The end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is quickly approaching. On September 20th the repeal and certification process officially is complete and the sexuality that a person is born will no longer be grounds for discharge. As we approach this historic day that marks the end of seventeen years of institutionalized discrimination former and active duty service members are telling their stories of how they made it through and what it was like to endure.
GQ magazine has collected some of these stories and presents them here.
Like the story of Eric Alva, the first American injured in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
When Alva signed up, before "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell," he had to lie on his paperwork. "I knew I was lying," he says. "But I loved what I did, I loved my job, and I didn’t want to tell anyone. I said, ‘It’s going to be my secret.’ I knew I was not going to be happy in a way, but I knew this was what I wanted." In 2003 he was deployed to the Middle East, and on March 21 he crossed the border from Kuwait. His unit was part of a huge convoy that stopped outside Basra. Alva got out of his Humvee and went to fetch something from the back of the vehicle. "That’s when I triggered the IED. I was awake, my hearing was sort of gone. My hand was covered in blood and part of my index finger was gone. The chaplain was holding my head and I was telling him I didn’t want to die. I was taken off a helicopter in Kuwait—it was estimated that I was only in Iraq about three hours—and carried into surgery. I woke up later and when I looked down I saw that the right side of my sheet was flat. I cried myself asleep, only to wake up hours later and see that it’s true: My leg is gone."
DADT not only affected the lives of those who risked their lives on the battlefield. It also took a toll on those they loved.
"The relationship lasted for about four years, but I always felt like I was disrespecting him, to have to pretend he didn’t exist when I went to work. When I got deployed, he was there with my family when I left. It kind of sucked—to shake his hand and a little pat on the back and ‘I’ll see you when I see you’ kind of thing. And when you’re getting ready to come back, the spouses were getting classes—here’s how you welcome your Marine back into the family—and my boyfriend didn’t get any of that. I had a really hard time adjusting to being home. We tried to make it work for a year but he was getting more and more paranoid about people finding out about us. It killed me that he felt that way because of me. I don’t think we ever really had a chance, ultimately."
For some DADT became the weapon used by haters.
The harassment grew worse. Of a number of escalating events—Rocha was also force-fed dog food and locked into a shit-filled dog kennel—the most abusive and explicitly homophobic was when he was ordered by his commander to act in a dog-training scenario, repeated over and over so that every dog in the unit could be run through it. "The scenarios were supposed to be relevant to what the dogs or the handlers would experience. Like a domestic dispute, or an armed individual who has been spotted on the base, or someone strapped with explosives. This day he chose that the scenario would be that I would be getting caught giving another service member a blow job and, once the dogs came in, I was supposed to jump up from having been in between this guy’s legs. He would coach as to how exactly he wanted it played out, which was the sickest part of it." Rocha says he had to act this out between half a dozen and a dozen times, about fifteen to twenty minutes each time. As they repeated it, his commander ordered Rocha to make the scenario more extreme. "He wanted me to be very queer and flamboyant. He wanted me to pretend like there was stuff on my face. Loving it so much that each scenario was gayer and more disgusting—the introduction of fake semen, that I would have to wipe my face, or that I would have to make slurping noises. The level of humiliation I experienced that day, that’s when I knew I wasn’t safe in the military."
I highly recommend heading over there and reading more http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201109/dont-ask-dont-tell-gay-soldiers-military#ixzz1WAXDJMrl
National Orginization for Marriage
NOM Sponsored NY Hate Rally
Rev. Ariel Torres Ortega of Radio Visión Cristiana says gays are worthy of death at the anti-gay rally sponsored by the National Organization for Marriage and NY State Senator Rubén Díaz today.
The hate these people have is so strong that it just falls from their lips.
HT: Good As You
Teaching the Gay
NOM’s Maggie Gallagher doesn’t like the idea that children as young as 6th graders might just happen to be taught how to be safe when having sex. Unfortunately she seems to think that any such talk in a school about sex is somehow related to gay sex. Her post includes a quote that covers a recent education proposal for 6th graders in Helena, Montana.
Understand that sexual intercourse includes but is not limited to vaginal, oral, or anal penetration; using the penis, fingers, tongue or objects.
