LGBT Groups Warn Gay Servicemembers: Don't Come Out, Re-enlist Quite Yet

WASHINGTON -- Although both chambers of Congress have now passed a repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) and the President is expected to sign the legislation into law this week, LGBT advocacy organizations are warning gay and lesbian soldiers not to reveal their sexuality or re-enlist in the military quite yet.

"While the immediate impact of this bill may inspire folks from across the nation, it is important to note that full implementation has yet to take place, and that it is not yet safe for service members to disclose their sexual orientation," wrote the Human Rights Campaign on its blog Saturday afternoon.

Even after Obama signs the repeal into law, he -- along with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Secretary -- must issue a certification stating the Pentagon is prepared to implement the repeal in a manner that won't hurt readiness, effectiveness, cohesion or recruiting. DADT will still be law until 60 days after certification. Until then, therefore, servicemembers are still at risk of being discharged or investigated.

"I respectfully ask Defense Secretary Robert Gates to use his authority to suspend all 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' investigations during this interim period," said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the advocacy group Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. "Until the President signs the bill, until there is certification, and until the 60-day Congressional period is over, no one should be investigated or discharged under this discriminatory law."

According to Metro Weekly both Sens. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) endorse this approach.

A Defense Department spokeswoman told the Huffington Post, "The current law remains in effect until certification takes place. As Secretary Gates has said in his statement [yesterday], the Department will immediately proceed with the planning necessary to carry out this change carefully, methodically but purposefully." The White House did not return a request for comment.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he will sign on to certification "only after careful consultation with the military service chiefs and our combatant commanders and when I am satisfied that those conditions have been met for all the Services, commands and units." Although several of the service chiefs advocated against repeal during their testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, they all said they were confident they could implement the change and make it work.

"Certification and the 60-day Congressional requirement must be wrapped up no later than the first quarter of 2011," Sarvis told ABC News. "The bottom line: for now, gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members must remain cautiously closeted."

During this two-month period, Congress may hold hearings to review the Pentagon's policies and plans for implementation, which would likely re-air many concerns of opponents who were against repealing DADT in the first place.

Comments

[tbrdfx96]

12:49 AM on 12/23/2010

Sex is such a small portion of a person's life. Why would you care about who someone has sex with if they are both adults? I do not ever think about my coworkers having sex. Ick. I don't think about any 2 random people having sex. There is something wrong with someone who dwells on someone else's sex life. If a person became disabled and could never have sex again they would still be gay/straight. It's really not all about sex people. Why is that not common knowledge?

[CaliforniaFree]

01:32 AM on 12/22/2010

It's very clear that in the past the senate has voted wrong laws into society for the benefits of the few....

We all know the facts that in 1850 the USA Senate VOTED to CONTINUE SLAVERY, Yet many folks out there were CHEERING for this VICTORY...­....

You may SCREAM at me or at others for speaking the facts that gays CHOOSE their own personal rich Lifestyle but it's surely evident that your LIES, DECEPTIONS­, and TRICKS will be exposed...­..

It's amazing we spent BILLIONS of DOLLARS for over 2 YEARS on Sex INSTEAD of CREATING JOBS for us AMERICANS in this GREAT RECESSION!

[Andrew J Epstein]

11:17 PM on 12/20/2010

so many heros let us not forget sgt. Lenoard Matlovich

[Ioan Lightoller]

03:01 PM on 12/21/2010

I love the verse on his tombstone: "They gave me a medal for killing a man--and gave me a discharge for loving one". I think that sums up the whole tragedy of straight religiously caused bias towards GLBTs in general and the military in particular. Sure it's great for a man to kill another man, but by god if we catch him loving one, he's getting booted out. Very very sad in the 21st Century.

[MohammedAbbasi]

03:48 PM on 12/20/2010

I agree - LGBT guys know along with other minorities that Extremist Christian groups have infiltrated the US military and are an unknown enemy within not just to the military but the United States

[alabamaDREAMIN]

09:45 PM on 12/21/2010

also, to what i would deem (humbly, and not saying im awesome or anything) "real christians" - obviously i am by no means a jesus replica free of sin, but i do believe that the christian values of peace, love, and tolerance are being ignored by the world because of awesome people like sarah palin and GWB. anyway, as a "real" christian, i am embarrassed it took us this long to repeal the law, and embarrassed that we are perpetuating dangerous and destructive propaganda under the guise of one of the greatest humanitarian efforts of all time (that statement serving to those who do not buy the christian doctrine). and trust me, the liberal christians are on fire right now with what the convservatives are doing to tarnish the image of peace that we are trying to promote

[LynnW49]

03:26 PM on 12/20/2010

I appreciate the desire to protect gay troops from further DADT harm. But does anyone honestly think that if there is one single move to continue processing current DADT discharges, or to start a new one, that there will not be rioting in the streets?

