Print Page - The SODOMITE Army of Amerika

http://news.yahoo.com/military-members-march-san-diego-gay-pride-000617150.html

Military members march for San Diego gay pride

7/16/11

.SAN DIEGO (Reuters) - A group of U.S. service members marched in a San Diego gay pride parade on Saturday, in a demonstration organizers touted as an unprecedented step for gay and lesbian military personnel under the Pentagon's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

The military contingent in the parade numbered about 250 people, and the former Navy operations specialist who brought the group together said many are currently in the military, while the rest are veterans. They dressed in civilian clothes.

Marine Corporal Will Rodriguez-Kennedy is on active duty and said he looks forward to next year's parade, when he believes it will be possible to march in "dress blues."

"One of my friends here has been back from Afghanistan for three days, and when he heard about the parade he said he served in uniform and he should be able to march in uniform," said Rodriguez-Kennedy, 24.

It was unclear exactly how many members of the San Diego gay pride parade's military contingent were on active duty. Several participants who spoke to Reuters had recently left the armed services.

Under the military's existing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, service members are barred from saying they are gay or lesbian, and that has until now discouraged some members of the military from participating in gay pride parades.

Organizers said the San Diego contingent, which included straight supporters also in the armed services, represented the largest group of members of the military to ever march in the city's gay pride parade, or any similar U.S. event.

Gay service members have been known to march in other pride parades, but usually in a low-key manner without calling attention to themselves.

COURT DECISION

The march came a day after a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily reinstated the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy on gays, but blocked the Pentagon from penalizing or discharging anyone for being openly gay. The decision marked a reversal from an earlier order to immediately end the policy.

President Barack Obama signed legislation in December to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," but the bill gave the Pentagon an unlimited time frame to implement the change, leading up to a final "certification" of the repeal.

That certification is expected within weeks.

In a parade that featured drag queens costumed as nuns and men dressed as pirates with G-strings, the military contingent of mostly men in their 20s and 30s marched in markedly more conservative clothing.

They wore green or grey t-shirts emblazoned with their military branch, and each carried in hand a small U.S. flag.

"This is my first time here, out as who I am: a gay man in the Army Reserves," Dale Smith, 50, told Reuters. "It's a great day for me and for all the gay people who've chosen to serve their country."

A Pentagon spokeswoman said U.S. Department of Defense regulations do not prohibit marching in parades while wearing civilian clothes, and that participation "does not constitute a declaration of sexual orientation."

The military contingent in the San Diego parade was organized by Sean Sala, an openly gay 26 year-old man, who left the Navy in June after six years.

"When we were walking, every step of the way it was standing ovations from the crowd," Sala said. "My mom was with me and it made her cry."

San Diego, California's second-largest city, has a large military presence. The nearby Camp Pendleton is the largest Marine Corps base west of the Mississippi River.

(Editing by Alex Dobuzinskis and Jerry Norton)
.

Pentagon celebrates gay troops

The Pentagon on Tuesday toasted gays in the military, with a top adviser to President Obama declaring the country is “safer” now that they may serve openly in the ranks.

“Because we repealed ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ our military … is stronger and our country is safer, more equal and more just,” said Valerie Jarrett, the keynote speaker at the Pentagon’s gay pride celebration.

It was the Defense Department second annual gay pride gathering since September 2011, when Mr. Obama signed the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” a ban on gays serving openly in the military implemented during the Clinton administration.

This year’s 35-minute gathering in the Pentagon auditorium was more low-key and shorter than last year’s event, which featured a gay Marine officer, an Air Force lawyer and a lesbian West Point graduate.

Wednesday’s speakers were assembled by a new group, DOD Pride, and featured three senior officials, topped by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

“We’re very proud of everything the gay and lesbian community have contributed and continue to contribute,” Mr. Hagel said. “With their service, we are moving closer to fulfilling the country’s founding vision that all of us are created equal.”

Eric Fanning, the Air Force undersecretary and acting Air Force secretary, noted that two years ago gays could not serve openly. Now, a secretary of defense was speaking at a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender celebration.

Ms. Jarrett told of meeting gay service members at the White House, including a Marine Corps captain.

“When he deploys in August, he’ll be taking his husband with him,” she said.

Army Reserve Brig. Gen. Tammy Smith, the first openly gay general officer, stood in the audience with her partner, to a round of applause.

“Stand up. Come on,” Ms. Jarrett said. “Whoo. Whoo.”

Ms. Jarrett, one of Mr. Obama’s closest confidantes, called the repeal of the gay ban “one of the most significant civil rights accomplishments of the president’s career.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/25/pentagon-celebrates-gay-troops/#ixzz2XKDnQlyQ

(http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/gay_army.jpg)

Quote

our military … is stronger and our country is safer,

Sorry but we are FAR from safe

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

I am a veteran of the US ARMY. I served during the first Gulf War, a real war. I joined the Army at the age of 17, served for 8 years and honorably discharged. At the time i fully believed in what this country stood for. Heck in the late 80's and early 90's it actually stood up for my beliefs. But this really upsets me, not just as a Christian, but as a full serving soldier of the beliefs of the USA.

Burial at Arlington Now Among Benefits for Military's Same-Sex Spouses

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel says the Pentagon "welcomes" the Supreme Court's gutting of the Defense of Marriage Act and "will immediately begin the process" of making the same benefits available to all military spouses, regardless of sexual orientation, as soon as possible.

"That is now the law, and it is the right thing to do," Hagel said in a statement issued on Wednesday.

"The policies governing burial at Arlington National Cemetery will apply equally to same-sex and opposite-sex spouses," the announcement said.

Eligibility for burial at Arlington National Cemetery is governed by the 1986 Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 553, Section 15, and it includes widows or widowers of active duty or retired members of the Armed Forces.

"Every person who serves our nation in uniform stepped forward with courage and commitment," Hagel said in a statement. "All that matters is their patriotism, their willingness to serve their country and their qualifications to do so. Today's ruling helps ensure that all men and women who serve this country can be treated fairly and equally, with the full dignity and respect they so richly deserve."

The Defense Department will immediately start updating its system for issuing identification cards, a process that will take an estimated 6-12 weeks. ID cards are needed to access medical, dental and other benefits.

At a news conference on Wednesday, Hagel said he doesn't know how much the changes will cost.

"I'm sure there will be some cost, but we'll figure it out because we'll follow the law of the land," Gen. Martin Dempsey added. -

See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/burial-arlington-now-among-benefits-militarys-same-sex-spouses#sthash.xTQfOtux.GTIBHjDI.dpuf

Dude, Gen. Martin Dempsey, following "orders" didn't work at Nuremberg, and it sure will not work now or with the Lord.

Quote from: Mark on June 26, 2013, 07:39:08 am

Yes, so true.

Air Force Says Drag Acts Symbolize Gay Pride

The U.S. Air Force said that a well-known drag queen group was invited to perform on base during a “Diversity Day” celebration because drag is a “symbol of gay pride and unity. But the performance sparked outrage among some airmen who called the drag show “totally offensive and inappropriate.”

Jewels and the Brunchettes performed to a small crowd at the Los Angeles Air Force Base on Aug. 8, the military confirmed.

The Air Force said in a statement to Fox News that “Diversity Day” featured eight cultural groups and was meant to “foster equality and diversity in the workplace.”

Photographs provided to Fox News show an individual wearing a giant wig and sporting form-fitting dresses performing to a sparse crowd underneath the American flag.

“Drag acts to this day represent the struggle for freedom and equality of the LGBT community, while at the same time providing a deep-rooted historical form of entertainment for the LGBT culture,” said Peggy Hodge, a spokesperson for the Office of Public Affairs.

The military said the drag queen group did not include any members of the Air Force.

“Drag queen acts are historically one of the main forms of entertainment in the LGBT culture, having its roots in the earliest of days of the gay rights movement,” Hodge said in a written statement.

She said individuals dressing in drag harkens to the days of the Stonewall riots when a gay bar was raided by police.

“What followed was the brutal beating and jailing of several men dressed as women,” she said. “This is commonly accepted as the start of the gay rights movement in the United States.”

As a result of the Stonewall riots, Hodge said, “the wearing and performing in drag became a symbol of gay pride and unity.”

http://www.trunews.com/air-force-says-drag-acts-symbolize-gay-pride/

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/03/20235244-gay-troops-prep-for-september-marriage-spree-put-wedding-parties-on-ice?lite=
9/3/13
Gay troops prep for September marriage spree, put wedding parties on ice

September marks nuptial season across part of the American military as gay and lesbian troops cash in new, Pentagon-granted leaves to tie the knot.

Starting Tuesday, the Pentagon is allowing gay troops to take travel leaves for up to seven days — or as many 10 days for those stationed abroad — as long as those service members live 100-plus miles away from a state that allows same-sex marriages.

Scores of service members are draining their savings just to pay for airfare, hotels and rental cars — common, logistical necessities for obtaining a marriage certificate in one of the 13 states where same-sex marriage is legal, advocates say.

