News>Chief of staff addresses 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' report
Photos
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee Dec. 3, 2010, in Washington, D.C. General Schwartz, his fellow service chiefs and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified on the recently released Comprehensive Review Working Group report, which addresses the potential repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott M. Ash)
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee Dec. 3, 2010, in Washington, D.C. General Schwartz, his fellow service chiefs and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified on the recently released Comprehensive Review Working Group report, which addresses the potential repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott M. Ash)
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz and other senior military leaders testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee Dec. 3, 2010, in Washington, D.C. General Schwartz, his fellow service chiefs and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified on the recently released Comprehensive Review Working Group report, which addresses the potential repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott M. Ash)
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz and other senior military leaders testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee Dec. 3, 2010, in Washington, D.C. General Schwartz, his fellow service chiefs and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified on the recently released Comprehensive Review Working Group report, which addresses the potential repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott M. Ash)
12/3/2010 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Allowing time to adequately prepare servicemembers prior to implementing a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law is vital to continued mission effectiveness, the Air Force chief of staff told members of Congress here Dec. 3.
Gen. Norton Schwartz, his fellow service chiefs and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on the Comprehensive Review Working Group report, which addresses the potential repeal of the 1993 law that forecloses gay men and women from serving openly in the military.
"It is my assessment that the U.S. Air Force can accommodate a repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' with modest risk to military readiness and effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting, and retention of our Airmen," General Schwartz said.
However, the general expressed concern about U.S. combat forces in Afghanistan and the potential disruption a repeal could cause units performing combat missions there.
"It is difficult for me as a member of the Joint Chiefs to recommend placing any additional discretionary demands on our leadership cadres in Afghanistan at this particular time," the general said.
General Schwartz told the committee members that he recommends deferring full implementation of any repeal of the law until 2012, to allow the Department of Defense to begin education and training efforts to better prepare the force.
The senior leaders' comments followed those of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, who met with reporters Nov. 30 to discuss the release of the Comprehensive Review Working Group report.
"I believe that it would be unwise to push ahead with full implementation of repeal before more can be done to prepare the force -- in particular, those in ground combat specialties and units -- for what could be a disruptive and disorienting change," Secretary Gates said.
The secretary said the working group's plan, which has a strong emphasis on education, training and leader development, provides a solid road map for a successful full implementation of the repeal, assuming the military is given sufficient time to prepare the force.
Early in 2010, the secretary of Defense directed a working group to complete a comprehensive review of the potential repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. As part of the review, DOD officials fielded two large surveys to gather feedback from both servicemembers and their families.
"The DOD study confirms that Air Force attitudes run roughly 70/30 toward those who see positive, mixed or no effect with respect to allowing open service by gay, lesbian and bi-sexual Airmen," General Schwartz said.
Additionally, the study recognized a number complicating factors, to include cohabitation, privacy and "universal" benefits, the general said.
"Each of these complicating factors will require focused attention and, in time, will be accommodated satisfactorily," General Schwartz said.
The general also echoed Secretary Gates' preference for legislative action on the repeal, rather than allowing the courts to decide the matter, in which case the military "would enjoy much less latitude to properly calibrate implementation" of the change.
"The Air Force will pursue implementation of repeal, if the law changes, thoroughly, professionally and with conviction," General Schwartz said.
Comments
12/23/2010 11:18:14 AM ET Capt S what you're saying certainly makes sense, but my only problem with your ideal of punishing someone after they do something wrong is that that is exactly what the Don't ask don't tell policy has already acomplished not only does it negate the need for paramount changes to many AFI's it also DOES NOT bar homosexuals from joining. Most of the servicemembers that I interact with don't often speak out about their sex lives at work as it is what is the problem with telling a homosexual person who wants to serve that they can't express their sexuality We have ALL given up some facet of our free speech by joining the DADT policy is merely a continuation of that idea
A1C B., Also Missouri
12/8/2010 3:31:09 PM ET AD SSgt the answers to your questions are in the repeal transition plan. The sodomy regulations in the UCMJ would have to be removed and frankly I think it needs to go regardless of a DADT repeal. I'm sure plenty of straight servicemembers are guilty of violating it since sodomy is not an exclusively homosexual act. As for drawing the line that line has already been drawn. All servicemembers will be held to the same standards of conduct and appearance regardless of sexual orientation. So while there may be some dumb airman or lieutenant who tries to parade around base in a feather boa that certainly would not go unpunished. Basically the point of this repeal is to not bar people from service based on how we THINK they might behave but rather to allow them to serve and then punish them if and when they actually do misbehave. Hopefully this will assuage your fears.
