Repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is a civil rights issue
Three North Carolina Libertarians candidates for Congress endorse repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” and view it as a civil rights issue that should be handled by Congress and the Department of Defense.
President Obama has endorsed a compromise between Congress and the Defense Department to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, an agreement that may sidestep a key obstacle to repealing the military's policy banning gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the armed forces.
Some opponents of the policy compare the issue to the integration of the armed forces after World War II. In 1948 President Truman ordered the military departments to integrate, even though some generals, including Army Chief of Staff Gen. Omar Bradley, and most Southern Democrats opposed integration.
Each of the military services also had separate branches for women, like the Women Army Corps. These were phased out and women were fully integrated into the regular command structure in the 1970s.
“Gays and lesbians can serve with honor in many military specialties and should have that opportunity, in our all-volunteer armed services,” said Lon Cecil, who’s running in the 12th Congressional District.
“While the Defense Department may have a few legitimate situations where gays and lesbians could serve only with unacceptable accommodations, the Navy agreement to put women in submarines should be a strong indication that any motivated person should be able to serve with honor in our military,” he said.
Voters in the distinct have told him clearly that “don’t ask, don’t tell” should be repealed. “If I were in Congress, I would vote to eliminate DADT as a military policy,” he said.
The policy takes away all discretion from local commanders, leads to potential civil rights violations and forces dismissal of soldiers who performed in an exemplary manner, Cecil said.
“I think the military should take the lead in resolving this issue,” said Tom Rose, the Libertarian candidate in District 2.
Rep. Bob Etheridge, Rose's Democratic opponent, recently voted against an amendment to a Defense appropriations bill that would have repealed the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
“There have been gays and lesbians in ever branch of the military since the earliest beginnings of this country and some have died for this country,” Rose said. “Those who are serving now are willing to fight and die for their country. They should be treated the same as all other military personnel in all matters.”
District 3 candidate Daryl Holloman agrees this is a civil rights issue and thinks Congress should take the lead to change the policy and allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces.







Good news
Some practical policy suggestions from Libertarian voices.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
It's been pointed out to me
It's been pointed out to me that I do not reply to comments. Sorry. Thanks for your words.
Brian Irving
Raleigh Libertarian Examiner
Apparently DADT isn't being enforced anyhow
Apparently DADT isn't being enforced anyhow. If it were, then Bradley Manning (a/k/a Alfred E. Newman?), who apparently was quite open about his homosexuality (or perhaps bisexuality), would not have been in a position to collect and then release tens of thousands of classified military documents.

Your bigotry is showing
God must be very proud of you today.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
name-calling...
...is what you do when you can't dispute the facts.
How about this?
Dan Choi's discharge was just enforced, he received the letter around a week ago I think:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/38373009#38373009
And posting doctored photographs
is what you do when the truth isn't sufficient to generate the scorn you'd like to see directed at somebody.
Seriously, that blacking of the tooth is about as mature as a high school freshman defacing pictures in an annual.
oh, come on...
Please don't tell me that you sympathize with that weasel! If we can't ridicule a traitor who stole and revealed to America's enemies tens of thousands of classified military documents, who CAN we ridicule? You've got to admit that Manning bears a striking resemblance to Alfred E. Newman. Are you truly offended by a little caricaturization to make the point? Seriously??

Assuming that he is guilty, he should be tried, convicted, and shot.
I am offended by your
implied association between allowing gays in the military and destructive/treasonous behavior, Dave. Feel free to deny that if you will, but your goal was/is apparent to any...how do you people say it? "Clear-thinking individuals", I believe it is?
Your choice to expose that on a thread about DADT smacks of both opportunism and bigotry, and any value your contribution to this community may have had in the past is leaking away quickly.
As Joe Friday would say,
"Just the facts, ma'am."
The fact is that if DADT had been enforced then Manning wouldn't have been in a position to betray his country. You don't have to like it, but it is true, and all your nasty name-calling won't change it.
It is also a fact, scharrison, that your first complaint was about the caricature of Manning as Alfred E. Newman. That complaint is what I responded to. Now you've changed the subject. You're still offended, but you've found something else to be offended by. This time it is the fact that I pointed out that Manning wouldn't have been in the military at all if DADT had been enforced in his case. It makes me wonder: is there anything that DOESN'T offend you?
Why is it that so many people on the Left reflexively respond to contrary opinions with umbrage, and assume that any disagreement with their own opinions is due to bigotry, rather than reason? That sort of response makes rational discussion impossible. They know what they believe, don't bother them with the facts, and if you do then you're a bigot!
Look at the current WCPSS imbroglio for a great example of such behavior. The Board is trying to fix the problems that cause the WCPSS to fail so many thousands of students so miserably, but instead of constructive dialogue the push-back they get from the other side consists almost entirely of vicious and nonsensical accusations of racism and bigotry.
The issue of whether homosexuals should be allowed to serve in the military is a another perfect example. There are three camps: the "absolutely no" camp, the "don't ask, don't tell" camp, and the "absolutely yes" camp. The military brass are almost all in the first two camps. Do you think it is because they are all bigots?
Yes, I suppose you probably do. But, if so, you're wrong. Although it is true that most homosexuals would never betray their country, it is also true that homosexuality causes very significant problems in the military, and it is a known risk factor associated with security breaches*, and if DADT had been enforced in Manning's case then he'd not have been in a position to betray our country.
Dave
* Some studies and experts dispute that homosexuality is a risk factor associated with security breaches. However, although it is true that most homosexuals are loyal and many have shown great valor (Mark Bingham comes to mind), it is also true that a disproportionate percentage of particularly infamous traitors have been homosexuals: E.g., Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Wm Vassall, etc.
and
just as a no gay rule might keep out gay rule breakers, a no straights rule would probably keep out even more no straight rule breakers, and a no women rule would keep out any women rule breakers, and so on.
Dave
your comments in this thread have risen to the level of intolerably obnoxious. You are no longer welcome here.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.