The Devil is in the details


I don’t want to spoil the celebrations at the death of DADT, but I’m a cynical pessimist. I get the feeling this is the LGBT version of Lily Ledbetter – more symbolism than substance.

There have always been gays in the military. When I joined the army in 1978 my drill sergeant was gay, but that didn’t stop him from terrifying us the way drill sergeants are supposed to do.

Now that DADT has been repealed, some questions remain:

1) Will the UCMJ be revised so that sodomy is no longer a crime? It’s kinda silly to say “You can be gay, just don’t do gay stuff.”

2) Will gay and lesbian service members be allowed to marry? By that I mean will their spouses receive benefits like other military spouses?

3) Will the military prohibit and punish the harassment of gay and lesbian service members?

4) Will the military make sure that gay and lesbian service members are not discriminated against in regard to assignments, evaluations and promotions?

One last thing – I want to point out that by fighting the court rulings that said DADT was unconstitutional, the Obama administration left open the possibility that DADT could be reinstated in the future.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to The Devil is in the details

  1. DandyTiger says:

    What people seem to forget is that DADT was actually an improvement over what was there before. Which was torture, beat up, and possibly kill anyway they think is gay. You can again be in the services and admit your gay again. But what does that mean?

    Let’s hope that the intent and follow through is to be moving towards a more equitable environment. But let’s be cautiously optimistic too. And like you mentioned, Obama is leaving the door open to reinstating DADT or something like it in the future. So fingers crossed, but we’ll see.

    • What do you mean “admit you’re gay again”? It was NEVER okay to admit it. In the past they could investigate and find out even if you denied it. And it was grounds for discharge.

      DADT was an improvement — the best deal Bill could get at that time.

  2. Dario says:

    When Bill Clinton tried to get his promise and allow gays to serve, hell broke loose and DADT was the compromise. I’ve never doubted that it was the military that was behind the push back. Removing legal barriers is a must, but it takes years to change prejudices. And so today DADT is supposedly dead. That’s a good start.

  3. ralphb says:

    Question 2 should be answered shortly. I read somewhere where a gay officer married his partner yesterday or this morning.

  4. Lola-at-Large says:

    Just another sliver of power shaved off the behemoth power structure, another greedy attempt to share that power with the smallest group available. When will the left get good at math? Apparently never, if the last 200+ years are the gauge.

  5. Dario says:

    Soldier tells dad he’s gay and makes video of call

  6. HELENK says:

    having never served in the military, I could never understand why the big problem someone’s sexual preferences made.
    All I would want to know is , can the person next to me shoot straight and hit what they aim at. My life depends on that person and their life depends on me.
    There seems to be such a big outcry about homosexuals but very little heard about the rape of women by their military comrades. Why?

Comments are closed.