American Morning
Gay soldier: Obama's 'don't ask' pledge a reprinted IOU
Editor’s note: Lt. Daniel Choi is an Iraq veteran and a West Point alumnus. He is facing discharge under "don't ask, don't tell," the 1993 law that bars openly gay and lesbian people from serving in the military. An estimated 65,000 LGBT Americans serve in the armed forces, according to the Urban Institute.
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/05/11/art.dan.choi.jpg caption= "Lt. Daniel Choi is an Iraq combat veteran and a West Point graduate with a degree in Arabic."]
By Lt. Daniel Choi, Special to CNN
As we watched our president speak so eloquently and thoughtfully about our country, many heard the resounding theme: "Jobs, jobs, jobs."
He spoke about the economy, then our national security, and then started speaking about our values. I wondered: "Is he going to address 'don't ask, don't tell'?"
We heard the buzz in the past days that he was going to mention it. I felt the speech was nearing the end and I was becoming a bit uncertain. And throughout this past year of coming out, standing trial for telling the truth, and fighting my discharge, I have become accustomed to this feeling of uncertainty.
This past year's journey has been a roller coaster for me. After returning home from Iraq and beginning my first love relationship, I realized that I could not lie anymore. Falling in love made me finally see why relationships make us more complete and more secure; I also began to understand my soldiers and their families.
As a leader, I always accepted the fact that my subordinates needed a support system at home, but now it became more than theory. The support and strength I got from my love relationship proved what I learned all along. It made me a better leader and soldier to finally understand true love.
So why should I lie about that?
When I came out publicly in March there was a great deal of uncertainty. Since I knew the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy would only require a statement as evidence to fire me, I was forced to choose: morals and honesty or career and rank?
But since my soldiers, peers and superiors knew about me being gay and there was no evidence of discomfort or chaos in my unit, I figured the military may indeed keep this Arabic linguist and West Point educated infantry officer.
Even after the trial in late June, where no evidence of lowered morale or harm to "unit cohesion" could be found, my career was uncertain. In fact, when I told some that I gave portions of my testimony in Arabic, I noticed an increase in morale and support from my unit. Even with the microscope of the media cameras on my case, even with all the commotion, my unit remains professional and ready.
Lawmakers who think ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is a “successful” policy are out of touch. Senator McCain is detached from reality. Rep. Boehner is flaunting his ignorance. Honesty strengthens a unit. Now is the time to erase the policy of hiding and lying. Our values cannot wait.
But in the end, the current policy says I must be fired for my statement of truth. I still have not heard the final decision. Will it be an Honorable Discharge or "Other Than Honorable"? Will I retain my veteran's health benefits? Will I carry the burden when applying for future employment? Will I be forced to pay back my West Point tuition?
So while I am inspired by the president's commitment and message, I still carry a toxic burden of uncertainty about the outcome of my career. I love my job and my team; I want my unit to deploy with all the skilled soldiers, resources and support available.
The president, as commander in chief, listed his national security objectives, reminding us that 9 years after our country was attacked we must all do what we can to keep our nation and the world more secure.
Whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Haiti, I was excited to think that I could do my part in any of these efforts as a soldier. I was excited that by the end of this year I might be able to serve in a military where honesty is protected, not punished, by law. While I heard the majority of the speech addressing jobs, I remained uncertain about my own.
But why should I remain uncertain? With all the drama surrounding the one line and so many gay activists praising this utterance as if they wrote the speech, I felt I should join the celebration. But I ultimately felt the harsh reality of what was missing.
As dramatized as it was, it was not an executive order saving my job and those of thousands, but a repetition of a promise: a reprinted I.O.U. While America knows that repeal is indeed the "right thing to do," so far it has only been the "right thing to say."
In my view, President Obama could have addressed 'don't ask, don't tell' in any portion of the speech. It is a matter of national security, it is fundamental to our values, it is preventing me from doing the job I love. But ultimately, I have found more than a job. Fighting to repeal 'don't ask, don't tell,' fighting for the values of honesty, fighting for our love is a moral responsibility: it is a Duty.
And when faced with such a duty, despite our fears and uncertainties, we cannot "run for the hills."
We must take the hill.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Lt. Daniel Choi.
About this Show
Welcome to the American Morning blog where you can get daily news updates from American Morning's reporters and producers. Join us for "the most news in the morning," weekdays from 6-9 a.m. ET, only on CNN.
On Twitter
Look at history when the integration of black servicemen happened, the same arguments were used... it will disrupt unit cohesion, we shouldnt "experiment" on the armed forces, its just not natural...
We now call those kind of statements racism. In a generation we will call the opposition to full equality for gay americans yet another iteration of bigotry.
Thank you Lt. Daniel Choi. for your service. God Bless you & your loved ones.
We pride ourselves as practicing equal rights. Our constitution states clearly that ALL men are created equal. Our troops are fighting to defend these rights. Descrimination is not tolerated in this country, whether it be
due to gender, race, religion, & sexual orientation. All military personnel take an oath to defend these rights & they do so even with thier very life.
The sooner we get rid of dont ask dont tell the better. Our military needs
to set the example for the rest of our country.
It's funny that some refer to this as a "Republican" problem.
Democrats have run the Congress for 3 years now. They could have changed this policy at any time in the past three years.
A Democrat has been in the White House for a year now. He could have issued stop-loss orders stopping the separations, or even signed a law sent to him by Congress–if they'd sent him one.
California, a heavily Democratic state, has voted *twice* not to allow gay marriage. Hawaii's legislature, which has only 8 Republicans total in both houses, just voted gay marriage down. Oregon has as well.
The Democrats talk a good game, but they're no more interested in so-called gay rights than Republicans. To try to make this an anti-Republican issue is disingenuous at best.
L-T: I don't care what gender you are and what gender you love. If you can shoot a rifle and won't freak under fire, you can share my foxhole.
Courage and Fidelity, sir. RLTW.
The greatest fighting armies of the world were Gay! The sacred Band of thebes,Alexander the Great, Fredrick the great, the samuri, Hitler, Lawrence of arabia, the Zulu,Native American warriors, oh and did I mention the 2 Gay Christian Married saints ST. sergius and ST. Bacchus.