While many of these unions may lack champagne-soaked celebrations, they are fueled by a practical brand of urgency: gaining immediate, military-family benefits, said Stephen Peters, executive director of the American Military Partner Association (AMPA).

After the Supreme Court’s decision to scrap the Defense of Marriage Act, leaders at the Department of Defense announced that same-sex spouses of military members would become eligible this month for an array of federal benefits previously offered only to heterosexual spouses, from housing to health care. At the same time, DOD authorized the special leaves for troops seeking same-sex marriages.

"This will provide accelerated access to the full range of benefits offered to married military couples throughout the Department, and help level the playing field between opposite-sex and same-sex couples seeking to be married," Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Pentagon spokesman, said via email. "We do not have an estimate of how many people this will impact."

A week to wed

At least three service members who work with AMPA have all hatched similar marriage plans for this month: quick trips to California to obtain licenses during their authorized leaves with festive wedding parties to follow sometime next year — or beyond.

"For us, California is the easiest way to go," said Melissa Jones, an Army E-3 (private first class), based at Fort Hood, Texas. She and her girlfriend, Danielle Nelson, have booked a seven-day trip to San Diego later this month. "We’re going to pretty much just get it done at the county courthouse. We’re not going to have a ceremony out there. We’ll do that back here with family and friends."

To help pay for their flight and hotel room, Jones and Nelson, both 20, cashed in their large collection of loose change plus $450 in recent bingo winnings.

“Many of our families simply can’t afford the costs of traveling across the country to get married in addition to having a large, expensive ceremony,” said Peters, executive director of the AMPA. “Many can barely afford to travel to a city clerk’s office across the country, wait the required number of days for waiting periods, and finally take care of the paperwork, only to hope for a larger and more formal ceremony at a later date.

“This all boils down to the financial burden they face in having to travel across country — or around the world, for many — a challenge that heterosexual (military) couples are not forced to face in order to care for their family,” Peters added.

'Just for the paper'
Despite the initial costs, the military benefits Jones will gain through marriage will save her thousands of dollars in the long run.

A marriage license will allow Jones to qualify for "base allowance housing," under which the military subsidizes service members' off-base apartments so long as they are legally married or are raising a child or children. That alone saves the couple about $700 per month, Jones said. And as a military spouse, Nelson's college tuition will be federally covered, instantly saving her an additional $4,000 per semester.

If Nelson falls ill after she's married, she can receive her medical treatment at Ford Hood thanks to her new military-family identification card and the official military decal she'll receive for her car. Currently, she must pay for medications out of pocket. The couple has been together for a year and a half, meeting two months before Jones headed to basic training.

"A lot of the urgency of this is that we’re missing out on a lot of benefits," Jones said. "It's not like we’re doing it for the money, but it’s going to help pay for things. I’m 20 years old and I’m helping her pay for college. I also have a car loan and an apartment. We both have full-time jobs. But getting the benefits, she can stop working and can just focus on school.

"I wear (an engagement) ring. People are always asking: 'Are you married?' I’m like: 'Yes and no.' People don't understand that. So I tell them that I'm gay and I have go 1,500 miles away just to get married," Jones said. "It’s not like we’re not going to enjoy it while we're there. But it kind of is just for the paper."

http://news.yahoo.com/feds-wont-enforce-same-sex-veterans-law-193154789--politics.html
Feds won't enforce same-sex veterans law
9/4/13

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration said Wednesday it will stop enforcing a law that blocks benefits to partners of military veterans in same-sex marriages.

In a letter to congressional leaders, Attorney General Eric Holder said that a provision in federal law on benefits to veterans and their families defines "spouse" to mean a person of the opposite sex. He says that definition leaves out legally married same-sex couples, and runs afoul of a June Supreme Court ruling.

The court declared unconstitutional a provision in the Defense of Marriage Act restricting the words marriage and spouse to apply only to heterosexual unions. Holder says that like the Defense of Marriage Act, the provision in the veterans benefits law has the effect of placing lawfully married same-sex couples in a second-tier marriage.

"Decisions by the Executive not to enforce federal laws are appropriately rare," Holder told Congress. "Nevertheless, the unique circumstances presented here warrant non-enforcement."

He said the Supreme Court's conclusion that DOMA imposes a stigma on everyone in same-sex marriages "would seem to apply equally" to the veterans benefits law. Holder noted that after the Supreme Court's decision, the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the House of Representatives withdrew from a pending lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the veterans benefits provisions.

President Barack Obama directed the executive branch to cease enforcement of the provision, Holder wrote.

Last week, a federal judge in Los Angeles ruled that a lesbian Army veteran and her spouse should be entitled to disability benefits, given the Supreme Court's recent ruling.

U.S. District Judge Consuelo Marshall said that federal law defining a spouse as a person of the opposite sex is unconstitutional since the high court's decision allowing legally married gay couples the right to health care benefits.

Although the Supreme Court did not directly address the constitutionality of the veterans benefits provisions, the reasoning of the opinion "strongly supports the conclusion that those provisions are unconstitutional," Holder wrote.

The Justice Department has been tapped by the White House to ensure that couples in same-sex marriages receive all federal benefits to which they are entitled. The Social Security Administration says it has started processing spousal retirement claims for same-sex couples and paying benefits. Last week, the government said that all legally married gay couples will be able to file joint federal tax returns even if they reside in states that do not recognize same-sex marriages.

Many of the changes are relatively easy to make because they involve federal regulations, but the veterans benefits present a more difficult issue because that prohibition is part of federal law.

"Continued enforcement would likely have a tangible adverse effect on the families of veterans and, in some circumstances, active-duty service members and reservists, with respect to survival, health care, home loan and other benefits," Holder wrote.

Obama wants Marines to wear ‘girly’ hats

A change to the Marine Corps’ uniform hats could take the hard-nosed Leathernecks from the Halls of Montezuma to the shops of Christopher Street.

Thanks to a plan by President Obama to create a “unisex” look for the Corps, officials are on the verge of swapping out the Marines’ iconic caps – known as “covers” — with a new version that some have derided as so “girly” that they would make the French blush.

“We don’t even have enough funding to buy bullets, and the DoD is pushing to spend $8 million on covers that look like women’s hats!” one senior Marine source fumed to The Post. “The Marines deserve better. It makes them look ridiculous.”

The thin new covers have a feminine line that some officials think would make them look just as good on female marines as on males — in keeping with the Obama directive.

“The Marine Corps is being ‘encouraged’ by DoD to standardize on a unisex/universal dress and service cap,” Marine brass noted in an internal memo obtained by The Post.
Modal Trigger

One of the new hats worn by a female Marine.

Male and female Marines currently wear gender-specific caps.

The controversial covers have been dubbed the “Dan Daly” hat, after a World War I sergeant from Long Island who twice won the Medal of Honor.

But some Marines love the old hat, which has been in use since 1922 and think the new hat is a glorified “porter’s cap.” The new Daly model is based on a style the Marines used from 1904 to 1918 – and then jettisoned.

“The Dan Daly cap looks too French, and the last people we want to associate our Marines with would be the French military,” wrote one commenter on the Marine Times Web site.

As of now, the new covers are only in the proposal stage.

Marines have until Friday to cast their votes on whether to adopt them or keep the old hat with modifications. Marine Corps head Gen. James Amos will make the final decision.

According to the memo obtained by The Post, requiring all troops to use the Daly cover will cost $8,221,958. Going with the traditional cap will save $284,043, because the current female caps are more expensive.

“Why are we even focused on this while we are laying troops off for no budget?” another Marine Times commenter asked.

“None of the [members] liked the idea of a universal cover for all Marines,” the internal memo noted. “The group members did not like the appearance of the Dan Daly cap on the male Marine.”

http://nypost.com/2013/10/23/obama-wants-marines-to-wear-girly-hats/

Hagel Deploys National Guard Chief to Combat States' Gay Troop Protest

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel announced Thursday night he had ordered the head of the National Guard Bureau to take action against states that have refused to comply with the Pentagon's new policies regarding gay soldiers and their spouses.

Texas was the first of nine states that have said it will not issue military identity cards to the same-sex spouses of troops within their National Guard units. The Department of defense lifted its ban on gays serving openly in the military following the June 26 Supreme Court ruling that struck down parts of the Defense of Marriage Act. In September the Department of Defense began issuing full military benefits to the spouses of these gay troops.

[READ: Pentagon Extends Benefits to Spouses of Gay, Lesbian Troops]

The state of Texas, followed by Indiana, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and West Virginia have all declined to issue the cards to National Guard troops, citing potential conflicts between these new federal policies and state laws at home.

"Not only does this violate the states' obligations under federal law, their actions have created hardship and inequality by forcing couples to travel long distances to federal military bases to obtain the ID cards they're entitled to," said Hagel Thursday night, while speaking at the Anti-Defamation League Centennial Dinner in New York City.

"This is wrong," he said. "It causes division among the ranks, and it furthers prejudice, which DOD has fought to extinguish."

