On July 30th, Seaman August Provost, a 29 year old man in the U.S. Navy, was found dead in a guard shack at Southern California’s Camp Pendleton.
Although military officials believe the cause of death may be murder and are holding a person of interest in the brig at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station no charges have yet been filed. In the meantime although an autopsy has been conducted officials are awaiting the findings of toxicology reports and beyond these few basic facts, officials are remaining tight lipped.
.
Much of the reason for that just might have to do with the fact that August Provost was gay.
Provost was openly gay. He never denied his sexuality to his friends. He trusted them and did not care that they knew, but for the most part, to those who had no right or reason to know about Provost‘s sexual preference, he kept his life private and even avoided mention of his significant other, Kaether Cordero, his male partner back home in Houston, .
But sadly it looks like someone who did find out about August Provost’s sexual orientation killed him because of it.
In the days before August Provost was found dead at Camp Pendleton, family members report that he conveyed to them that he was being harassed. They urged him to report it to his superiors but Provost refused.
This refusal was most likely based upon the anti-gay military tradition that is currently preserved behind the “Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell” policy which grudgingly acknowledges homosexuals in their ranks but only through a military code that enforces denial and if broken, that code is grounds for dishonorable discharge.
Without all the circumstances and facts surrounding August Provost’s death publicly clear, one can not claim with certainty that his murder was rooted in homophobia. But several gay advocacy groups are all over this tragedy. They have even put pressure on several California congressional representatives to call for an official inquiry into Provost’s death based on the existing evidence which does point to a homicide that was committed because of Provost’s sexual orientation.
I bring this to your attention because I respect our military traditions. I respect our military for what they do, what they sacrifice and for their longstanding traditions of bravery and honor but it is on honor that I must begin to doubt our military’s commitment.
Is it honorable to force a fellow American to fear the discovery of who they are, who they love and how they love them? Is it honorable to force a fellow American to keep risks to their safety and life or infringements on their inalienable rights a secret because of potential penalties that the victim may face based on policies that discriminate against them because of who they are?
I understand that it is necessary for our military to operate under codes that are somewhat different from the ones that are afforded to the general American society whom our armed forces defend. It is necessary for a cohesive flow of our military’s efficacy. But I dare say that in so far as the military code applies to sexual conduct, it is applicable to all individuals regardless of sex or even sexual preference. Prohibitions on sexual activity that may seemingly pertain to heterosexual members of the military while serving on active duty do not force a female service member to deny that they are a woman. It simply precludes sexual activity while on duty. This same rule can still be upheld by and applied to homosexuals who are serving in the military. So why should a gay man or woman in the military be forced to serve in fear of being outed?
While these men and women in our armed forces are preserving the rights of all, why should they fear reporting that a fellow member of the military might be denying them their own civil rights or threatening their life?
The current policy which promotes this hiding of facts may have helped to kill Seaman August Provost.
Now I am not a gay pride parading, rainbow flag waving gay man. I am happier to wave the American flag which symbolizes a nation that allows me to be who I am and what I want to be, but circumstances and times have compelled me to confront the issue of gays in the military.
We are a nation at war and I know many gay men and women who have served, are currently serving and will be serving. One gay service member that I know has just completed three tours of duty in Iraq and is scheduled to report back to duty and serve in the same region in another 10 months.
These gay service members and future service members do not seek to turn lifesaving camouflage outfits into pink polka dot petticoats or convert tanks into gay pride floats and turn in their combat boots for stilettos. They do not wish to add ruffles and gold lamé ribbons to their parachutes before they get dropped into the mountains of Pakistan for a covert operation. They do not seek the chance to have their way with a fellow service man or woman in some sandy Afghani foxhole in between exploding mortar shells. They seek to preserve our nation and our freedoms. They seek to serve our nation not service someone. They are willing to risk their lives to serve our nation and yet because of Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell, August Provost may have lost his life while trying to serve.
For this reason, I seek to abolish this arcane policy of official denial. I do not plan on replacing it with some sort of modern day version of the segregated, all black Muskogee Pilots of our past by implementing some sort of Gay Brigade that segregates homosexuals from heterosexuals. Nor do I wish to change any existing restrictions that pertain to the sexual activity of active duty service members. But I do seek to make sure that a gay person can serve his country without fear of discrimination and with the same protections from abuse and misconduct that are afforded to heterosexuals in the military.
The Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell policy is a failure. Its name may sound rational and even safe but in actuality it is dangerous. August Provost may be proof of that.
|
http://politics247.wordpress.com/
This horrendous murder will be held up in the media, as did that robbery turned death of Matthew Shepard was. I believe that the military is and should be the only ones to change the laws and statutes within its own practices. What people are going to realize is that every gay person who dies isn’t a target or a hate crime, no matter how hard the media tries and plays it.
Kt has a solid point as does Kemp. U shouldnt live in fear of others in the miliatery. If the policy is not working we need to look at it.
RS, first of all, Michael Jackson is the only person I know who actually chose his race (which is extra funny since Jamie Foxx emphatically declared that 'Michael Jackson was one of us' and 'we lent him to the world' and all that). Second, don't ask don't tell doesn't really work for race or gender.
One thing I'd like to add to those who say there is no room in the military for "progressive" thought... was the military not among the first things in this nation to try racial integration?
Kempite is making the assumption this guy was killed for his homosexuality. People in the military get killed, fragged whatever. Shot bye your own troops. What you cannot assume is this guy was killed for his sexuality and make and issue of it. This will further destroy your cause. Because if you assume this one homosexual was killed, because of that you are assuming all homosexuals in the military are in danger. And that is a fallacy of an arguement.
Kempite is making the assumption this guy was killed for his homosexuality. People in the military get killed, fragged whatever. Shot bye your own troops. What you cannot assume is this guy was killed for his sexuality and make and issue of it. This will further destroy your cause. Because if you assume this one homosexual was killed, because of that you are assuming all homosexuals in the military are in danger. And that is a fallacy of an arguement.
here is my issue- and in rading all of these comments i got quite queasy. DANT is a policy where you have to hide who you are. if someone over hears a phone conversation or goes through your personal belongings it is considered "telling" you do not have to flaunt your sexuality but you shouldnt have to live in fear of hiding it either. anyone that is willing to sacrifice their life for their country deserves our respects.
Actually, I need to go to bed too.
Good night Tali.
Good night gentlemen.
Surely a Freudian slip
*Fairly*
Well, kempite with that in mind, while I was a young man 50+ years ago, it was fairy unthinkable to say how many times you had relations with your wife a week, that was taboo. It was also taboo to say how many women you had engaged in sexual congress with. You just said you were not a "virgin"
there was bullshit then as is now I imagine, but we never pried into a mans sexual life. We had in my day men who were not "normal" in the language of the day but we didn't pry. If the military was the same now as it was then I would guess that your friend if he kept it to himself would be alive today. It is the act of advertising your sexuality (even though it is no ones concern) that creates problems.
talisan, I do agree that it being an issues is a problem in and of itself
I posted my response in it's own blog since it was taking up too much space.
Why did it say anon. when I was registered in?
Thank you for your civil response sir. It reflects well on you.
Excuse me, while archangelwolf is correct, I am a dying breed, and while I was arguing against Erock I believe I was not arguing against you kempite. I have yet to hear from you on what I said till now.
I had said that it is really a non issue unless it is advertised. In my day we dealt with the same bullshit if we chose to be faithful to our wife. I knew many men who were if you will excuse the term "fluffy" as long as they did their job nobody said shit. It is a travesty that this is even an issue.
Taliasin.............your opinion certainly does matter. In fact you experience makes your opinion matter even more. But at the same time I do not claim that I can win wars or make everyone believe in something. I also do not wish to inflict any way of life on people. However, while you are assuming that I want special rights for homosexuals in the military and acceptance by all of homosexuals, The Wiz is assuming that August Provost was Gomer Pyle and both miss my point. The fact that August Provost could not report incidents of harrassment because he was gay demonstrates is a problem. DADT is a problem that is compounded by a policy that forces individuals to lie and it is the cover for a policy of discrimination. At this point what it comes down to is either try to officially ban homosexuals from the military and court marshall any gays found in it or get rid of the waste of time that is DADT. The ban will be quite difficult though.
You are right! Your opinion is mattering less and less. 66% of the 18-29 demographic voted for Obama. 52% of the 30-44 crowd voted for him. The only demographic that McCain won was everybody over 65. So, yes, as sure as death and taxes, that age group is having less and less of a voice every day.
Perhaps you are right archangelwolf. What does it matter anyway? This is a site for politics (supposedly) I concede this debate. Erock is right and I am wrong for doubting him. Good night.
Hell this has been going on since Patton slapped a coward.
In my day we were a Republic not a mob rule (democracy). Do you see something wrong here? I sure as hell do. But then again I am an old man.
My opinion doesn't matter does it?
Wiz, you are right! We do not know without a shadow of a doubt that he was killed because he was homosexual. The premise of the blog is still legit, regardless.
