|
||
Obama To Fire His First Gay Arabic Linguist
Dan Choi, a West Point graduate and officer in the Army National Guard who is fluent in Arabic and who returned recently from Iraq, received notice today that the military is about to fire him. Why? Because he came out of the closet as a gay man on national television.
Some readers might think it unfair to blame Obama. After all, the president inherited the "don't ask, don't tell" law when he took office. As Commander-in-Chief, he has to follow the law. If the law says that the military must fire any service member who acknowledges being gay, that is not Obama's fault.
Or is it?
A new study, about to be published by a group of experts in military law, shows that President Obama does, in fact, have statutory, stroke-of-the-pen authority to suspend gay discharges. Obama could simply invoke his authority under federal law (10 U.S.C. ยง12305) to retain any member of the military he believes is essential to national security.
Or he could take advantage of a legal loophole. The "don't ask, don't tell" law requires the military to fire anyone found to be gay or lesbian. But there is nothing requiring the military to make such a finding. The president can order the military to stop investigating service members' sexuality.
An executive order would not get rid of the "don't ask, don't tell" law, but would take the critical step of suspending its implementation, hence rendering it effectively dead. Once people see gays and lesbians serving openly, legally and without problems, it will be much easier to get rid of the law at a later time.
I spent a day with Dan Choi last month, and he is not someone we want to fire from the military. He loves the armed forces. He served bravely under tough combat conditions in Iraq. His Arabic is excellent, and he used his language skills to defuse many tough situations and to save lives, both Iraqi and American. All of his unit mates know he is gay, and they have been very supportive of him. But he doesn't want to live a lie.
Obama has been praised for delaying efforts to get rid of "don't ask, don't tell," and some major gay rights groups are actively lobbying to delay consideration of the issue. They seem to believe that Obama should focus on other gay-rights issues first, and that he shouldn't spend his precious political capital trying to ram a repeal bill through Congress.
This misses the point. Obama could sign an executive order today. With roughly three-quarters of the public, including a majority of republicans, in favor of open gay service, a meaningful public backlash is unlikely. A slight majority of service members prefer that the policy be left in place, but polls also show that only a tiny minority of them care strongly about the issue, and that the vast majority of service members are comfortable interacting with gays.
Obama may believe he has nothing to lose by waiting. But what about Dan Choi's career? Is this really the right time to fire military officers who are fluent in Arabic?
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
SOME FACTORS ABOUT GAY OR GAYNESS THAT MAY COME OUT BEFORE IT ACCEPTED LIFESTYLE.
It used to be illegal and even considered a mental disorder and now it's just a new respected lifestyle that governments are not ready to accept because it is controversial with many voters. And around the world something still unthinkable, maybe indefinitely so.
A basic question is whether it's genetic, environmental, both or indeterminate. Maybe even different for men and women. A good point to make to convince persons who have not thought about is to get them to see that it may be genetic, or part of a person's makeup, so it is basically unfair to deny. On the other hand it may eventually turn out that everyone will eventually become gay if they so desire. This is unknown.
To pass laws that involve marriage may not turn out to be best way to make lifestyle legal and accepted. On the other hand many gay advocates are demanding respect and recognition. This may be logical in enlightened parts of the US but may not work in the rest or in the world in general.
If in the future it turns out that everybody is gay or can be, it can turn out that the persons who helped make it legally accepted were just being sensitive and emotional, what it takes to make social progress in general.
Could we please repeal the asinine "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy before one more expert military officer is given their walking papers - arghhhh! I really thought Obama would keep his campaign promises. I'll give him some more time, but some of these things are no-brainers that can be changed by executive order first and legislation later. Wake up, Obama! Throw us a few bones, will you?! Bo's not the only one hoping for some table scraps. Watch Rachel Maddow 5/19; another good one bites the dust while Obama takes his time. When you have two wars waging, I thought it was the best and brightest we wanted to serve in the military? Almost 13,000 who would still be serving but for this horrendous law. OK, I'll get off my soapbox now.
You never forget your first gay, Arabic linguist. The second one's a lot easier.
Oh Michael Lynch...you're bad! LOL! But thanks, I needed that!
Regardless of what he inherited, he"s doing the firing, so he is following with the stated law. If he didn't agree he would have changed it like he did with many other things.