Under Hagel's orders, National Guard Bureau Chief Gen. Frank Grass will meet with each of these states' adjutant general, who commands the state National Guard when it isn't federalized. These officers will be "expected to comply with both lawful direction and DOD policy, in line with the practices of 45 other states and jurisdictions," the secretary said.

[READ: Memo Outlines Pentagon's New Plan for Same-Sex Benefits]

"Whether they are responding to natural disasters here at home, in their states, or fighting in Afghanistan, our National Guardsmen all wear the uniform of the United States of America," Hagel said, adding they are all entitled to the benefits and respect accorded to active duty troops.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/11/01/hagel-deploys-national-guard-chief-to-combat-states-gay-troop-protest

Commission Finds ‘No Compelling Medical Reason’ To Exclude Transgender Americans From Military

An independent commission led by a former U.S. surgeon general has concluded there “is no compelling medical reason” for the U.S. armed forces to prohibit transgender Americans from serving and that President Barack Obama could lift the decades-old ban without approval from Congress, according to a report being released Thursday.

The report said Department of Defense regulations designed to keep transgender people from joining or remaining in the military on the grounds of psychological and physical unfitness are based on outdated beliefs that require thousands of current service members either to leave the service or to forego the medical procedures and other changes that could align their bodies and gender identities.

“We determined not only that there is no compelling medical reason for the ban, but also that the ban itself is an expensive, damaging and unfair barrier to health care access for the approximately 15,450 transgender personnel who serve currently in the active, Guard and reserve components,” said the commission led by Dr. Joycelyn Elders, who served as surgeon general during Bill Clinton’s first term as president, and Rear Adm. Alan Steinman, a former chief health and safety director for the Coast Guard.

The panel, convened by a think tank at San Francisco State University, said the ban has existed for several decades and apparently was derived in part from the psychiatric establishment’s consensus, since revised, that gender identity issues amounted to a mental disorder.

The ban also appears based on the assumption that providing hormone treatment and sex reassignment surgeries would be too difficult, disruptive and expensive. But the commission rejected those notions as inconsistent with modern medical practice and the scope of health care services routinely provided to non-transgender military personnel.

“I hope their takeaway will be we should evaluate every one of our people on the basis of their ability and what they can do, and if they have a condition we can treat we would treat it like we would treat anyone else,” Elders said in an interview with The Associated Press, which was provided along with the report ahead of official release.

At least a dozen nations, including Australia, Canada, England and Israel, allow military service by transgender individuals. Transgender rights advocates have been lobbying the Pentagon to revisit the blanket ban in the U.S. since Congress in 2010 repealed the law that barred gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals from openly serving in the military

“At this time there are no plans to change the department’s policy and regulations which do not allow transgender individuals to serve in the U.S. military,” said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a defense department spokesman.

The commission argued that facilitating gender transitions “would place almost no burden on the military,” adding that a relatively small number of active and reserve service members would elect to undergo transition-related surgeries and that only a fraction might suffer complications that would prevent them from serving. It estimated that 230 transgender people a year would seek such surgery at an average cost of about $30,000.

Retired Brigadier General Thomas Kolditz, a former Army commander and West Point professor on the commission, said he thinks allowing transgender people to serve openly would reduce gender-based harassment, assaults and suicides while enhancing national security.

“When you closet someone, you create a security risk, and we don’t need another Chelsea Manning,” Kolditz said, referring to the soldier formerly known as Bradley Manning who came out as transgender after being sentenced for leaking classified documents to the website WikiLeaks.

But Center for Military Readiness President Elaine Donnelly, whose group opposed the repeal of the ban on openly gay troops, predicted that putting transgender people in barracks, showers and other sex-segregated could cause sexual assaults to increase and infringe on the privacy of non-transgender personnel.

“This is putting an extra burden on men and women in the military that they certainly don’t need and they don’t deserve,” Donnelly said.

The commission recommends the president issue an executive order instructing the Department of Defense to amend its regulations so transgender people are no longer automatically barred. The Pentagon then would need to develop rules for assigning service members who are transitioning, said Palm Center Executive Director Aaron Belkin, whose San Francisco State-based think tank commissioned the report.

The Palm Center, which previously researched “don’t ask, don’t tell,” is funded in part by a $1.3 million grant from Jennifer Pritzker, a billionaire former Army lieutenant colonel who came out as transgender last year.

The Williams Institute, a think-tank based at UCLA, estimates about 15,500 transgender personnel are currently serving, nearly all under their birth genders and not transitioning in an appearance-altering way.

Army Reserve Capt. Sage Fox, 41, was one until recently. Following a deployment to Kuwait, Fox started taking female hormones last year. In November, with her hair getting long and her voice higher, she notified her battalion commander, whom she says expressed support. At drill time, an announcement was made to 400 colleagues at the B.T. Collins Reserve Center in Sacramento.

For a few days, Fox thought she might escape the ban. But then she was informed she had been placed on inactive status.

“When I transitioned, I wasn’t just a good officer, I became a better officer because I didn’t have to deal with that conflict anymore,” she said.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/03/13/commission-finds-no-compelling-medical-reason-to-exclude-transgender-americans-from-military/

SEAL Team 6 member becomes Pentagon’s poster girl in transgender recruiting

A former member of SEAL Team 6 has become the poster girl for a Pentagon effort to include transgenders — people who have undergone sex-change operations — in the ranks.

Kristin Beck, formerly Senior Chief Petty Officer Christopher Beck, spoke recently at several high-profile events at intelligence agencies and the Pentagon to promote the integration of transgenders.

(http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/2013/06/04/beck_s640x360.jpg?bdf16668e55ec43c1616e34e8b83fe12b465f34c)

“Transgender service in the armed forces, yes it will happen soon,” she said on Twitter.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, among the most politically correct Pentagon chiefs of the past several decades, fueled the effort within the Pentagon to integrate transgenders in May when he said the policy of banning transgenders should be reviewed continually. The transgender drive is the latest element of the Obama administration’s social engineering within the U.S. military.

The Pentagon currently defines transgenders as sexual deviants.
Warrior Princess A U.S. Navy SEAL's Journey to Coming out Transgender, by Kristin Beck (formerly Chris Beck). (source: Amazon Books)

Enlarge Photo
Warrior Princess A U.S. Navy SEAL’s Journey to Coming out Transgender, by ... more >

Among Ms. Beck’s recent appearances were speeches at the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office and at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, according to the DIA and her Twitter feed.

She also was scheduled to speak to the Multicultural Heritage Committee at Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska, although one defense official said it is not clear how transgenderism fits within the multicultural spectrum.

Ms. Beck, author of “Warrior Princess,” spoke to the DIA on June 18 as part of the intelligence agency’s annual Pride Month — formerly Gay Pride Month but now expanded to include a host of sexually related terms, including transgenders. She received an award from DIA Director Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn at the event.

PHOTOS: Top 10 U.S. fighter jets

According to DIA’s newsletter, Ms. Beck, in her remarks, pushed for allowing transgenders in uniform. She said the Pentagon should stop defining people by external appearances and accept what they say they are on the inside.

“We are all, all of us, created equal, and we all deserve equal justice,” she said, explaining how she hid her true sexual identity during her military career.

As a man, Ms. Beck was part of SEAL Teams 1, 5 and 6 and was awarded a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart.

Since sex reassignment last year, Ms. Beck has sought to promote gay, bisexual and transgender acceptance in the military.

“The world is looking at us,” Ms. Beck told the DIA. “You can change the wallpaper, but I’m still right here. I can still do the job I was doing in uniform.”

The DIA said its event was designed to promote education and diversity in the workplace.

A Pentagon official critical of the sexual-diversity campaign said it was a waste of money.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/26/seal-tem-sixs-kristin-beck-transgender-recruiting-/#ixzz35nDZlnZL

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/03/military-should-end-transgender-ban-immediately-former-generals-say/
9/3/14
Military should end transgender ban immediately, former generals say

The U.S. military’s ban on transgender servicemembers should be eliminated immediately, according to three retired generals, including the former chief medical officer of the U.S. Army.

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced in May that the policy should “continually be reviewed,” but stopped short of saying it should be overturned. Hagel said he “would be open” to rethinking the ban, prompting some advocates to believe that a policy change could be forthcoming. Three retired generals, including Maj. Gen. Gales Pollack, the Army’s former acting surgeon general, now say that ending the ban is “administratively feasible” and will not be overly burdensome or complicated.

“Three months have passed since [Hagel] announced a willingness to review the military’s ban on transgender service, an effort the White House indicated it supports,” the generals said in a statement issued by the Palm Center, a California-based think tank. “Our new report shows that implementation could proceed immediately and will be successful in its execution.”

The study, “Report of the Planning Commission on Transgender Service,” estimates that approximately 15,500 troops currently serving in the military and National Guard are transgender, or less than 1 percent of the 2 million-plus U.S. active duty and reserve troops. Additionally, 18 other nations, including Germany, Australia and the United Kingdom, allow those individuals to serve openly.

“Our conclusion is that allowing transgender personnel to serve openly is administratively feasible and will not be burdensome or complicated."

