Secretary Gates memo changes discharge authority for 'Don't Ask' law

News > Secretary Gates memo changes discharge authority for 'Don't Ask' law

Photos


(U.S. Air Force graphic)
Download HiRes

Secretary Gates memo changes discharge authority for 'Don't Ask' law

Posted 10/22/2010

Email story Print story

by Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

10/22/2010 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Given the uncertainty over the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has directed that any discharges under the law be made by the service secretaries in consultation with the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness and the defense general counsel.

More uncertainty over the law looms, as the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals approved a stay of an injunction issued Oct. 12 on the law. The court's action means "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is once again the law of the land after eight days of the injunction.

The court granted a stay of four days, said a senior defense official speaking on background. The temporary stay lasts through Oct. 25 to give the judges the time to look at the government's request.

The court may extend the stay through the length of the appeals process or allow the injunction -- which would allow openly gay and lesbian servicemembers to serve or openly gay and lesbian people to enlist -- to take effect.

The appeals process typically last 16 months in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, said the defense official. The court "briefing" schedule has the case on the books through March.

"With a case of this magnitude, it may be sooner," the official said. "Likely (there) could be a decision sometime in 2011, but I can't predict or control the court's timetable."

The legal uncertainty caused Clifford L. Stanley, the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, to once again caution gay and lesbian servicemembers not to alter their personal conduct during this time.

In a memo issued Oct. 22, Mr. Stanley wrote that changing their status because of the injunction "may have adverse consequences for themselves or others depending upon the state of the law."

"I also emphasize again, that it remains the policy of the Department of Defense not to ask servicemembers or applicants about their sexual orientation, to treat all members with dignity and respect and to ensure maintenance of good order and discipline," he said.

In the meantime, Secretary Gates' guidance places the decision for discharges under the law in fewer and more senior hands.

"From this point forward and until further notice (service secretaries) are the ones who will be the separation authorities for their services," the senior official said. "This is not delegable."

The senior defense official said there is no guidance on recruiting in the secretary's memorandum to the service secretaries.

President Barack Obama and defense leaders want Congress to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Changing the law overnight by court action makes for uncertainty within the force, the official said.

"Repeal of this statute that has been in place for more than 17 years should be done in an orderly way, informed by the recommendations ... (and) assessment of the DOD Working Group," the official said.

Comments

11/5/2010 1:57:16 PM ET
Dane - FYI I have been to the desert several times. I have spent months at a time traveling throughout the AOR and living in very close quarters with my fellow AirmenSoldiers. I have seen the effects of combat up close and personal. Obviously you haven't because if you had you would know you come to rely heavily on each other when you're out there. You have to or it could cost someone their life. So no. I'm not worried about whether the guy or gal next to me is gay or lesbian as much as I'm worried about whether they've got my back so we can both come home alive. If you are more worried about a person's sexuality than their survival then I can only pray we never end up in a combat situation together because one or more of us probably won't make it.

G.I. Tain, McChord AFB

11/3/2010 9:57:40 PM ET
Tain - it seems that you obviously live some sort of fantasy land. This is the real world and this is what happens. If you haven't seen this be an issue then you haven't been to an actual deployment location in close quarters. So, until you do, you have no leg to stand on.

Dane, Colorado

11/2/2010 1:00:59 PM ET
T. Street - It's interesting to me that several of you keep clinging to the argument that repealing the DADT will somehow cause unrest and irrevocable damage to the military what it represents its mission and people but I have yet to hear how. How exactly does the fact that Gay Johnny and Lesbian Jane can now openly proclaim what most who are associated with them probably have known all along impact the mission in any way? And if by some small chance it does and I mean very small what exactly does that say about the caliber of our men and women in uniform and their level of professionalism if we are unable to maintain good order and discipline and prevent something so trivial as a person's sexuality from becoming an major issue? Here's a news flash - we're a country at war and we've made many controversial decisions over the years. Yet somehow we've managed to maintain our composure through it all and keep the focus on what's important - the mission.