Let's stop justifying his actions in the shadows of what he inherited.
There is a process to redress injustice. Use it and stop being a crybaby. If you use the system, eventually you will see justice. Patience!
Whatever, that's like a two line bill he could've gotten a junior legal staffer to write the first hour he was in office. For whatever reason they still don't see it as politically viable. But why's everyone trying to get them to change this law anyway? What else all you straight peoples like me going to lie about to stay out of the draft when they eventually reinstate it? lol
What straight person wants to shower/dress/live in close quarters with a gay person? Why should a straight person be forced to have a gay bunk mate? The military is not the same as the rest of the US.
Millions.
Nonsense.
The US's biggest employer discriminated against blacks for generations. (And back then there were the same limp arguments about sharing barracks.) We ended that. Time to stop the rest of it.
And Choi was too good to lose.
The ONLY discrimnation going on by ALL Employers (forced by the Govt) is against the white male! I've told my sons to leave the entry blank or mark other. It opens up more jobs for the "qualifications" and shuts or locks out many for claiming white! Ask any military counselor at a MEPS -- he will admit that a Black, low-scoring individual gets a better job selection than a white, high-scoring white kid! As a recruiter--it was the most frustrating part of my job. I learned NEVER to take two kids of different race or sex on the same trip! They would never be given equal treatment even if their health, age, education & test scores were the same! If you were a black female--you could pretty much write your own job description, get a bonus and the large $$ for college all for just a 2 year commitment!
Your comment misses the point. Soldiers HAVE BEEN sharing their showers and living quarters with gay people. And you're right, the military is not the same as the rest of the US ... it's FAR more dangerous and MUCH less comfortable. How is knowing someone is gay more important than the skills he brings to a unit when death is on the line? Besides, we're not talking about criminals or defective monsters ... we're talking about fellow creatures of God.
This is ridiculous policy was enacted to circumvent an uncomfortable conversation that we ARE intellectually capable of having. It's time for the alarmists to quiet down and allow considered conversation to take place.
You think too highly of your attractiveness to gay people. If you as a straight person feel no same-sex attraction, why would gay men or lesbians be attracted to the opposite sex--especially if the likely reaction is a punch in the nose or worse? Gays in the military have a lot more to think about than scoping out your straight a@@.
Surely you're joking. You think way too highly of yourself. No doubt you already think all WOMEN are also attracted to you because you're just so damned irrestible.
what a stupid policy!
save Dan Choi...we need him and his linguistic talents
it is in the interests of the country
homosexuality has been around since the dawn of time..let's deal with it openly, honestly, respectfully
How about if ALL the gay men and women now in the military stop allowing this infamous organization to demean and humiliate you. Why stay? Have you no self-esteem? The US military DOES NOT deserve your service. If you feel that you must serve your country somehow, even though it has not earned your devotion, there are many other ways to do that, without risking your life for an organization that despises you. So leave. Today. Believe me, the pentagon will hear all those doors slamming. There are many organizations which can help you find other employment which will not demean you. When you are gone, it will be unfortunate for all those straight men in the military who flatter themselves that the gays are all slavering for their hot bodies, but they'll get over it and go back to beating up blacks for kicks.
Although I am a conservative Christian who strongly disagrees with the gay movement as far as redefining marriage in America, i am not about to tell people they can't be gay. Just because I don't agree with the decisions of others, doesn't mean I can dictate to them how to live their lives. As far as the military goes, I think it's silly that a person's sexuality can determine their service in our armed forces. I do agree that this policy needs to go bye bye. Our American sovereignty and security need to be protected above all else.
If I am missing something that dictates that we leave this policy in place then let me know. The only thing that I can see this policy provides is the safety of those who are gay, in regards to those that mean to do them harm.
So, they can die for you, but not marry the people they love?
TarzaninChrist:
Just to clarify something and bring you into 2009, being gay is not a "movement" any more than being "straight" is one either.
TheGoodShepherd:
Your "question," if it can be labeled as such, illustrates once again the level of homophobia in this country that, if policies such as this are not changed, our country will continue to lose exceptional soldiers.
I saw Dan Choi on Rachel Maddow's show the night he publicly came out, and my first thought was, oh dear lord, we're going to lose another fine and talented officer to this bonehead policy.
DADT is obsolete and needs to go, now.