[Tom Sito]

02:43 PM on 12/20/2010

All those clowns who complain about gov't spending also complain about DADT. Well, since it's implementation the US Military fired the equivalent of an ARMY DIVISION's worth of soldiers- almost 14,000. Combat veterans, medal winners, translators, West Point grads. All the lawsuits and hearings burned money, must have burned untold tens of millions of dollars to propagate a social prejudice. Now THAT's gov't wasteful spending.

[LynnW49]

03:33 PM on 12/20/2010

"In 2005, the Government Accountability Office found that the cost of discharging and replacing service members fired because of their sexual orientation during the policy’s first 10 years totaled at least $190.5 million. This amounts to roughly $20,000 per discharged service member.

Analysis of GAO’s methodology, however, shows that the $190 million figure may be wildly off the mark. A recent study by the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara, found that GAO’s analysis total left out several important factors, such as the high cost of training officers—commissioned soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, and Coast Guardsmen with several years of service experience—who were discharged due to their sexual orientation. When these costs were factored in, the cost to the American taxpayer jumped to $363.8 million—$173.3 million, or 91 percent, more than originally reported by GAO."
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/03/dont_ask_dont_tell.html

And those were just the numbers from five years ago. On Obama's watch alone, another 1200 servicemembers have been discharged.

[UltraClassicII]

12:48 PM on 12/20/2010

I am wondering, purely from a logistical point of view, if the services are going to be forced to take in transgendered people? What in the world will they do with them? I'm sure some liberal/leftist dem/prog can site and example on how some pip-squeak little European country with a joke for a military has transgendered people serving with great success.

[randy of the netses]

01:10 PM on 12/20/2010

Well that statement doesn't sound like something someone called "UltraClassic" would say.

[Ioan Lightoller]

01:16 PM on 12/20/2010

"UltraClassicII is a legend in his own mind.

[kde301]

01:18 PM on 12/20/2010

Hi, I'm a liberal/leftist/dem/prog in the Army, and though I won't CITE any "pip squeak european country with a joke for a military", I can tell you that all applicants have to pass a physical exam and meet certain physical strength and endurance requirements. Many applicants are declined from military service for operations such as bariatric, eye, and knee surgery, due to likelihood that their bodies can't hold up to the strain. Otherwise, I'm sure there are many fine TG people who would love to serve their country. Have fun at the Klan rally.

[carmenjonze]

01:33 PM on 12/20/2010

Shows what they know about trans people. I know trans people who have to TELL you they are trans because otherwise one would never know. As for passing physicals, like anyone else, each person has their own route with that. Like anyone else some will pass, many will not.

Why people have to keep pretending like their own personal knowledge that someone is LGB or T is somehow the end of the world, I will never know.

[carmenjonze]

01:33 PM on 12/20/2010

Shows what they know about T people. I know trans people who have to TELL you they are T because otherwise one would never know. As for passing physicals, like anyone else, each person has their own route with that. Like anyone else some will pass, many will not.

Why people have to keep pretending like their own personal knowledge that someone is LGB or T is somehow the end of the world, I will never know.

[EndTheGOP]

11:41 AM on 12/20/2010

Why come out at all? What does it matter? Who cares, as long as you can fire a weapon? There is no need for a "self-actualization" moment, when you can shout to the world your personal gender attraction.

[halfpricefaustian]

11:57 AM on 12/20/2010

My guess is most gays/lesbians in the military don't want to make a point of their preference, it is just enough to know that if that preference becomes known, they can't be kicked out of their chosen profession. The whole sexual preference thing has been totally overblown for so long that people seem to think every gay person wants to carry a flag. In reality, they just want their preference to not matter.

[EndTheGOP]

12:13 PM on 12/20/2010

Agreed, thanks, you helped fill the blanks in on the point I was trying to make.

[LynnW49]

03:30 PM on 12/20/2010

That's right.
The 'phobes think that every gay servicemember will be shouting about their identity. This will simply not happen. It only means that if a gay soldier is thinking about appearing off base, say at the grocery store, with a partner, he or she will not have to deny themselves that simple and ordinary act.

[EmmaDarian]

12:11 PM on 12/20/2010

Do you consider it shouting to the world when a straight soldier carries or displays a photo of a wife or husband? Mentions a significant other in conversation? Sends an email that gives a clue to one's sexuality? Those things could be construed as coming out if a gay soldier did them.

[lotus321]

12:57 PM on 12/20/2010

Good point. As long as I still have the right to tell them I don't want to see such things which refer to their homosexual relations the same way I can sayit to anyone else..I could care less.