When I was training for ROTC, during the PFT run this fat kid fell down on a track gasping for air. He had a full scholarship. I lapped him and stepped on his nuts. Thats what happens when you are a Gomer Pyle.
I have to take erock's side here. Taliasin, you need to read the blog again. You and erock are arguing oranges and apples here. Erock is making an argument consistent w/ the blog. I don't know where your argument is coming from.
The military has no rights, Burn em at the stake for a maybe. Hell it's already fact now, the community is the jury and the military has been judged. Burn em
Until this goes to trial, its not known whether he was killed for his sexuality. You are making assumptions for the sole reason of trying to create some sort of political statement.
Scuse me Erock but tell me did the military say " Hmmmmmm we need to make it an issue cause a few of our men are quietly gay? Of course not. Clinton forced the no ask no tell policy. I thought it was wrong but I was long a civilian then. I thought for God's sake now they have the right to refuse to answer the questions we must, but perhaps just maybe it needs to be there. They have a right to serve as well. Now you are trying to say we must accept a gay man giving a sexual resume and be totally fine with it even though we have a moral objection to it we don't have that right anymore. I am glad I am the age I am, cause I don't have to deal with it. I am within 10 yrs of the final right. I really don't give a good damn what you think of me I have survived and I am still learning. You are so convinced of your own opinion you will fail to learn ,listen, hear, or even care about others rights as long as your agenda is served. Typical modern politician, it's about my power, my opinion and my status in society. NOT about the people you serve nor their opinions. They must admit you are right and adapt to your beliefs, not vice versa. I would say as a citizen (you are fired)
I do agree because special rights are not in question here. Equal rights are and I believe that equal rights and equal treatment should even be a part of the military code.
Taliasin is missing the entire premise of this blog.
Taliasin........perhaps you miss something here. I am not a proponent of special rights. I am not a supporter of hate crimes legislations that make killing one person more heinous than killing another and I do not seek special rights anywhere in this post. I also do not seek to make sex an issue. However it is not I who makes sex an issue it is the circumstances of reality that make it an issue. DADT is a policy that essentially keeps intact a system that will discharge gays if that aspect of their lives is discovered. As such, August Provost refused to report the harrassment that may have led to his death. Now in this event, I am not seeking "special right". I oppose special rights. What I am asking is that the deeper reasons behind DADT be overturned and that homosexuality not be grounds for discharge. Now innappropriate conduct is inappropriate conduct, be it by a homosexual or heterosexual and any innappropriate conduct should be dealt with in accordance to military guidelines. You are under the impression that I want homosexuals in the military to wear pink camouflage and promote a gay agenda. I am not seeking any such thing. I want no special treatment or dispensation. I simply want equal treatment. You are under the impression that I want people to enlist by advertising their homosexuality or distinguishing themselves as gay when I do not. But at the same time when a group of friends are sitting around the mess and talking about their significant others at home, why should Harry not be able to mention the name of his significant other if it is Stanley or Howard? There are no special rights being sought here. I only seek the lifting of the veil of secrecy and deception that is masked by DADT
Who does the miliatery answer to o right the civilian government. And whos rights are really being threatend? Pray tell me in this situation? Gays are told to shut up but hetro's in the armed forces can flaunt their sexual preferance all the time? Hmmmm whos rights?
Is the military making it an issue, or are you? Does the military demand that you give them a sexual resume or do you demand that you can give a resume and then the rest of the men must accept it? must you be so obtuse? You are so focused on your forcing of others to accept your beliefs that you have lost sight of the primary precept of rights.
How am I threatend by gays serving openly? Miliatery personally get married all the time others in the service how is that okay? But gays should just shut the fuck up?
I'm not , you are. We didn't care as long as it was kept like everybodys personal sexuality. You are the one making an issue of it aren't you?
Are u really that threatened by it? I don't think so the Corp survived blacks, indians, hispanics, and even woman serving. So what gays what to put on the uniform and defend their Freedom as well.
I Knew three sgt's and one major who were but didn't advertise the fact. I reiterate why make an issue of a non issue unless you have an agenda?
Okay so do hetro sexuals have their families on bases? Yes so what is the problem of 2 gay guys being open about it?
Then why make it an issue? unless you are advertising Eh?
U lose your bet. And I don't think gays are going to show up to the milatery saying anything other then they want to defend their nation.