- Joint statement by three retired U.S. generals

The report also noted that unlike the ban on openly gay service that was repealed by Congress in 2010, the current transgender service ban is not a statutory bar but rather falls under the authority of the president and secretary of defense.

Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said the “discriminatory” policy should be replaced with a fully inclusive one, characterizing it as inconsistent with the military’s core values.

“In an earlier study, the former U.S. surgeon general, along with retired generals and flag officers, concluded that transgender personnel are as fit to serve and as ready for deployment to austere environments as anyone else,” Minter said in a statement.

Pollock, the former Army surgeon general, was joined in her statement by Brigadier General Clara Adams-Ender, former chief of the U.S. Army Nurse Corps, and Brigadier General Thomas Kolditz, a professor emeritus at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

“Our conclusion is that allowing transgender personnel to serve openly is administratively feasible and will not be burdensome or complicated,” the retired generals said in a statement released last week.

Several advocacy groups have praised Hagel’s comments, including the National Center for Transgender Equality, whose executive director, Mara Keisling, has said the willingness to review the ban is “overdue but very welcome.”

“If the Secretary were able to meet and talk with the trans servicemembers I've met, he'd understand the answer is self-evident,” Keisling said in May. “These are amazing people who serve even though they must hide a basic part of who they are."

A review of military policies pertaining to transgender soldiers could occur, as it also deals with questions regarding how to treat transgender prisoners. Bradley Manning, a former Army private currently serving a 35-year prison sentence for providing classified documents to WikiLeaks, now goes by the name Chelsea and is fighting to be treated as a woman. Manning is seeking a counselor who specializes in gender issues and also wants to get hormone replacement therapy, which military officials have said it does not provide, The Associated Press reports.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/manning-sues-defense-dept-gender-treatment-25711143
Manning Sues Defense Dept. for Gender Treatment
WASHINGTON — Sep 23, 2014, 7:18 PM ET

Convicted national security leaker Chelsea Manning asked a federal court Tuesday to order the Defense Department to provide hormone therapy and other treatment for her gender identity condition while she serves her 35-year sentence in military confinement.

A spokeswoman at the Pentagon, Army Lt. Col. Alayne Conway, said she could not comment on pending litigation, per military policy.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, says the Army private formerly known as Bradley Manning is at a high risk of self-castration and suicide unless she receives more focused treatment for gender dysphoria at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

"Such clear disregard of well-established medical protocols constitutes cruel and unusual punishment," ACLU attorney Chase Strangio said in a statement.

The Army is providing some treatment but not enough, according to the lawsuit. She is getting psychotherapy from a mental health specialist who lacks the qualifications to treat gender dysphoria, according to the document.

And although Manning has been issued female underwear and sports bras, "she is denied permission to outwardly express her female gender through female hair length and other grooming standards," the lawsuit says.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons and many state and local corrections agencies administer hormone therapy to prisoners with gender dysphoria, but Manning is the first transgender military prisoner to request such treatment.

The 26-year-old former intelligence analyst was convicted in August 2013 of espionage and other offenses for sending classified documents to the WikiLeaks website while working in Iraq. She changed her legal name in April after disclosing at her court-martial that she had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

Transgender people are not allowed to serve in the U.S. military but Manning can't be discharged from the service while serving her prison sentence.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/04/us-usa-defense-sexassault-idUSKCN0JI04J20141204
12/4/14
U.S. military sex assault reports up 8 percent: officials

(Reuters) - Sexual assaults reported by U.S. military troops rose 8 percent in 2014 amid signs that victims are increasingly confident about reporting the attacks, defense officials said on Wednesday ahead of the formal release of the annual figures.

Defense officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said military personnel reported 5,983 sexual assaults in the 2014 fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, compared with 5,518 the previous year.

A separate survey conducted by the Rand Corp concluded that about 19,000 military personnel were victims of sexual assault or other forms of unwanted sexual contact in 2014, down from about 26,000 when the two-year survey was last conducted, the officials said. More than half the victims were men.

The survey concluded about one in every four sexual assault victims filed a report in 2014, compared to about one in every 10 in 2012, they said.

The findings come amid a Pentagon crackdown on sexual assault in the military following a spate of high-profile incidents in recent years that sparked public outrage and demands for action by the president and Congress.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was scheduled to officially release the initial findings of the Pentagon's annual report on Thursday afternoon. He also was expected to release directives to strengthen the military's response to the issue.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Hagel had briefed President Barack Obama on the report. He said the findings were under review by the administration and the White House, adding that the problem "continues to be a priority of the president's."

Last year, reported sexual assaults jumped 50 percent, a spike officials said was a sign victims were increasingly confident the crime would be prosecuted as a result of the crackdown.

Senator Claire McCaskill, a former sex crimes prosecutor who has pushed reforms in Congress, tentatively welcomed this year's findings.

"Reporting of assaults being up and incidents of assault being down are exactly the combination we're looking for," she said in a statement.

The Pentagon keeps track of sexual assaults reported by male and female military personnel each year but also conducts a survey every two years to try to estimate the prevalence of the problem.

This year the survey was conducted by Rand Corp for the first time using many of the same questions in order to obtain comparable responses, the defense officials said.

Army eases policy on transgender soldiers

The decision to discharge transgender soldiers from the Army now has to be made by a top, senior civilian official, documents obtained by USA TODAY show, a move that will make it more difficult to remove such troops from the service.

Instead of being made by lower-level Army officers, the undated memorandum says the decision to discharge transgender soldiers must now by made by the assistant secretary of the Army for personnel. In all services, transgender troops can be automatically dismissed from service on medical grounds once they are identified.

"This is a welcome step toward inclusive policy, but transgender troops must still serve in silence until more is done to dismantle the ban," said Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center, which has published research on sexual orientation issues in the military.

Army officials had no comment about the memo, known as an All Army Activities directive, or the level at which decisions on dismissing transgender soldiers had been made, said Wayne Hall, an Army spokesman. The new directive expires after 12 months, or sooner, if a broader re-interpretation of the Army's rules about transgender soldiers is issued.

The Army's decision echoes the military's dismantlement of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which allowed gays and lesbians to serve unless their sexuality was discovered. Before the policy was rescinded in 2011, the decision to discharge gay troops had been raised to the Pentagon's top lawyer and personnel official and service secretaries. In effect, that requirement functioned as a moratorium, as no further dismissals were sought under "don't ask, don't tell."

"Hopefully this is a signal that the Army — and other service branches — will finally begin a comprehensive review of the regulations regarding transgender servicemembers, which everyone agrees is long overdue," said Joshua Block, who leads the American Civil Liberties Union Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Project. "I also hope the 12-month time frame is an indication that the Army understands the urgency of this issue for transgender servicemembers and their commanders."

The Army memo is the latest move toward changing the Pentagon's policy toward transgender troops. Last week, the Army, for the first time, agreed to allow hormone treatment for Chelsea Manning, a transgender soldier convicted of divulging national security secrets to WikiLeaks. Manning, previously known as Bradley, is serving a 35-year sentence at the Fort Leavenworth, Kan., military prison. In December, Air Force Secretary Deborah James said the ban on transgender troops should be lifted.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/02/16/trangender-troops-chelsea-manning/23504073/

http://tablet.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-move-hailed-by-advocates-army-adjusts-process-for-dismissing-transgender-soldiers/2015/03/07/fe26c56d23b99b686666ad12a31b3f28_story.html
3/7/15

The Army on Friday announced that it was changing its process for dismissing transgender soldiers, a shift hailed by advocates as groundbreaking and historic.

But in a sign that there has not been a whole-scale change in the military’s treatment of transgender service members, the Army terminated a transgender soldier just hours before the change was announced.

In a directive issued Friday evening, the Army announced that dismissals of transgender soldiers must be approved by an assistant secretary of the Army, a senior-level official. Previously, such dismissals could be approved by lower-level officials.

An Army spokeswoman emphasized this was not a change in policy toward transgender people, who are barred from serving in the military. But transgender rights groups lauded the shift, saying it will make it harder for the military to kick out transgender service members. And they noted that a similar change took place months before the lifting of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the policy barring gays and lesbians from serving in the military openly.

“The new policy is welcome news for transgender soldiers and it hopefully is a sign that the Army is moving toward a comprehensive review of the current regulations,” said Joshua Block, a staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union. But he added that the overall policy still harms transgender service members.

It is the latest sign that the military is taking a hard look at its longstanding policy barring transgender service members. Late last month, new Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, during a town hall meeting in Kandahar, Afghanistan, expressed an openness to permitting transgender people to openly serve in the military.

The military also agreed recently to provide hormone treatment to Chelsea Manning, an Army private convicted of leaking classified secrets. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals on Thursday ordered the military to stop using male pronouns when referring to Manning, who was previously known as Bradley Manning.

Some groups oppose lifting the policy barring transgender service on the grounds that it could hurt military cohesion and readiness. Transgender advocacy groups, however, say there is no basis for such fears. The possibility of a change in Army dismissal procedures was first reported by USA Today.

At least a dozen transgender service members have been dismissed from the military in the past six months, said Allyson Robinson, director for policy at SPARTA, a group that represents and advocates for current and former transgender service members.