G.I. Tain, McChord AFB

11/2/2010 11:07:21 AM ET
Dane - Sounds like the problem lies with those who ARE NOT gay or lesbian rather than those who are. If your biggest concern downrange is someone's sexuality then I'm extremely concerned for my and others safety. There are a lot more important things going on over there - like good men and women dying. If your biggest concern is whether Johnny is gay or Jane is lesbian then you need to get your heads in the game before someone really gets hurt. Don't use sexuality as a scapegoat for unprofessional behavior when it's clear by your statement the real issue is lack of order and discipline on the part of those who take issue with others differing beliefs and values. Seriously come up with a better argument than ignorance or let's just drop this one altogether.

G.I. Tain, McChord AFB

10/30/2010 11:24:13 PM ET
J.J after a little re-read on history did anyone over here really know about his past? It appears that von Steuben used a modern day version of DADT. It should be noted his so called resume was fluffed and doctored so we would not know why he was released from his duties. Maybe because homosexual acts would have adverse affects on the mission. There are plenty of accounts of George Washington kicking men out for this behavior. I'm sure we could go on and on with this but when you boil it down this behavior will cause a long list of issues that will ultimately effect the mission.

T. Street, USA

10/29/2010 6:51:56 AM ET
Oh my Chief I fret to think how you and I would get along if you were in my chain of command. You've become so indoctrinated with the fact the military has lawful discrimination you've presented the idea that some discrimination based on non-physical limitations is okay. I'll rehash the racial argument in that blacks and whites had separate quarters when we were segregated. Was that an okay and efficient form of discrimination? The fact is I'd rather be in a foxhole with a fat can barely pass his PT test gay man who can carry me off the battlefield than a 100 pound female who gets a 100 on her PT test and can barely lift her rucksack. Gays and lesbians are already in the military they might be sitting down the hall from you or sharing a shower with you next time you're in gym and now all of a sudden, you're going to cover up because you know they are gay. Pretending they aren't around is just as childish as hiding from the monsters by getting under the covers.

Some guy, Everywhere but nowhere

10/28/2010 5:30:21 PM ET
Tain I wasn't comparing it to fitness level. I was comparing it to a standard. Standards are at the base level discrimination plain and simple. So if the standard as it is now is that being openly is unacceptable then it is detrimental to the mission. So nice try in your part as well. If someone is openly gay as I have seen in my career it is truly a problem in the workcenter and downrange as well.

Dane, Colorado

10/28/2010 2:46:29 PM ET
Dane - As you mentioned being gay is a lifestyle choice not a physical limitation so comparing fitness requirements and disabilities to being gay or lesbian is like comparing apples to oranges. Your argument would make sense if being gay prevented you from effectively doing your job. Being physically fit is a requirement in the military because you may put yourself and others in danger if you aren't in top physical condition. Last time I checked a person's sexual orientation was never responsible for someone's death while they were under enemy attack. In addition being straight is just as much a lifestyle choice as being gay. And in case you didn't know straight people tend to have the same issues as gay or lesbian people. Whether you're in a gay lesbian or straight committed relationship any problems that arise can impact a person's job just the same. Nice try though.

G.I. Tain, McChord AFB WA

10/28/2010 12:39:06 PM ET
Here is the bottom line... The military discriminates to disallow people who cannot effectively serve their country. You cannot be in the military if you have some sort of physical or mental issue that prevents you from doing your job. I don't see why who you love who you have sex with and any other personal legal feelings or actions would negatively impact your ability to do your job. If you can do your job there is no reason to bar you from service. What we need is people to be not so judgemental. Your disapproval of an individual's otherwise minus DADT legal personal actions that have nothing to do with you does not give you the right to condemn that person or their actions.

