DADT: Michael Barrett, Sergeant Major Of Marine Corps, On Gay Rights

"Get over it." That's the ultimate message delivered to marines by the top non-commissioned officer of the Marine Corps regarding the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT).

Sgt. Maj. Micheal Barrett was recently chosen to be the senior enlisted adviser to Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos. According to The Wall Street Journal, Sgt. Maj. Barrett visited a base in South Korea last week, where he delivered his opinions on DADT and the plans to repeal the ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the U.S. military.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Sgt. Maj. Barrett brought out a small copy of the Constitution and referenced Article 1, Section 8. “It says, ‘Raise an army.’ It says absolutely nothing about race, color, creed, sexual orientation.” He then asked if everyone in the group joined the Marines to protect their nation, going on to say, “How dare we, then, exclude a group of people who want to do the same thing you do right now, something that is honorable and noble?”

Sgt. Maj. Barrett concluded by saying “Get over it… Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines.”

According to the Marines website, Sgt. Maj. Barrett recently returned from Afghanistan. Marine Corps Times reports that Barrett is a 30-year Marine, and Commandant Gen. James Amos told the news source, “He’s the best of the best.”

Commandant Gen. James Amos fought to retain DADT, arguing to Congress, "I don't want to lose any Marines to the distraction.”

The repeal was enacted in December and the military is already training troops on their new position. But the repeal requires certification that the military is ready for the change by the president, the secretary of defense, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Politico reports that House Republicans are asking President Obama to hold off on implementation. A Pentagon survey from last November found that while most people serving in America’s armed forces do not strongly object to repealing DADT, Marines are most strongly resistant to the ban.

In April, Sgt. Maj. Barrett told Military.com that he saw no evidence of Marines leaving because of the DADT repeal, saying, "It is important that we value the diversity and background and the culture and the skills that all the Marines bring to the service of the nation."

Comments

[sueoh46]

05:38 AM on 07/14/2011

Just get out.

[VirginiaJeff]

11:58 AM on 07/10/2011

Well and beautifully said.

[duckpuddle]

08:53 AM on 07/08/2011

Take a good look at the picture with this story. These are the people who are going to do much of this generations work to advance gay rights in America.

They should have been taught in their homes, schools, and religious institutions that gay people should be treated like people. But their families, teachers, and religious leaders have been too unwilling, ashamed, intolerant, naive, ignorant, powerless, intimidated, or badly taught themselves to do what is right.

I respect the way that the military is handling implementation of the repeal of DADT, albeit not as fast as I would prefer. When the military gets an order from on high, "Thall shall not discriminate against gay people", they take is seriously.

As Joe Biden said, "this is a big __ deal".

[chazzman4]

08:57 PM on 07/06/2011

In just a few short years, DADT will be like Trumans 1948 lifting of racial segregation in the U.S. military. "No Big Thang" Get over it America, join the 21st century. Israel. the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and many of our allies have so called 'GAYS' in their military services.
" Another "No Big Thang" moment.
GBA

[KitchenCabinet]

02:36 PM on 06/22/2011

Let us value each person in our community, and give each the space to create the life he or she chooses. In the military or out, no person has the right to disrespect another. Let us choose to treat each other with maximum respect and dignity. Take a deep breath, America. When you breathe out, let go your fear and be grateful you live in a country that nourishes freedom. Then extend that freedom to all of our citizens.

[tj101]

01:03 PM on 06/22/2011

Berettasskeeter
For what we are about to receive, may we be truly
230 Fans
Become a fan
2 hours ago (10:57 AM)
Really? They will now be charged under the UCMJ for expressing their disdain for homosexual­s!
--------------

Prove it.

[Berettasskeeter]

01:25 PM on 06/22/2011

The UCMJ prohibits, and provides penalties for, the use of disparaging words and gestures. The UCMJ, in it's entirety, is available on the web!
Semper fi

[tj101]

01:42 PM on 06/22/2011

Couldn't name the Article? It's Article 117.

And how about these?

Article 92: Failure to Obey a General Order or Regulation

For commissioned & warrant officers, cadets and midshipmen, we also have Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and a Gentleman -- Article 133.

------------------
The punishment should be swift and severe. These people are obviously unfit to Serve.

[Jacob Black]

01:42 PM on 06/22/2011

You previous post(s) clearly implied that the repeal of DADT somehow changes what service members are allowed to say or to express. This is not the case. What was acceptable before the repeal of DADT is still acceptable. What was unacceptable before the repeal of DADT is still unacceptable.