Among them is Capt. Jacob Eleazer of the Kentucky Army National Guard, who got word of his termination Friday afternoon. Eleazer — who appeared in a front-page Washington Post story about transgender service members last year – joined the military as a woman but transitioned to male later. After a year of limbo, he was dismissed Friday morning. He plans to fight the order, he said, and is unsure of the impact of the change in dismissal procedures.

“It was a huge down and then a huge up, so I don’t know how to feel about it all,” he said.

Obama to nominate first openly gay service secretary to lead the Army

President Obama, in a historic first for the Pentagon, has chosen to nominate Eric Fanning to lead the Army, a move that would make him the first openly gay civilian secretary of one of the military services.

Fanning’s nomination is the latest in a series of actions taken by the administration to advance the rights of gays and lesbians throughout the federal government. The Obama administration has overhauled internal policies to provide benefits to same-sex partners, appointed gay men and lesbians to the executive branch and the federal bench and ended the 18-year ban on gays serving openly in the military.

Fanning, who must still be confirmed by the Senate, has been a specialist on defense and national security issues for more than 25 years in Congress and the Pentagon. As Army secretary, he would be partnered with Gen. Mark Milley, who took over as the Army’s top general in August. Together the two men would assume responsibility for the Pentagon’s largest and most troubled service.

“Eric brings many years of proven experience and exceptional leadership to this new role,” Obama said in a statement. “I look forward to working with Eric to keep our Army the very best in the world.”

The Army, which swelled to about 570,000 active duty troops, has shed about 80,0000 soldiers from its ranks in recent years and plans to cut 40,000 more over the next few years. Those planned cuts would shrink the service to its smallest size of the post-World War II era.

Battered by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has had to deal with a spike in suicides as the wars drew to an end and has struggled at times to provide the war wounded with the care they need to heal.

Recently, the Army’s outgoing top officer, Gen. Ray Odierno, said that tight budgets and the ongoing strain of 14 years of war had badly degraded the Army’s readiness to fight and that only one-third of its brigades were prepared to deploy to a war zone, the lowest readiness rate in decades.

Fanning’s role as Army secretary would give him influence over the generals the Army selects to rebuild the service after a long stretch of counterinsurgency wars in which soldiers dismounted from their tanks and armored vehicles and found themselves leading foot patrols through remote villages.

Much of Fanning’s time in the Pentagon has been overseeing massive ship and aircraft programs. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter tapped Fanning last year to oversee his transition team as he moved into the Pentagon’s top job.

Fanning served briefly as acting Air Force secretary and has been acting undersecretary of the Army since June 2015.

“He understands how the Pentagon works and how to get things done in the Pentagon,” said Rudy de Leon, who was deputy defense secretary in the Clinton administration. “He knows what works and what doesn’t work” inside the federal government’s largest bureaucracy.

Fanning would play a key role in helping the Army, which has struggled to field new combat systems amid the strain of fighting two wars, to upgrade aging tanks, armored personnel carriers and helicopters. Since 2000, the Army has been forced to cancel virtually all of its major new weapons programs because they ran over budget or didn’t perform as expected.

New equipment for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, like special armored vehicles designed to resist blasts from roadside bombs, had to be developed outside of the traditional procurement channels.

“Eric is taking over at a critical time for the Army,” de Leon said “The Army is still living off equipment from the Reagan years.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-to-nominate-first-openly-gay-service-secretary-to-lead-the-army/2015/09/18/d4b1aafe-5e30-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html

'Gay' **** in U.S. military: Don't ask, don't tell

Study shows male-on-male sexual-assault rates higher than previously thought
11/3/15

President Obama signed legislation repealing the U.S. military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in 2011, but servicemen are still keeping silent on a related issue: Male-on-male ****.

A new study released by the American Psychological Association says male **** is underreported in the U.S. military. A true approximation of the problem may even be “15 times higher than has been previously reported.”

The APA’s conclusions, released Tuesday, were drawn from data spanning the 1980s until present. Its authors found cases of male Military Sexual Trauma, or MST, ranged over the years from .02 percent to 12 percent, with an average of 1.1 percent. Anonymity during questioning raised reports of male MST from .6 percent to 2.8 percent.

Researchers concluded there were many factors discouraging men from filing MST reports.

“Men may feel pressure to be ‘stoic warriors’ and may feel their ‘manhood’ earned through service has been stripped,” APA reported. “[Researchers] further found that men may experience sexual identity confusion. Taken as a whole, the research indicates significant barriers to disclosure of male MST, the majority of which can be captured under the broad umbrella of stigma and related self-report biases.”

The Pentagon’s official number of male sexual assaults reported in 2013 was 14,000. The Washington Times noted Tuesday that APA’s findings indicate a more accurate estimate of male MST is 210,000.

“Male veterans who reported being sexually assaulted while serving their country suffered more severe symptoms of PTSD and depression, had higher rates of suicidal thoughts and were more likely to enroll in outpatient mental health treatment than those who were not assaulted,” researchers concluded. The process involved surveying 180 combat veterans of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

There are roughly 1.4 million U.S. military personnel on active duty.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/gay-****-in-u-s-military-dont-ask-dont-tell/#U3M14VjrZ1RYwEj6.99

Eric Fanning, First Openly Gay Army Secretary, Confirmed by U.S. Senate - NBC News

Wonder how we went from winning every war to not winning any... hmmm... ::)

In another historic moment for the Obama administration, the Senate on Tuesday evening confirmed the long-stalled nomination of Eric Fanning to be Army secretary.

Fanning becomes the first openly gay leader of any U.S. military service — a milestone not lost on gay rights groups, coming five years after the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," which had prohibited gay and lesbian service members from being open about their sexuality.

ric Fanning at the 30th Space Symposium Corporate Partnership dinner in Colorado Springs, Colorado, in May 2014. Duncan Wood / U.S. Air Force via AP — file

"Eric Fanning's historic confirmation today as Secretary of the U.S. Army is a demonstration of the continued progress towards fairness and equality in our nation's armed forces," Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin said in a statement.

Fanning previously served as the Army secretary's principal adviser on management and operation. He was undersecretary of the Air Force from April 2013 to February 2015, and for half a year he was the acting secretary of the Air Force.

"I'm honored by today's Senate confirmation and thrilled to return to lead the total Army team," Fanning said in a statement Tuesday night.

The voice vote to confirm, Fanning, 47, came after Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, dropped his opposition in a dispute over Obama administration efforts to close the prison at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and transfer detainees to the United States.

Roberts said he received reassurances from the administration in private discussions that the clock has run out on moving detainees to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-California, was among the first politicians to congratulate Fanning publicly Tuesday, tweeting that he is "capable, experienced & will lead with honor!"

A slate of senators from both parties joined in the praise for Fanning. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, tweeted that Fanning's selection is "an historic moment for #LGBT servicemembers," while Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, tweeted that he "appreciated (Fanning's) recognition of Alaska's strategic importance & need for larger @USArmy."

Fanning's path to the post began roughly eight months ago, but it was stymied when Roberts held up confirmation.

"Let me be very clear on this — as a veteran, a Marine — I support Mr. Eric Fanning for this post," Roberts said on the Senate floor late last month. "If the White House calls and assures me that terrorists held at Guantanamo will not come to Fort Leavenworth, I will release the hold — immediately."

White House officials suggested that Roberts was grandstanding, and fellow senators pleaded with him to lift his hold. Sen. John McCain, chairman of the Armed Services Committee — who calls Roberts a "good friend" — took the floor last month and urged him to move the process along.

Watch: Sen. Pat Roberts Discuss Eric Fanning's Nomination

The pushback centered on the president's announcement of a long-anticipated pitch to Congress in February to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. The Obama administration is considering 13 locations across the country, including seven existing prison facilities in Colorado, South Carolina and Kansas and six additional sites on current military bases.

Officials have said the plan doesn't highlight a preferred site.

A number of lawmakers — particularly Republicans — balked at the president's proposals. But Roberts was especially entrenched in his opposition. In March, he introduced a Senate resolution to reject any efforts to transfer detainees from Guantanamo Bay to U.S. facilities.

After changing his mind to allow Fanning's confirmation to move forward, Roberts reiterated his belief on the Senate floor Tuesday that he always considered Fanning the right person to lead the military's largest branch, which has about 470,000 active troops.

"He will be a tremendous leader as Army secretary and will do great by our soldiers at Fort Leavenworth and Fort Riley," Roberts said before the vote.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/first-openly-gay-army-secretary-confirmed-n575661

Veterans Affairs Wants To Provide Sex-Reassignment Surgeries For Transgender Vets

As the nation struggles over which restroom to use when you're 'undecided', the Department of Veterans Affairs has decided to chime in on the issue of gender dysphoria as it plans to lift a ban on sex reassignment surgeries for transgender veterans.

The VA says the surgical procedures were not deemed to be "medically necessary" in the past and there were questions over their safety and effectiveness. However, as the military prepares to allow transgender troops to serve openly and President Barack Obama's administration wrangles with states over the rights of transgender people to use the restrooms of the their choice, it appears, as Military.com reports, that transition-related surgeries may soon be covered...