Capt S, Missouri
12/8/2010 2:38:01 PM ET So... I know it was briefly mentioned before but what's going to happen to the UCMJ sodomy Article 125? Is that going to be completely done away with? Is this where we are drawing the line? What's next? My big issue is not all about DADT being done away with but where does it end. We have to draw the line somewhere so things don't get out of control. This is a very dangerous step we are taking. Everyone that is or has been in the US armed service know's that we give up a lot of constitutional freedoms in order to serve our country... including the pursuit of happiness free speech blah blah blah. Save it for when you get out.
Active Duty SSgt, DC
12/8/2010 11:22:11 AM ET I thought terrorists are the enemy not homosexuals.
SSgt TC, Hill AFB
12/8/2010 9:23:24 AM ET Andrew it wasn't George Washington, but actually John Adams in the Treaty of Tripoli November 4 1796 that stated As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws religion or tranquility of Mussulmen and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. Just letting you know.
TSI, SP
12/7/2010 11:39:28 PM ET Examine the reason that a non-heterosexual has to become a part of the U.S. Armed Forces The real reason, First off this reason puts them at odds with the very fabric of the most tightly knit organization that we have the armed forces. An organization that cannot risk anything unnecessarily has a direct conflict with this issue because it is a life or death matter. Secondly we must ask this question. Are there not enough American Citizens who are qualified and who would serve to fill the ranks as needed?
Mack, eugeneor
12/7/2010 1:41:51 PM ET Wow OneMADTSgt....just...wow.I have to agree with the general consensus here. Regardless of your religious or personal beliefs not only is this happening, but it's going to be one of the multiple things the military does that might be against your beliefs. You need to do what you always do and just keep on truckin. There is no other option. Your CO is not going to let you out because you hate gays and he's also not going to tolerate bigoted actions or verbiage in his company. It's going to happen, it's going to be implemented, it's going to take transition, but it's something you need to deal with now before you get yourself dishonorably discharged.I served 5 years with the Marines in the states and deployed to Iraq and can count easily on both hands the amount of gay service members from all branches that I served with. Them being gay never affected the mission made anyone who knew feel uncomfortable or ended in any gay orgies.
YourMarine, Goodfellow AFB
12/7/2010 1:07:54 PM ET The lifestyle is a choice that's what it boils down to. We have all urges to sometimes probably yell at someone who angers us or hit someone/something. But that doesn't mean you act on that impulse every time you either choose to or not. If someone who chooses a lifestyle that is offensive then don't we have the right to protect those who find that offensive. I understand deployed location wise that might not be feasible but stateside it can be. If you go tdy and your roommate is gay and you don't feel comfortable staying in that room then you should have the right to have a room with a heterosexual person of the same sex. So let's see how this plays out. We are all taking in account the rights of the homosexual people but what about everyone else?
Dane, Colorado
12/7/2010 12:54:37 PM ET All this is coming one way or another. I would rather have congress repeal it in a controlled fashion than have the courts strike it down instantly. One MADTSgt first there is no evidence that homosexuality is a mental illness. Second homosexuality is between two consenting adults. That makes it very different than pedophilia and bestiality. Third sexual behavior and harassment during duty is inappropriate regardless of your orientation. Homosexuals already have seen you in the shower and have not done anything to you they won't be able to do anything different after DADT is repealed. Finally I would be interested in seeing proof that homosexuals are more promiscuous. Ronald I agree with you that religion creed sexual orientation etc should not come up in the workplace, however, I also believe that a person should not have to hide or suspend those aspects of themselves for fear of reprisal from their coworkers or employer.
Analyst, Barksdale
12/7/2010 12:09:53 PM ET Obviously there is still a lot to discuss on this topic. I think we should keep DADT but make it across the board. Make it equal for hetrosexual members also. PDA not allowed on base and functions. No pictures of families at work also. I really don't agree with the comments that a small minority should sway policies and push their views and way or life. How many white guys you see are members of the Black Panthers? How many catholics you see at baptist churches? How many men you see members of Oprah's book club? haha. Just saying there are many ways to serve our country besides the military.