LT. Choi:
Whether you're given an "Honorable" or "Other Than" is for someone other than I to judge. However, when you disrespect a tried, true and proven soldier like Sen. McCain, you lose your point with me.
Sen. McCain probably spent more time in a POW camp that you've been the service. What have you done to protect this country?
You're the one that's out of touch and I see nothing honorable about your position or your words!
Oh! And btw, I forgot my most important point: As I knew it, Executive Order 9981 was a "presidental Directive" from the "Commander-in-Chief" of the armed forces ordering the "don't ask;don't tell" directive. So what is this I'm hearing about taking this to Congress for a vote? Congress never passed this in the 1st. place.
Why can't Obama just simply "rescind" the order issuing a new one allowing gays to protect our country just like everyone else who galantly, with supreme patriotism, decides to do so? It's his call as Commander-in-chief, not anyone else's.
P.S. Could it be that he doesn't want to alienate all those who would put him in office the NEXT go around? My son told me that the the latest edition of the "Advocate" (Gay Community) has a donkey kicking him. At least THEY know what is going on!
As a mother of a former Marine & a gay man, I feel my opinion counts for something. Both my sons are very close dispite their differences & my gay son just got back from visiting his best friend & family in Florida who also is a former Marine & is quite vocal about a gay man being his best friend.
I, like so many others, can tell you that being gay is NOT a choice even IF the lunatic fringe wants us to believe it. In fact, I've seen so much more love, tolerance, helping one another, charitable giving & volunteer work among the gay community, it has made me look more carefully at the "straights" and their attitudes & behaviours compared to gays. Guess who wins?
Israel has had gays in their army for years & it works tthere. Personally, my belief is that there aren't any gays in foxholes & I'd want the best soldier beside me if things were getting hot, gay, straight, or other!
@Alex Turner-there is no added stress of getting raped by a fellow soldier. gays, lesbians, and bi's are no more a crazy sex fiend the a straight man or woman. which means yes, there are exceptions to the rule like with everything else in this world. your just making things worse by suggesting the military should segregate gays from straight soldiers. just another homo-phobic responce to change. i am not saying i am gay nor straight . cuz i dont think that should matter, i am human so what i say and my opinion should be heard just because of that and that alone.
I have known several straight men in my 63 years and never had a problem. It's the radical ones that have raised my blood pressure. They want the rights of the consitituion only for themselves and be considered superior to those that aren't like them. I am an American male that has worked all of his life, paid his bills and tried not to bother anybody. I'm white, straight, and mail and God forbid should I feel like i'm a minority. Do I parade around, toting my guns, beating people up to prove I'm a man, ridculing others that aren't like me? I think not.
First I am straight. Ok, so what, big deal. I think the issue here is, can the military, or for that matter any business or orgainization survive the few that seem to create a problem. OK, who presents a problem, straight or gay? It is only the few on either side that have strong standings and they are the focus of any situation. No group, straight or gay, wants to have the opposing side in their face screaming I am this or that. If acceptance is desired by either side then moderation and self control is warrented. Straight folks do not understand Gay folks and frankly if you do not understand they they do not accept, in other words reject the idea that two of the same sex can have the same feelings as those of opposite sex. Straight folks, generally, do not openly flaunt sex in front of the public and I believe that if Gay folks were to adopt that idea then problems would soon disappear. It is only when any group forces an issue that hackles are raised. How does this affect the military? The gay soldier is looked at as being odd by straights because they do not understand and fear them, fear that they might not act like they should, would try to "put the make" on them, or not fight as strong as a straight person. Somehow these mistaken views are hold overs form the past, like discrimination and will continue for God only knows how long. Government cannot control ones feelings and thoughts, as much as they wish to through legislation. We will always have these until acceptance is established and that the proper actions by all involved and time. In the future you will see more acceptance but at the same time, no matter if you are gay or straight violations of public trust, laws, and rules can and will be met with appropriate punishment regardless of gender, sexual preference, race, or bliefs. That is what should be stressed.
To all those serving their country, we're not going to ask so don't tell. I will serve my country, drink a beer, laugh, cry, and grow with you. For those that are serving for an alternate agenda, you signed up for the wrong reason. Go tell your commander, because you are a liability to your peers.
This issue could be solved with one storke of the pen. It was one of Obama's pledges. This isn't a piece of legislation that needs house and senate approval. This is DOD policy, not a law, and the President is Commander in Chief and approves or disapproves DOD policy. Clinton instituted it as CINC, Obama could change it. Don't stand in front of people on the campaign trail or in front of the full congress and make it seem that someone else is holding it up. Shut up and just do it, you are the boss of DOD.
I lived in the barracks my fifrs 5 years in the Army! Soldiers do not get a choice of who their room mates are! You live with males if you are male and female if you are female, So if a male soldier is attracted to males why should I have to be un comfortable living in my room? I would feel equally uncomfortable with a female living in my room! As long as I don't know what their sexual preference is it wouldn't make a differance to me! As long as they don't tell me! Thats why the policy is so great! I don't go around screamming I'm straight so don't tell me you are gay!
If gays/lesbians are afforded the opportunity to serve in the military openly, will the armed forces be required to provide separte shower/bathroom facilities, or will it all go "co-ed" ???
LT,
I have served for 21 years and am finally stepping down. I love my country and I understand the Military. The UCMJ is written to give us guidance on what is legal and how we shoud respond to certain types of investigations. You may live your life how you want, that is one of the freedoms we have all protected. But, I really am tired about hearing about sexual orientation. It has nothing to do with how well you shoot or how good a soldier you are. If your straight or live an alternative life style, it is not the business of the army if it does not break down moral or put soldiers in danger. However; I do believe in law and order and until the rules are re written, we should live by them.
Being prior military I did meet lesbian women. I did not care what they were or who they were but when I was approached in our communal shower then it became a problem. Later I found out I was not the only one. To think we actually started to post shower watch so as not to be approached and we could not report it. Do you know how it feels – GROSS. All I hear is how they won't it is not a problem but it is. I was young then, sheltered but that is not excuse to be exposed to this.
