http://www.detnews.com/2005/editoria...A09-102039.htm
Monday, February 28, 2005
Admiral steers support for gays in military
By Deb Price / The Detroit News
"Honest concern." That's the phrase retired Rear Admiral John Hutson returns to again and again as he reflects back on why a dozen years ago, as one of the Navy's top lawyers, he opposed allowing gays to serve openly in the military.
"We really didn't know what would happen if we opened the ranks to gays. We had visions of all the straight people simply leaving, that the ranks would become depleted, that there would be a huge uprising," recalls Hutson, who in 1993 was the Navy's negotiator as the White House, Congress and the Pentagon hammered out the Don't Ask, Don't Tell law, allowing only closeted, celibate gays to serve.
"It wasn't just bigotry. It was an honest concern that we would be seriously undermining our nation's ability to fight and win wars.... And people who may not have had a discriminatory bone in their bodies were concerned about the discriminatory bones in other bodies," says Hutson, who embraced Don't Ask as a "flawed compromise."
But the world has changed. And so has Hutson.
He's now among the leading heterosexual voices saying anti-gay discrimination hurts the military. He wants Don't Ask repealed. And on March 2, for the first time, legislation to do that will be introduced by a bipartisan group of 25 lawmakers. Introduction of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act coincides with key developments:
� Taxpayer abuse. The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, concluded Feb. 25 that it has cost taxpayers more than $191 million to replace the 10,000 service members kicked out since 1993 for being gay. Those wasted tax dollars -- the GAO notes its estimate is low because it doesn't, for example, account for training replacement specialists -- could have purchased a dozen Blackhawk helicopters or 800 sidewinder missiles. Among those booted out were 322 language specialists, including 113 trained in Arabic, Farsi (Iranian) and Korean. (See:
www.gao.gov)
� Hypocrisy. Discharges of gay soldiers have fallen three years in a row, with a 15 percent drop since fiscal 2003 and a 47 percent plunge since the start of the war on terrorism, Pentagon figures released Feb. 11 show. "The discharge numbers undermine the central rationale for Don't Ask, Don't Tell because at the most critical time -- a time of war -- they are kicking fewer gay servicemembers out," stresses C. Dixon Osburn, director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (sldn.org).
� Recruitment woes. In January, mirroring the difficulties of other service branches, the Marines failed for the first time in a decade to meet a recruitment goal.
� Allied advances. Five years ago, following the lead of other U.S. allies, Britain lifted its ban on gays in uniform. That breakthrough has been proven so successful that the Royal Navy announced Feb. 21 that it is working with a gay group to create a friendlier climate to retain and attract more gay sailors.
To retired Admiral Hutson, the lesson is that the U.S. military needs a midcourse correction. "If I thought that letting (open) gays in the military now would degrade the mission," he says, "I wouldn't be for it. The military mission is unique enough that it shouldn't be a social laboratory. But we are at a point now where we can do it. And once you can do it, that creates a moral imperative that means you must do it."
Lifting the ban, he has come to believe, will strengthen military readiness by enhancing unit cohesion. As for those service members unable to control their anti-gay attitudes, Hutson adds: "I'd rather have a good gay sailor take his or her place, and just get (the bad apples) out and send them back to wherever they came from to work out their problems. I don't want them in my Navy. That will make the military better."
Think the military is losing valuable assets? That's an honest concern -- and an excellent reason for lifting the gay ban. Do tell your lawmakers.
Top