Ronald, Fort Sam Houston
12/7/2010 11:34:34 AM ET If you don't like it, start working on getting out. Enough said. The military doesn't want someone so closeminded.The majority of people complaining about glbt joining military have no idea about them. You have friends and family that have been hiding and still are hiding your sexuality. It is a much larger percentile than you actually think. People are just afraid to be true to themselves and others. Comparing homosexuality to pedophilia or beastiality is like trying to compare an apple to a carrot. Not even partially close to the same thing.
a1c, little rock
12/7/2010 10:34:11 AM ET Folks this is happening - like it or not. Now it's time to shift focus to accepting and incorporating the change so it has as little impact on the mission as possible. If you are unable to do that then perhaps it is time to consider a career change. Your moral and family values have nothing to do with nor should they have any impact on the the mission. If they do then again - perhaps it is time to consider a career change.
G.I. Tain, McChord AFB
12/7/2010 10:04:39 AM ET In contemplating a tasteful way to address these responses this is the best I could come up with... politically socially democratically administratively constitutionally and generally speaking this is the right thing to do. The leadership is taking the necessary steps to ensure that it is implemented practically and effectively. If you have personal objections you should deal with them personally -- not legislatively.
tr, ok
12/7/2010 9:45:53 AM ET Why on Earth are devoting so much time effort and money to trying to integrate a small percentage of the population that suffers from a mental/emotional disorder Once the gays come in what's next? Pedophiles People who love their dogs a little too much? They are all nothing more than sexual deviants and none should be accommodated. It's kinda funny how the DOD wants people to quit smoking quit drinking and work out more to help reduce their medical expenses, but yet in the same breath are ready to go along with letting homosexuals serve. Kind of counterproductive considering the homosexual deviants have FAR higher instances of STDs due to their proven sexual promiscuity. So instead of treating breathing problems in smokers and liver problems in drinkers they will be treating Hepatitis and AIDS. Never mind the housing nightmare. How will you group them in basic? 60 men in a single dorm you gonna separate the homos and build a fairy flight Hope you like gay orgies.
OneMADTSgt, Little Rock
12/6/2010 8:57:15 PM ET As a female who has many outside the wire deployments, i dont understand how the bathroom is the largest concern. I've had to squat in the middle of nowhere while someone has my back. And i've never had to ask whether they were gay lesbian or what not. I DIDNT CARE. The job got done and they pulled the trigger like anyone else.
Sara, Florida
12/6/2010 6:50:20 PM ET Even though I am against the lifestyle, I wonder how many homosexual men and women gave their lives in defense of our country.
Tom, oklahoma
12/6/2010 6:05:29 PM ET There is no difference between serving with someone that you believe to be gay and that you know to be gay. You will think of them the same way. Many of the comments here are driven by religious ethics and though they are important in personal lives, they have no place in a government institution. Racial integration used to be a hot issue and was resisted by many in the private sector. Many of you are right about the Armed Forces needing to take the high road--but I believe that means being the first to formally accept homosexuals and be the first to formally discredit and disallow harassment and discrimination.
SM, USAF
12/6/2010 5:16:35 PM ET Everyone scared of the pink menace is more than welcome to leave. If you can't be called upon to defend the liberties of the minority, why should we count on you to defend the majority? If you serve in the military it's no longer about YOU. It's about the whole of a nation. If your PERSONAL views or moral liabilities prevent your service to the greatest nation on the planet...GOODBYE. You can and will be replaced.
MSgt C, CONUS
12/6/2010 5:13:34 PM ET I find it amazing how the vast majority of the military is so narrow minded in regards to allowing homosexuals to honorably serve without having to hide their lifestyle. Constantly I hear about shower scenarios not being able to sleep for fear someone will be raped in the middle of the night by a homosexual or the constant leering across the dining facility tables that some feel will no doubt occur. The gay population that wishes to serve has one agenda to serve their country honorably without any fear of reprisal. Like it or not we all share the United States to include its rights and liberties and to discriminate against a certain group of individuals who choose to live their lives outside of the norm is in my opinion a travesty and an insult to the uniform we wear. Who actually defines normalcy to the point it becomes a power issue meaning if you are not in agreement with the masses then you are shunned and seen as someone that has a personal agenda to bring down society.
