Officer Asks to Be Relieved of Command Over Repeal of 'Gay' Ban In Military

WND Exclusive THE GAYING OF AMERICA
Officer won't sign order for troop indoctrination
Asks to be relieved of command over repeal of 'gay' ban in military
Posted: December 24, 2010
7:40 pm Eastern

By Brian Fitzpatrick
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama (C) signs legislation repealing military policy law, while former Marine Staff Sgt. Eric Alva (2nd-L), former U.S. Navy Commander Zoe Dunning (L), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) (2nd-R) and Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) (R) stand nearby during a ceremony December 22, 2010 in Washington, DC. President Obama signed into law a bill repealing the don't ask, don't tell law against gays serving openly in the military. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

President Obama's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is already damaging the U.S. military.

An Army lieutenant colonel has asked to be relieved of command rather than order his troops to go through pro-homosexual indoctrination following the repeal of the policy, which required homosexuals to keep silent about their sexual preference.

Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo "behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality.


The soldier sent the following letter to his commanding officer:

Subject: Request for Relief from Command due to Personal Moral Conflict with New Homosexual Policy

1. I respectfully request to be relieved of Command of XXX Squadron, XXX Cavalry prior to new policy implementation subsequent to the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." My personal religious beliefs and moral convictions do not permit me to treat homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, compatible with military service, any more than adultery, illicit drug use, or criminal activity. I believe this lifestyle runs counter to good order and discipline in military units, and I refuse to sacrifice my belief system, protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, in order to fall in line with the command policy that will logically follow. This new policy will undoubtedly include mandatory sensitivity training as well as same-sex partner inclusion in Family Readiness Group activities and integration into the full spectrum of other military benefits, as well as a whole new category of discrimination standards and investigative procedures. I will not, as a commander, put my signature on a training schedule or other document recognizing or legitimizing any of these things that contradict my personal beliefs.

2. I would like to remain in the XXX Army National Guard until I am eligible for retirement (at 20 years and 0 days), which would be in the late summer of 2012, but on grounds of my religious beliefs, I will not attend sensitivity or behavior modification training consequential to this policy change, even if it means disciplinary action. I regret that I cannot continue to serve in the military further, but feel that my efforts would be insincere because my heart will no longer be in it."

(Story continues below)



"I will not be the person who forces this training on my soldiers," the officer, whose identity was being protected, told WND. He plans to go on the record as soon as he discusses his request with his chain of command.

The officer said he's aware of other officers who intend to resign their commissions.

"These people want to serve. I want to serve. I love my job, but I can't do this job once they begin to implement this policy," he told WND.

Under the terms of the DADT repeal, the armed forces will not be permitted to allow open homosexuality in the service until the president, secretary of defense and head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can certify that terminating DADT will not impair military readiness. During the transition period that will precede certification, the military plans to require servicemen to attend mandatory training sessions intended to change their attitudes toward homosexuality.

"Very few soldiers are fine with open homosexuals in the service," said the officer. "I cannot believe the numbers jibe with what was published in the previous survey," referring to a study commissioned by the Pentagon to assess whether the military could safely repeal DADT.

"I did not give up my constitutional rights and freedom of religion when I joined the military. I don't believe in subjecting myself to all of the behavior modification and sensitivity training. They're going to try to push the position that this is an acceptable lifestyle."

Beyond concerns about violating his own conscience and the beliefs of his soldiers, the officer predicts several additional adverse consequences to repealing the military's ban on open homosexuality.

"I don't believe the steps they're taking allow a commander to maintain good order and discipline in a military unit," the officer told WND. "DADT was a compromise to allow homosexuals to serve as long as they kept it to themselves. Now they'll be able to throw their lifestyle in everybody's face and commanders won't be able to do anything about it."

The officer also predicted problems with retention and recruitment:

"I think it might not have an immediate, huge impact, but as enlistments expire you'll get people who vote with their feet and leave the service, and I don't believe the recruiting effort is going to offset the amount of people that leave. The military historically attracts a more conservative group of people who have certain principles and beliefs and swear an oath to the Constitution."

As previously reported by WND, some experts predict as many as a quarter of Americans in military service will resign or leave earlier than planned because of the advent of open homosexuality. Nearly half of the Marine Corps respondents to the Pentagon survey said they would consider leaving the service earlier than planned.

The officer also predicted growing security problems as homosexuals become more prevalent in the service.

"One of the Army values is selfless service. Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier, who may be called upon to give his or her life in the nation's defense. When you start trying to attract people who are so self-centered that they put living their lifestyle out in the open above the needs of their country and national defense, then you have a really dangerous combination. That's when you get instances like PFC Bradley Manning, who is a homosexual. Because of his personal beliefs and bitterness toward the military he decided to leak 150,000 sensitive wires that have done irreparable damage to our nation."

Manning, an openly gay soldier, reportedly sent many thousands of sensitive documents to the Wikileaks website out of anger over the military's ban on open homosexuality.

