Here’s a what if question for you all.
Seeing as being gay today isn’t exactly the same "Stigma it was back 25-30 years ago when they had a draft, do you think many straight men (or women) would avoid it simply by saying they were gay.
I take it back then if you said you were gay they would just not draft you. I mean how would one, today at least, prove him/herself to be gay?
Or do you think the military would just say “forget it, let’s just draft everyone.”
Changing the subject somewhat, but I once read a book that argued it was illegal to deny gays admission to the armed forces. The author argued that the second amendment meant that any American citizen who was capable had the right to serve in the military. He pointed out that historically groups that have been prohibited from military service such as blacks, Indians, or women (or Jews in Nazi Germany or Muslims in Israel) have not enjoyed full civil rights.
The military’s attitude toward gay recruits or draftees changes in direct proportion with how desperately they needed people. They’ll reject gay volunteers in times of peace, but forget the rules against them in times of war, where their attitude is “let’s draft everyone.”
During Vietnam, they’d often allow gays, and even outright consensual gay behavior, because they needed men. I’ve heard one example when someone claimed an exemption because he was gay and was told that he could only get out if he was married to another man.
When the army has plenty of manpower, they can afford to be more picky. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” was unofficial policy long before Clinton, though the army wouldn’t admit it.
Realitychuck (who obviously forgot to emulate his nickname here): that would be a neat trick, a man being married to another man, since it ain’t legal in the US yet!
Note: I’m not stating an opinion here one way or the other on if that should be legal, but just describing the current fact.
Perhaps Joseph Heller could write a Vietnam-era book called Catch 69?
Sue from El Paso
members.aol.com/majormd/index.html
Monty – that was the point. Since the guy couldn’t provide a marriage license, he wasn’t getting out of the army. Catch-22 and all that.
What about the scene in the movie “Hair” where the guy was rejected because he had painted toenails? They made it seem as if any “fruit-tay” behavior was grounds for rejection. Of course, it didn’t work for Klinger.
*voguevixen: What about the scene in the movie “Hair” where the guy was rejected because he had painted toenails? They made it seem as if any “fruit-tay” behavior was grounds for rejection. Of course, it didn’t work for Klinger. *
There was an episode of MAS*H where Henry finally relented and had Dr. Sidney Freedman evaluate Klinger. When Sidney told Klinger he thought he should get out of the Army, Klinger was elated. Then Sid read him the contents of his report, basically labelling Klinger a homosexual. Klinger got indignant and refused the discharge, arguing that he was crazy, not gay.