Fed Up With Discrimination, Langley
12/6/2010 5:11:14 PM ET According to Webster's, a bigot is someone intolerantly devoted to their own opinions and prejudices. Somehow it seems most of the people vehemently name calling are the pro-repeal folks they have even called people stupid bigots for not agreeing with their point of view. Way to support your cause. How about you respectfully allow folks to have a differing opinion? As far as discrimination we will always have legal systemic discrimination of some kind in the military. How come no one cares about a midget's right to serve in the military?
Tim, Gunter
12/6/2010 5:00:00 PM ET I honestly could not care either way if DADT is lifted or stays in place with myself being a pansexual, but I am getting greatly annoyed with people claiming our nation is founded on Christian values. Quote from George Washington - The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.Now who should I believe the random politicians or blinded christians who think their way is the only way or a great man who helped found our nation. Btw I have nothign against christians just bible thumpers who try to force their faith on others.
Andrew, Little Rock
12/6/2010 4:26:14 PM ET Capt A- get off the our forefathers blah blah blah horse. Homosexuals and to be quite honest minorities were not included or thought of when all men are created equal... was put in the Declaration. And stop comparing us to all other countries. That is another useless argument. Just because another country approves of a behavior does not make it right for us...especially since our cultures are different. Again we are at war, not at peace...focus your energy on winning the war overseas and stop pushing political agenda on the military that is understaffed, overworked etc. You wouldn't even know our country is at war in AFG and eleswhere if you were born today and read the news. My how our country's priorities have gone down the toilet.
Maj Sense, Florida
12/6/2010 3:42:55 PM ET Analyst - Maybe flaunting isn't the correct word to use. The point was that all those things should stay out of the workplace. Religion creed orientation...should never be part of the workforce or job. I have a strict no PDA policy with my family when in uniform. I don't do it on base either. If everybody followed this then lots of things would be solved with DADT. Housing and benefits is an issue also. Federal government doesn't recognize homosexual marriage. If they did then it would be legal in all the states. What do we do? I don't have issues with the gay and lesbian community. I got friends that are. Just think it is a bigger issue than just repealing it. For those that bring up the color segregation this is a different issue. If it were the same then you would be using unisex bathrooms instead of men/women.
Ronald, Fort Sam Houston
12/6/2010 2:54:09 PM ET Post-repeal there will be one standard of conduct expected between opposite sexes and another more permissive standard permitted between members of the same sex. Show me a university which madates the close contact required of military service but denies a portion of the population the right the object to being forced into those situations i.e. lodging showers UA testing doctor exam with someone they know to be attracted to their sex.
Dave, Alaska
12/6/2010 2:16:55 PM ET For the good of the service you can infringe upon my First Amendment right to free speech via Art 89 of the UCMJ waive my Fourth Amendment right to be secure in my person from search by calling a drug urinalysis an inspection and yet you tell me I must accept a very small demographic of people who make a decision to deviate from the norms of society because someone not living the life of a service member decided they have a right to serve. Our very own Core Values require that I put Service Before Self. What service are they putting before themselves? How many rights have I already abrogated for the honor of defending my country? Do I not have a right to be protected and to protect my family from the morally perverse behavior of the few regardless how loud their political voices are? Should I not be permitted to take my weekly shower in a combat zone without fear of lewd thoughts from other occupants of the shower tent?
MSgt D, Alaska
12/6/2010 2:12:28 PM ET Here here Capt A.
Analyst, Barksdale
12/6/2010 2:03:04 PM ET That 70 percent positive is skewed because it includes those with mixed feelings. Somehow the mixed feelings automatically get grouped in the positive column, how is that? Take those out and i'm sure the stats will be evenly divided. Take a look at the comments from both sides that are posted every time this topic comes up. Bottom line it's a dividing topic and there is no way this will have a positive impact on the force. Arguments are always the same from both sides. Those against DADT use comments like bigotry close minded homophobic DOMESTIC enemies third world military policies and compare to racial integration. Those for DADT talk about showering housing benefit allowance transgenders. Both sides need to come up with some new compelling arguments and quit googling stats. And shame on Capt A for calling someone who sticks to their beliefs and values a DOMESTIC enemy. That's contradictory to your entire statement, isn't it?
