Gay Soldier Discharged
FORT HUACHUCA, Ariz., Jan. 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Kyle Lawson, a 19-year old Army Private who was recently attacked by a fellow soldier who learned Lawson is gay, was discharged yesterday from the Army. Officials at Fort Huachuca, where Private Lawson and his attacker were both stationed, have refused to say if any appropriate action has been taken to hold his attacker, Private Zacharias Pierre, accountable.
“The Army should retain patriotic soldiers like Private Lawson and discharge those who viciously beat their colleagues out of sheer prejudice, like Private Pierre,” said C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN). “Harassment will continue to flourish and commanders will continue to condone that harassment, as they appear to have done in this case, so long as it remains official policy to discharge soldiers for being gay. Congress and the Pentagon must repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ immediately and impose strict penalties against those who engage in any form of harassment. If America is fighting for democracy abroad, it must abide by those same principles at home.”
Private Lawson’s nose was broken and he was later threatened with a knife after a friend revealed during a Battalion party in October that Lawson is gay. While Private Pierre was originally charged with aggravated assault by civilian police, Fort Huachuca officials have decided not to prosecute the case “for reason fort officials say they are not at liberty to explain,” according to press reports. Lawson says the solider used an anti-gay slur during the attack.
Fort Huachuca officials also continue to refuse any explanation about why the civilian police recommendation to charge Private Pierre with felony assault was overruled, or to explain discrepancies between their various press statements and the police officer’s account of the incident. Officials have also declined to cite any measures that may have been taken to hold Private Pierre accountable for the attack, citing privacy laws. SLDN today disputed that those laws place a complete gag order on the command. (source)
I have little to say about this, other than my total disgust at the actions that were taken by the U.S. Military. We have lost yet another good soldier, and by overruling the felony assault charge against Private Pierre, the U.S. Military, true to form, have stated very loudly that anti-gay biased is just fine.
I can understand what our troops are going through in Iraq. And I can sit here and say that “I support them”, but not the war in Iraq. But when I read crap like this, I’m honestly getting to the point that I no longer want to support our military. Bigotry is wrong. It’s always wrong. Yes, even in the military.
I don’t blame Kyle Lawson for leaving the military. He has to be concerned for his safety among his peers, and since the U.S. Military apparently doesn’t care about his safety, he really has no other choice but to leave.
Related Article
America Losing a soldier, Private Kyle Lawson, for no good reason
11 Comments
Leave a comment
I just received this from the HRC...
...On Tuesday in Charleston, S.C., I joined two of our nation's young veterans, Alex Nicholson and Jarrod Chlapowski, to help roll out the "Call to Duty" tour. This national speaking tour will shed light on the military's discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. Not only is it un-American, but it's keeping trained and skilled troops who want to serve, like Jarrod and Alex, out of the fight at a critical time.
When these two brave men were forced out of the military because of the ban on open service, they decided to fight back. They formed "Call to Duty" (http://www.calltodutytour.org). Alex and Jarrod are true patriots in the best sense of the word. Take a look at The Post and Courier story on their tour and our trip to Charleston: http://www.charleston.net/stories/?newsID=64713&ion=localnews ...
...and this is why I can no longer find it in myself to support the military...
That kind of says it all.
You're gonna love this, Bill. Here is an excerpt from my a local news story. The Defense Language Institute is getting huge new funding. That's a good thing. What pissed me off is the quote from the Monterey City Manager. Check it out...
DLI Expansion Could Mean Hundreds Of New Jobs
Facility Expanding Language Proficiency Programs
MONTEREY, Calif. -- A planned expansion of the Defense Language Institute could bring hundreds of new jobs to the Central Coast.
DLI will get $362 million over the next five years to expand its language proficiency programs, and another $80 million for new construction...
..."We need people here that are experts, native speakers in that language, and so some we can find locally, some we can't ... but they'll be coming here to Monterey, adding to the economy of Monterey, and adding to the diversity," Monterey City Manager Fred Meurer said...
It is the "diversity" part that set me off when I read this yesterday. Why? Because that diversity doesn't include gay and lesbian linguists.
Military dismisses seven gay linguists
David Ryan Alexander, Gay.com / PlanetOut.com Network
The Army recently dismissed seven gay Arabic linguists from the military's Defense Language Institute (DLI) in Monterey, Calif., despite increased efforts to recruit linguists and a congressional report noting "a significant shortfall in linguists."
In one case, according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN), Private First Class Patricia Ramirez made a statement to her command disclosing her sexual orientation. In response, Ramirez received a notice stating that she would be allowed to continue working with the Army despite the fact that she was a lesbian.
Nope. I never said (or even suggested) that "every single one" in the military was bigoted. They aren't.
But... what I am stating FOR A FACT is that the military, at this point in time, is actively practicing bigotry. Why do I say this?
Because there is no good reason to maintain "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". None! They are still maintaining that it's necessary for "unit cohesion", suggesting that if openly gay soldiers were serving, that unit cohesion would fall apart. BUNK! Straight soldiers already know gay soldiers are there and nothing has fallen apart. The only thing that has fallen apart are the careers of soldiers who are found out to be gay (sometimes only by rumors) who have been discharged from the military.
