From: dwthoma1@eos.ncsu.edu (DAVID W THOMAS)
Subject: Gays in military prove unpopular: Raleigh News & Observer
Originator: dwthoma1@steely.ece.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: dwthoma1@eos.ncsu.edu (DAVID W THOMAS)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 04:21:37 GMT



The News_&_Observer (Raleigh, NC) had 2 articles on Friday (July 24, 1992)
with motss relevance. (See also "Kids' book about gay father sets town abuzz")

This article (duplicated below w/o permission) is titled:
    "Gays in military prove unpopular" by Dennis Rogers

In brief, the artical had local (mixed) response to a previous article 
which was in favor on homosexuals allowed in military service.  The authors'
response (the last 4 paragraphs) is worth reading.

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

    "Gays in military prove unpopular" by Dennis Rogers

Letters and leftovers: A recent column on the discrimination faced by
homosexuals in the military prompted Donald Phillips of Raleigh to write:
"After your recent column in favor of homosexuals in the armed forces, it is
noted that you took vacation.,

  "I am sure by now you are feeling heat from many sources.  Your appeal for
more liberalization and eventual ruination of the military is disgusting.
Coincidentally, or perhaps not, an article by Col. David Hackworth, U.S.
Army (Ret.), regarding homosexuals in the military was featured in your
paper the same week as your column.  In any case, you should read it.
[I don't subscribe to the N&O so I've not read the referenced article, dwt]

  "I write as one who served for 22 years in the Marine Corps. In August,
the 1st Marine Division will be holding its annual reunion in Washington, D.C.
The members of this organization will be honoring the 50th anniversary of
the battle for Guadalcanal.  Perhaps you would like to attend."

  Edward E. Hollowell of Raleigh agrees: "I have always enjoyed your
articles because of your humor and your appreciation of history.  However, I
am very disappointed in your column in which you advocate homosexuals being
allowed to server in the military.

  "Either you do not have an appreciation of the role of the military, or
you are being pressured by the liberal influence of the media.  I hope it is
the former and I commend you to stick to your articles of humor and history
and let the editors deal the issues of the latter."

  Not everyone had the courage to sign their names.  Typical was this
comment: "This column isn't going to endear you to combat veterans.  You
write fine human interest columns laced with humor.  You should stick to
that and not get out of your league and over your head."

  But the response was not all one-sided.  A former Marine aviator in
Vietnam stopped me on the street and said, "We had a guy who flew with us
who was gay and I trusted him with my life.  It is about time somebody said
what you said."

  And Ann Fowler of Clinton wrote: "I just want to say thank you, thank you,
a thousand grateful thank yous.  I have new respect for you and your courage.
You said exactly the right words and it warmed my heart to read them.  This
is a column I will save to read over and over." [again, I don't subscribe
to the N&O, so I haven't read the referenced article. dwt]

[------ begin author's response -----]

  Should a homosexual service member who harasses barracks mates be allowed
to serve?  Should a homosexual officer or noncom who uses their authority to
coerce young soldiers be allowed to serve?  Of course not.  They should be
court-martialed and if found guilty, stripped of rank, thrown in the
stockade and then thrown out of the service.

  Should a heterosexual service member who sexually molests fellow soldiers
continue to serve?  Should a heterosexual officer or noncom who uses their
authority to coerce young soldiers be allowed to serve?  Should officers who
force 26 women, some of them fellow pilots and officers, to run a gauntlet
of sexual terrorists be allowed to continue their careers?  Of course not.
They should share the fate now reserved of homosexuals.

One argument is that homosexuality is illegal and immoral and therefore
homosexuals are unfit for military service.  Adultery is illegal and immoral
but that has not stopped many married soldiers from spending time with
locals, paid and otherwise, near military bases around the world.  That
behavior is not condemned and not punished by the military.

  The military, contrary to what some uninformed civilians think, has
proudly led the nation in treating people fairly and justly.  It is a
record those of us who served can justly be proud.  But that
tradition of fairness must apply to everyone.

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

David W. Thomas
dwthoma1@eos.ncsu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.motss