SW, OK
12/6/2010 12:59:32 PM ET Wow there are some seriously bigoted ignorant and downright stupid people sharing my USAF with me. Some of you need to step outside of the brainwashing and actually experience the world. Sadly I fear that all some of you know about gays are from movies like Bruno.
JK, BAFB
12/6/2010 12:50:15 PM ET Well said Captain A. Judge a human by what they do, not what they are. If homosexuals are allowed to serve openly they are to be held to the exact same standards as the rest of the military. There's no gay agenda here. It's about life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Let's embrace everyone who chooses to defend those freedoms.
Oliver, Nevada
12/6/2010 11:45:48 AM ET As another commissioned officer in this forum I am absolutely disgusted by anyone who would espouse anything to devalue another human being. I joined in order to defend the very freedoms for which this holds dear and upon which this nation was founded as outlined in both the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution all men are created equal and the pursuit of Happiness I do not know about you but I took an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.
Capt A, Maxwell
12/6/2010 11:43:00 AM ET Moreover as a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we are bound by our moral conscience to hold All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. But how can we hold the moral high ground when we openly discriminate? Lastly out of our NATO allies, Israel, Australia and New Zealand there are only two countries, Turkey and the US who do not allow homosexuals to serve openly. Get with the times
Capt A, Maxwell AFB
12/6/2010 11:39:23 AM ET @Rhonda You are simply parroting LGBT talking points. Homosexual activists contend the U.S. military should embrace the open homosexual policies of small forces like the United Kingdom which is 26th in size Israel which is 34th in size and Australia which is 67th in size. By comparison, the world's ten largest militaries all ban homosexuals to include the U.S. India and Pakistan which are all-volunteer forces as do all Islamic countries, Russia China and Japan. Those are the facts.
Joe, Texas
12/6/2010 10:42:00 AM ET To second a couple of other posts here.. the bathroom shower situation IS an issue. From a completely selfish perspective, if homosexual women are to shower with other women I should get to also.
Mike, WA
12/6/2010 10:29:26 AM ET To Ronald at Fort Sam Houston - He also added the benefit of the medical helping him her. WHAT? Helping him her? If a person can't figure out who she/he is, I don't want that person working on a flight line carrying a gun on post or .... anywhere
Retired MSgt, Arizona
12/6/2010 9:21:11 AM ET People please eduacte yourselves. This has nothing to do with transgender individuals. People who are transgender are MEDICALLY DISQUALIFIED because they are diagnosed with GENDER IDENTITY DISORDER. This is about gay men and women. Read the report to find the answers about benefits - it has already been discussed.
Kris, EAFB
12/6/2010 9:01:17 AM ET Whoa how did it go from homosexual to transgender? Totally different things moreover crossdressing is a fetish. And what is up with the whole shower debate? I don't know about ya'll but it was since basic when I had to share a shower.
Bobby, Florida
12/6/2010 8:56:37 AM ET Ronald it is not about 'flaunting' who you are it is about not having to conceal it. Religion creed orientation etc you should not have to hid these sorts of personal details for fear of reprisal. Yet some servicemembers must. Also homosexual transgendered. That is an entirely separate issue.
Analyst, Barksdale
12/6/2010 2:15:49 AM ET Do we have time for this? A new CBT squadron commanders call, group commanders call, wing commanders call - tracking attendance, playing question and answer to those who didn't attend. And for what? Folks we aren't playing war here we are at war.
Jim Crosson, Ali Al Salem AB
12/6/2010 2:07:20 AM ET Great. Not only am I forced to live on-base now, I'm going to have some gay neighbor's lifestyle on display in front of my kids. Moral viewpoints aside I say until all U.S States Territories recognize same sex marriage this initiative be terminated. Lest we jump the gun unintentionally transforming the States stand on this behavior by welcoming these people into our disciplined all-volunteer fighting force. Having this lewd lifestyle choice impressed upon my family is not cool. I vote for DADT. Let the gays serve America in some other venue, next to the swingers child predators racists and convicted felons.
