Taking ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to court

July 5, 2005

On the Hill, Rep. Marty Meehan’s Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which would repeal the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, continues to slowly build stronger and broader support. As of this week, the bill (H.R.1059) has 89 co-sponsors, three of whom are Republican, and six of whom have signed on within the last few weeks.

However, since we probably shouldn’t wait around for Tom DeLay and Dennis Hastert to bring this legislation to the floor, it’s encouraging to see that 12 servicemen and women are challenging the policy in federal court.

During her first five years in the Navy, Jen Kopfstein avoided conversations about her personal life. In the collegiate atmosphere of the Naval Academy and the close quarters of a ship, that was difficult for Kopfstein.

“I felt like I was being forced to lie and having to be dishonest,” said Kopfstein. “I could never share anything about my family or my home life or even say what I did on the weekend. It is hurtful to do that.”

So Kopfstein wrote a letter to her commanding officer telling him she was a lesbian. Under the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, she was discharged from the Navy.

Kopfstein and 11 other service members are challenging the 12-year-old policy, arguing in a federal lawsuit that it violates their constitutional rights to privacy, free speech and equal protection of the law.

“It’s a terrible policy,” said Kopfstein, 30, of San Diego. “It’s very detrimental to morale. It turns people into second-class citizens.”

Indeed, it does. Nevertheless, the Bush administration is seeking to dismiss the case before the trial, arguing that the policy “rationally furthers the government’s interest in maintaining unit cohesion, reducing sexual tensions and promoting personal privacy.”

If nothing else, I hope the case helps put this nonsensical policy back into the public debate. With the country engaged in two wars, the military struggling to meet recruiting goals, and enforcement of the policy costing taxpayers nearly $200 million, it’s time for the country to restart the dialog as to whether this discrimination is wise.

Bill Clinton could have issued an executive order during his first term that would have effectively ended de jure discrimination against gay people in the military. In fact, his campaign oratory (“We can’t afford to waste a single person”)led many of us to expect that he would do exactly that. Instead, he caved to the old-line military and their supporters, and the deceptively named Don’t-Ask Don’t-tell policy was the result.

The irony, I suppose, is that in order to seem less gay, Clinton didn’t just kiss Sam Nunn’s ass; he enthusiastically rimmed him. And what did Nunn give Clinton in return? All I can think of is the bird.

I wish these folks well with their lawsuits, but I don’t see the courts taking this on, and I *sure* as hell don’t see this administration doing anything other than interposing themselves between the military and anything that resembles progress. I’m sure they consider $200 million a small price to pay in order to maintain the sanctity of whatever it is they’re maintaining th the sanctity of this week.
. . . jim strain in san diego.

  • Among the countries of the Western industrialized world, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Japan, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the UK allow gays and lesbians to serve freely. (source) Within NATO Britain finally caved to the EU demand for fairness and even Turkey is about to do so as a condition of EU entry. The only holdout? Our ante-diluvian bastian of progress and equality, God-Bless-America.

  • I never forgave Clinton for his failure on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. That was a big reason why I didn’t vote for him the second time he ran. Not that he missed my vote.

  • I don’t see why gays can’t die for thier country as easily as I can.
    When I was in the military, I really resented the fact that a gay could come out and get discharged when they were tired of the military. I knew 3 guys who did that. Pissed me off, hell I wanted out of the service too but I spent my full enlistment period in the service. Just because I wasn’t gay.

  • The Bush administration and congresssional Republicans won’t get rid of DADT because they already have the ability to ratchet enforcement up and down as needed. That is, when we’re at peace and the military doesn’t need people, out you go, but when there’s dyin’ to be done, then it’s hey, you fags are all right.

    The Servicemember’s Legal Defense Network has documented this trend. Here’s a link to their press release: http://www.sldn.org/templates/press/record.html?record=2204

    Here’s the choice pieces:

    “The military discharged 653 men and women in 2004 under the gay ban, the second lowest total since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tellâ€? was implemented. … The SLDN analysis also reveals that, based on other data obtained from different sources, less than one-quarter of all 2004 discharges under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tellâ€? were from units deployed in support of war operations, suggesting the services are far less likely to discharge gays and lesbians serving on the frontlines. Gay discharges have declined by 47% since September 11, 2001.”

    Absolutely disgusting hypocrisy. Either let us serve with honor all the time, or fight your own fucking wars.

  • As a former service member, and now working for the Army, I can firmly attest that there are a LOT of homosexuals (both gay and lesbian) serving in the Army today. Funny thing is, most people know who they are, and DON’T CARE! As long as they don’t parade it out in front of everyone, people turn a blind eye on it, and live and let live. Unfortunately, there are bigots out there who would harass these people, and those cases hit the headlines. But for the majority, it’s just a pretend world (with a VERY small slimmer of pretend) covering them.
    But Damnit, these people pull their weight like everyone else, they don’t ‘hit on’ the other guys in the group, and unit cohesiveness doesn’t seem to be affected whatsoever. I have never seen line soldiers complain about their mates, and have seen quite a few stick up for their ‘queer’ buddies. It tends to be the bigotted people in the chain of command who tend to create a ruckus. We would be much better off if we drummed out the bigots, and let people be people.

    Oh, and one more funny thing. Everyone I know who left the service for being gay- wasn’t. They all played the card of being gay just to get out (while at the same time hitting the bars with their girlfriends on the weekend). The actual gay people I have known all spent their time in.

  • With Bush’s wonderful education and firm grasp of history, surely he knows that the Spartans—the toughest MFers in ancient Greece—made San Franciscans look straight. If unit cohesion is such a concern, then why not just have some all-gay units? Viva Sparta!

    Time for a couple choice Barry Goldwater quotes:

    Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar.
    You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.

  • Of course, if the US military adopted a more progressive attitude about gays, it would pre-empt the technique of getting out of the draft by telling the doctor/psychologist that you are gay.

    • Comments are closed.