Why do you need to tell others. The soldiers I worked with did not go around talking about their spouses. Nor did the singles go around talking about their loved ones. Their private lives is just that – private.
I agree that the military is not the place for social experimentation. Any policy that subverts unit cohesion or potentially puts the esprit de corps in jeopardy should not be pushed on the individual troops. I agree that the troops should be polled to see what they want in this situation as that is the only honorable thing to do.
Based off of those concerns I wholeheartedly agree that we should not allow blacks to serve openly in the military.
Oh wait, wrong decade.
It's OK as long as there isn't any "gay awareness week" or gay awareness training or promotion quotas.
Its about time Obama stick to his promise to the gay and lesbain community. Almost every one has someone gay in their family line.
Look people, all who serve do so honorably. Sexuality is private and personal: No public display of affection in uniform, do not discuss about your spouse, sex, or politics in the Wardroom. These are just some of the rules that are tenants of military discipline.
How would it make a fellow female soldier feel if I, as a heterosexual male, discussed my sexual preferences and desires. There is no place for it. I am not going to ask you, and you are not going to tell me, straight or gay. You can serve without bringing out your sexual desires.
I will say that when this rule is repealed, and a guy comes up to me and says they are gay, I am going to take offense to it and bring a charge against them for sexual harassment. There is no place for it.
Sir, thank you for serving our country and standing up for the rights of many. While I was serving in Iraq, we were subject to "the gay witch hunts". We called it Gayzing (like hazing, but against gay people). As if mortars and sporatic gun fire wasn't enough... our chain of command was out to "capture" a real life gay person. They made our lives living hell. Oh yeah, even the straight people. Cause when you have to take a buddy everywhere you go... Do you pick the same sex, and get labeled GAY? Or do you pick the opposite sex and get labeled something worse?
What I don't understand is in all these comments about people being worried about being hit on and sexual assault – unwanted sexual conduct is already banned, right? So how is knowing another soldier is gay more scary than knowing another soldier might be a closeted, repressed, self-loathing gay person who is really good at hiding his true identify to advance his goals? I feel like having someone living a lie is much more unsettling than being near someone with a partner at home. And if people can't deal with the idea of someone around them being gay or hitting on them, then I feel like they're not the best people to put in high pressure military situations where someone is actually shooting at them.
I have to applaud, and add to, the comments made by Mike M. I'm glad to see that there are some, probably many, hopefully most, soldiers who do not stoop to homophobic bigotry. I'm not a veteran, and I'm straight too, and I understand that the military, despite it's resistance to change has been one of the first organizations to open opportunities to minority groups in the past. I'm not sure why the gay thing has been such an issue... what are the opponents afraid of? Why do they care about someone else's preferences in the company he/she keeps? Lt. Choi graduated from West Point (a definite accomplishment) and is an expert in Arabic (something our country definitely needs) so why oust him from his career because of who he loves? My respects to Lt. Choi, and the hope that his example will help to eventually change policies promulgated by ignorance, superstition, and fear of anybody who is different
Lt. Choi– thank you for your service and you're continued courage in pursuing your moral duty!
Prohibitions against homosexual conduct is part of the law of the land as far as our military goes. The uniform Code of Military Justice goes back to the Truman Administration, and was not just something thrown into place by do-gooders, evangelists or Right Wingers.
If it is a bad law, act to get it changed. Until then, it is the law that Bill Clinton, and Barrack Obama both swore to uphold.
in the military men and women currently have seperate facilities ( for sleeping, showering) for obvious reasons. With out such seperation the sexual tension would be VERY destructive to unit cohesion. so if DADT was repealed, would gays also be given seperate facilities? would straight folks be forced to shower with OPENLY gay ones? if that were the case what would be the justification for any seperation of men from women in the military?
First I am a retired recall veteran soldier and I dont care of the sexual orientation that my comrade is. The soldiers that are homosexual and want to tell to the world can do that, but Lt Choi and the other fellows soldiers that want everybody to know their sexual preference were discharge bc they disobeyed a direct other of the policy. No because they were gay. The policies are being develop for discipline, unity and cohesion. The policy DADT are being creat for the that purpose. A lot of soldiers know that all the branches of the Department of Defense has homosexual. Soldiers sospect but all not 100% sure. That is why the policy is a success in this Army. When a soldier learns that a soldier in the company is gay, you can see that soldier most of the time is alone. Remeber that most of gay soldier are in a Non Combat unit and that is why you dont hear a lot of soldiers been discharger for assault or harrasment of gays soldier. I believe that the DADT policy was for the protection of the gay solodiers.
The "separate barracks" issue is bunk. If you've ever been in the field in GP mediums, men and women sleep in the same tent. You work out the issues. No one cares about sex in the field. No one has the energy.
Not to say that gays can not serve in the military, but what are the guidelines? Do we extend the same benefits to their partners that we do to other military spouses? Should gay soldiers be assigned barracks rooms with other gay soldiers or with straight soldiers? What about trans-genders in the military, should the military use tax-payer dollars for sex change operations? Personally, I don't care about sexual orientation of an individual – and feel that there should be no special benefits or consideration for married soldiers or other workers in relation to single soldiers. Marriage should be a religious/group institution that is seperate from the state and should receive no recognition as such. Sorry for going off-topic.
Lt Choi is no doubt displaying the courage of his conviction. As a 20 year veteran, I for one have no problem with allowing gay men and women to serve. However, let's not for a minute believe that this will not come at a cost to the Services.
Every time the military has been forced to become demographically more like the public we serve, there has been a cost. Standards have been lowered to allow more women to serve. Standards have been lowered to allow minorities to serve. Neither statement is conjecture or ignorance. They are matters of fact that can be borne out by checking test scores, grades, or physical performance. Every time we do this, the military gets a little less capable.
Will straight men be forced to live with gay men? Can gay men choose to live together? Any commander will tell you that young men and women working and living in close quarters ultimately proves the biggest challenge to the unit due to male/female issues. Openly gay men and women serving in the same units as one another will simply add to those challenges.