Analyst, Barksdale

10/28/2010 10:18:08 AM ET
Once again we find ourselves in the midst of turmoil because of our elected civilian leadership and their attempts to gather votes. Here is the bottom-line...the military discriminates. We don't let amputees deaf disabled too young too old uneducated physically unable to perform persons etc into the military. Why? Because our existence is predicated on efficiency...not accommodation. Today's military is a high-mileage vehicle that already needs some periodic maintenance. We are about to burn up the transmission in this mud. Stop it

Chief, Barksdale

10/28/2010 6:33:26 AM ET
T. Street I'm not trying to spin anything. I stated facts and facts can't be argued because they are unequivocally irrefutable. I don't have a moral or ethical agenda that I'm trying to push on anyone here because for the most part I'm impartial to this subject. What I won't do though is stand by and watch someone spin what our founding fathers said and did for their own moral qualms without pointing to some evidence of such intentions. As far as my statement about Von Steuben I KNOW HE WASNT A FOUNDING FATHER NOR DID I SAY THIS This was counterpoint to what you said about gays not being accepted by our founding fathers because Washington still picked Von Steuben to teach and lead OUR soldiers with his suspicion of homosexuality KNOWN by Washington. Washington was an extremely tolerant man especially for his time and is arguably a great example to follow as far as tolerance goes. He has many quotes penned in his own hand denoting such behavior.

JJ, TX

10/27/2010 10:20:28 PM ET
Actually Tain if you get right down to it. Discrimination is abundant everywhere where we look. The standard we have set thus far has served us well for this lifestyle CHOICE. Choice that's what is plain and simple and those who disagree like to say they are born that gay but that's not the case. What's next let's go ahead and let those who are overweight and cannot pass their pt test stay in as well. I mean that's discrimination as well. People who are too short or exceed certain height standards can't be pilots, let's overturn that standard as well. You can go on and on. Being born a different race is something you can't control your lifestyle choice you can control it's an action. Which we all control.

Dane, Colorado

10/27/2010 4:39:37 PM ET
Maj Sense - Thanks for the history lesson but I think you skipped over the most important part - the lesson. Times have changed and society has changed with it. That's why it's called history. As I said to Tim it's time to step out of the past and into the present. If your only defense for the DADT law is That's how it used to be when the world was a different place then I'm extremely concerned for the men and women who serve under and for you. The military thrives on innovation and change it's backwards thinking like Things are fine the way they are that prevents us from moving forward.

G.I. Tain, McChord AFB WA

10/27/2010 4:00:04 PM ET
Tim - I would like to know what military you are serving in because the one I'm serving in right now preaches respect and tolerance for others differing beliefs and values. Discrimination is discrimination - be it based on religion race gender or sexual orientation. The federal law doesn't tolerate discrimination and military law needs to stop tolerating it as well. Otherwise there is no point in having organizations like MEO if they only support equal opportunity for certain groups of individuals. Your argument that the law serves to protect servicemembers from each other made sense 20 years ago when the law was enacted. Times have changed and openly declaring that one is gay or lesbian is not only accepted but also encouraged in society. Sounds like you need to step out of the past and into the present and do some research of your own. You can start by reading the comments on this article as you can tell you are in the minority of people who think the law should still remain

G.I. Tain, McChord AFB WA

10/27/2010 3:00:01 PM ET
JJ 1. Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben was not a founding father of our country 2. the homosexual community in theoretical terms is not a minority and our founding fathers writings and morale beliefs would support this. No matter how hard you try you can not could spin US History to say our founding fathers would see this behavior as acceptable.

T. Street, USA

10/27/2010 2:07:53 PM ET
TME- Changing the way things are done just because one leader says so is not how a democracy a republic or our military works. That is called a dictatorship and if you perfer it then there are plenty of other countries that will let you move in.

