Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Just out. (Portland, OR) 1983-2013 | View Entire Issue (April 17, 1998)
aprii 17. 199fl * Jiaat o u t ^ See my Exclusive Listings on our webpage T he L ong H aul Military ban on out gay men and lesbians batted about in federal appeals court— again by Bob Roehr he issue of gay men and lesbians in der. And the Pentagon has conceded in court the military was again before the that gay men and lesbians are no more likely to courts on April 2 in the form of misbehave than their straight counterparts. Able vs. the United States, which Judge Pierre N. Leval asked for a description challenges the “don’t ask, don’t of “unit cohesion,” which prompted Hoyle to tell, don’t pursue” policy banning openly gay recite the privacy and sexual tension arguments. and lesbian people from serving in the military. “Suppose we deal with the problem by treat In New York, a three-member panel of the ing everybody alike?” asked Judge Wilfred 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard argu Feinberg. ments in the case. It could well be the last step “Congress came to a different conclusion,” before the matter lands before the Supreme answered Hoyle, adding the government does Court, probably next year. “not consider homosexuals [to he] predators.” The Able case was initiated in 1994 by However, he said, “One is inclined to act on Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and their sexuality. The military wants to prohibit the Gay and Lesbian Civil Rights Project of the people from serving who are going to continu American Civil Liberties Union. The plaintiffs ously engage in homosexual acts.” are six active-duty and reserve service members Lambda’s Beatrice Dohm, arguing for the who won at the trial court level when Judge Eugene Nickerson declared the policy violates the free speech rights of gay and lesbian service members. Following an appeal of that ruling, the 2nd Circuit sent the case back to Nickerson and directed him to decide if the policy violates equal protection under the Constitution. “The Constitution does not grant the military special license to act on prejudices or cater to them,” Nickerson wrote last July in his second opinion on the case. He dismissed the gov ernment’s argument that the ban was necessary to preserve “unit cohesion," ACLU attorney Matt Coles calling the policy “a euphemism for catering to plaintiffs, said the policy is nothing more than a the prejudices of heterosexuals.” form of pandering to the presumed lowest He added, “It is hard to imagine why the instincts of heterosexuals. mere holding of hands off base and in private is She argued that when one strips away the dangerous to the mission of the armed forces if rhetoric, all that is left is the simple fact that “a done by a homosexual but not if done by a het person is made uncomfortable” by the presence erosexual.” of those perceived to be gay or lesbian. The government again appealed the ruling, Dohm reminded the court that “privacy which in turn prompted the April 2 proceed concerns are the same ones raised about integra ings. tion of the military” nearly 50 years ago. Questioning was spirited that day, with pre The judges, meanwhile, twice suggested to siding Judge John M. Walker—who happens to Dohm that perhaps a heightened level of scruti be the cousin of former President George ny was required in examining the issue. Bush—taking the lead. “You are asking this court to substitute itself Walker said the case involves three concep for the judgment of the military,” said Walker. tual pieces: deference to the military, the level of Dohm disagreed, and during a media briefing scrutiny in examining potential discrimination, following her court presentation, she expressed and the nature of the government’s justification frustration. for such action. “We are arguing the Constitution should still John Hoyle, a U.S. Justice Department attor apply,” she told reporters. ney, argued the military was unique. He main “There is a lot of homophobia in the coun tained Congress had thoughtfully and rationally try, but that isn’t the only negative feeling,” decided there were sufficient concerns pertain added ACLU attorney Matt Coles. “There are a ing to the “privacy” of heterosexual service lot of things that make a lot of people uncom members and the possible detrimental effects on fortable with each other. What the military has “unit cohesion" if gay men and lesbians were effectively said is: ‘We will deal with all of them, but we are not going to deal with this one.’ They allowed to serve openly in the military. Hoyle added that allowing gay people to haven’t said they can’t deal with this one, serve openly would be like putting men and they’ve said they don’t want to. And what we say is that the Constitution doesn’t let them do women together in the service. "You can expect sexual conduct to occur,” he that.” Government attorneys declined to speak said. Hoyle did not explain how the Uniform with the press following the court appearance. Neither side would speculate as to when a Code of Military Justice is deemed adequate to restrain sexual tensions between men and ruling might come down. women but not between people of the same gen T http://www. StanWiley.com JEWEL A. ROBINSON Multimillion $ Producer OFFICE (503) 281-4040 1730 N.E. 10th Avenue Portland, OR 97212 VOICE MAIL (503) 301-4283 E-MAIL Jewel2U @ teleport.com UIG'RG Hawaii Specialist W ayne B oulette H aw aii P a c k a g e s from budget to super luxury Hawaiian gay wedding arrangements Hawaiian house rentals PACIFIC NORTHW EST TO U R & TRAVEL 503 - 286-5811 1 -8 0 0 -8 3 5 -5 8 6 0 Pick up Ju st O U t here. m2 SEX A re You Pulling O u l? Connect your WWWeb site through us We support freedom of speech — If it’s legal, we don’t care! Portland Co-location (to OC-3) for big sites - T -l, 56K B , Frame Relay to your site. sales@ in2sex.net P: 503/224-2169 F:503/223-1619 W H O W O U LD W A N T TO BE POOR? People never seem to tire of reports detailing the incredible wealth of Bill Gates and others who have scaled to the top of the American dream. Even as we gasp at the excesses of the fabulously rich, we secretly envy them and, in truth, often measure our own suc cess by our material status. How different from Jesus in the Gospel of Luke. He turned upside down the common sense notion that wealth is blessing by declaring “Blessed are the poor.” Was he serious? Did he really believe that poor people who can barely scrape enough together to survive are more blessed than those with money to burn? Jesus was no pie-in-the-sky idealist. He knew firsthand the suf fering of the poor, but he also knew the deadly self-sufficiency of the rich who enjoyed their surfeit at the expense of others. For Jesus, all who are unjustly oppressed are especially beloved of God and possess an innate spiritual gift enabling them to apprehend that love.The stir ring spirituals of African slaves poured from hearts that knew only God as salvation. As gay people we too have suffered our share of oppression at the hands of a homophobic society. W e may soothe these wounds by harkening to the Sirens of our materialistic culture, but only the abid ing love and grace of God can bring real inner peace and healing. It is our choice whether to view ourselves as “poor” and claim the promised spiritual gift, or strive to be “rich” and cast our lot in with the bankrupt values and vain aspirations of a society which so often despises us. A message from the Anawim Community—gay men seeking to follow Jesus through lives of prayer and service to our gay brothers.