"However, increased understanding of gender dysphoria and surgical techniques in this area have improved significantly, and surgical procedures are now widely accepted in the medical community as medically necessary treatment for gender dysphoria," the VA wrote in the notice.

The department called it a serious medical condition with severe consequences for patients if treatment is not provided. Current VA rules prohibit the department from covering or performing any surgical procedures considered to be gender alterations.

In February, the Defense Department proposed adding non-surgical hormone therapy for gender dysphoria into the military's Tricare insurance coverage. The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee shot back at the time, urging that the military not be an "experimental laboratory for social issues."

The changes could be laying the groundwork for the Pentagon's plan to allow transgender troops to serve openly. Defense Secretary Ash Carter set a deadline earlier this year for studying the issue but a final directive lifting the prohibition has not yet come.
The VA's proposal was lauded by the American Military Partner Association, which describes itself as the nation's largest organization of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender military families.

"So many veterans rely on the VA for important medical care that they have earned serving our nation, including transgender veterans," AMPA president Ashley Broadway-Mack said in a statement. "Gender confirmation surgery is often a critically important and medically necessary treatment for transgender veterans, and lifting this ban is long overdue."
Advocates estimate there could be as many as 15,000 transgender servicemembers, and the number could be much higher among the millions of veterans who use the VA...

...like Christopher Beck, who served as a SEAL before transitioning to Kristin Beck.

Are you going to argue with him her?

As Under The Radar reports, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter has declared that transgender men and women “are being hurt by an outdated, confusing, inconsistent approach that’s contrary to our value of service and individual merit.” He’s ordered a six-month study that will most likely provide a roadmap for integrating transgender troops into military service.

A study by the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law suggests that 150,000 transgender men and women have served in the U.S. military, with approximately 15,500 of them still in uniform. At least 18 other countries have already integrated transgender troops into their militaries.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-07/veterans-affairs-wants-provide-sex-reassignment-surgeries-transgender-vets

Report: Pentagon Plans to Repeal Ban on Transgender Troops July 1

The ban on transgender service members will be lifted July 1, the Pentagon reportedly plans to announce. The repeal is a decision that would end nearly a year of back-and-forth about how to allow those officers to serve openly, according to Defense officials.

The move to repeal is likely to be swift, as senior personnel are expected to meet as early as Monday to iron out details of the plan and Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work could sign off on the measure by Wednesday, according to a source familiar with the issue who spoke to USA Today on condition of anonymity.

Final approval of the repeal, which would impact only a marginal number of the military’s 1.3 million active duty members, would come from Defense Secretary Ash Carter and the announcement would be on the night before Independence Day.

Should the ban be lifted, each branch of the military would go through a year-long sequence to implement the new policy, which would affect recruiting, housing and uniforms for transgender troops. Carter indicated last year that the armed forces would move forward with the repeal unless a review showed doing so would have an “adverse impact on military effectiveness and readiness.”

But some are not so sure the review would make any difference in the final decision.

Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry (Texas), chair of the House Armed Services Committee, questioned whether an “honest and balanced assessment” could truly be made of the affects on “military readiness, morale and good order and discipline” under Carter’s guidelines for a review.

Thornberry intensely questioned the Pentagon in a letter last July, calling on officials to provide extensive information on the impacts of repealing the ban on transgender troops.

“What would be the projected cost of changing the transgender service policy?” he asked. “To what extent would military barracks, ship berths, gym shower facilities, latrines, and other facilities have to be modified to accommodate personnel in various stages of transition and what would be the projected cost of these modifications?”

The lawmaker also asked how far the Pentagon would be willing to go in order to provide medical treatment for transgender officers. Thornberry asked if it would include “behavioral health treatment, cross-hormone therapy, voice therapy, cosmetic or gender reassignment surgery and other treatments?”

And the congressman is not alone in his concerns. According to anonymous sources familiar with the situation, the debate over the repeal has been contentious. One of the chief concerns is how long transgender members would be required to serve before being eligible for medical treatments associated with a transition to another gender.

The Pentagon responded to Thornberry’s questions in September, department spokesman Eric Pahon said. But the main focus of its review was on how the measure might affect the military’s readiness to fight. More details about the review are expected to be released soon.

Additionally, the Pentagon commissioned a report on transgender troops from RAND Corp., but the findings have not yet been published. It estimated there are fewer than 2,500 transgender members currently in the armed forces and only 65 of whom would seek medical treatment each year, the New York Times reported.

Currently, transgender people do not qualify for the military due to medical reasons. The Pentagon has not tracked the number of people turned away because of this policy.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/06/24/report-pentagon-plans-to-repeal-ban-on-transgender-troops-july-1/

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/2187928/thumbs/o-TRANSGENDER-570.jpg?4)

Wonder why we cant quite seem to win a war anymore?

Navy to Name Ship After Gay Rights Activist Harvey Milk

The Navy is set to name a ship after the gay rights icon and San Francisco politician Harvey Milk, according to a Congressional notification obtained by USNI News.

The July 14, 2016 notification, signed by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, indicated he intended to name a planned Military Sealift Command fleet oiler USNS Harvey Milk (T-AO-206). The ship would be the second of the John Lewis-class oilers being built by General Dynamics NASSCO in San Diego, Calif.

The Secretary of the Navy’s office is deferring releasing additional information until the naming announcement, a Navy official told USNI News on Thursday.

Mabus has said the John Lewis-class – named after civil rights activist and congressman Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) – would be named after civil rights leaders.

Other names in the class include former Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren whose court ruled to desegregate U.S. schools, former Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, women’s right activist Lucy Stone and abolitionist and women’s rights activist Sojourner Truth.

Mabus has also named ships in the past for other civil rights icons, including the Lewis and Clark-class dry cargo ships USNS Medgar Evers (T-AKE-13) and USNS Cesar Chavez (T-AKE-14).

Milk came from a Navy family and commissioned in the service in 1951. He served as a diving officer in San Diego during the Korean War on the submarine rescue ship Kittiwake until 1955. Milk was honorably discharged from the service as a lieutenant junior grade.

Following his service, Milk was elected to the San Francisco board of supervisors and was the first openly gay California politician to be elected to office. He was killed in office in 1978. When Milk was shot he was wearing his U.S. Navy diver’s belt buckle.

Over the last several years, there have been pushes from California politicians to have a ship named for Milk since the 2011 repeal of the Department of Defense’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” policy.

Naming a ship after Milk, “will further send a green light to all the brave men and women who serve our nation that honesty, acceptance and authenticity are held up among the highest ideals of our military,” said Milk’s nephew Stuart Milk in a statement to San Diego LGBT Weekly in 2012.

https://news.usni.org/2016/07/28/navy-name-ship-gay-rights-activist-harvey-milk

U.S. Government to Cover Sex Change Operations for Active Duty Soldiers

The U.S. Department of Defense will now cover costs for the sex change operations of soldiers in active duty, according to reports.

“[A] Defense Department spokesman said Monday that the option is available to all transgender active duty troops if their doctors recommend it and senior military health officials approve it,” the Military Times outlines.

As previously reported, the Pentagon announced in June that it would end the nation’s ban on open transgenders in the military. It had advised last year that a six-month study would be conducted to determine whether lifting the ban could have any adverse effect on battle preparedness.

The study was to encompass a variety of aspects, such as how transgenders will be housed, what uniforms they will wear, what bathrooms they will use, and what physical fitness/training standards they will be held to as a person that now seeks to be known as the opposite gender.

Officials also planned to consider whether the government will pay for “gender reassignment” surgeries and other treatments sought by those who identify as transgender.

Now, according to a Military Times report released on Monday, the Pentagon will indeed pay for such operations as long as the military member is active duty.

“According to [spokesman Air Force Maj. Ben] Sakrisson, gender reassignment surgeries for active duty personnel will be conducted at either a military hospital or, if qualified care is unavailable at a military facility, at a private hospital paid by Tricare,” it said.

The notation comes a week after it was announced that the Pentagon would cover the sex change operation of Army private Bradley Manning, who since 2013 has gone by the name Chelsea. Manning is currently serving a 35-year sentence in Leavenworth for leaking classified information to Wikileaks.

He had been permitted to receive hormone treatments last February, but had not been cleared for surgery until Sept. 13.

“[Monday’s] announcement clarifies the scope of treatment available to transgender military personnel and differs significantly from earlier Defense Department statements, which noted that cosmetic surgery for gender reassignment ‘in most cases’ would be considered elective and not covered by the military health system,” the Military Times said.

As previously reported, the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty expressed concern in July following a conference call with a Pentagon official who outlined the implications of lifting the ban on open transgenders in the military. The Alliance said that the new policy could be especially adverse for Christian doctors.

“An endorser on the call asked whether medical professionals who hold a biblical view on human sexuality will be required to violate their consciences and do as these persons demand,” Chaplain (COL) Ron Crews, USA Retired, who serves as the executive director of the Alliance, explained in a statement, “and the response was that it is the responsibility of medical professional to serve military persons.”