concerned chair force Sgt, PACAF
12/5/2010 8:03:00 PM ET It is difficult to comment on DON'T ASK DON'T TELL because the subject matter is profane and unclean. When you deal with this subject matter bluntly and fully, you will have to exclude these gentelmen from the service for the good of the country. When I see the Joint Chiefs deal with this subject matter I feel sad because such honored men should not have to deal with this subject. A1C Thomas J. Young 1963-1967 HONORED TO SERVE
Tom Young, Scappoose Oregon
12/5/2010 3:15:58 PM ET Should the US Military approve recognize and condone gay tendencies? What moral issue is being presented not only to the American public but the world? Will America be viewed as the leader of freedom liberty justice and moral degradation? I may be wrong, however, I believe many countries don't recognize or approve of gay tendencies or openness. Many countries like the Muslims see the U.S. as a breeding ground for evil. This only fortifies their stand against America as the so-called infidels. Im a traditional person with traditional beliefs. I'm all for freedom and equality but please don't openly influence my children that this is normal and acceptable behavior. Do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home but don't indicate to the world that it's all good. I have trust in my god and my country to portray and do what is morally right. Because I serve be assured that should the decision be made to repeal the law, I will defend the rights of those affected.
33 yrs service, U.S.A
12/5/2010 11:16:43 AM ET I have served proudly in our military now for 25 years. If DADT is repealed I will be forced to follow my convictions and retire. Homosexuality is disruptive to society and destructive to families. It is COMPLETELY inappropriate in a military setting and always has been. I will uphold my moral convictions and denounce this action that our country's leaders are proposing. If they want to integrate this policy all dorms showers bunks need to be coed. This will make an already stressful situation for combat troops even more stressful. People with a conscience with be leaving the military in droves. I openly object to having to tolerate this.
LWilson, Salt Lake City UT
12/5/2010 3:43:38 AM ET So our service chief is presenting data from a survey to Congress and people want to write in arguing about it You can't argue with data people. The fact - yes - fact is that an overwhelming majority of service-members don't have a problem with gay people serving. Stop trying to come up with every possible what-if scenario and accept that change is coming. If you don't like it then start planning your alternate career path outside the military where ironically you will be working with gay people. Just because someone bunks in your tent or uses your shower does not give them the right to sexually assault you. We have rules and laws already in place that address it...get over yourselves.
Texas Pete, Texas
12/4/2010 2:32:50 PM ET On the issue of showers DoD civilians share showers with military members at any base I've ever been to and there are currently no rules against them being gay. On the issue of marriage the federal government should recognize any legal marriage between two people. It is not the Federal government's responsibility to decide what is and what is not a marriage that is up to the states.I agree with applying rules about housing dress and bathroom use based on legally recognized gender. If a transgender individual has officially made the change then that person has fundamentally changed his/her gender. They do not need a special category unto themselves. Again this is all only relevant if congress takes action to repeal DADT. Untit that time our homosexual brothers and sisters in arms will continue to serve with the daily stress that at any time they could be outed and discharged from military service.
Richard, AL
12/4/2010 1:23:49 PM ET I don't care how they do things in Europe. We were at one time a nation of Christian values. This is another indication that we are no longer. Keep your perversions on the civilian side, we're supposed to be better than that.
DS, Anchorage
12/4/2010 1:14:23 PM ET Remember...it is a crime against nature. All 50 states have bigomy incest and sodomy as a crime against nature. To allow homosexuality in the Military ranks is another example of the United States straying from the formula that formed this nation. Homosexuality is not the normal being for a human. It is a mental issue. They are not to be hated or feared. But the practice of sodomy and having a mental aversion is not coherent to the mission of a healthy force.
SS, California
12/4/2010 12:39:43 PM ET Sexual conduct and the associated restraint that honor demands is unhinged by approving homosexual conduct among service members. One of the sexual revolution's prime-movers Dr. Kinsey found that homosexual men had literally thousands of sexual partners in a lifetime. Women who are sympathetic to the stereotypical gay fashion designer have no idea what a testosterone-infused hostile gay man will do to manipulate those around him. And unfortunately the family men who would normally temper or reprimand young men for deviant sexual conduct will be silenced. Please everyone PRAY and WAKE UP. This issue strikes at the heart of sexual restraint and accountability within the force.
William, Maxwell AFB AL
12/4/2010 11:57:27 AM ET Has anyone heard if this will change the UCMJ stance on sodomy? Does repeal of DADT allow gays to serve openly but not fornicate with other gays?
Joe The Sergeant , Overseas Location
12/4/2010 9:50:59 AM ET For all you scared straight people out there. We gay and lesbians have been serving for years. We don't make unwanted advances on you, we won't break up your sacred marriage. We will serve our country as you do if not better. We follow the rules as you do. If a lesbian serves she will adhere to the proper women's regulation. A gay man will follow the men's regulations. I have one request, please respect our lifestyle as we respect yours. We are all God's children. God loves all of us no matter what or who we are.