This is never something you'd hear from the brass – not politically correct, but absolutely true. So, while it may indeed be the right thing to do, let's make sure we have our eyes wide-open on what the costs will be.
Why do soldiers need to bring up sex again?
Here's the human problem with this entire situation that you hypocrites who are straight and bigoted don't seem to grasp, though you are proficient enough in it's perpetuation. Human beings have a distinct proclivity to "KISS AND TELL". Every day of my life I have to listen to straight people talk about who they love, who they have sex with, who they would like to have sex with, on and on and on and on. Soldiers in uniform are ESPECIALLY Interested in such subject matter, if I am to judge by any militarily themed movie I have ever seen. Human beings are possessed of a curiously human condition in that they cannot hear or talk enough about what other human beings are doing with their penis's and vagina's. It is a fundamental human interest, and comes in only behind food and shelter. This natural human proclivity is what you expect gay people to somehow be completely free from, while they listen to your endless love and sex stories. I am not posting to defend s**t talk in any discourse, public or private. But here's a news flash for the PRETENTIOUSLY ignorant. IT'S THERE, AND YOU MAKE IT BE THERE. We're there too, and we're gay, and you're going to get used to that.
Having completed 2 combat tours in Iraq in an infantry unit I can say with personal experience that our young men and women in the military are a lot different than the old farts in Washington. They are much more understanding and tolerant of others. It doesn't matter if it's race, creed, religion, heritage, or even sexual orientation. We did have gays, as well as Muslims in our unit and never had a problem with either. Our biggest issue was having good leadership. This soldier is a good leader and speaks Arabic on top of that, he should be allowed to stay in his unit and fight for his country.
My Hero, Lt. Daniel Choi. Thanks for being who you are and doing what you do! May the Spirit that set the heavens in motion shower blessings upon you and your loved ones.
@ jim vicalvi:
When your IQ reaches triple digits, give us a call.
Keep up the good fight Daniel ! Lot's of people support you !!
It is long overdue for the disgraceful "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy to be swept into the dustbin of history. it is an insult to the men and women who serve our country to think that they are are incapable of maintaining their moral or unit cohesion while serving with a gay soldier. Are we really so intellectually and emotionally inferior to the military branches of Israel and so many other nations that have allowed their gay citizens to proudly serve their countries? If so, we are most certainly doomed to become a second class nation!
When folks refer to"flaunting" one's sexuality, I wonder to what they are referring. If they mean, as one commenter put it, "parading down the street half-naked ranting and raving," then this is behavior that would be considered off-putting or even offensive regardless of one's sexuality. But if they are referring to general things that heterosexual people in relationships take for granted – such as referring to the loving support one receives from one's partner or spouse, this is something entirely different. People have the right to disagree with the idea of gay relationships. This country affords us the freedom to have our beliefs, either grounded in our own personal morality or in our religions. But when a person sacrifices his or her life by entering military service, it is reasonable that this person should be afforded the same freedom afforded to everyone else – the freedom to refer to one's own family relationships, however defined, completely separate and distinct from any reference to one's sexual behavior.
An interesting story from the perspective of a gay officer.
As with most articles on this subject the writer has an agenda.
There are many ways that this issue must be viewed. From a human rights standpoint is one. Another is military effectiveness. Bottom line is that the military has a job to do.
Can the military perform its job better under don't ask don't tell or can it perform its job better under a policy that allows openly gay soldiers to serve? Can it recruit and retain more soldiers under the old or a new policy? Are military units more effective under the old or a new policy? The human rights issue should be secondary.
I served in the Navy and know of only 2 shipmates who were gay. I would not care if a person was gay or not if they pulled me out from a burning ship. We were a crew all inclusive .I worried more about officer stability. They put me in more peril than the gays. They have women on some of the new ships , we called them loveboats. So what the diff. ?
You are RIGHT, Sir. Thank you for loving our country and defending it. You should be allowed to love your country and your partner. I'm married to my best friend and it makes life wonderful. I hope you get to enjoy that bliss and continue your courageous and honorable work.
I support our president and hope this is ended, once and for all!
I will preface my statement with I'm a conservative. While most of my beliefs are closely aligned with the conservatives there are some ideologies I can't reconcile with – gays in the military being one. The military is a job and sometimes the only job someone will find,especially in our countries current state. I think it is egregious that someone would be removed from their position strictly because of their sexual orientation. If a man or woman is performing their job satisfactorily or above then their sexuality should not even be an issue!
To U S Army: I respect your opinion about the trying times that our military is going through. However, that is a baseless argument that is meant to push it off for when? Is there ever a good time? You also raised the issue of how much it would cost. Hmmm. If you were the one being treated as a second class citizen, would you have the same opinion? I doubt it. On the same note of cost- I often wonder how much money is wasted when we kick out the thousands of highly trained soldiers for being gay. I'm convinced that this costs way more money than any change to the policy could potentially cost. The cost to educate Lt. Choi alone is high, and he is only one man.
As a Marine in Okinawa, I was aware of a couple of sexual assualts by gay men on their extremely drunk / passed out cubicle mates (we lived in open squad bays separated by wall lockers and partitions). Before everyone liberal flips out, sexual assualts by military members continue to occur – same sex, opposite sex, children and even animals. The fear that homosexuals somehow will destroy a unit's espirit de corps is far fetched. Drug use, domestic violence, alcohol abuse, mental illness, combat anxiety, all have an impact on a unit. Sexuality and controlling unwanted advances is simply an issue that should be addressed by sexual harrassment policy. Violations are dealt with via the UCMJ. Set professional boundaries for all...and move on toward real problems vice those highlighted by special interests.
Good for Lt. Choi. I'm currently in the Army. Have been for seven years. Seen a lot of gay soldiers come and go, from different MOS's including infantry and SF. Guess what? The world is still turning and the war still needs to be fought. As long as you can do the job what's the problem? I'd rather have a gay doc that can do his job, rather than a medic who's straight an a complete d-bag. And if you'd be willing to risk your life in combat, only to run for the for the hills because the guy next to you is gay, then that speaks volumes about your commitment to the cause.
