On March 2, 2005, Congressman Marty Meehan introduced H.R. 1059, the Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2005.  The bill would replace "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the military's current policy prohibiting openly gay soldiers from serving, with a policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Congressman Meehan has been an outspoken advocate of equal and fair treatment for gay men and lesbians. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2005 is not the Congressman's first attempt to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.  In fact, the first amendment Meehan offered as a Congressman was to delete Don't Ask, Don't Tell provisions from the Fiscal Year 1994 Defense Authorization.

Meehan's efforts on behalf of gay rights have been lauded by the Human Rights Campaign, the preeminent political advocacy group for the gay, lesbian and bisexual community. The Campaign's quarterly magazine for the Summer of 1997 named Meehan to its "Hall of Fame" for his stand against discrimination in our armed forces.

Following the introduction of H.R. 1059, Congressman Meehan received numerous messages of encouragement from current and former members of the Armed Services.  Many shared personal stories detailing how "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has affected their life and their service.  Some of those messages and stories appear below:

---

Dear Congressman Meehan,

As an openly gay veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom  (Mar 2003 - Aug 2003), I was incredibly encouraged to hear that legislation had been introduced to repeal "Don't Ask Don't Tell...". I was an Enlisted (Specialist) Servicemember of the US Army for 3-1/2 years, having served as a combat medic both in Bosnia and Iraq.  I know firsthand how difficult it is to communicate to legislators as "gay enlisted soldiers" under the current climate of the military; now, having the luxury to do so, I wanted to thank you for recognizing that this policy is antiquated, unnecessary and, most importantly, un-American.

I know that the greatest argument against repealing "DADT" will be the baseless claim that it would "upset unit cohesion and/or morale" voiced most often by people who have never served.  The truth is that my fellow soldiers judged me as a soldier, and most could not have cared less about my "orientation." They cared about whether I could remain alert on a 36-hour convoy, use my weapon efficiently, and perform my medical tasks successfully.

I separated from active duty in November 2003 after the expiration of my (extended) service contract and am currently pursuing my Bachelors degree at New York University.  As such, if I can be of any help to you and/or the progress of this legislation, please let me know.  

Sincerely,  

Patrick Heusner

Veteran, Operation Iraqi Freedom

 

---

Congressman Meehan:  

I wish to applaud your courage in challenging the military's archaic policy regarding homosexual service members. 

On 31 Dec 04, I gave notice to my command group that I was homosexual.  At the time I was an Active Duty Sergeant First Class with better than 15 years total service.  By all accounts I was fast-tracking to prestigious assignments.  However, as I achieved more rank, and became accountable for more soldiers, speculation began to surface.

Why is SFC Bassett never at the family functions?  Does SFC Bassett ever go on dates?  These questions became more and more frequent.  Ultimately, I made the life-altering decision to let the truth be known, and attempt to begin a new phase of my life.  This was the decision that seemed most professional, ethical and compassionate for both me and my soldiers. 

I've returned to school, and I'm performing quite well, but Sir...there's something missing.  I have a gaping hole in my soul that constantly reminds me that my purpose on this earth is to serve in the U.S. Army.  I thrived on the Army's mechanics and routine, and the Army requires my technical and tactical proficiency, especially in this time of war. 

I would be honored to lend my support to your proposed legislation in any capacity you deem most advantageous.   

Respectfully,  

Jason Bassett  

---

---

As the military valiantly battles terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, many officers, non-commissioned officers, and soldiers are fighting soulful, internal battles of their own between the concepts of honor and duty.  How does one balance one's sexual orientation against one's desire or perceived duty to serve one's country through honorable service in the United States Armed Forces?  I would like to highlight the inconsistencies between the honor codes that are at the core of indoctrination at all of the Federal service academies and this antiquated policy.  

As a member of the Long Grey Line and a former Secretary of the Cadet Honor Committee at the United States Military Academy at West Point, I am opposed to the current "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy."  

This policy continues to force soldiers at all ranks and across all services and components to live a lie.  Furthermore, it prevents countless numbers of other candidates or recruits from serving at a time when our nation absolutely needs their service.  

The Cadet Honor Code states that "[a] cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do."  Yet, I can't help but wonder how many cadets must continue to lie or deceive their peers and the Academy administration about their sexual orientation or sexual past for fear of separation or some other form of retaliation.  

The Spirit of the Code is a concept that I learned as a Plebe and taught as an Honor Committee staff member.  Its importance lies with the fact that a code of honor should be more than a legalistic checklist to avoid punishment, but rather an internalized, shared sense of moral principles that foster an environment of trust and respect. I find it intolerable that our nation continues to dishonor untold numbers of cadets, midshipmen, officers, and soldiers by forcing them to not be who they truthfully are.  