Tim, Wright-Patt AFB OH

10/27/2010 2:05:03 PM ET
The biggest thing for me is the desire to be openly gay. What does that really mean I served for 22 years beginning in 1980 and have always known or suspected someone was gay. I don't care who people sleep with but when relationships....gay straight cheating spouses or whatever affects good order and discipline we need to create boundaries. The UMCJ was created based on accepted moral behaviors and there's alot stuff there that is wrong....co-habitation for one is frowned upon and adultery...those engaging those behaviors don't come out the closet...DON'T TELL ME AND I WON'T ASK YOU....AND I WON'T LOOK TO OUT YOUR BEHAVIOR.....

Darrell, Wright-Patterson AFB

10/27/2010 10:54:37 AM ET
President Barack Obama and defense leaders want Congress to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell. Changing the law overnight by court action makes for uncertainty within the force the official said.Which makes for more uncertainty A quick decisive action done by a leader that stands for what they beleive in or at least say they beleive in or a back and forth political repeal and replace leadership that wont get on the same page. Im sorry but if the Head boss says repeal it. It should be done. Period. Just as in the past with decisions involving desegregation it won't be popular but ten years down the road, We will be a stronger Military. Simply by looking at the fact that we already are from desegregating the Military.Of course there will be issues at first Basic Training flights come to mind but like all other obsticles in our past we'll get past them. And if we can't, at least we tried.Which in my opinion is a hell of alot better than sticking your fingers in your ears.

TME, Watching the chaos from the sidelines

10/27/2010 10:49:26 AM ET
PB- Yes I am talking about protecting our gay servicemembers from other servicemembers. It is not a statement that I am proud to make but it is reality. Again I encourage you to research why don't ask don't tell was put in place and the eventscrimes commited against homosexuals and suspected homosexuals and how they were treated in the decade before it was put into place. I don't believe in the easter bunny but I do believe in history.

Tim, Wright-Patt AFB OH

10/27/2010 10:22:34 AM ET
Maybe repealing this is actually a force reduction tool. All the people with problems with homosexuals might now get out therefore aiding the AF in meeting force reduction goals without forcing anyone out...which I hope happens. I'd rather work with people who are open to diversity - see what I did there - and tolerant of all people.

MM, FL

10/27/2010 10:01:44 AM ET
Actually APB if you look at nature when a group of animals reproduce more than what the enviroment can sustain research has shown that more and more offspring are born with homosexual tendencies to help curb the population. Who is to say that it isn't happening with the human race as well? Homosexuality is born not made.

airman, littlerock

10/27/2010 9:44:40 AM ET
I don't really care if I have a gay person working along side me in the military as long as they are not disrupting the workplace or acting so gay that it disrupts my work. The only problem I really see is when it comes to showering in basic training that would be pretty awkward.

T PAYNE, Barksdale AFB

10/27/2010 8:09:11 AM ET
I suggest to wait until Federal Law allows same-sex marriages before completely overhauling the policy. When it becomes socially acceptable in Federal justices it will be easier to accommodate two types of lifestyles. Hold homosexuals to the same PDA standards that we hold heterosexuals Too much exposure on either side makes many uncomfortable.

SH, Scott AFB IL

10/27/2010 7:52:22 AM ET
T. Street you should probably do some history reading on our founding fathers. They were deists and Christians but despised the dogmatic principles of the popular religions. It's because of these dogmatic principles that they so eloquently used terms like all men are created equal and the inclusion of the first amendment into our constitution. This way they could setup a foundation for all men to be equally recognized for their worth and in turn keep minorities from being subjugated by the majority. You should read Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli written by John Adams who I might add was an outspoken and proud Christian as well as the letters between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. I'll also add that Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben a man who is credited with training the continental army chief of staff to Washington and honorary citizen of our country was highly suspected of being gay. Please in the future do some fact checking before posting opinioned based facts.

JJ, TX

10/26/2010 11:20:50 PM ET
Homosexuality is a behavior choice cannot be compared to race at all. But that's not the issue. If the law is repealed we will abide if not we will abide that way as well. No matter our personal beliefs and such that doesn't matter here at all and that's the truth.