Why would having gay miltary personnel would be worse than having Blackwater mercenaries?
Maybe the reason they needed to waterboard the guy 180 times, was because there were no translators.
good observation
Unfortunately President Obama does have a mean streak. I find it surprising and disappointing. I noticed it when he invited the victor of prop 8 in California, Rick Warren to invocate his inauguration. It was a deliberate slap in the face to all Gay and Lesbian Californians in their loss in defeating prop 8, which legalized discrimination. No one made Obama choose Rick Warren, he did it as a political calculation to build a bridge to the religious right in joining them in their victory against Gay and Lesbian people. And it worked, has very high job approval ratings.
Now comes don't ask, don't tell. Obama knows that ending this policy will lose him popularity overall in America, and solidify right wing opposition. He knows Gay and Lesbian people are the object of cruel discrimination as practiced by the American Military, and President Obama has chosen to continue it. It's a smart political move and wretchedly mean to an oppressed minority.
Where can Gays and Lesbians turn if they oppose Obama. My answer is nowhere. And Obama knows it. Therefore Obama can engage in discrimination of Gays and Lesbians in the military and celebrate discrimination in California with the victors of prop 8, and there's really no place for the Gay and Lesbian community to go. Nice people don't become He's better then George W. Bush, and my oppression, as a Gay man, will help him get reelected in 2012. He is mean and a coward. But who cares, really?
Please elaborate on "cruel discrimination as practiced by the American Military"...I am retired Navy and have no idea what you are talking about... Bring it PLAYA
I guess losing one's career because one doesn't want to lie about one's sexuality isn't cruel in your book. Being denied basic equal civil rights-including the right to serve one's nation as one's self-- isn't cruel in your mind, either? Can we vote on your civil rights next?
Mean streak? Get real. Obama's decision to embrace Warren, whom I personally despise, was a signal to reach out to the right. Obama has tried this over and over again, with little or no success, so in my opinion it is pointless. Concluding it was done out of meanness is outright childish. People expect Obama to do away with every piece of injustice and bigotry immediately, that exists on every level of our society, and if he can't he is "mean". Obama got handed the biggest bag of sh*&t in US history. He has to prioritize.
Hello??? Just where do you think Obama was for "143 days" prior to his decision to "CHANGE" America? He was shoveling some of that sh*t right along with the other idiots in WASHDC!! Honey--he doesn't even know how to stop lying let alone "prioritize". This is the era of punishing those who succeed & REWARDING those who don't want to get off of their FREE housing (I think some of these places got the "shovel-ready" jobs to build more..., FREE medical (I PAY for my coverage & theirs & theirs, etc.,), FREE college (mine 4 kids don't qualify because their parents have JOBS!!!), FREE Food (I've YET to see a slim & fit food stamp (card) holder!!, FREE utilities (Cap & Trade won't effect these fat & lazy people)....I am so sick of this "inherited" slogan that has now be slapped in our faces for 100+ day!! It's not like someone died and he was FORCED to accept the position!! Get Real & Get a job to pay for all the free loaders that are signing up on a hourly basis!!
perhaps he has other priorities, i.e., Middle East, two wars, health care, economy, etc. Possibly one or all might benefit you in some small way. then he can concentrate on gay rights, human rights, and the like.
You're a bit self indulgent..........don't you think.
Yes, to demand equal protection under the law is very self- indulgent. To expect politicians to actually honor their commitments is very self-indulgent. Not to be content sitting in the back of the bus is very self-indulgent. Why, someone might thing you're uppity.
If this were happening to women or people of color, millions of Americans would be in an uproar. Where are you now?
Write to the White House at http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/.
Where is the uproar from the gay community about the unarmend black men being killed by police? Where is the outrage about black unemployment being 50% in urban areas? Black people are being discriminated against in the work place when it comes to pay and promotions. ALL women are also payed less than white men. Where is the outrage about that? Stop pretending that DADT is the biggest problem in the US.
No one is. Can't we fight for equality for all? BTW, some us are lesbians aka women and people of color. We have a vested interest in all the things you mentioned, too.
Never said it was the biggest problem, just an outrageous one that can be so easily fixed and would be easily fixed it it were about race. And the gay community has fought for the rights and plights of other groups for a very long time. Take a look at that community--it is poor, middle class, rich, black, white, able-bodied, disabled, etc. No other group crosses class, ethnic, and cultural lines, and no other group has stood up for others with as little reward.
