NYT - A Gay Soldier's Husband

  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Jun 10, 2009 8:40 PM GMT

    Op-Ed: A Gay Soldier's Husband
    A gay man talks about "don't ask, don't tell" and the difficulties he faces having a partner on active duty in Iraq.


    http://video.nytimes.com/video/2009/06/09/opinion/1194840804819/op-ed-a-gay-soldiers-husband.html
  • Tiller66

    Posts: 380

    Jun 11, 2009 2:22 AM GMT
    Well that's really sad and another reason why I'm not happy with Obama right now and won't be until he does something more then give us a month of pride
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 11, 2009 2:25 AM GMT
    I know just exactly what he was going through.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 11, 2009 2:35 AM GMT
    That's heartbreaking... Having been a deployed soldier I can relate to the conveyed story as well.

    I second Tiller66 re: Obama. Wow, a month of pride. Certainly that offers a visibility that we need, but it's really not in line with the substantive changes Obama could and should be making. I know he is in the process of instigating change and I do believe he is working on his campaign promises, but I think he could be doing more. If nothing else, he should simply halt the removal of gay men and women from service in the interim.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 11, 2009 4:04 AM GMT
    That 4 minutes was pretty powerful stuff.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 11, 2009 4:19 AM GMT
    Both my ex and I can relate, through 4 deployments.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 11, 2009 4:23 AM GMT
    That brought me to tears. It's the first time I got to see DADT from another perspective.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 11, 2009 4:23 AM GMT
    Very moving. icon_sad.gif
  • hartfan

    Posts: 1037

    Jun 11, 2009 6:00 AM GMT
    Excellent piece. Tragic story. I want to say more, but there's really nothing more that needs to be said. President Obama, Congress, the Armed Forces, the American public, I hope you are all listening.
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Jun 11, 2009 6:51 AM GMT
    The government can just say it's the code they are violating and have chosen to violate and hence have put themselves into this position because it clearly states a person serving in the armed forces is to not engage in any homosexual activity regardless if it's in his/her private life or not, while on base or off, and that being in a same-sex marriage or attempting to be in a same-sex marriage is also a violation.

    I think it's more than stupid by the way what the government has deemed as it's policy in regard to homosexuals and the armed forces. The government should be ashamed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 11, 2009 7:28 AM GMT
    That was so powerful. Not really much was said, but it hits the heart with full force.

    I just hope that heterosexual people will be able to feel it as much as our own did.
  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Jun 11, 2009 7:55 AM GMT
    I have to ask: is this on television, yet? If no, why not?

    Preaching our message to what may be our choir (New York Times online readers) is good, but won't bring us the kind of support it might provide us as a short film on TV (by, for example, targeting the US audience of mothers or active duty Service members).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2009 4:14 AM GMT
    RESIZED TEXT GOES HERE
    My brother serves in the military, I however do not and could not imagne fighting for the liberty of another yet mine is denied by those who risk their lives and stand beside me carring the flag all in the name of freedom.... AMERICA
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2009 4:21 AM GMT
    wow, that was a beautifully done video. moving. elegant.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 13, 2009 5:36 PM GMT
    The NYT Op-Ed piece was a short clip from the upcoming documentary titled "Silent Partners", from In Their Boots - a documentary series about life for US soldiers after they return from Iraq and Afghanistan. This will be the first time they tackle the DADT issue. It should premier around July 4th.

    Thanks for the support.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Jun 13, 2009 5:44 PM GMT
    I recently wondered about what would happen if a legally married gay active duty couple sought on post/base family housing or Basic Housing Allowance with dependant rate (spouse) and had to divulge the fact that they were gay, which is contrary to the policy of DADT. It's a catch 22! We lose!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 13, 2009 5:55 PM GMT
    Thanks for sharing this, "In Their Boots" looks great.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 05, 2009 10:12 PM GMT
    coolarmydude saidI recently wondered about what would happen if a legally married gay active duty couple sought on post/base family housing or Basic Housing Allowance with dependant rate (spouse) and had to divulge the fact that they were gay, which is contrary to the policy of DADT. It's a catch 22! We lose!


    no its not, since Gay Marriage is specifcally outlawed under UCMJ. A leagally gay married person in the military would be immediately discharged.
  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Jul 06, 2009 7:17 AM GMT
    gaysoldiershusband saidThe NYT Op-Ed piece was a short clip from the upcoming documentary titled "Silent Partners", from In Their Boots - a documentary series about life for US soldiers after they return from Iraq and Afghanistan. This will be the first time they tackle the DADT issue. It should premier around July 4th.

    Thanks for the support.


    http://www.intheirboots.com









  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Jul 06, 2009 9:19 AM GMT
    coolarmydude saidI recently wondered about what would happen if a legally married gay active duty couple sought on post/base family housing or Basic Housing Allowance with dependant rate (spouse) and had to divulge the fact that they were gay, which is contrary to the policy of DADT. It's a catch 22! We lose!


    Like the other guy said, such a union is a violation of the armed force's policy in regard to homosexuality. In fact, there shouldn't be any same-sex relationship happening at all, or sex. Like I've said before, the policy clearly states that it is not to occur in private or otherwise, off base or on, while a person is serving in the armed forces.

    You have to remain single, never participate in any gay sexual activity, and never tell anyone that you have a homosexual orientation. That is the armed force's policy in regard to homosexuality.

    It's not just about acknowledging you are gay. You aren't suppose to be having any gay relations either.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Jul 06, 2009 11:38 AM GMT
    Ummmm, after serving through the entire existence of DADT and then some, and you're telling me what you can or can't do under the policy? I KNOW ALREADY! Re-read my post. You missed my point!

    The point I made is that although legally recognized in a state or a few states for having a gay marriage, you still cannot come forward and get the full benefits of marriage because of DADT. But if you do seek marriage equality, you can do it, outside of the military. You can't have both as of now. That's the catch 22.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 06, 2009 11:48 AM GMT
    Thank you metta8. This was a great post and especially moving on this weekend.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 14, 2009 4:48 PM GMT
    really powerful stuff.

    when i was active duty, and gay. i was young and i dont think it bear any semblance to what clay and his partner has gone through.. i was in the dating scene, from one guy this month to the next, till the time i got deployed. through 5 deployments, i broke up with 5 guys because i was leaving. and being young and professionally in the closet, it was easier for my conscience at the time to have no "unofficial significant other" waiting for me back home. it was stupid, but i was young.

    after 6 years of active duty, i am in a commissioning program now which lets me be in the reserves while i go to school to get my commission to be an officer. till then, im an almost-civilian 28 days of the month.

    obama really needs to repeal this. also, a helpful book to me was nathaniel frank's unfriendly fire. its my bible as a gay soldier.