Dane, Colorado

10/26/2010 5:29:53 PM ET
For everyone who is claiming that the DADT is a good idea doesn't know the number of people who have gotten out of the military by claiming to be gay. I know out of the long list of people kicked out under DADT some of them were straight. For some DADT is a Get Out of Jail Free card. No one should be kicked out because of sexuality. Period.

APB, Dirt Town Texas

10/26/2010 4:30:02 PM ET
The services should reasonably expect that many members will no longer bring their wives and children to unit functions granted we will have to accept the fact that the policy is repealed but that doesn't mean we have to agree with it and subject our families - especially our children - to immoral and unnatural behavior. Overall I don't see a big culture shock coming once this is repealed...homosexuals can still be prosecuted under the UCMJ for certain acts if found guilty and with that said the likelihood of actually serving openly won't happen anytime soon following repeal - if at all.

SJ, Florida

10/26/2010 4:15:28 PM ET
To all those using the race argument Homosexuality is a behavior NOT a race.

O in Tyndall, Tyndall AFB

10/26/2010 3:16:18 PM ET
O in Tyndall- the DADT policy itself undermines integrity.

jlavonc, Andrews AFB MD

10/26/2010 2:38:07 PM ET
I think we are wasting too much time on this. Lets take a look at the numbers. 3M Armed Force'sfour percent are gay. That gives us about 120K people that are currently serving. Ohh did I mention there are about 13M starving children in the United States? Lets get our priorities in order.

DL, Why Not

10/26/2010 2:18:50 PM ET
Correction All men are created equal but that doesn't change why the military won't allow those with mental physical or other issues to serve. If the so called issue can disrupt or prevent the mission from being completed. Homosexual behavior will affect the mission review Major Sense's comments. A little research of our nation's founding fathers will provide details in why this behavior wasn't accepted in the first place.

T. Street, USA

10/26/2010 1:03:17 PM ET
All men are created equal but that it doesn't change why the military won't allow those with mental physical or other issues to serve. If the so called issue can disrupt or prevent the mission from being completed. Homosexual behavior will affect the mission, review Major Sense's comments. A little research of our nation's founding fathers will provide details in why this behavior was accepted in the first place.

T. Street, USA

10/26/2010 10:03:27 AM ET
Not to mention this country was founded with the believe that All men are created equal without equality for all race sex sexual preference etc. we are in fact going against this.

andrew luster, Offutt AFB NE

10/26/2010 9:45:59 AM ET
For all of you homosexuals that can't understand why the majority of people have a problem with not only DADT but the very idea of homosexuality. Wake up and get your head out of the rainbow this is not Europe or any other country that openly accepts this lifestyle. This is the USA and we have been a successful nation for reasons you refuse to believe and understand. Our freedom is inspired by biblical principals yep I said it

T. Street, USA

10/26/2010 8:38:47 AM ET
Why can't people just be realistic Yes the policy needs to change and it's quite obvious it will. However such sweeping changes require planning and preparation for the benefit of all concerned. I don't know anyone who likes to have drastic change pushed on them without explanation of what the new order is going to be.

Deborah, Midwest

10/26/2010 8:29:25 AM ET
While I have no problems with gays openly serving repealing DADT is more than just being able to come out. Yes it will be a culture shock for the military but the main concern is and should be the various legal ramifications with this repeal i.e. spouse-partner rights benefits medical state laws UCMJ EEO etc. Is the military-government ready to deal with change and implement all laws and regulations if DADT is taken off the books? I would venture to say it will take another 10 years before EVERY aspect of repealing DADT is addressed.

Steve, Tampa

10/26/2010 8:04:44 AM ET
Tim protecting gay military members by not letting them serve openly Isn't that close to the excuse we used for blacks women Atheists Asians Hispanics and other groups who didn't fit the homophobic rich white male protestant bible thumper bill You can't have rights because we are protecting you Come on. Gays should be allowed to serve openly and the standards should be enforced by military leaders at all levels.