There is no time like the present. I urge everyone to go to www.whitehouse.gov and let Obama know this has to stop. We need dedicated people in our service.
Obama didn't do anything...he has bigger fish to fry...mr choi made his decision to let us all know he likes boys. Maybe he was looking for a boyfriend? Get over it
Can we make a rule to deny you your basic civil rights and ask you to "get over it"?
Get over it? You must not grasp the basic injustice in the law for you to just say get over it. It effects people so deeply and so profoundly and all you can say is get over it??? It's this complete lack of empathy that shocks me! As if, it isn't happening to you, so what does it matter. This is what the gay community is failing at doing, educating people like this guy/girl about why this is everyone's problem. I can't do it because I could be fired based on who I love.
Yes, he has bigger fish to fry, however, we don't have enough soldiers in our armed forces so most have done multiple tours. Letting a qualified translator go because he is gay seems to be the height of stupidity.
Interesting read. Is Obama better than Bush/Cheney? Oh, yes, but that's hardly a gold standard of comparison. Thus far, I'd give him maybe a 25% approval rating for courage and leadership, and in terms of walking his talk in virtually any of his change-related mandates.
What's equally interesting in the tone of the blog replies. Obama has pretty much shot his wad with those who read Huffington, and here we're dealing with "centrist progressives," not with far left progressives.
A few people will say, "Give him more time." His true character is now clear, however, and I sense that time has run out. Amongst progressives in general, and here we're dealing with anyone to the left of Geithner, there's an increasing feeling of betrayal, bordering on contempt.
I voted for him--that was in 2008, not in 2012--but I won't even listen to his speeches anymore. This is just one more nail in the coffin.
Given our 2 party election process, as disappointed as I am in Obama, I have no one else to vote for in 2012 that would have any chance of winning, and my vote for a 3rd party candidate would only give the Republicans a chance at victory, which is worse then Obama. I think the best approach is local, support progressive candidates that can win, that have the courage to stand up for their knowledge and convictions, and assist them in attaining leadership on the local, regional and national stage.
I previously voted for Gore, Kerry and Obama. My point is that politically, I'm very pragmatic. That said, I no longer regard the "lesser of two evils" argument as in any way compelling. I will be a witness in the unraveling of our country, but I will no longer be a participant in maintaining the lies it seeks to perpetuate. Picking up my cue from Obama, when asked who I want in this office or that, I intend in the future to simply vote "present."
What I as a minority of one does is largely irrelevant, however; my guess is that by the time 2012 rolls around, 30%+ of those who voted for Obama the first time around will be so disillusioned as to never vote for him again.
We know what happened in Germany. Does that Weimar II could ever unfold in this country as a scenario? Limbaugh and Cheney certainly believe it could, but you know what? Frankly, at this point, I don't give a dam*ed!
Any dictatorship the United States installs will itself be short lived. We will have run out of money and credit, and most of our youth wouldn't even be able to find South America on a map. I say give America it's long wished for cup of hemlock and be done with it.
How about voting your conscience and having faith in democracy to handle the rest?
How about choosing NOT to vote when none of the candidates are acceptable to you?
How about having faith that, over time, right prevails over wrong and people do in fact change their minds when confronted with truth and justice. Or, you could be like Buddakan and the other haters who insult others who have the sincere and good-natured belief that "marriage" is more than a set of legal contracts, but a solemn religious and biological compact which binds our society to a commitment to strong familial relationships. I don't happen to share their belief, but I respect it. I also respect the democratic process which prevents it.
If enough people voted for a third party, or simply cast a ballot saying none of the above, it would finally send a message to politicians. If you vote for the democrat out of fear of who would win that may be practical but is not helping our country. I doubt we could have another Republican to equal the Bush Cheney Regime.
the one thing I've learned reading these comments is, the "left" is as hypocritical as the conservative right, and in many ways worse, given most of us ( I assumed) believe in political discourse. Many of these comments from the left are juvenile, with a maudlin sense of entitlement. The man has been in office three months and you're pissing and moaning as if he's going to save the world. If you're so dissed, 'run for office", or go to Dafur and make a difference.
No comment about those poor fools who lost the election and can't get a life.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
