Gay soldier told, so he's ousted

An openly gay and much-decorated soldier has been released from the Army after telling his story to the media.

According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, Sgt. Darren Manzella lost his job — which included stints in Baghdad providing medical care to soldiers, Iraqi guardsmen and civilians — because of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

His troubles may have begun during a CBS "60 Minutes" interview aired in December, when he told Lesley Stahl that he served openly during much of his service.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy was put in place by President Clinton and has been left in place by President Bush.

Gay rights advocates argue that whoever imposed it, Congress should lift it.

"The discharge of battle-tested, talented service members like Sgt. Manzella weakens our military in a time of war," said the communications director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, Adam Ebbin. "National security requires that Congress lift the ban on gays in the military and allow commanders to judge troops on their qualifications, not their sexuality."

— Johanna Neuman

Comments

[Oblio B]

How ridiculous. It's time this country's military grows up and gets over its baseless prejudices over sexual preference. Let those who choose to be straight be straight, and lets gays be gays, etc.

[Jim]

What idiot implemented this "Don't ask Don't tell" policy?

[Paul]

Good enough to die in a war as long as no one knows who you really are. Not good enough to get married because then everyone will know who you are. Why are some people so afraid of gay people?

[jimmyinarkansas]

This is a perfect example of the nonsensical way our country is being ran. A person's sexuality has nothing to do with who they are or whether or not they should be allowed to defend their country. The last time I checked the Constitution protected the rights of all Americans, not just heterosexual Americans. If our government spent half as much time fixing the real problems we have as they do focusing on what people do behind closed doors, we not be in an economic tailspin.

[Sicj]

Makes no difference how gay you are or what sacrifices you have made to this country. If you openly discuss you're gayness in the military you are THROWN out. And rightfully so. The military is about defending this country not having sex or getting closer to other men to have sex, or even submitting them to sexual innuendo. I have nothing against gays. However This is not an openly acceptable form of sexual activities in our society as of yet. There is an overwhelming amount of straight men in the military. Yes many men may discuss there sexual activities openly and because there straight thats amazingly OK to do. However Man and Woman couples reproduce and add vital Americans to our country. Gays cannot reproduce and must adopt children it has been proven that there lifestyle is not as strong as man + women couple adopting children. There is nothing wrong with adopting and this may very well contribute to a stronger outlook of America being a Positive force in the world as we know it today. However this is also an easy path to move in more and more gay people with gay agenda's perverting children and locking down natural human behavior perverting it into a form of unnatural near pedophilia BS. Thus will ultimately contribute to the downfall of our society as we know it as less and less couples will be reproducing. And for that matter being a stronger family. Its a fine line we walk, and a tough world we put our women through. Thats my 2 cents on this BS.

[Arnold]

This is another example of how our servicemen and woman are viewed. In a time of low re=inlistment i have the impression that it is better if we lose a good courageous soldier if he is gay.

[AZNOGY]

Adam Ebbin said, "National security requires that Congress lift the ban on gays in the military and allow commanders to judge troops on their qualifications, not their sexuality." He, like so many others, do not see the big picture.

First of all, if all military personnel were judged on their qualifications and not their sexuality, then there would be few, if any, females in the military. Females in the military do not have to meet the same physical qualifications as their male counterparts. Females are allowed to wear their hair longer. The list can go on and on.

Secondly, if being gay and in the military shouldn't matter, then why even bother having separate living areas to segregate the males and the females? Then again, if they're segregating based on sexual orientation then the military should have 4 (or more) different arrangements; straight male, straight female, gay male, and gay female. But then what if the gay men or gay women decided to have any orgy...

I say no gays in the military. It is just too difficult a situation for nearly everyone else.

[Jimmy Evans]

This is a perfect example of the nonsensical way our country is being ran. A person's sexual orientation has nothing to do with who they are or how well they will serve their country. The last time I checked the Constitution protected the rights of all Americans, not just the heterosexual ones. If our government spent half as much time worrying about REAL issues as they do worrying about what people do behind closed doors, we might not be in the economic tailspin we are in currently.

[Nathan]

Land of the free? sure thing guys

[jimmy evans]

This is a perfect example of the nonsensical way our country is being ran currently. A person's sexual orientation has nothing to do with who they are or how well they will serve their country in a time of war. The last time I checked, the Constitution protected the rights of ALL Americans, not just the heterosexual ones. If our government spent half as much time worrying about the REAL problems of our country as they do worrying about what people do behind closed doors our country may not be in the economic tailspin we're in now.

[jefft]

.....and you wonder why readership is falling for this rag publication.
A policy put into place by Clinton is being enforced and you blame the current administration.
Is Ms Neuman suggesting that the military selectively enforce rules or is this just another blame Bush for everything story?

[Robert]

The heterosexual people are living in a sexual fantasy if they think homosexual men enlist just to have sex with heterosexual men. They really need to see a shrink. I spent 10 years in the Army and I know that people are serving our country to do a job; not to “hook-up” with a sex partner and it does not matter what their sexual orientation is.

This guy takes care of patients. That’s his job. Why does anyone care about his sexual orientation. Would it be OK if he was a heterosexual man banging every gal he laid his eyes on?

Discrimination against Afro-Americans went out the window and they sleep in the same rooms as the whites. Discrimination against gays will eventually go out the window. I suggest that the Archie Bunkers of the US seek a shrink to learn how to deal with it.

[Tony Brucato]

If the Military Draft was implemented again quotas will never be met because everyone will be gay.

[David Smtih]

This comment is in response to "SICJ's'" posting above. You say. "I have nothing against gays." But, then you go on to say a lot of really ignorant statements based on either fear or just uneducated opinions. Homosexuality has existed since man has been on this earth. Do you seriously believe that gay people will "ultimately contribute to the downfall of our society?" If that were the case, then mankind would not exist, since as I said, homosexuality has existed from the beginning. If you read some history, you will find that homosexuality was very prevalent in all of the ancient societies, from the Romans to the Greeks to the Egyptians (and way before them in ancient Iraq). Last time I checked, those societies (countries) are still around. Lastly, I am disgusted with your relating gays to pedophiles. I would argue there are far more heterosexuals who are pedophiles than there are gays who are pedophiles. And, while I am at it, there are plenty of heterosexual rapists, adulterers, murders and incest people. Are these people the so-called "vital Americans being added to our country?" So, how dare you defile gays when we have plenty of good, talented and contributing gay people in our society. I'll bet there is at least one artist or musician you enjoy who is gay. Would you totally discard their work, simply because of their sexual orientation? Lastly, we do NOT have agenda, we simply want to be treated as equals and with respect. I suggest you attend some college courses and get a decent education before making further ridiculous comments on this site.

[jordan bartkowiak]

I was a gay serving in the military, and the fools afraid that gays would affect unit cohesion or that we would have an orgy, I say they are unfounded accusations. What if all the straight people had an orgy over there? Pregnant women on the battle field is an actual problem. Last time I checked, we don't make babies all that well. It's illegal to have sex in the war zone anyway, so that point is null and void. I think that there are just waaay too many homophobic people with something shiny on their shoulders. This is stupid. You want to fight a war, and send only straight boys over? We can heal, kill, cook, and function as well as any straight person you send over there. They should focus on all the problems they already have, instead of preventing artificial ones.