I served 10 years in the US Navy, on nuclear submarines. Some experts have said that in any given population, one can expect upward of 10% of its members to be gay. That means that on my subs, there should have been a dozen gay sailors. Whether there were, or not, I can't say. What I can say is that we did our job and backed up our shipmates. We didn't ask...they did their jobs efficiently and with pride. I think the issue here is one of education and a little more tolerance. Unfortunately, it is apparently all too true that when emotions are introduced into purely rational issues, humans ultimately fail to rhetoric and hysteria. To this young Army vet I say: "Good luck with your trials and tribulations. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your service and sacrifice. God bless you!"
As John Waters said, the best thing about being gay was not being allowed to get married or serve in the military. If anyone gay wants to serve in the military if that's what they want to do, by all means let them. If someone isn't qualified they won't make it.
It's pure ignorance that prevents well qualified linguists such as Lt. Choi from serving. Stupid, prejudiced and short sighted. These conservatives who care so much about protecting our country and borders should be the first in line to welcome Lt Choi back.
As a retired straight male USAF enlisted member with 26 years of service including remote tours and deployments to the CENTCOM AOR, I knew several lesbian airmen & it's a statistical certainty that I served with many gay airmen as well. At no time did their conduct or presence EVER produce a disruption of any sort in any unit that I belonged to, period.
It's long past time to relegate this particular foolish prejudice to the dustbin of history along with many others. President Truman engaged in a "social experiment" with the military by integrating blacks & whites in uniform more than a decade before the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It's shameful that today's leaders thus far have lacked the courage & foresight to emulate his example by abolishing discrimination against sexual preference in our armed forces once and for all even as civil society has moved forward.
LT Choi, I wish you the very best of luck in your fight, and as others have said I would gladly serve under your command. You've exhibited far more leadership & moral courage than the vast majority of officers in the present day, believe me.
Executive Order 9981 was past without long term studies into "unit cohesion" or asking every soldier what they thought. A bulk of Americans and soldiers most likely didn't care for desegeration in the military. However you can either argue that the military suffered because of it or that the military eventually got over and continued to do their duty. I'm sure there are still white soldiers in the military who dislike the idea of having superior officers of another color having to serve with non-whites. There are those who feel the same about non-Christians. Disliking or feeling uncomfortable because of these differences arguably hurt unit cohesion. At one point that was also the argument for allowing the common man into the officer ranks in that unit cohesion would suffer because soldiers wouldn't want to follow a lowborn into battle.
LT Choi,
Thank you for your service. It is my hope that the United States government will continue to acknowledge you for your leadership, dedication, and capabilities regardless of who you love. I bear this truthful in statement, as I currently serve with several gay soldiers in the U.S. Army. In my 16+ years of experience, I can honestly say that the current military policy commonly known as "don't ask, don't tell," needs to be abolished to pave way for a policy which has no regard for service members’ sexual orientation. I firmly stand by this action because I personally have several gay troops who stand poised for combative action; they are ready to die for their country. I have a strong team, and lead all as one united team to fight and die for the liberties so great of the United States of America, and have been very successful so forth. I am successful in my fight because I rid my teams of stereotype and difference… in the absence thereof, I create a common goal with unity and cohesion. After all, we ARE brothers in arms.
@ Mike, Co
- t's time we look at and seriously analyze the reasoning behind "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". The idea of the law is that our military members do not wish to be in a combat situation, where emotions are running high and everyone is on a short fuse, and have to worry about being "hit on" by a member of the same sex, nor do commanders want to worry about such an occurance causing an incident, such as the assault of the gay soldier. These are real and important considerations. -
You mean, like us women have been "hit on" and assaulted while in the Armed Forces?
Gender does not make one immune from sexual advances, nor does it make one the automatic *recipient* of such. It is narcissistic to assume that, simply because a person is interested in a particular gender, that they are interested in a particular *person*.
^ Interesting. I always thought the Infantry was taught to "adapt and overcome."
If this passes, don't join. Force a draft, then refuse to report. He drew the line,rub his nose in it. If you thought the tea paries were something, wait and see.
As a former Army CPT, the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is outdated and harmful. Our unit had *almost* openly gay members, and it didn't make squat worth of difference, even though it was an unspoken truth. "Don't ask don't tell" was a bad compromise at the time and should be stricken from the USMJ and federal law. To the "soldier"– your "military is not an experiment" is the excuse they used to not allow racial integration until forced by law. Are you saying that GEN Powell was a mistake?
This law needs to be repealed. You are a brave man Sir. If sombody is willing to risk there life to fight for my rights, then they should have the right to do it and we should be proud of them, honor, and thank them. Our country shouldn't be ashamed of those strong, brave, confident, respectful men and women. The way i understood it the military only sees green, and sexuality should be included in that. Obama is our commander in chief...shouldn't he be able to repeal this today! Its his decision when it comes down to it.
The military should be allowed to look like the diverse society it's protecting.
Would we find it acceptable for the military to tell Jews that they cannot identify as Jewish because some radical, right-wing Christians might not be comfortable with them and that there might be an issue with cohesion, trust and security? I would bet not. So why do some feel it is acceptable for the military to tell anyone of any particular identity that they cannot identify as they are because someone might not be comfortable with them. Those members of the military who cannot look past differences and recognize that they are part of a government institution that should be respecting all citizens should remove themselves from the military. I respect the military, I thank the military – but I'd rather not have bigoted, biased, prejudiced individuals protecting and serving.
Don't hurt morale and cohesion? These soldiers that are in your unit are already gay (you know, the ones you have already bonded with), the only difference would be that they could be open about it. Absolutely nothing changes except your perception. There seems to be this idea that removing DADT would mean gay pride parades and gay relationships in the military units. There will still be standards and regulations that have to be followed by all soldiers, regardless of orientation. I would like to think that the soldiers we send to war are mature enough to handle anything that comes their direction, including the fact that the person risking his/her life beside them might like someone of the same gender.
I'm more concerned that we currently have relaxed a lot of requirements to allow people with criminal records and foreign nationals (as a path to citizenship) into the military, but still say no to law abiding gay Americans who want to serve.