"One of the Army values is selfless service. Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier, who may be called upon to give his or her life in the nation's defense. When you start trying to attract people who are so self-centered that they put living their lifestyle out in the open above the needs of their country and national defense, then you have a really dangerous combination.

"Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier,"

Chris wrote:Oh well, I say. If the presence of out gay soldiers will be that much of a problem for a select few that they feel they can't competently do the job they signed up for, then let them be the ones to go home with a dishonorable discharge. Let the bigots be the ones inconvenienced and compelled to leave, but I don't foresee it being a huge problem for the majority of military personnel. For the most part, I imagine most won't care if their fellow comrade is gay, or won't care enough to raise a fuss. Some are acting as if the military is going to suddenly become a pride rally; the repeal of DADT is only going to stop the witch-hunts, necessary cover-up's and forced discharges. I doubt that every closeted gay soldier is now going to be compelled to reveal his sexual orientation to his unit.

Chris wrote:Oh well, I say. If the presence of out gay soldiers will be that much of a problem for a select few that they feel they can't competently do the job they signed up for, then let them be the ones to go home with a dishonorable discharge. Let the bigots be the ones inconvenienced and compelled to leave, but I don't foresee it being a huge problem for the majority of military personnel. For the most part, I imagine most won't care if their fellow comrade is gay, or won't care enough to raise a fuss. Some are acting as if the military is going to suddenly become a pride rally; the repeal of DADT is only going to stop the witch-hunts, necessary cover-up's and forced discharges. I doubt that every closeted gay soldier is now going to be compelled to reveal his sexual orientation to his unit.

Navy orders investigation into raunchy videos
Content includes women sailors taking showers, references to masturbation and bestiality

NBC, msnbc.com and news services
updated 53 minutes ago 2011-01-03T01:33:54


The U.S. Navy has launched an investigation into the production of raunchy videos aboard the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Enterprise four to five years ago but just now publicly released, NBC News reported Sunday.

The videos which portray women sailors taking showers, references to masturbation and bestiality were apparently produced by or with the consent of the current commander of the Enterprise, Capt. Owen Honors.





According to senior Navy officials, the videos — which were apparently produced for the crew's entertainment and as a "morale booster" —first surfaced when Honors was executive officer of the ship. A senior Navy official tells NBC News that although senior officers up the chain of command were aware of the videos at the time, Honors and others were simply told to "knock it off" and there was apparently no formal disciplinary action taken.

Although the Enterprise is scheduled to deploy within weeks, Navy officials tell NBC News in light of the investigation it appears unlikely Honors will command the ship. When asked about the video, one senior navy official described it as "pretty bad."

Excerpts from the videos and descriptions of their content were first published Saturday by The Virginian-Pilot newspaper in Norfolk, Va.

"The videos created onboard USS Enterprise in 2006-2007 and written about in The Virginian-Pilot article on Saturday, January 1, 2011, are clearly inappropriate," the Navy said in a written statement.

The Navy said, "Production of videos, like the ones produced four to five years ago on USS Enterprise and now being written about in The Virginian-Pilot, were not acceptable then and are not acceptable in today's Navy. The Navy does not endorse or condone these kinds of actions."


In the videos, Honors indicates that he's trying to entertain the crew, the newspaper reported. They were shown roughly once a week on closed-circuit shipwide television, according to a handful of sailors. According to The Virginian-Pilot, the sailors requested their names not be used for fear of reprisals.

It's clear from the videos that Honors had already gotten complaints when some of them were made. "Over the years I've gotten several complaints about inappropriate material during these videos, never to me personally but, gutlessly, through other channels," he said in the introduction to the video posted by the newspaper.


Honors did not respond to requests by the newspaper for comment. Neither did the Enterprise's then-commanding officer, Larry Rice, who was later promoted to the rank of the rear admiral and had been assigned to the Norfolk-based U.S. Joint Forces Command, but is no longer there, a spokeswoman said.

"This evening, all of you bleeding hearts... why don't just go ahead and hug yourself for the next 20 minutes or so, because there's a really good chance you're gonna be offended," Honors says in the video, posted on the newspaper's website.

Then Honors tells the audience to get ready for something that always pleases: "the F-bomb." The video goes on to show a string of clips in which he uses the expletive. The next part of the video shows Honors and other sailors pretending to masturbate in a variety of situations.

The video then moves on to a different subject. "Finally, let's get to my favorite topic - something foreign to the gay kid over there: chicks in the shower," he says.

Commissioned in 1961, the Enterprise is the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. It is scheduled to sail two more deployments before it is decommissioned in 2013. It can carry a crew of more than 5,800.

The video posted by the newspaper included clips of past "movies" Honors had made — including several statements in which he holds his higher-ups blameless for the material.

"As usual, the admiral and the captain have no idea about the contents of the video or movie this evening, and they should not be held accountable in any judicial setting," Honors says.

NBC News' Jim Miklaszewski and Courtney Kube and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40877392/ns/us_news-life/