Chris, New Mexico
12/4/2010 3:09:52 AM ET Hey Mike from Florida the only MODEST RISK that the General was referring to are the ignorant paranoia and stereotypes over nothing. Grow up and join the 21st Century. Over 30 nations have already repealed similar laws and it truly is a shame that we are so progressively backwards that what we should have been the first to do we have not done yet.The repeal will allow new and existing gay and lesbian military personnel to serve openly in the military. Wow that's such a threat to morale..... As the Congressional hearings have also brought up the repeal will also prevent STRAIGHT PEOPLE from using the I'm Gay excuse to get OUT of the military. Bet you didn't think of that one did you? The reality is if the law was repealed tomorrow, it would be forgotten about by Monday. Why? Most military personnel with a shred of common sense know that they are already serving with gays/lesbians - these same men and women that serve with honor and integrity
Mike, Also from Florida
12/4/2010 1:42:06 AM ET Military members joined knowing that if they were homosexual they could not express their sexual preferences. Just like any other job that has stipulations like you can't smoke you can't do drugs. You wouldn't demand your employer let you do drugs just 'cause you wanted too. He'd say get another job. Why are we letting a small percentage of homosexuals dictate what they should be allowed to do? Find another job. DADT works. This is a politically-charged agenda that has no place in our country founded In God we Trust. And if this is repealed military members should have the option to not bunk shower and live with an openly gay individual. I don't expect him to check me out but the fact is homosexuals are turned on by the same sex. Just like a female would feel awkward bunking showering living with one of the guys. If you want to serve our country follow the UCMJ that you swore to follow. Otherwise find another line of work.
justin, Deployed
12/4/2010 12:51:43 AM ET What is a modest risk to military readiness effectiveness and cohesion? Why risk ANYTHING? I don't object to the homosexuals serving, I just ask that they act like the gender they were born with unless and until they are with their own kind.
ALVIN ZIEGELBAUER, BEDFORD TEXAS
12/4/2010 12:51:25 AM ET While I do support the repeal of DADT, I do wonder how it will incorporate those trangender individuals. Would they have full medical benefits that would allow them to change their gender at the expense of the military? How would the use of community facilities go? I take my young children to the pool. I would be very uncomfortable with a transgender individual changing beside my kids. While I personally don't have a problem with anyone's sexuality there are some issues that need to be resolved.
Jennifer, Germany
12/3/2010 11:24:59 PM ET Make it an all homosexual military That's the way to go. Let em all stick together. I'd put papers in if I were still active. Most them can't spell combat much less do it.
Dave, CA
12/3/2010 11:08:32 PM ET Look this is America. We want to be as progressive as Europe. We have already been fundamentally changed with socialized medicine punished taxed more because some are wealthy. So yes, we are just a couple of step behind Europe. Might as well be just like them. Shoot. The wise one in US schools are already allowing for people of the opposite sex to share rooms just becuase they can identify with the opposite sex and are uncomfortable with the same sex. Yes, let's do it. Repeal that silly thing.
Echo Victor, SJ
12/3/2010 8:54:18 PM ET Wow. That's all I can muster...Wow. I'm sure all of my fellow service members who fear the repeal of DATD also would have stood tall for a segregated military too. I'm sure all the same scare tactics used FOR DATD were used in support of nonintergration...Troops will never serve alongside a black man, Readiness will suffer... blah blah blah. We as a country military got over it...and the fear mongering of homophobes will pass too.
C, USA
12/3/2010 8:21:08 PM ET I really hate it when someone compares our military force to another country. since 20 countries allow.... And do these same countries deploy with the same force size and duration and fight on the front lines No no and no. And their cultures are vastly different than ours. Quit using the military as a science experiment and let's focus our efforts time money on what's important...winning and coming home.
Major Sense, Florida
12/3/2010 8:14:08 PM ET I was in the Air Force for 20 years and was never seen in the company of women ever. I had to serve from the closet to keep my homosexuality quiet. I was very sexually active with other military guys who were in that same closet. When I retired I came out totally and nobody was at all surprised. We didn't have the internet then or I would most certainly have been found out. The pressure of serving from the closet is immeasureable. When the ban is lifted you will see morale rise from those free to come out. We've lost way too many mission critical personnel and lost millions of tax dollars in training simply because that individual is gay.