“The Department of Defense must ensure a service member is not forced to violate his or her conscience and that doctors and nurses who hold to a biblical view of human sexuality can serve in today’s military,” he said. “Congress has spoken on this issue in the FY2013 National Defense Authorization Act.”

Crews also advised that endorsers were told that military members with “mixed genitalia” may be present in showers and barracks as they will be in the process of changing their identity.

http://christiannews.net/2016/09/19/u-s-government-to-cover-sex-change-operations-for-active-duty-soldiers/

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/commander-chief-obama-orders-military-pay-gender-reassignment-surgery-transgenders/
Commander-In-Chief Obama Orders Military To Pay For Gender Reassignment Surgery For Transgenders

By the RAND Corp.'s estimate in a June 2016 study, there are between 1,320 and 6,630 transgender troops on active duty. Of those, between 30 and 140 would prefer hormone treatment, and 25 to 130 would seek surgery. The surgery will either be conducted at a military hospital or a private hospital if the former lacks the qualified care, USA Today reports.
10/3/16

Starting today, the U.S. military will pay for gender reassignment surgery for transgender soldiers, a program that could cost up to $8.4 million a year.

The Defense Department’s policy states that if a soldier’s ability to serve is “adversely affected by a medical condition or medical treatment related to their gender identity,” they are eligible for reassignment surgery or hormone therapy, subject to a commander’s approval for the timing.

By the RAND Corp.’s estimate in a June 2016 study, there are between 1,320 and 6,630 transgender troops on active duty. Of those, between 30 and 140 would prefer hormone treatment, and 25 to 130 would seek surgery.

The surgery will either be conducted at a military hospital or a private hospital if the former lacks the qualified care, USA Today reports.

Those in the military who oppose the policy argue that since gender reassignment surgery makes it impossible for soldiers to deploy for up to 135 days, the money spent on surgery could be better used elsewhere.

“I think this is a gross misuse of military medical dollars.”

— Ron Crews, Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty

Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, said military personnel are also getting transgender education, which takes valuable time.

However, the Palm Center, a pro-LGBT armed forces group, welcomed the move.

Aaron Belkin, director of the Center, said surgery could reduce the number of suicides among transgender troops.

“The military’s continued progress in integrating transgender service members is a tribute to core principles and values.”

— Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center

Dept. of Veterans Affairs Delays Plans to Offer Sex Change Ops for Vets Due to Insufficient Funds

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has delayed its plans to offer sex change operations for veteran service members due to insufficient funds.

“VA has been and will continue to explore a regulatory change that would allow VA to perform gender alteration surgery and a change in the medical benefits package, when appropriated funding is available,” it said in a statement on Monday.

The VA first announced its plans to lift its longstanding ban on what is called gender reassignment surgery in June after reportedly considering the move since 2014, releasing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking entitled “Removing Gender Alterations Restriction From the Medical Benefits Package.”

“Increased understanding of both gender dysphoria and surgical techniques in this area have improved significantly, and surgical procedures are now widely accepted in the medical community as medically necessary treatment for gender dysphoria,” it wrote of its intentions.

“In light of these medical advances and recent research, VA would revise its regulation to remove the prohibition on medical services that are considered gender alterations,” the Department said.

Six Democratic lawmakers have since called upon the VA to speedily following through with its plan: Reps. Mike Quigley of Illinois, Mike Honda and Jackie Speier of California, Raúl Grijalva of Arizona, Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey, and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton of the District of Columbia.

“We urge you to move forward with publishing a proposed rule to remove the arbitrary and outdated restriction that prohibits VA from providing medical services to treat gender dysphoria,” they wrote to Secretary Robert McDonald in September.

But 30 Republican lawmakers also wrote to McDonald about the matter, stating that the VA should focus on improving service-related medical care rather than assisting men with their desire to become women.

“Currently, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) employs classification groups to help ensure the Department’s limited resources are focused first on veterans with service-connected disabilities. Many veterans struggle to receive appropriate and timely treatment for service-connected conditions, such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), due to significant backlogs and inadequate access within the VA’s health care system,” the letter noted.

“We do not believe the VA should be discussing the potential coverage of gender alteration surgeries as the agency faces challenges in delivering health care to those veterans whose service directly resulted in their need for medical treatments,” it said.

The letter was signed by Reps. Charles Boustany and John Fleming of Louisiana, Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, Bill Flores of Texas, Jason Smith of Missouri and Andy Harris of Maryland, among others. Boustany, Fleming and Harris are physicians.

On Monday, transgender advocacy groups expressed disappointment that the matter had been stalled.

“All of our nation’s veterans, regardless of their gender identity, deserve access to the medical care they earned serving our nation,” Ashley Broadway-Mack, president of the American Military Partner Association, told reporters. “This is a deeply disappointing setback in making sure an often medically necessary procedure for transgender veterans is part of that care.”

However, others, such as Susan Wright of RedState remarked that “t’s insanity to foot the bill for such surgery … when there are vets dying while waiting on actual medical needs to be met.”

The VA is already offering “hormone therapy, mental health care, preoperative evaluation” and other services, according to a statement from the department to the Military Times.

http://christiannews.net/2016/11/15/dept-of-veterans-affairs-delays-plans-to-offer-sex-change-ops-for-vets-due-to-insufficient-funds/

U.S. Army Makes Transgender Sensitivity Training Mandatory, So 1 Vet Delivers A Wakeup Call
http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=83133
6/23/17

Political correctness has run rampant throughout every facet of our country and it has now infiltrated the military in full affect. Those responsible for defending our country will now be forced to learn how to be more sensitive to transgender needs.
One Vet has had enough and is sharing a wakeup call.

RedWhiteandRight.com reported:

Well, it was inevitable.

Nothing is above the rule of political correctness in this country, not even the U.S. military.

Did you know it is now mandatory for soldiers to take a “transgender sensitivity training” course? Neither did we.

But it’s true: Those who serve in the U.S. Army must be educated on how to be “sensitive” around transgender individuals…you know, as opposed to learning how to defend themselves and a country.

Granted, it’s only a 50-minute course but this doesn’t bode well; it’s a slippery slope that we’ve seen in all facets of our society.

And military veterans aren’t big fans of this. One who has served in “every major campaign from Grenada in 1983 to present day conflicts” has spoken up, and what he has to say is definitely turning heads.

Here’s what Delta Force Operator Dale Comstock told IJR:

“This whole political social experiment is not helping. The reality is it’s in the Army, it’s in the Navy, it’s in the military.

And unless Mattis and Trump rescind all these policies and stop this madness, it’s here to stay.

It affects morale and combat readiness on many levels. At the end of the day, war fighting is about one thing: Killing people. It’s about bringing home our guys alive.

It’s not about being sensitive to a transgender. This isn’t corporate America, this is the military.

You can’t just put some policy in place because you want people to feel equal. Most guys who join the military, especially special operations forces, were the boys who had dirt clod fights on the playground, wrestled and fist fought, stole each other’s girlfriends, and pledged allegiance to the flag.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/07/transgender-men-womens-showers-must-get-dignity-respect-u-s-army/
7/7/17
Transgender Men in Women’s Showers Must Get ‘Dignity and Respect,’ Says U.S. Army

Female soldiers must give “dignity and respect” to transsexual men who join them in their shared shower rooms, according to training manuals leaked by soldiers in a mandatory class.

But this “dignity and respect” is a one-way street, according to the training slides, which were developed by officials working for former President Barack Obama. “Transgender Soldiers are not required or expected to modify or adjust their behavior based on the fact that they do not ‘match’ other Soldiers,” according to the slides, which were first leaked by TheFederalist.com:

The insistence that women remain mute when a man enters their shower room “shows a lack of respect for the vast majority of service members [because] no consideration is given to their feeling about this circumstances,” said Peter Sprigg, senior policy studies expert at the Family Research Council in Washington.

Female soldiers in showers are supposed to ignore visible biology and “act as if nothing has happened when some male … is all of a sudden in the shower room with them,” said Austen Ruse, president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. “This is a flat-out humiliation of women. … Females will have their dignity and respect violated [and] they are being told this does not matter even a little bit,” he added.

Female soldiers will not even be allowed to cover themselves because it could signal a lack of “respect” for the transsexual man in the shower, Ruse said.

Several nations have decided to accept transsexuals into their militaries, including Sweden, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In 2014, a group of those transsexual soldiers held a joint press conference with the ACLU in Washinton D.C. See photo above.

The demand for “dignity and respect” of transsexuals is shot through the Army documents because the “transgender ideology” insists that normal Americans — including American soldiers — must respect claims by men who insist they are women, regardless of their visible genitalia, civic practices, law, and science.

The justification for this transsexual demand is the unproven claim that all people have a so-far unverified “gender identity” that can be disconnected from their obviously female or male body. Transgender activists then argue that a person’s “gender identity” is more important than the fundamental sexual distinctions between male and female humans, and, in fact, also requires that the transgender men be treated as legal females, whether or not they have had surgery.

