Reserve Officers Association changes position on gay military service

Timothy Kincaid

February 15th, 2010

The Reserve Officers Association of the United States (ROA) was founded in 1922 and granted a Congressional Charter in 1950 to “support and promote the development and execution of a military policy for the United States that will provide adequate National Security.” They are an advocacy group representing military officers.

Shortly after the 1993 battle over open service in the military, ROA passed the following resolution:

Resolution No. 07-26
Federal Law Regarding Homosexuals in the Armed Forces

WHEREAS, Title 10, United States Code, Section 654, establishes a policy whereby homosexuals are currently permitted to serve in the Armed Forces under the misguided concept of “Don’t ask; Don’t tell; Don’t pursue”;

WHEREAS, the law further states that, “Pursuant to the powers conferred by Section 8 of Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States, it lies within the discretion of Congress to establish qualifications of service in the armed forces.” and further that, “There is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces”; and

WHEREAS, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, an Act of Congress, prohibits sodomy and other deviant behavior on the part of Armed Forces personnel, on duty, off duty, public or private, in uniform, and out of uniform, worldwide; and

WHEREAS, the special conditions and demands related to accomplishing military missions, especially in wartime, are uniquely distinct from the conditions which prevail in civilian society; and

WHEREAS, heterosexual Armed Forces personnel experience significant stress when forced to associate with known homosexuals in close quarters, lacking privacy, and during life and death situations; and

WHEREAS, the presence of homosexual personnel in the Armed Forces has been found to be detrimental to good order, morale, discipline, esprit de corps, recruiting, and retention, which are at the core of combat effectiveness; and

WHEREAS, service in the Armed Forces is a unique calling, entered into by those who meet and maintain stringent physical and mental requirements; and

WHEREAS, discrimination related to deviant behavior, sexual preference, and aberrant lifestyle must not be confused or equated with that based on gender, race, or religion; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Reserve Officers Association of the United States, chartered by Congress, urge the Congress to exclude homosexuals from induction, enlistment, commissioning, and continued service in the Armed Forces of the United States.

In other words, this group not only opposed service by gay personnel willing to serve in silence, they endorsed bold and blatant anti-gay discrimination in terms selected to indicate contempt and disdain. This position was renewed during National Conventions on June 12, 2004 and June 30, 2007.

However, as of last Wednesday, the ROA no longer sees same-sex attracted people as deviant homosexuals with aberrant lifestyles that cause stress and are detrimental to good order. Now they are gays and lesbians serving in the U.S. military, and this endorsement of discrimination has been jettisoned.

From the ROA press release.

Members of the Reserve Officers Association of the United States voted Wednesday to rescind its previous call for complete exclusion of gays and lesbians serving in the U.S. military.

The association also rejected by a two-thirds vote a proposal to endorse the current Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) law, which allows gays and lesbians to serve, provided they keep silent about their sexual orientation.

Leaders were careful to note that they have not endorsed President Obama’s efforts to repeal the ban. They simply will take no position and cannot be used as a source by opponents of open gay service.

This decision is monumental. These include the “officers in the field” to whom Republicans claim to be deferring on this issue. This 63,000 member organization speaks not for the Pentagon, but for “all federally commissioned officers and warrant officers, and their spouses” with a special emphasis on the men and women in the Reserve Components, many of whom are now serving in Afghanistan and Iraq.

GTI

February 15th, 2010

Their 1993 statement is repugnant, contemptible, and inexcusable. Ugh.

And 1993 wasn’t that long ago.

N.V.B

February 15th, 2010

I read the sentence ‘heterosexual Armed Forces personnel experience significant stress when forced to associate with known homosexuals in close quarters’ and thought ‘now if we change the position of heterosexual and homosexual in that sentence …’

DADT is ridiculous to begin with. It seems that ROA has come to that conclusion too. : )

Amicus

February 16th, 2010

Wow, let’s see the opponents paint that as “hollywood history”, as they have done to Adm. Mullen.

Ben in Oakland

February 16th, 2010

Sent to the Chronicle. Probably won’t be published.

The military wants more studies on repealing Don’t-Ask-Don’t-Tell, and that repeal is years away. They’ve had seventeen years to study it. They have the experience of our allies that openly gay and lesbian soldiers serve well alongside heterosexual soldiers, posing no threat to morale or discipline. What else needs to be studied?

And then we find they want to avoid a theoretical backlash, including violence, though they believe that this could be contained with standard discipline.

So who exactly is the threat to unit cohesion and good order? The soldiers that want to serve their country honorably, without the constant threat of being thrown out, or the soldiers who are so homophobic that they would ignore discipline, trash unit cohesion, and commit violence against their fellow soldiers. They get to stay, and the gay soldiers go?

This whole “rationale” underlines that this has never been about the ability of gay people to serve well and honorably, but about the prejudice of some heterosexuals, given a thin veneer of respectability by concerns about “unit cohesion”.

Gay soldiers are already serving alongside their compatriots. Let them do so openly, and now. I’m sure the best military in the world can handle it.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.