OPINION & EDITORIAL
Gays stand up for their right to fight
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Jeff Carnes:
- Gay frat diversifies Greeks (May 4, 2007)
- Problems in city's environment vast (April 26, 2007)
- State budget must keep UW in mind (April 19, 2007)
- Students should take responsiblity for credit card debts (April 12, 2007)
- State must confront brain drain issue (March 29, 2007)
Related Stories:
- 'Don't ask, don't tell' hypocritical (March 15, 2007)
- Military recruiters must remain on campus (April 14, 2005)
- Not just another word for nothing left to lose (August 8, 2005)
- Protesting policies, defending soldiers (November 30, 2004)
- Straight or gay, hire either way (May 3, 2007)
by Jeff Carnes
Thursday, October 5, 2006
University of Wisconsin students Derek House, Justin Hager and UW alumnus John Alaniz attempted to enlist in the Army on Aug. 30. The Army Recruiting Station on the east side of Madison could not allow them to enlist because they told the recruiter that they were openly gay, violating the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Policy.
On Sept. 27, Mr. House organized a sit-in in front of the Army Recruiting Center as a part of a nationwide "Soulforce Right to Serve Campaign," whose goal is to overturn the 1993 "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Policy. The Madison Police Department arrested the five protestors for misdemeanor trespassing.
These men stood up for what they believe to be wrong, and they believe they have a right to serve in the military despite the official policy.
In light of recent events, their stance is not unwarranted. All branches of the service claim that they are succeeding at their recruiting goals; but in fact, the Army has called inactivated soldiers numerous times since 9/11, and the Marine Corps just last month announced a call up for 2,500 former Marines. There is a disparity between the official party line and the reality that the armed forces are short of boots to put on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Not only has the military had to call up inactivated service members, but the military has lowered the standards required to be able to join the armed forces. The New Republic published in September that the number of recruits who scored "below average" on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) being allowed to enlist has doubled, and the maximum age to enlist has been raised to 42. While the Army did make its recruiting goals for fiscal year 2006, there is a question about the quality of these potential soldiers and the future of the Army.
The Rand Cooperation reported that recruits in Category IV (those who scored below average) do not perform to standard in critical tasks. When teams of soldiers from a signal battalion were given the task of making a communications system operational, 67 percent of Category IIIA soldiers succeeded while only 29 percent of Category IV soldiers could complete the task to standard. By raising the number of Category IV recruits, the military will damage their operational readiness in the near future. Considering the sophistication of the operational environment in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military should be attracting higher-quality recruits to fight in wars that require a soldier to think critically, make split-second decisions in an urban environment, and treat civilians on the battlefield ethically and with the proper cultural awareness. Recruiting for quantity out of desperation instead of quality will only degrade the capabilities of the military.
Despite their recruiting woes, the military still upholds the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Policy. A majority of Americans now support allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the armed forces. A poll conducted by the Pew Research Center in March 2006 reported that 60 percent of Americans support gays in the military. While there is support for legislation such as Military Readiness Enhancement Act (the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"), Congress is not considering the measure. This may be because 46 percent of Republicans and 58 percent of conservative Republicans do not support allowing gays to serve in the military.
When Americans perceive that the government is doing a disservice, most Americans complain that they cannot do anything about it. While this city and campus are famous for their activism, it is rare in 2006 to find students who are willing to be arrested for their beliefs. Being openly gay is difficult; being openly gay and willing to sacrifice for one's country takes a personal courage that few have. These three men are doing what they think is right, legally and morally. Despite being the definition of the Army Value of "Integrity," the Army will not give them the opportunity to live up to that standard.
While many college students are obsessed with their studies, partying or their newest relationship, there are still some on this campus who live the Madison ideal by having the personal courage to stand up and sit in defiance of what they think is wrong. With some persistence, these three men may soon be able to display their selfless natures by serving their country, out loud and proud of whom they are and the country for which they are serving.