Regardless of my personal beliefs on sexual orientation there is an inconsistency in the systems of honor at the service academies and the regulations implementing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.  How can we on one hand require by regulation an individual to be absolutely truthful in speech and deeds (not just to tell the truth) and on the other hand require by law the separation of anyone who speaks about their sexual orientation truthfully?  

Furthermore, what right do we have to deny these individuals the same rights enjoyed by its other citizens?  One of our founding documents the "Declaration of Independence" states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."  Yet, with the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy we deny so many citizens the right to happiness that they can only truly achieve through self-acceptance and acceptance by others.

It seems it is time to either do away with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" or the concept of honor at our service academies and in our Armed Forces.  Which should it be?  

Anonymous  

---

Dear Sir,

I want to express my deepest thanks and gratitude for the work you do in supporting all human rights and especially those rights for the service men and women who were involuntarily discharged due to their sexual orientation.                  

I am one of those people.  I was an E-3, Airman First Class in the United States Air Force.  I was an Intelligence Specialist at the time I was discharged, I was also newly married.  I had been married for almost two months when I was accused by two female coworkers of being a homosexual.  It took the Air Force four days from that point to discharge me.  No questions asked.  I was 19 years old and my life was falling apart.  Nobody wanted to give me any advice...the little advice I did receive was totally wrong.     

I am still to this day paying off debt to the government because of this.  I received an enlistment bonus for the Intelligence Career Field. Because the government says that I didn't finish my enlistment term (due to my own fault or not) I must repay it. 

All I ever wanted (and still do) was to serve my country.  I was following in the footsteps of my forefathers.  My grandfather served 22 years Navy.  My father served 21 years Air Force.  I was so proud of them both.  Nothing made me more proud of myself than wearing that uniform and being a part of something great; protecting and defending my country which I love so much.

It is hard for me today, to hear our National Anthem without getting a teary eye.  I can't understand how you can love something so much, put your life on the line and be willing to risk it all for your country....when in the end...your country wont have you.

I do what I can today.  I protect our country in another way.  I am a Security Screener for the Transportation Security Administration.  I am proud of this uniform that I wear.  I am proud to be able to protect the citizens of our country again.  However, I can guarantee you that should this bill pass, I will be the first in line at the recruiting station.

Thank you again so much for all that you do.  I am looking forward to seeing this bill pass.  I have the web status page saved in my favorite places on my Internet explorer so I can check the daily progress of the bill.  You have no idea how much this means to me, and how much your involvement in this means to me.  All that I am thanks you Sir.  I am anxiously looking forward to serving my country again.

Respectfully Yours,

Matthew McCary  

---

Dear Congressman Meehan:

I am profoundly grateful to you and the other Representatives in the House who are sponsoring the "Military Readiness" bill which seeks to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.  

I served in the US Naval Reserve on active duty from March 1969 through February 1972.  Following my graduation from Navy Officer Candidate School in Newport, RI, I attended Nuclear Weapons School in Albuquerque, New Mexico for 2 months in the spring of 1969.  Thereafter, I served on the USS Ticonderoga from June 1969 through September 1970.  From October 1970 until February 1972, I was the Educational Services Officer for Naval Forces, Vietnam, serving in-country Vietnam.

At the time of my induction into the Navy, I had a physical examination, and was required to fill out a questionnaire, which included a question about "Homosexual Tendencies."  I checked the "No" box.  In other words, I had to lie in order to serve my country.  At this time, many of my contemporaries, were seeking less risky forms of service or had "other priorities."  Some others found less honorable ways of avoiding military service.  

I feel very strongly that citizens of the United States should not have to lie in order to serve our country.  The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law, while not explicitly requiring individuals to lie in order to enlist in the military, in effect does require dishonesty and lying to remain serving on active duty.  I look forward to helping you win passage of this legislation.  

Sincerely,  

Nathaniel G. Butler

 

---

(The following statement appeared as a Letter to the Editor in the April 22, 2005 edition of The Washington Post)

As a retired Army judge advocate who also served in the infantry, the military police and the transportation corps, I applaud the April 13 editorial recommending the end of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and allowing honest and open service.

Since retirement, I have dealt with this issue as an informal counselor to soldiers affected by the policy. I also have examined the lifting of similar policies in the armed forces of other countries. In other militaries, the lifting of such bans has essentially been a non-event. Canada, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Israel have successfully lifted bans similar to "don't ask, don't tell." In some of these countries, those favoring the policy of exclusion predicted mass resignations and retirements that didn't happen.

As a company commander, I expected that some people would not get along. But good commanders and noncommissioned officers can solve these problems. Our present "solution," which tells a large group of loyal Americans that we do not want their dedicated service, is shameful.

I also have found that younger soldiers are much more apt to believe that all Americans should be able to serve their country, because, unlike their elders, they are more likely to have known openly gay and lesbian fellow students and co-workers.

Michael Allan Haas

Wilmington, N.C.

 

---