[tj101]

12:49 PM on 06/22/2011

In the Armed Forces EXCEPT the National Guard (Army or Air)
Armed Forces Oath of Enlistment:

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

---------------------------

Anyone who cannot uphold this is unfit to serve.

Semper fi

[TheHandyman]

04:22 PM on 07/06/2011

The whole oath is negated by two things. First, the UCMJ which usurps a citizens rights under the Constitution. And second, the appeal for help from a mythical being. Real patriots don't need help from a big man in the sky. Belief in that big man in the sky is what caused Gays and Blacks to be denied their Constitutional rights to begin with.

[tj101]

09:52 AM on 07/08/2011

I totally agree.

[Ishkodewaaboo]

04:24 AM on 07/12/2011

Part 1:
"So help me God" is optional. Also the UCMJ is not wrongfully nor illegally employed. We are sworn to SUPPORT AND DEFEND the constitution of the United States I think you are misunderstanding exactly what that means. Plus there is a flaw in your argument you are saying "citizens" not all members of the United States military ARE in fact citizens many join in order to attain this status. Military are not given equal rights but we ARE SWORN TO SUPPORT IT meaning we have to back the constitutional laws, and DEFEND IT meaning we have to fight for all it stands for in the face of the enemy.

[Seer Clearly]

12:17 PM on 06/22/2011

Barrett has put his finger on the real problem with DADT: a bunch of right-wing pseudo-Christians are trying to make their social agenda of hatred and inequality into a priority for the military, and the military should not be bothered with that since it is actually the bogotry that is the problem, not the proudly serving GLBT service people.

[Thaag Tidestalker]

10:10 AM on 06/22/2011

That man is a Marine.

[TheHandyman]

04:23 PM on 07/06/2011

No, the man is merely a good human.

[mytewcents]

07:33 PM on 07/07/2011

After completing 30 years of service, he has deserved the right to be called a Marine. I agree, that man is a Marine.

[Ishkodewaaboo]

04:31 AM on 07/12/2011

No Sir... HE IS IN FACT A MARINE! He deserves this title, just as every honorable service member deserves their title. You desecrate his name by trying to negate the importance of the title MARINE. He is NOT just a good human, he is in fact what the military stands for above all of the civilian population. A man of honor, courage and commitment dedicated to the protection of all peoples no matter race, creed, sex, or orientation. HE IS A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES MILITARY ABOVE ALL ELSE AND HE IS A MARINE!

[Cratewasher]

09:29 AM on 06/22/2011

Booya!

[D-Barger]

08:48 AM on 06/22/2011

Indeed, when someone serves in the military for 25 years, is about to retire, is found out to be gay and has their honors removed and pension denied, they should just "get over it."

This guy is a real thinker.

[EmmaDarian]

10:23 AM on 06/22/2011

I am not trying to sound snarky, but I have to ask--did you read the article?

[TheHandyman]

04:25 PM on 07/06/2011

Is this some real event or are you just pulling out of your nose? Have not read one case in which this happened. Please elucidate, if you can.

[Atwill]

08:32 AM on 06/22/2011

DADT is wrong and unconstitutional. It gives the freedom of speech to straights and not to gays. a straight man in the service can say "This is who i love. This is my wife." and nothing happens. A gay man says "This is who i love," and he is fired, kicked out. I have often wondered what hompbobies in the military would inthink ifwent the other way to make it equal and fiar. Meaning this. If the militayr made DADT for both straight and gay. No one can announce their sexuallity. Straight or gay. Meaning this. A straight man says "This is who i love. This is my wife." and he is now kicked out for announcing his sexuallity.

[Berettasskeeter]

09:22 AM on 06/22/2011

And now, freedom of speech has been denied to hetersexuals, and awarded unilaterally to homosexuals.
Semper fi

[EmmaDarian]

10:24 AM on 06/22/2011

Heterosexuals can say anything they could say before DADT repeal. How do you believe heterosexuals' free speech has been changed by the repeal of DADT?

[tj101]

11:30 AM on 06/22/2011

Since when does military personnel have Free Speech? They obey orders and that is their ONLY job.

[Jacob Black]

01:20 PM on 06/22/2011

I don't agree that this is a free speech issue, as the 1st Amendment really doesn't apply to active members of the armed services in the same way that it applies to civilians. But, your post does demonstrate quite well that this is not an example of seeking special rights, but instead merely seeking the same rights enjoyed by others.