For the record, I have spent years in the military and there is always potential for cohesion to be rattled with or without gay soldiers. We are professional enough to handle it, like so many other countries who allow openly gay soldiers without problems.
After serving 14 straight months in a combat outpost on the Syrian border, I can comment on this issue. Gay or straight is going to be an issue in this enviornment, do not ask or tell is not the best policy, but at least we have a policy. Social experimentation is not for the military, as an officer lead, and do what is expected of you, something greater than yourself.
I am a veteran Army officer who served two tours in Iraq before completing my service to the nation. I served with several gay Soldiers during my service. All were exemplary Soldiers, and were mortified only that they were in breach of a regulation that is unjust and wrongheaded. They were disturbed that they had to subvert a regulation... their discomfort with this is a clear indication of the caliber of service member that they represented. They served honorably, and most members of the unit knew their status. They were protected because they were respected; moreover, they were needed in a very difficult mission. And one of them didn't make it home. So to hell with whatever causes anyone to stand by this policy. You are simply out of touch and care more for your discriminatory beliefs than you truly do for the health and welfare of this nations troops.
The fellow that posted as Soldier is far too prejudiced to see the facts. LT Dan Choi served in one of the finest Infantry BDE's in the Army. I was proud to have served with him. Currently, I am serving with another Infantry BDE in another locale and wish that we had more people like Dan and less like the aforementioned poster.
I am a Major in the United States Army. I have served for over seventeen years, combined reserve enlisted and active commissioned service. I have commanded at the company level for a total of 33 months. The odds are that I have served with or commanded several gay and lesbian personnel (although I have my doubts to the validity of the Urban Institutes estimates). I did not experience any issues under the current “Don’t ask, don’t tell policy”.
I am disappointed that the Commander in Chief would select a time of persistent conflict to engage this issue. Should the President succeed in his efforts, it has the potential to cause a serious disruption to an already over burdened military. Military leaders that should be focused on what resources and doctrinal changes are needed for the current fight will be distracted with the task of determining policy and regulation requirements needed to make the policy work. For instance, what type of training will be required? Will this require separate or designated barracks? How much will this cost? And how does the government pay for it when deficit spending is already out of control? These are just a few of the issues and decisions that will be required. Is this fair for our troops?
My opinion is that a President without military service already has an uphill battle to gain the trust and confidence of the men and women in uniform. A decision to pursue this action may prolong these feelings. Many may view this action as nothing more than a President using the military to further a political campaign/career.
Right or wrong, this is not be the best time to address this issue. In the end, we have a duty to obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Officers appointed over us in accordance with regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. As professionals, we will do this. Those that object can leave the service.
ROBERT wrote the following.
As a retired Army Infantry First Sergeant and combat veteran, I sympathize with Lt. Choi. In my 20 years in the Army, I witnessed the institutional prejudice against gay and lesbian soldiers, who were just trying to do their duty to God and Country like everyone else. I never saw morale decline in a unit because of a gay soldier, adn I never saw a soldier personally attacked because of his sexual orientation. The republicans in the Senate and House are living in the past. They're a bunch of out-of-touch old men that do not represent me. I always judged a soldier on his abilities and heart, and not on his religion or sexual preference.
My experience (during Vietnam) is almost exactly the same. He is so RIGHT, it deserves repeating. (The only mistake he made is saying "sexual preference." Preference means choice.
Sorry, "soldier," you're sooooo afraid, you're dead wrong. Morale and cohesion are NOT hurt. That's not fact, that's fear, talking. DADT WILL finally be eliminated. And it's about time.
I admire you so much for being honest and being public with your views. My husband was in the military for five years and to be honest, we never knew any gay soldiers. I was mildly concerned about the repeal of don't ask don't tell because I felt concerned about backlash, but you illustrate that the point isn't your orientation, it is the mission.
Obviously I have a soft spot for soldiers; I married one. And your story makes me happy and even more proud of our people in service. Thank you for serving.
Hey soldier
I'm in a marine infantry unit and I only care if my guys can shoot straight. I know the army doesn't adapt as well, but in time, you too could learn not to worry about others orientatation.
In my time in the military I never asked anyone in my foxhole what their sexual orientation was. They never asked me! We did the job and got along. I served honorably and was discharged accordingly. By the way, I am gay.
Soldier,
Every war? Even Vietnam?
There are veterans, including combat veterans, commenting on this policy, on this very page. They do not seem to care even slightly that Lt. Choi is gay, and his troop supported him. We lose a valuable asset in the war against terrorism because of his sexual orientation when we're already having difficulty winning this war? Tactically, that does not make sense. The policy is archaic, outdated, and needs to be repealed.
To John: The mere fact that he said he was gay is "flaunting it"? What utter nonsense. If he were caught having sex with another man in the middle of the barracks, THEN I would agree with you. So if a straight officer talks about his hot girlfriend back home, is he flaunting his sexual orientation?
To soldier: LT Choi has already proved that being gay does not hurt unit cohesion or morale. Everyone he worked with knew he was gay, and they didn't care.
I sincerely doubt that any gay or lesbian soldiers are just going to be hitting on someone over and over again and make them feel uncomfortable. These soldiers are supposed to be professionals. So long as soldiers are not being sexually harassed or assaulted, it's probably not going to be an issue. If, while in a battle situation, the only thing you can think about is whether or not your homosexual comrade is looking at you or flirting, you probably have some other issues that need to be dealt with, anyway. Are women in the military constantly worrying about whether or not they are going to be raped? Most are probably not, and there are a lot more straight men in the military than gay, so women have to face this issue far more often. If they are supposed to be professionals, then honestly, your home life shouldn't be coming up all the time anyway, at least any details that would really set anyone on edge, but to be discharged in the event that it does seems very harsh. To lose some of these soldiers is probably greatly hindering the military (think Linguists).
I find it somewhat amazing that Lt Choi is even in this situation, much less that he would be up for an "Other than Honorable" discharge. Lt Choi's conduct has been nothing but honorable, if not courageous. It is the system that forces men and women to choose between serving their country and being honest to their colleagues about who they are that is dishonorable. We need more Dan Chois in the services, not less.