And now the President has enforced a "stop loss" measure for all discharges. That means, that if you are found to be gay, you will be discharged from the military, but only after your military duty (if you are in Iraq). In other words, it's acceptable for these gay soldiers to risk their lives for our country, but after we are done with them, they will be discharged. If the Pentagon is so damned worried about gay soldiers harming "unit cohesion", why would they allow them to stay at all?
And what about the dismissing of linguists (because they were gay) during a time when the Pentagon was complaining that we were short of linguists who could speak Arabic? That is the definition of bigotry, just like it would be a definition of bigotry if the military started discharging African American soldiers.
This is what the Pentagon is practicing. That doesn't make "everyone" in the military a bigot, just the top brass of the military (that includes President George W. Bush) that want to keep this stupid policy going year after year.
So you mean to tell me that every single person in the military ranks is bigoted, therefore you won't support them? "Every single one?" I don't think so...the majority yes it seems, but EVERYONE...I don't think so.
"Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible for those in the military to speak out against policies with which they do not agree."
Very true.
I have talked to gay soldiers who are currently serving right along with straight soldiers. I talk to them on line to try to offer my support.
I have also talked to straight soldiers on line who know for a fact that there are gay soldiers in their ranks. No one talks about it because of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and the straight soldiers, by and large, do not have a problem at all with the gay soldiers. This is especially true with the younger soldiers, as you alluded to, Fritz. They only ask that they do their job like the other soldiers. I would expect that as well.
The painful thing for me is what I have to say to the gay soldiers who want someone to talk to about the issues they are facing. They are in Iraq. They are lonely and they have to lie about so many things, or simply they have no way of talking about the issues going on in their lives. All the while, the straight soldiers are openly talking about their girl friends and wives without regard to any possible consequences of doing that.
Here, we have gay soldiers who are risking their lives for our country (for us), and we deny them the basic dignity that others are allowed. They are not allowed to voice their love for their "friend" back home who is the lover of the solder. When they get home, they are not allowed to openly show emotion/attachment to their partner because that very simple act could open an investigation that would lead to discharge.
And the truly painful part of all of this is that, when a gay soldier tells me over on line chat that they are gay and need to talk to someone, I have to tell them, "Stop. You can't say anything more because it may land you in trouble." On line chat is not secure. Others could be listening in. Yes, our government now has sweeping powers to do all of that.
We've lost freedom to protect.... freedom.
Try making sense of that.
Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible for those in the military to speak out against policies with which they do not agree.
Currently, there aren't too many top brass who openly advocate for repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and allowing gay and lesbian people to serve openly in the military. (Wesley Clark was one of the few who had the guts to do so.) Most of them are relics of the 1960s.
The bright side is that those young people I wrote about earlier are the future military leaders. When G.W. Bush, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, and all of the other bigots of today are dead and rotting in their graves, more enlightened leaders will take their place.
I've actually had a few friendly debates with friends who are vets in which they tried to use the old "you didn't serve" ploy on me (the argument that you can't criticize the military if you didn't do your duty). They're always at a loss for words when I reply, "My government never gave me that opportunity." I've found it is very difficult for them to look someone they know and respect in the eye and tell them that they're a second-class citizen.
I understand that there are people in the military that support gay people. I do.
Perhaps it's just me that's changing, but the older I get, the more focused issues become.
A company either discriminates in it's hiring practices, or it doesn't. The military, although very diverse, is like a company. The head of that company (the Commander In Chief) allows discrimination to take place. Therefore, I do not support that company. I take the same stance against the military as I do any company (or state) that discriminates against us. It's wrong, and it should stop.
If the soldiers really supported gay soldiers, they would not remain silent against Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Yet, I hear nothing from them.
I say this not to be unpatriotic. I say this because I am patriotic. We are losing too many good soldiers at the hands of this stupid archaic policy of kicking out soldiers who are found out to be homosexual, at the expense of our nation.
It's 2006 for Christ's sake. It's time we had some progress in this area.
I draw a distinction between the military establishment (which includes the Commander in Chief) and the men and women who serve.
I do not support a military that discriminates against me. Period.
However, in spite of idiots like Pvt. Pierre, many young people currently serving in the military support gay rights. I have met many of them here at the Defense Language Institute and Naval Post-Graduate School in Monterey. Keep in mind that the people serving at these institutions are more highly educated and more intelligent than your average enlisted person.
Many of them have placed gay pride bumper stickers on their cars even though they're straight. They display them as a way to silently protest the discrimination that their gay and lesbian peers are subjected to.
The reason I no longer support the military is because the leaders of the military have repeatedly turned a blind eye to this kind of behavior. This is not an isolated incident. Gay soldiers have been killed, and very little was done. Now, gay soldiers can't even be open about being gay. If they are found out, they are kicked out of the military. Is this what you would have me support?
Yet, we are supposed to believe that soldiers follow orders. If that be the case, if they do indeed follow orders, then I'm left believing that the soldiers are doing these injustices to gay soldiers because the military leadership will do nothing about it.
This has little to do with bigots in the military. It has everything to do with the military not wanting to clean up their act and stop this crap from happening.
I will not support bigotry. The military, by doing nothing about these deeds, is participating in bigotry. Therefore, I will not support them.
Just like their are bigots in civilian life, so there will be bigots in the military. I disagree with your statement of not supporting our military, because there will be bigots in all facets/aspects of life, not just military, and not just civilian. It spans everything, Bill.