Double D, RAFL

10/25/2010 11:59:10 PM ET
All the arguments below don't equate to reality. Yes other countries have gay soldiers but none have near the quantity that deploy in mass like the US does...don't even compare. So what if we have gays/lesbians currently serving...they can keep serving under the current policy. Why do we have to promote and publicize to all what your sexual preference is? You all are ignorant to think that just reserving this one policy will fix everything. There are huge implications on DOD policy relating to Health Care access to base housing states not recognizing same sex marriages...the list goes on. We have more important issues to tackle then worry ifwhen Johnny can come out of the closet.

Major Sense, Florida

10/25/2010 9:35:11 PM ET
Keep the policy in place it's a force shaping tool. Works so far.

Dane, Colorado

10/25/2010 9:14:12 PM ET
I live and die for my country. I joined the military to make sure my family and friends have a future. I don't see why gayslesbians can't openly do the same thing for the ones they love. Just becuase they look at life differently doesn't mean that they can't fight like anyone else. Who knows they might even fight better.

L337 4573R, Minot AFB ND

10/25/2010 8:54:50 PM ET
Time for Congress to do the right thing and repeal DADT with a vote on this issue all by itself not part of another bill. The problem with DADT is its obvious double standard. Closeted gays are currently serving in the military with distinction. But when outed by DADT they suddenly become unqualified and detrimental to good order and discipline Nonsense. The same arguments were made when President Truman desegregated the military and all the fears turned out to be baseless. The same is true here.

Jim H retired colonel, Omaha

10/25/2010 7:47:41 PM ET
Just get rid of the policy. Recruiters don't need to ask and if someone is gay they don't need to tell unless they want to. But kicking people out of the military because they are gay is stupid. People get kicked out for actual CRIMES or when they can't cope with military life. Let's keep it at that. I know a few gays currently serving and even if the policy is reversed they aren't going to annouce it to everyone.

SSgt, Alaska

10/25/2010 6:36:07 PM ET
I don't want to know if someone is gay or not. If I know they were gay I would be very uncomfortable showering with them in open bay areas - for example at Combat Skills Traning where you are showering with no cover whatsoever. Nuff said.

Chris, Middle of nowhere

10/25/2010 5:57:58 PM ET
I still think if you sexual orientation is what defines you as a person then there still is no place for you in the military. Overly open homo or hetero sexual behavior that makes others uncomfortable is incompatible in any profession especially one where some of us quite literally trust our lives to our coworkers. I personally think everyone should keep there sexual orientation a private matter. If bringing you same sex partner to a squadron party is more important to you then your military service then maybe you don't belong in the military. Witch hunts to find the behavior or inadvertant disclosure of sexual orientation shouldn't be grounds for dismissal of most servicemembers who have undergone vast amounts of training but hopefully those freed from this oppressive policy who decide to flaunt their orientation will shortly be discharged for innappropriate sexual behavior.

thinkingoutlound, Planet Earth

10/25/2010 5:50:56 PM ET
Tim Wright-Patt AFB OH- You fail to realize that in addition to gays not telling, they are not allowed to enjoy the same relationships you and many other heterosexuals enjoy. So frankly you may need to reconsider who the ignorant one is before making such comments. How about you talk to someone who is gay and i'm sure they'll tell you all about what it's like to serve silently. You should try serving silently under Don't Ask Don't Tell so you can tell us all what it's like. Good day.

kjb, Florida

10/25/2010 5:37:52 PM ET
Tim -- To protect the military members from whom exactly? If you're talking about protecting the gay servicemembers then you're implying they need to be protected from other servicemembers and that's a shameful commentary on our military. If you're talking about protecting everyone else then the question is from whom? If you want to believe in the Easter Bunny that's on you but it shouldn't impact others' right to honorably serve their nation.