[NYBill]

04:11 PM on 06/23/2011

Jacob Black, wrote: ..."this is not an example of seeking special rights, but instead merely seeking the same rights enjoyed by others". Unquote.
Whenever I hear the term "seeking the same rights enjoyed by others" or a level playing field, I wait for the other shoe to drop. When a group has been perceived to be victimized by prejudice has their civil rights confirmed as with this DADT decision... many in that group, instead of rejoicing and going on happily with their lives suddenly become obnoxious and argumentative. Read the posts on this site to confirm. Some are unhappy with their perceived "real" feelings of SgtMajor
Also, they seem to believe that they have been granted special status in the society. How many times have you heard Gays demanding that assaulting a GLBT person be made a Constitutional violation!!!
How did the Trannies get in on this? Maybe that is the next phase, having the military medical people do transgender procedures?
Free speech??? I could make a list a foot long of words and phrases the average (straight) G. I. will be forbidden to say. I will not post them here because Comrade sensor would reject the entire post. Anyway, most of you know which words and phrases I am referring to.
In the future,any time there is a confrontation, no matter what the cause, it will be played with the good ol' man-fear card. Homosexuals have now officially become the special needs child in the family.

[nbj5215]

07:52 AM on 06/22/2011

If a gay or straight commits sodomy while on duty will this be punished under the UCMJ?

[Atwill]

08:34 AM on 06/22/2011

no. sodomy i anything other then penis / vagina sex. sodomy also includes oral sex. how many marrid straight service men ahve had their wives go down on them? and if their superiors knew, would they kick these straight men out? No.

[NJPI6097]

01:25 PM on 06/22/2011

I suggest you do some research into this issue. Read Article 125 (Sodomy) of the UCMJ. The language of this article will undoubetly cause another problem.

[Adrian Rodriguez21]

09:13 AM on 06/22/2011

Yes, it is illegal, I was in the Marines for 5 years I never saw anyone disciplined for it and it obviously happens... Funny how we can take rights from gays and lesbians in America. Most military service members that are against DADT are worried about gay men showering with them, which is rather ridiculous.

[tj101]

02:01 PM on 06/22/2011

I agree with your point, but this is the sad reality when it comes to prosecuting those crimes:

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/38800

Love your avatar!!!!

[Atwill]

07:36 AM on 06/22/2011

I agree. Get over it. I had someone comment to me the other day that DADT was better becasue if gays can be open it would effect readiness. what a load of crap. He said "If you have a 5 man team in hte field and 2 of them fall in love then it will compromise the mission." What? 1. how many people, out of all the people in the military, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines are in this situation? In a five man team in combat? Then what are the chances of 2 gay guys being in the same team 5 man team and then, falling in love? And if it did happen, just tell your commander and one is moved to another team. DUH. I mean, what are the odds? 1 chance in 100,000? If even that? and you want to keep discriminating because something like this MIGHT happen? DADT is a special rule for straights. Telling straights they have the freedom of speech. and telling gays they do not. They goes agasint the constitution.

[brj7370]

03:17 PM on 07/06/2011

I've always thought this crap was exactly that--crap.
The Spartans of olden times---it was a requirement that they be gay--and
have a partner to fight along side.
They didn't do very bad when it came to fighting an enemy.

[Michael Lindley]

07:08 AM on 06/22/2011

Well, Marines, I guess Semper Fi needs to become Semper Fi if you're str8!!! Are they only Real Men if they have guns in their hands and grenades on their belts? This is a pathetic reflection of American Culture on how emotionally dependent tough guys seem to be on stereotypes! COWARDS if your are afraid of being in a foxhole with your openly gay combat buddy!

[bbackin20min]

03:03 AM on 06/27/2011

Hey Mike, quit it with drumming up your own arguments. It all goes much deeper than that. Most every posting here that comes from the gay community is dependent on stereotyping the socially conservative hetero community. I don't live with hate, bigotry, any agenda, and I wouldn't be afraid of being in a foxhole with someone of your orientation. This is far from the point. But people like you insist on shutting down any legitimate conversation with labeling me as a coward. The point is that my faith gives me a moral compass. You don't agree with it because it opposes your life style. This is the same for people who commit polygamy, marry their cousins, marry more than one person, people who shack up, people who do crazy things with farm animals, etc.., Their are a great many hetero lifestyles that I oppose to the same degree as I oppose homosexuality, but I'm not a coward and I don't hate anyone. With your way of labeling people, you are every bit as bad as the people you are speaking out against.