It has never affected my job performance before. I don't think it will make a difference now. And to be honest since then, I don't see a difference because of my homosexuality."

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said Manzella's case demonstrates the military is arbitrarily enforcing its "don't ask, don't tell" policy now that the country is at war.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy prohibits active-duty service members from openly acknowledging whether they are gay or lesbian.

Manzella still could be investigated now that he has left the battlefield. Every time he has said he is gay publicly can be counted as a violation of the policy, one of his attorneys said.

Manzella first told a military supervisor about his sexual orientation in August 2006 while he was stationed at Fort Hood, Texas, and working in division headquarters. Three weeks after Manzella made the revelation, his battalion commander told him an investigation had been closed without finding "proof of homosexuality."

A month later, Manzella was redeployed for the war in Iraq.
The Associated Press: Soldier: Policy on Gays May Be Shifting

It's interesting how the military enforcement of their homosexual exclusion policy, which is typically applied to prohibit gay service in the military, is applied LESS during times of war.
If it's so important for troop cohesion, one would think that it would be needed more in times of war. But the policy is decisively applied LESS during those times.

In the presidential party discussions, the Republican candidates have pretty much all agreed that we should not change our policy in a "time of war".
But one has to question the point in that approach when the military has obviously already made a change, and has historically made this change, during times of war.

__________________
"(Gay marriage) is a debate about whether you think gay people are part of the human condition or just a random fetish."
-- Jon Stewart

foundit66

Furthermore, there is a misconception about the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
Some believe it helps protect gays, and is only used against gays who "out" themselves to the military.
However, this is untrue as our Federal Congress's own research demonstrates....

Research Note Assessing "Homosexuals and U.S. Military Policy: Current Issues," a Congressional Research Service Report for Congress
....
The CRS's current denial of the practice of retaining known gays during wartime is difficult to reconcile with the 1993 Congressional testimony of the report's principal author, which acknowledges this practice. It states, in part: "The situation that arises during a time of deployment place[s] homosexuals in a no-win situation. They are allowed or ordered to serve at the risk of their own lives with the probability of forced discharge when hostilities end if their sexuality becomes an issue. By deploying suspected homosexuals with their units, the services bring into question their own argument that the presence of homosexuals seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission."[7]
....
The CRS report mischaracterizes what "don't ask, don't tell" punishes so as to make the policy seem more tolerant of homosexual identity. The report claims that "don't ask, don't tell" in its statutory form is "based on conduct," while making "no mention of orientation.'" It says that individuals who "choose" to make their sexual identity public will be discharged.[8] The implication is that gay people who opt to conceal their sexual orientation can continue to serve so long as they do not engage in misconduct.

In truth, the current regulations are not based solely on conduct, but also punish people for having a gay or lesbian identity, even if they remain celibate. Those whose homosexual orientation becomes known, i.e. whether or not they choose to reveal it, must be discharged from the military, even if they do not engage in misconduct. Not only are service members discharged simply for saying they are gay, even if such statements are not accompanied by evidence of same-sex sexual conduct, but they are also discharged if, while not choosing to come out, they are outed by other people or by the surfacing of evidence such as romantic photos, letters, etc.[9]

Contrary to the assertion of the CRS report, the law makes clear that it targets people who have a gay or lesbian identity, not just those who engage in homosexual conduct. It stipulates that a service member will be discharged if he or she engages in same-sex sexual conduct unless "such conduct is a departure from the member's usual and customary behavior" and it is "unlikely to recur," i.e. the person is straight.[10] Thus heterosexual people are allowed to engage in same-sex sexual conduct on a one-time basis, while gay people are not only punished for any same-sex sexual conduct, but are banned from service simply for being gay, whether or not they engage in sexual conduct.

By insisting that "don't ask, don't tell" targets conduct, the authors of the CRS report imply that anyone who is fired under the policy has willingly chosen to violate the rules. In reality, many service members are fired because of their sexual identity, even when they have done nothing wrong.
Research Note Assessing "Homosexuals and U.S. Military Policy: Current Issues" | Michael D. Palm Center

And a little bit about what the "Congressional Research Service" is...
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is the public policy research arm of the United States Congress. As a legislative branch agency within the Library of Congress, CRS works exclusively and directly for Members of Congress, their Committees and staff on a confidential, nonpartisan basis.
....
Congress created CRS in order to have its own source of nonpartisan, objective analysis and research on all legislative issues. Indeed, the sole mission of CRS is to serve the United States Congress.
Congressional Research Service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


It is time to end this pointless excuse for prejudice against gays, and allow gays to serve openly in the military like many other modern countries' militaries are doing....

Durga

It's encouraging when we see editorials that point out how ridiculous the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy is. It's UNBELIEVABLE that in 2008 there is even a question why a gay or lesbian person should be allowed to service -- shows us how truly moronic those who are opposed to gays in the military really are.