PB, US

10/25/2010 5:37:27 PM ET
Jlaonc - The purpose of the US Armed Forces is the armed defense of the United States-NOT to free homosexuals from living a lie. There is no right to join the US Armed Forces-it is a privilege. Homosexual acts are deviant. Therefore open homosexuality is subversive to good order morale and discipline. Let's identify the attempt to repeal DADT for what it is- an effort to undermine the integrity of the military that ironically protect a society that provides homosexuals more freedom and security than any other.

O in Tyndall, Tyndall AFB

10/25/2010 4:14:23 PM ET
The people pushing to change the law are the ignorant ones. They should go back and read why the law was put into place to begin with. It is in place to protect the military members. All the things that happened to gay members before will happen again. Society might have changed and become more accepting but the military hasn't, especially in a combat zone or near the edge of a ship. No one cares what you do behind closed doors hence the don't ask. Being openly gay in the military is a conflict of intrest and a very bad idea, legal or not.

Tim, Wright-Patt AFB OH

10/25/2010 3:52:52 PM ET
There are actually plenty of places in Europe where gays and lesbians are allowed to serve openly in the military. As far as reports go, there aren't any of these big problems that people tend to conjure up out of misplaced fear. The military actually wastes more money training and then discharging them than it would constructing programs and possible facilities for these people. This law is a joke.

supahamn, Beale AFB

10/25/2010 2:20:39 PM ET
It is a fact that both openly and undisclosed gay and lesbian servicemembers are serving in the armed forces despite the law still being in affect. Many servicemembers across the different branches have somewhat turned a blind eye to the growing number of servicemembers who are simply tired of lying about their personal relationships. This policy is losing more and more of it's public support and rationality. The only matter left to decide is how much money are we willing to waste in order to pass a repeal on something that has already been decided unconstitutional. The preference of which method to use for the repeal is irrelevant being only a means to delay a firm position from the administration on the matter while unfortunately highlighting the same ole politicians continue to run Washingtion.

Regis S., RAF Lakenheath

10/25/2010 10:36:52 AM ET
Just end this ridiculous policy

SL, Charlotte NC

10/25/2010 9:52:31 AM ET
I honestly don't understand why everyone has to make such a huge deal out of this. Military readiness is not a good enough excuse to keep this law in place. This law is ridiculous and ignorant. There are gays all over the world and they aren't hurting anyone. There are gays in the military protecting this country everyday making this America and world for that matter a safe place to be. They sacrifice their lives for their county knowing it could all be over in a flash and know one would really know the pain they felt from living a lie. Yet we cannot allow them to be themselves. They fight for our freedoms yet they are not allowed to be free themselves. It is absolutely proposterous to ask military members to live in secrecy for the sake of those who cannot accept slightly different lifestyles. The funny thing is for all of you that believe gays in the military would hurt us I guarentee that you more than likely have a gay friend that you are close to respect and love serving for y

jlavonc, Andrews AFB MD

10/24/2010 9:46:57 PM ET
Brilliant. Rather than actually stand by or decisively change existing policy we are giving lip service to it but establishing internal procedures that effectively halt its use. How typical of the DoD...

Master Of The, Obvious

Add a comment

Inside AF.mil

GeneralImagesVideo

View All RSS

Subscribe AF.MIL

More Headlines

Missing for 46 years, air commando laid to rest

Air mobility response team readies for 'Sandy'

As Sandy closes in, Mobility Airmen stand ready

Air Force Week in Photos

U.K. F-35 fleet increases capability at Eglin AFB

Avon Park Air Force Range receives Interior Secretary award

Former Little Rock AFB commander and spouse receive 2012 O'Malley award

Reservist sets latest mark in battle for Schriever track record

CSAF shares perspective during AETC Senior Leader Conference

Thule boilers save big in first year

Life Extension Programs modernize ICBMs

SecAF visits basic military training

Through Airmen's Eyes: Airman battles breast cancer

Remains of two Airmen lost in 1969 identified, honored

Commentary

Teal ropes to spotlight sexual assault response 37

Air Force Academy energy research will yield global benefits