Spokane7
54°
August 26, 2010 in Opinion
Editorial: ‘Don’t ask’ inherently unjust for U.S. troops
Yet another decorated, dedicated member of the military is under the threat of expulsion because of the nation’s asinine and counterproductive “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach has never admitted to being gay. The military won’t allow that. But he was accused of sexual assault by a man in Boise two years ago. Fehrenbach, who is based at Mountain Home Air Force Base, cooperated with a police investigation that determined the allegation was unfounded. However, Fehrenbach did admit to sleeping with the man. Unbeknownst to him, Air Force investigators heard this confession and then launched an inquiry into his sexuality.
Think about that for a moment. Fehrenbach could have lied to police investigators and that would have kept the Air Force at bay. Instead, he told the truth, and it could cost him his career and retirement benefits.
Fehrenbach has flown nearly 90 missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo over his 19 years of service. He is one year shy of qualifying for retirement benefits, and he fears that he will soon be discharged. He has been forced to take a desk job but would love to be deployed again. His attorneys estimate that the military has spent $25 million training him over the course of his career.
This is not the portrait of a worker any employer would want to dump.
Fehrenbach is fighting back and could succeed, thanks to a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in the case of another stellar service member, Maj. Margaret Witt. She was discharged two years short of retirement when the Air Force learned of her relationship with a woman with whom she shared a house in Spokane. It didn’t matter that she was a decorated flight nurse at McChord Air Force Base in Tacoma. She sued, and the court established the “Witt standard,” which forces the military to prove that continued service would be a detriment to unit cohesion, military readiness and other factors that the “don’t ask” policy was designed to protect.
On Sept. 13, a federal judge in Tacoma will oversee a trial that will attempt to apply the standard to Witt herself. If Witt prevails, that will be good news to Fehrenbach, because Idaho is covered by the 9th Circuit. However, gay military members in other jurisdictions will not benefit.
That’s why Congress needs to end this discrimination. The House has passed an end to the ban as part of a larger defense bill. The Senate hasn’t done anything. Meanwhile, the Pentagon is conducting an insulting survey of how homosexuality affects heterosexual service members and their spouses as part of a larger study of the issue. Sample question: “If a gay or lesbian service member lived in your neighborhood with their partner, would you stay on-base or would you try to move out?”
Whether someone is discharged should be determined on a case-by-case basis, not on a presumption that a particular sexual orientation is intrinsically corrosive. The exemplary careers of Witt and Fehrenbach demonstrate why.
To respond online, click on Opinion under the Topics menu at www.spokesman.com.
Editorial: Workers’ beer routine undermines public trust 
hardwroc on August 26 at 4:09 p.m.
By taking away the Institutionalized stigma, of being “branded” gay, the military takes away the power of that information. People cannot be blackmailed if there is no negative action empowered with that knowledge. As it is now, IF you are gay, anyone knowing is handed POWER to abuse you using the truth as a bludgeon.
Which is more American, accepting yourself and being honest, or pretending to be what OTHERS want you to be, despite performing perfectly fine otherwise thank you ever so much?
Honesty should be the desired policy, and given the fact that NO sex is sanctioned in the military, there should not be any conflict, except perhaps those that think they are above the laws over assault and battery like the bunch that beat a fellow Marine because they thought he made a pass at one of the guys.
Is NO really so hard to utter? Should women bust out a NINE if you make a pass and she isn’t interested?
You know we are short on translators for Arabic? And fired a bus load of them because they were “gay”? Which do you think effected our troops the most, them being gay, or them not being around and leaving us in a huge linguistic crater.
I would much prefer a translator of any ilk to none. Just sayin
misjustice on August 26 at 5:29 p.m.
Great post hardwroc!
It is past time to do away with Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Let all members of the Armed Forces be judged by their ability to perform the mission rather than their sexual orientation.
Similar arguments of mission cohesiveness and low moral in the ranks were used to keep blacks and women out of the Armed Forces. Those arguments were based on false premises, just as the current arguments against homosexuals are.