[AMCD]

11:18 AM on 12/20/2010

Finally, a bit of good news for the same sex crowd. It is way past overdue.
Next is the right to marry. Gays and lesbians getting married does not affect my marriage in the least.

[sprtakis69]

11:35 AM on 12/20/2010

You sound sane, and secure with your own sexuality.

[Ioan Lightoller]

12:26 PM on 12/20/2010

F&F. Nice to see someone on here who is secure in their own sexuality and is sane.

[AMCD]

01:28 PM on 12/20/2010

Thank you. Although I wouldn't say its about being secure with my sexuality. I mean, I don't know any other way to be. Sorta like saying I'm secure with my ability to breath air...

But I will tell you where it comes from. My religious belief. Jesus did not preach hate. He preached tolerance, acceptance, understanding, forgiveness. Not hate.

[vulpecula762mm]

09:55 AM on 12/20/2010

I find the who kerfuffle just so darn....

Gay....

:-)

[av1drdr]

09:45 AM on 12/20/2010

There is something that really frightens me about the repeal. When these brave young men and women are in the field, how will the law protect them from their homophobic siblings-in-arms? Will the military implement another DADT to protect them from murder charges? I just hope we don't see a lot of friendly fire "accidents".

[Artboyz]

10:09 AM on 12/20/2010

This does not force gay folks to come out. Most will only come out if they have to, or they feel it won't compromise their situation. Don't be such a worry-wart. This is their problem. They are big boys and girls.

[PLDgyrl]

10:12 AM on 12/20/2010

I am not trying to be snarky but why do they need to come out?? If anything it would put them at risk due to ignorance. In what instances would they need to come out?

[sprtakis69]

10:10 AM on 12/20/2010

As a recently retired 20 year Navy vet I can tell you most people in the military really don't care about gays in the military, it's a non-issue.

I called my buddy Saturday after the vote. He was on duty and asked him what the reaction was on his watchfloor and he said it was just a normal day and that no one was up in arms. He said people just don't care....

[darkstar92772]

10:35 AM on 12/20/2010

I'm a Navy vet and it is a non-issue with me, but the thing that I wonder about and no one seems to talk about is that fraternization is going to take on a whole new dimension. Anyone who has been deployed knows what goes on, so the role of sexual politics just became that much more complicated. It was bad enough when women came on board ships, you couldn't even scratch yourself without being accused of sexual harassment. However, I believe gays and lesbians deserve every right anyone else gets. This should be interesting.

[judgejay]

09:40 AM on 12/20/2010

Its about time that we allow all of our best and bravest to serve openly. The rest of this is just bs, they are professionals who do a great service for all of us.

[SuperKK]

09:25 AM on 12/20/2010

Let's be honest about why DADT was repealed. It is becoming more and more difficult to get recruits for the military. If it were not for high unemployment, which effectively forces the poor and dispossessed to join the military to survive, the situation would be even more dire. GEN Shelton recently stated that the military has had to raise the age limits and lower the educational requirements to meet recruiting quotas. Repeal of DADT will allow the military to keep and recruit more people from the gay and lesbian community, so they can serve as cannon fodder in our endless imperial wars. While repeal is a victory, it is a pyrrhic victory.

[MCWAY]

09:45 AM on 12/20/2010

More difficult? It depends on which branch. The Navy is overmanned; they're tightening up their physical fitness standards as well as "Perform To Serve", in order to throw people out.
 
I doubt gays and lesbians will be lining up to serve Uncle Sam. Of all the reasons for discharges, DADT violations were at the bottom.
 
 

[Artboyz]

09:48 AM on 12/20/2010

That is definately the pessimistic spin. For LGBT individuals, both serving and civilian, this is no pyrrhic victory. It is one more barrier, one more bit of institutionalized discrimination that is coming down. While we can debate the use of our military and it's involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that is entirely different issue (one on which we would certainly agree). We are not so concerned with the military's motivation to do the right thing, with which we have no illusions. We're just glad they did.

[StephCaster]

09:21 AM on 12/20/2010

The other reason to be cautious about coming out is that if they ever leave the military it is still legal to discriminate against them in the civilian economy.

[schnauzergirl]

01:09 PM on 12/20/2010

Actually with the exception of the federal and state government (where major rule changes require voting) most private companies have added sexual orientatuion to the list for non-descrimination.

[EmmaDarian]

09:30 AM on 12/20/2010

You can't mean what I think you do. Can you explain what that comment means?

[Loyd Hawkins]

09:33 AM on 12/20/2010

I have a feeling he means exactly what you think he does. Sad the world is still inhabited by people with so much hate.

[pipetoe]

09:39 AM on 12/20/2010

I think he/she means they make too big of a deal out of this crap.

[Artboyz]

09:50 AM on 12/20/2010

Good thing you don't have a vote, sweety.