Because a person’s “gender identity” is deemed more important than a person’s actual sex, the Pentagon’s rules do not require that transgender soldiers undergo sexual surgery before they switch their legal sex. According to the new rules, a soldier who has a conflicting “gender identity” is deemed “stable in preferred gender” once:

a documented medical treatment plan is complete, no functional limitations or complications persist, and the individual is not experiencing clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. Continuing medical are, including but not limited to cross-sex hormone therapy, may be required to maintain a state of stability.

The shift to pro-transgender, anti-sex language also means there are no recognized male or female bodies in the military, nor are there any recognized members of the two sexes. Instead, the sex of each soldier is reduced to a mere “gender marker,” which is amputated from Americans’ expectations for the behavior of members of the male sex and the female sex. According to the new rules, the “gender marker” is a just “data element” in the “Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting system.”

This shift in focus from the sex of a soldier to the “gender marker” has additional impacts. For example, all soldiers are expected to take periodic drug tests by peeing into a cup in front of a higher-ranking soldier. This means female soldiers will be required to pee into cups while sitting beside a soldier with a female “gender marker,” even when the observing soldier is male. According to a document provided with the training. “It is DoD and Army Policy that a urinalysis sample must be collected by direct observation and that, absent an exception to policy, the observer will be the same gender as the Soldier being observed (as reflected by the gender marker in DEERS).”

The new policy of ignoring sexual differences in favor of a “gender marker” will apply throughout many Army procedures, including sharing bedrooms: “For facilities subject to regulation by the Army, a Soldier uses those billeting, bathroom, and shower facilities associated with the Soldier’s gender marker in DEERS.”

The rules also say that men who declare themselves to be women only have to meet the lower physical standards required of female soldiers who tend to be smaller and lighter and have less testosterone. This means that normal soldiers must provide “dignity and respect” to the transsexual male soldiers who are only obliged to meet the lower standards for female soldiers.

These military documents establish the transgender ideology as a government-backed belief system in place of Americans’ long-standing treatment of women and men as equal, different, and complementary, says Sprigg. The transgender rules are “really serving an ideological purpose, not a military purpose,” he said.

However, on June 30, Secretary of Defense James Mattis announced a six-month delay on the planned July 1 recruitment of transsexuals, scheduled by Obama officials, who also dropped the ban on open transsexuals in the military and commissioned the new training manuals.

The Mattis delay gives the military time to debate and prevent Obama’s damaging pro-transgender policies, said Sprigg. Under Obama, the military was “never asked ‘Do you think this is a good idea?’ – they were told this is what is going to happen,” he said.

For example, the financial costs of the pro–transgender rules will be enormous, he said. Obama’s officials promised to pay for the hormones and surgeries sought by new recruits, and accepted the extra costs of replacing transsexuals who cannot go to war because of their unique medical requirements, such as the muscle-weakening female hormones, he said. Those costs could reach $3.7 billion over the next ten years if the number of transsexual people in the military matches claims by transgender activists, he said.

If the military offers free medical services to transsexual recruits, the number of transsexuals in the military might increase, further boosting costs. Already, military doctors are required to provide transgender-related services to soldiers even if they judge those services are harmful, according to the Center for Military Readiness.

And if the military agrees to establish the transgender ideology at the end of the six-month delay, the pro-transgender campaign will be boosted in the nation’s courtrooms, capitols, and classrooms, said Ruse. “Every transgender activist can point to the military to say, ‘They’ve done, it, so we should do it… in grade schools, high schools, colleges, everywhere,” said Ruse.

The progressive outcome is possible because White House officials have not taken a strong stand against the transgender ideology’s hostility towards the two sexes, he said. “I’m very nervous,” said Ruse.

“We have not seen a lot of concern from Trump … [so] we’re working closely with allies on Capitol Hill,” said Sprigg.

The long-term goal “is cultural transformation, not one of increasing the effectiveness of our military,” said Sprigg.

The transgender ideology demands that the federal government force Americans to accept the “gender identity” sex-switching claims made by each person, regardless of scientific data about genetics, biology, and the variety of normal behavior and appearances shown by normal, equal, different, and complementary women and men, boys and girls.

The progressive push to bend Americans’ attitudes and their male-and-female civic society around the idea of “gender” has already attacked and cracked popular social rules for how Americans handle the many charming differences between complementary men and women.

These pro-gender claims have an impact on different-sex bathrooms, shelters for battered women, sports leagues for girls, hiking groups for boys, K-12 curricula, university speech codes, religious freedoms, free speech, the social status of women, parents’ rights in childrearing, practices to help teenagers, women’s expectations of beauty, culture and civic society, scientific research, prison safety, civic ceremonies, school rules, men’s sense of masculinity, law enforcement, and children’s sexual privacy.

U.S. House Fails to Pass Amendment Banning Govt. From Funding Soldiers’ ‘Gender Transitions’

The U.S. House has rejected a proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would have banned the U.S. Department of Defense from using federal money to fund the “gender transition” procedures of soldiers who wish to live as the opposite sex.

Over 20 Republicans voted no on Thursday to Amendment 183, presented by Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., which had been attached to the $696 billion military spending bill.

“Funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to provide medical treatment (other than mental health treatment) related to gender transition to a person entitled to medical care under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code,” the amendment simply read.

The Pentagon had agreed to cover the services under the Obama administration, and the military healthcare program Tricare began doing so in October. Hartzler estimated that the so-called therapies and sex-change procedures could cost $1.3 billion over the next 10 years.

“By recruiting and allowing transgender individuals to serve in our military, we are subjecting taxpayers to high medical costs including up to $130,000 per transition surgery, lifetime hormone treatments, and additional surgeries to address the high percentage of individuals who experience complications,” she outlined in a statement. “This policy is costly and a threat to our readiness.”

Hartzler said that the amendment does not prevent those identifying as the opposite sex to join the military or to obtain the desired treatments, but “makes sure our defense resources are allocated in a way that is smart and good for our national defense.”

However, Democrats in the House ardently opposed the measure, asserting that it propels the nation backward instead of forward.

“This amendment will go back in an area where we’re going forward,” stated Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash, according to the Charlotte Observer. “It wouldn’t just impact transgender people who are serving, it would also impact their children. It’s a social agenda that has no business being in the defense bill.”

A handful of Republicans also denounced the move, including Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Miami, whose daughter identifies as transgender.

“I view it as a personal issue, because as a mom I’m impacted, but it’s an issue of fairness for everyone,” she said. “You don’t have to know someone that’s transgender or have someone in your immediate family to feel this impact. It’s just needlessly hurtful and serves no useful purpose.”

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif, was one of those who supported Hartzler’s amendment. He believes that taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for such a controversial issue.

“We’re $20 trillion dollars in debt, the VA is in shambles, our soldiers aren’t paid enough, and we’re at war with Islamic State, but sure, let’s spend a billion dollars on this. The military restricts people with asthma from serving in the military, but we’re going to pay out billions for people who want to change their sex?” he asked in a social media post following the vote.

The final vote was 214-209. Republicans who voted against Hartzler’s amendment included Darrell Issa of California, Barbara Comstock of Virginia, Ryan Costello of Pennsylvania, Tom Reed of New York, Jack Bergman of Michigan, Mike Coffman of Colorado, and Leonard Lance of New Jersey. The full list may be viewed here.

http://christiannews.net/2017/07/17/u-s-house-fails-to-pass-amendment-banning-government-from-funding-soldiers-gender-transitions/

Military Academy West Point Holds Same-Sex 'Marriage' Ceremony At Cadet Chapel For Active Duty Gay Couple

Two Army captains who met at West Point returned there to be married, in what is believed to be the first same-sex marriage of active-duty personnel at the storied New York military academy.

“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” Romans 1:26,27 (KJV)

EDITOR’S NOTE: Things that were unthinkable just a generation ago are now celebrated as “progress” and “diversity”. How far down does the rabbit hole go? All the way to the pit of Hell, as the Bible clearly points out the spiritual condition of these last days.

The New York Times reported Captains Daniel Hall, 30, and Vincent Franchino, 26, both Apache helicopter pilots stationed at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, were married at West Point’s Cadet Chapel on Jan. 13.

The men met at the school in August 2009, when Franchino was a freshman and Hall was a senior. Their first date was in February 2012 in Washington, some months after the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was repealed in September 2011.

That policy, in place since 1993, barred any gay person from disclosing their sexual orientation or talking about any same-sex relationship.

“It’s really frustrating when two people have feelings for each other but are not allowed to act on them,” Hall said. “We were serving under a policy that was telling all of us — perfectly capable soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines — to lie about ourselves.”

The men wore their uniforms during the ceremony, and left the chapel under an arch made up of sabers held aloft by several of their guests. They also used Hall’s officer saber, a graduation gift from his grandparents, to cut the cake. source

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/west-point-holds-first-ever-sex-marriage-ceremony-active-duty-gay-couple/

End Times and Current Events

General Category => War On Family => Topic started by: Psalm 51:17 on July 16, 2011, 10:05:26 pm