Jeff Carnes (jmcarnes@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in linguistics and a veteran of Kosovo and Iraq.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 5:31am):
"...courage to stand up and sit..."
How did they manage to pull that off? Gosh, Jeff, you and David Van Sant must've had the same English Comp teacher.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 7:44am):
They were not trying to enlist, they were trying to get attention plain and simple. If the Army had taken them in and made them go through boot camp, they would have gone home wimpering to mama. If they knew there was the slightest chance they would get in, they would have never gone in the first place.
To say they just wanted to fight for their country is a bold face lie, they wanted to get noticed and make money for themselves (in the form of a lawsuit) and a few lawyers. It is disgusting.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 11:11am):
You're telling a veteran that he's wrong? Damn America-hating hippies.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 12:40pm):
do you know them? Because I do and they really do want to join - and help others too. And what kind of steriotype are you implying by saying they cannot get through boot camp?
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 3:13pm):
That's pretty brave of them to disrupt the military recruiters work in Madison. I'm sure Washington is watching carefully for the next sit-in in a liberal Wisconsin town.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 3:44pm):
7:44 is right on. These d-bags are just looking to get their names in the paper.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 4:43pm):
The columnist and the activist wrongly assume that the military is united against bringing gays into the armed services. As long as we progressives gloss over the political nuances of servicemembers we will never make any process on eliminating Don't Ask Don't Tell. The policy is utterly impervious to Madison's idealistic faux-activists. There are hundreds of thousands of servicemembers opposed to DADT, their military credentials give them legitamcy and important sway.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 4:51pm):
I'm in the military and I certainly don't mind gays...except for the soldier who would always alter their shower schedule when I altered mine, always watched me when I dressed or undressed... and basically harassed me in our barracks until I had to spend my own money on lodging in a hotel. Other than that, and the fact that they are sometimes cleaner than the average soldier, I don't think this is a cut and dry issue. The military isn't and never has been a reflection of our society as a whole, and therefore has always followed different standards, so that those of you who are not in the military can do what you want to, which is fine with me.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 5:03pm):
If they wanted to enlist, they would not have made the fact they were gay an issue.
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 5:19pm):
There is no stereotype. The ones who complain the loudest are the ones who rock the boat and disrupt the function of the military. They would have never made it through boot camp because they would have been looking for something, whether they existed or not, to prove to others they were not treated fairly (just as they did outside the office). They would have then done something similar to spread hate and discontent for the unit, in turn the unit would not function efficiently. You need unity and teamwork when you have people shooting at you. You are talking about the military, there is a little more at stake than one working at Walmart.
I was in the military and yes, there are gays in the military. They want to serve and do what they have to in order to serve, they do NOT try to make a political statement. The problem is, the likes of the writer of this column and the spoiled children throwning a tantrum outside the office have no clue what it means to serve in the military. You do NOT go in to serve a group, you go in to serve your country (they did it to help gays? That is the WRONG reason to join the military. Sorry to say this, but the military is not a place for social experimentation.
What is the worst that can happen with this kind of behavior in the civilian world? You get fired, you get your name in the paper, etc. What's the worst that can happen with this kind of behavior on the battlefield? You get yourself and 30 of your closest friends shot, dead, taking an eternal dirt nap because you had to make a point. Get a clue!
Anonymous (October 5, 2006 @ 5:38pm):
I stand corrected, my appologies the the author. If you were indeed in combat, hats off to you and I thank you.
That said, you should know the impact of those who rock the boat (if they do it now, they will do it later) can have on the moral and unity of a unit. If you are not fighting for the unit and are fighting for gays, or X or Y etc, you cannot be efficient. In peacetime, that may be acceptable, but it is not acceptable in a time of war. You can say what you want, but the personality of one who protests will be disruptive. In boot camp, the drill instructors will have them for lunch and send them home for their attitude (and make life miserable before they can leave). It would not matter if you were gay, straight, etc.