Understand gender identity is different from sexual orientation.
The only conclusion that Maggie seems to come to is that this is about gay sex. Also unfortunate for Maggie is the fact that everything in that quote covers what heterosexual couples do when they get under the covers. The proof of which can be found in the video section of any porn shop on the planet.
But then I guess Maggie would prefer that kids get absolutely no education at all about sex, thus leaving them to discover the pitfalls and hazards like unwanted pregnancies (which lead to the abortions Maggie doesn’t like either) and STD’s. It’s great to want kids to abstain from sex, but one has to be intellectually dishonest with themselves if they believe that kids won’t experiment. Shouldn’t we teach them how to be safe when they do it?
I’m posting this here since NOM prevents me from posting in their comments. They certainly can’t have any civil dissenting opinions or facts that discredit them on their own blog.
Where’s the Dislike Button?
The National Organization for Marriage has announced the launch of their new Facebook page celebrating their desire to impose discrimination and Christian theology into our government policy.
Blocking Debate
The National Organization for Marriage, along with most other Anti-Gay hate groups often throw the victim card around, claiming that Marriage Equality Advocates are trying to silence the voice of Christians through Non-Discrimination legislation like ENDA, which makes this recent post at the Ruth Institute Blog (a NOM funded affiliate organization) so ironic.
Oftentimes I read someone’s comment and wonder if I really ought to let it pass or trash it. Usually I go ahead and approve it because of our very open policy on this blog.
While they are certainly within their rights to censer commenters on their blog, and I completely agree that if a comment contains foul language or threats of violence it should be deleted, if not turned over to police, I just have to wonder who is trying to silence who now. I guess we will just have to wait and see if the Ruth Institute is just as heavy handed in deleting civil discussion posts that disagree with their stance on Marriage Equality and Abortion.
Update:
Betsy from the Ruth Institute has been kind enough to respond to me my post by copying it verbatim as a comment; which would appear to be a violation of copyright and fair use but I’m a forgiving individual.
Betsy then goes on to actually make a personal attack against me…
The words that I put in italices point out, VV, your lack of reading comprehension skills.
Which kind of seems to go completely against their own new comment policy which is called the “Fun To Be Around Rule.
Update 2:
It now appears that Betsy and Ruth Institute are not really interested in civil debate as they have now deleted my remarks as well as Betsy’s cut and paste of my blog post.
The Definition of Marriage
NOM is at it again. This time they are attempting to distort the writing of gay blogger Gabriel Arana who is getting married on Feb 5th. NOM and other gay marriage opponents are always making the claim that allowing gays and lesbians to marry would be redefining the institution and thus destroying some mythical tradition that has supposedly lasted for eternity. NOM attempts to make it seem that Gabriel is proving their point by quoting this Line.
Ultimately, I’m still not sure what marriage "means," but Michael and I can make it up as we go along.
Of course this is nothing but a scare tactic that. the have perfected over the years. They of coarse assume, unfortunately correctly, that few of their ready will actually take the time to read the rest of the post.
Gabriel’s real conclusion, the one NOM expects you to not recognize, is this.
In historical terms, though, the "meaning" of marriage was not static before the sexual revolution
…
In fact, it is the adaptability of marriage that has ensured its survival. Not only has "marriage" not remained static across time and in different cultures, it is defined and redefined by couples every day. Sometimes it’s beautiful, and sometimes it’s not, and some people marry for richer but not poorer, and some marriages last while others don’t. Couples make "marriage" in their own image; it’s that basic freedom and responsibility that make it frightening, exciting, and worthwhile.
What NOM wants you to ignore is the historical fact that the definition of marriage has always been fluid and dynamic, molding itself to human society and those who have the desire, the will, and the necessary courage to tie ones soul to that of another. Marriage is a bright and beautiful thing no matter who partakes in it. Gays an lesbians are not after marriage to redefine it. We can’t redefine something that is constantly redefining itself.
Oh and I cant forget; congratulations Gabriel.
I find myself not too happy with Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today. It appears that on Wednesday he went on to the liberal talk radio show of Bill Press and said?