I'll bet Erock, that you say when you take a job, " I prefer to suck cock everybody and I really get off when you stab me in the ass with your big winger please remember that" , but just treat me like anyone else. I musta missed it when did we straight people walk into a job and say " Please remember I prefer to get sucked off before I fuck your brains out, also I prefer doggy style in the shower, second to that an X style while sucking your boobs. But ignore all that. I'm just a guy who want's to defend the country.
The death of this kid is exactly the reason why the rules were put in place years ago. The military is not a venue for social experimentation. Especially with a large population of people from rural communities that are not exposed or expected to understand city slickers. Noone knows if he was killed for his homosexuality or maybe he was just a Gomer Pyle. But because he was gay, now it becomes some stinky comment on soceity within the military.
U are not asked if your straight or not in private sector jobs. And how is letting them serve as gays special any more then letting the gays see hetro sexuals in the miliatery with their loved ones all around them openly on the bases with their families? How is that fair?
You stepped into the trap kid. Do you give your sexual resume to the job and ask for special treatment?
I have a huge issue when you discharge people simply for having a sexual preferance that you do not like. The fact is they serve with just as much honor as the next guy. And how do u know only 3% is gay? LOL don't ask don't tell not working? lol It shouldnt matter if they are gay or not as long as they do their duty and follow orders. Last time I checked they look just the same as the guy next to them or the woman. Same hair cut, same uniform. So what exactly is the issue?
No response?
The military is what it is. In my day it was quite different than it is today. The military SHOULD be able to make policy within the military. If you are a gay man don't advertise the fact, I didn't advertise the fact that I was a one woman man, many others went to local bars and copulated with anything that was willing, in England many enlisted married men got what we used to call tremblers (The act of oral sex on the men while standing outside a club or bar). The act of adultery is still a courts martial offense. I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. Why should a gay man get special dispensation within the military? I watched many men get shit and sometimes get their ass kicked by idiots just for being faithful to their wife. If you are faithful you have honor. Those that weren't have to live with the consequences, whether they tell their wife or not. Honor is a personal thing, not to be confused with popularity. The military is for the great majority of men who serve an institution that requires great sacrifice on their part. Military justice is rapid and harsh, not like civilian law, within which, one can quite bluntly get away with murder, rape, or child molestation by simply not getting the miranda rights read to them before arrest. The service by it's nature must not allow even small breaches of personal honor to go by without discipline due to the extremity of the job you are asked to do. My belief is that homosexuality should never have been allowed within the military openly due to the problems that are now evident. Don't mistake what I am saying here, we had what we called "fluffys" in WWII, Korea, ad Vietnam. They were respected as much as any other soldier as long as they kept it to themselves. If they were discovered they were instantly protected till discharge to prevent harm from being visited upon them. It was a Dishonorable Discharge, but not for the reason of their sexuality. It was a Dishonorable Discharge due to false enlistment, lies on Federal documents for those of you who do not understand the military process. While I sympathize with the position, Open homosexuality in the American military is counterproductive and creates more problems than it is worth. Less than 3% of the military is gay. When you FORCE 97% of the military to accept your philosophy and cosmology, I would say that you have special rights and therefore are more important than Fred Smith who faces the same horrors of war. So let me ask you sir, Why are you more important/valuable?
...When I say "safely," I of course mean not being persecuted by the ones supposedly on the same side, of course.
I agree with you... the don't ask, don't tell policy was well-intentioned, but it just is not working. Anyone who wants to serve in the military should be able to do so freely and safely.
But Kempite doesn't just disagree strongly with the left on most issues. He constantly spouts bullshit about how stupid and evil liberals are. Then he all of a sudden wants their help when it comes to DADT. I think he's an ass backwards hypocrite.
I would just like to point out that in between all the name calling there are issues that we can find common ground. instead of blasting kemp for positions i dont agree with i am going to just say - i agree- and i think it proves that most people can find some common groud in this hyper partisan world.
I'm sick of ass backward conservatives like Kempite doing nothing but demonizing the left wing and deffending the right no matter what they do THEN running to the left to end don't ask don't tell. I'm all for ending don't ask don't tell. But if Kempite is going to constantly compare the left wing to Hitler or whatever fucked up retarded bullshit he says constantly, he has no business hoping the left will end policies that discriminate against gays. He's an assbakcwards fucking hypocrite. I don't care how much conservatvies on here like him. Kempite is a fucking tool.
Shut up you fucking retard.
Don't Ask Don't Tell is fine. The millitary should be allowed to make its own policy. Stupid Democrats and evil liberals just want to overturn Don't Ask Don't Tell so they can ruin America and turn our country into Communist Hitler Russia Chavez-Land.
|
<< Home