The military isn't the place for the government to 'social experiment.' Allowing the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy will undermine the integrity of all units deployed and those that are not. While I believe that it is fine for gays and lesbians to serve in the military, the yucksters on Capital Hill need to pull their head out of their 'pet projects' and start focusing on what really matters and that is the integrity of this nation the politicans along with the servicemen and women are sworn to protect and defend.
Somebody needs to get it right!
Soldier, sorry.. I have served. Two tours in Vietnam and I can tell you that for those I served and fought with, we didnt care what your sexual orientation was back then. Only if you could shoot straight. Your bs about 'moral and cohesion' is just a cover for your bigotry. As for your 'experiment' comment... dude... there have been gays in the US military since it's inception. Wake up.
Mitchell, with 1.5 million men and women serving in our military right now, an estimate of 65,000 of them being gay would actually seem low based on the estimated 10% of humans are gay or bisexual.
You can always find one person who supports either side or an argument. I only wish CNN would show both sides of the story.
My personal take is that it shouldnt be up to the President bc he doesn't deal with our troops on a daily basis. If the policy is ready to be changed then let the top generals recommend it, don't shove it down their throats like you try do everything to us.
Soldiers are professionals and as such – those that are truly professional can serve with straight or gay people.
Any soldier who has a problem with it should be allowed to leave the military.
As an Army Colonel of over thirty years I've seen this issue debated for my long career. LT Choi managed to capture the issue and I'm proud to serve with such a dedicated and honorable Soldier. Those of us in the Armed Forces have always known we had many gay men and women in our ranks, and we've generally accepted them as fellow Warriors, without discussion of their sexual preferences. I might add those of us in the straight community don't often expect questions about our sexual experiences or partners. Why would we? I see this issue as another tool the politicians employ to drive wedges between citizens for political posturing. I don't ask, I don't tell, and I don't care.
First-How ironic is it that CNN is chosing to only publish comments that favor the people who challenge the current policy? (That is why you will not publish this comment). I have served for 21 years now in the Army and have had to listen to briefs/lecture time and time again about what is important for a couple of people/Soldiers. Why is this issue any more important than what is important to me or my Soldiers? LTC Choi, stop your whining and Soldier up! While I admire your honesty, you chose to violate a directive and a standing policy. How can you sit here and expect to flaunt your resume as a West Point grad, LTC and a leader when you can not follow the law yourself? BOTTOM LINE: You are a leader who is supposed to set the example. You do not get to choose what rules you think are fair or the ones that suit you best. If you choose to break the rules, prepare to pay for them. Living in a fairy tale world and thinking that by writing a blog to get attention for your issue will only get you the loss of your Soldiers respect and a discharge to boot. You Sir, are wrong.
To "Soldier"; if you actually read any of the above commentary, you'd have seen that half a dozen or more of the respondents DID serve or are serving in the military, and they all disagree with you. I served, I'm straight (if it matters), and I disagree with you. You cannot leave politics out of a political; argument, and this is not a military issue at base, but a political one. We already know the military will function with gay soldiers in it, it has for centuries.
John, what you mean when you say things like – "In today's society, we generally don't care of or, better yet, are more accepting of people's sexual orientation. The only caveat is that we accept you the way you are, just don't flaunt it." is that you really wish gay people would just shut up and stay invisible. My experience with people who say things like this is that they don't want to know anything about you, don't want to hear about your life, don't want to guess or even have to think about what you did over the weekend – it just grosses them out. When gay peoples mention their "partner" or who they went on vacation with or, worse, are seen in public with someone of the same sex – they're "flaunting" it. Your comment is patronizing at best and absolutely bigoted at worst.
Hey Mitchell,
The 65,000 estimated GLBT members serving in the military is from a research study published by Gary Gates of the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law. It was also published on http://www.armytimes.com. Go check it out yourself before you accuse CNN of making things up.
http://www.law.ucla.edu/williamsinstitute/home.html
Are your ready??
was in Viet-nam and the gay traffic I saw at Tahn Sonn Nhut airports t-rooms was not to be believed and that was over 30 years. Most overtures were made to me by ST8 Men, never complained, though: who would of believed me?? Itshere to stay, learn to get over it like, interracial marriage. You really owe it to yourself to accept this reality..good luck!!!
Soldiers are forced to live the first 3-4 years in the barracks, and men and women cannot be forced to co-habitate. This is because the burdens of being a soldier and having your living situation decided by others should not also be complicated by sexual tension or the fear of assault in the place where you sleep. If openly gay individuals are allowed to be openly gay, now men who are forced to cohabitate with openly gay men are placed under undue stress and burden...same for the ladies. Now we have to create seperate living quarters for men, women, gay men, gay women, bisexual men, bisexual women. Instead of a culture of cohesion and moral we now have seperate classes and groups within the military. WE FIGHT WARS, that's what we signed up for....not to place undue burden on our fellow soldeirs who may be unconfortable by this.
Stop misinterpretting the policy...Don't Ask, Don't Tell refers to No one being asked about their orientation, and NO ONE telling their orientation whether it is gay or straight. This means that openly straight men and women are in violation of the policy if they go out of their way to let everyone know they are straight. WE FIGHT WARS, we are not to be used as the front for LGBT civil liberties.
As a 26 year member of the UASF, active duty, reserve, and Air National Guard I have served with 1,000s of people and never once did I concern myself with theire sexuallity. All I cared and still care about since I am still active is can they do the job? I have good leadership and bad leadership, capable airmen/women and not so capable and I dont think any of it had to do with gender or sexuallity.
We dont need new rules or "Dont Ask, Dont Tell" we already have rules and laws that dictate how we are supposed to treat each other and those are the ones we should live by. Treat each other equally and fairly. 'Nuff Said
I'm not gay. Don't care if others are. It comes down to the persons ability to perform the basic mission of the armed services. Kill people and break things. Then you can move up from there what the mission is. Some "straight" person cannot even perform that duty least the others that fallow. Has no one looked at history. The actual 300 Spartens made famous by their actions, movies and stories about them throughout history. Gay! Every last one of them. Alexander the Great. Gay. And the list goes on. Being gay does not stop you from performing the mission. Those that can not perform the mission do not need to be there. And striaght person can not to do the mission while the gay one is doing the mission. The striaght needs to go.