Alan Reeser, Mesa AZ
12/3/2010 7:42:12 PM ET One issue that's come up in my shop is if we allow openly gay persons to serve, what impact that will have on accompanied housing. i.e. will we have to change the rules who can get dependent rate BAH and who can live in on-base housingoff-base housing. Will two gay males or females be allowed to live in an on-base house ahead of behind or at the same priorities as heterosexually traditional marriage couples?
Tom, Tinker AFB OK
12/3/2010 5:13:38 PM ET Not everybody joins to serve our country. Most people join for school or economic reasons. I have met a transgender that wanted to serve. He also added the benefit of the medical helping him her. With the bad economy there will more wanting to join. I have served with gay members also. Reason it worked is because no personal lives where out there. I don't flaunt mine so you don't flaunt yours. That will change if the rules change.
Ronald, Fort Sam Houston
12/3/2010 4:47:59 PM ET Rhonda and Amanda. I take it you will not have a problem when men begin to use the female showers at the gym while you are in there taking a shower. It is not against the law is it
MSgt T, here
12/3/2010 4:08:44 PM ET To some of Ronald's points the report itself addresses some of these issues and makes recommendations. As for which bathroom a TG would use I believe that would depend on the person's legally recognized gender. Some folks have a court legally declare them the new gender regardless of the original plumbing. It's almost like changing your name except you whiz a little differently than you did before.
BK, Definitely NOT Maxwell AFB
12/3/2010 4:06:52 PM ET I have to agree with Capt S on this. We already have many gay military members serving, some in combat zones and usually they are known to quite a few of their team members. I have served with gay military. It's not a big deal, especially in today's military. They serve because they feel it's their duty to their country. Let's let them serve with honor and dignity like the rest of the military. It's time to get on board and quit throwing imagined what-ifs in the way. If you don't want to serve with a gay military person then don't enlist, don't re-up or resign your commission. Since over 20 countries allow gay people to serve openly with little or no problem, why is it so difficult for Americans to allow this? Can't our military men handle this or are they so unsure of themselves the thought of serving with a gay person unmans them.
Rhonda Elmore, Hill AFB Utah
12/3/2010 3:48:05 PM ET Capt S - Really? Do you really think the flaming gay transgender would actually join the Air Force? Don't you think you are making a big assumption about flaming gay transgender individuals? I would expect a more informed stance from somebody indicating that they are possibly a Captain in the U.S. Armed Forces. Flaming or not, they are people willing to put their life on the line to protect our country. Let us all show them some respect.
Amanda, North Dakota
12/3/2010 3:13:35 PM ET Apparently the people making the rules don't have to share a barracks room shower or tent with other troops. Maybe people living in the trenches should be asked. Or are they going to give every member of the military their own barracks room toilet shower tent? Or are we going to just have one big room for every member to share regardless of sex or sexual preference?
Guy, San Antonio
12/3/2010 3:08:20 PM ET I appreciate your concerns Ronald. But we have to remember that we are an all-volunteer Air Force. Enlisted and officers who join the Air Force do so because of a sense of duty and patriotism. Do you really think the flaming gay transgender would actually join the Air Force? I seriously doubt that.
Capt S, NH
12/3/2010 2:49:03 PM ET I thought that 70 percent of the military was the majority. Wait Wait Someday. Where did I hear this before?
Johenry Nunes, Vermont
12/3/2010 1:46:36 PM ET After getting up off the floor I read this article again. General Schwartz says the AF can accommodate repeal with MODEST RISK to military readiness and effectiveness unit cohesion recruiting and retention...Can anyone please tell me when it became okay for a commander at ANY level to risk ANY AMOUNT of readiness effectiveness unit cohesion etc. without getting fired?
Mike, Florida
12/3/2010 1:44:41 PM ET There are plenty of issues in repealing it. Very true that we have members in the service right now and they do a great job. The issues in my eyes are the question on transgenders that would like to serve. How do we accommodate them? This also opens questions on marriage where some states consider it legal. What happens to benefits then? Does this push to make gay marriage federally legal? Do cross dressers get to use the opposite sex uniforms? There has to be new rules in place addressing all this.