It's time we stop talking about it, and simply end discriminating based on sexual orientation. President Obama where is the executive order ending this discriminatory practice? Don't buy the moral and unit cohesion arguement, they said the same thing when blacks were integrated.
The people commenting on this site have probably never served in an Infantry unit. What people do on their own time is not an issue. But the military is not an experiment. You cannot have something or someone destroy unit cohesion. Not enough time to discuss this issue on this venue but understand that if you have never been in this situation then dont comment becuase you dont understand. It should not be allowed. We have won any war that has been asked of the US Army so let us continue to win. Leave politics out of it. Dont hurt morale and cohesion. Its not a big deal too regular military becuase they have a regular job but out in a close fight you need every tool and eliminate anything that might cause a problem such as this issue.
What people will do for 15 min of fame......
In today's society, we generally don't care of or, better yet, are more accepting of people's sexual orientation. The only caveat is that we accept you the way you are, just don't flaunt it.
As LT Choi has mentioned, his soldiers, peers, and superiors all knew that he was gay (as they knew it was the truth) ..... it was when he flaunted it, that is when things started to go downhill. Don't ask, don't tell; it is not the best policy but it is a sound policy.
For all this verbage, the president didn't say what, if anything, would replace the current policy. Those on the left want the miliary to be more open than current society. Those on the right want the military to reflect a differnet set of values (return to the previous policy?). This all remains to be seen but lets not put words in the presidents mouth. The miitary has good reason to be concerned about any change policy. After all, the military is trained to be armed and dangerous.
It's time we look at and seriously analyze the reasoning behind "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". The idea of the law is that our military members do not wish to be in a combat situation, where emotions are running high and everyone is on a short fuse, and have to worry about being "hit on" by a member of the same sex, nor do commanders want to worry about such an occurance causing an incident, such as the assault of the gay soldier. These are real and important considerations.
The question is whether the current military policies and the UCMJ are adequate to handle these incidents without having a special clause concerning homosexuality. My stance is that adequate controls are already in place. Sexual Harrassment is forbidden, and punishable by dishonorable discharge. Assault is also forbidden, and punishable by dishonorable discharge or even incarceration. So what exceptional circumstance could a homosexual person cause which circumvents these reasonable protections already existant in military law that justifies specifically excluding them from the armed forces? I can't think of any...
As a retired Army Infantry First Sergeant and combat veteran, I sympathize with Lt. Choi. In my 20 years in the Army, I witnessed the institutional prejudice against gay and lesbian soldiers, who were just trying to do their duty to God and Country like everyone else. I never saw morale decline in a unit because of a gay soldier, adn I never saw a soldier personally attacked because of his sexual orientation. The republicans in the Senate and House are living in the past. They're a bunch of out-of-touch old men that do not represent me. I always judged a soldier on his abilities and heart, and not on his religion or sexual preference.
Gay soldier: Obama's 'don't ask' pledge a reprinted IOU,
Where is "Straight Solder: Obama's 'don't ask' pledge a reprinted IOU"
Why doesn't the Pentagon survey all the active,reserve and naitonal guard troops, officer and enlisted, to find out what we want on this policy?
Mitchell, CNN doesn;t have to dream up numbers, go look up how many people have been discharged due to this policy, tens of thousands!!!!! Don't be ignorant, this isn't the 1950's, even gays have rights, everyone is human!
Thank you Lt. Daniel Choi for stating the facts and having the courage to stand up for what I consider right. I served with gays in the Middle East, and have never had any issues except those caused by higher command gay witch hunts. It should not matter ones persuasion, only ones commitment to serve honorably. I will be very happy if and when our government grows up and acts in a mature and responsible manner.
Thank you Sir for you service
Why not let them serve as they are truly are. There human beings, Americans and patriots that want to serve their country. God knows you need soldiers with all that is going on in the world. And that includes Haiti, the middle east, and Korea and any other place in the world that needs the help of the U.S. military, including our homeland.
It is about time that we realize that gays and lesbian's are human beings just like us and should be treated as so. How sad is it that Lt. Daniel Choi fought for us to keep us from harms way and then to get treated as if he was a germ. It is about time that these old farts in our congress and senate either get with the program or just shut up. We are now living in a different times then in the past. Oh, how about Rock Hudson, would he have been treated the same as the Lt. Daniel. He is still a person and has fought for our country and is very intelligent. I'm all for getting rid of the Don't Ask, Don't tell...isn't this the same as profiling and discrimination??? Get real grow up.. and let these people alone and enjoy their life in peace.
As a USAF veteran who just happens to be straight as an arrow, married and with a young daughter, I can do nothing other than admire the courage and tenacity of Lt. Daniel Choi.
Sir – I speak with honesty and with honor when I say that I don't care a whit about who you choose to love – you understand love and that's what matters. You certainly understand courage, honesty and duty far more than many officers I've served under regardless of who they were attached to.
I'd follow you into combat anytime based solely on that.
It is time to reverse this wrongheaded and medieval policy. Let those who wish to serve the nation and the world serve with honor and honesty. We need all the men and women with such courage and sense of duty that we can get.
Mike M.
formerly Senior Airman, USAF (Honorably Discharged in 1988)
His is also a "reprinted story". Come on CNN...65,000 estimated LGBT's serving in the military, where did dream up that number. Just another example of why you dropped the quote that you were "the mosted trusted name in news". However you are at least one of the most trusted outlets for the liberal's point of view.
I have known several gay men in my 63 years and never had a problem. It's the radical ones that have raised my blood pressure. They want all kind of extra rights and be considered a minority. I am an American male that has worked all of his life, paid his bills and tried not to bother anybody. I feel, now, that I am in a minority. Do I parade around half naked ranting and raving to attract attention? I think not.
Unlike many others that will probably comment I don't have an answer to this matter.I'm not a politician so don't know everything. I think that if things had been changed, slowly, over the years we would have been a lot further ahead