VETERANS OBJECT TO LIFTING BAN ON GAYS IN MILITARY

Area veterans are up in arms over President-elect Bill Clinton's vow to allow homosexuals to serve in the military.

But a co-chairman of the Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Association (GLBA) at Southeast Missouri State University says it's "blatant discrimination" to prohibit gays from serving in the military.

The co-chairman, Joe Dunlap, argued that homosexuals are already serving in the military, but now are forced to hide their sexual orientation.

"It (lifting the ban) would make them more productive because they wouldn't have to spend that extra energy to hide it," said Dunlap.

About 14,000 men and women have been kicked out of the services during the past 10 years because they were homosexual.

Dunlap said the issue is not "men sleeping together in barracks. The issue is performance.

"If anybody is willing to get out there and fight, then they should be allowed to do so as long as their performance record is okay," Dunlap said. "The military has dismissed people just because they happen to be gay. That is what the whole issue is about."

Two well known veterans in this area Blair Moran of Sikeston and Charles Woodford of Cape Girardeau said they and their colleagues strongly oppose lifting the Pentagon's ban on gays serving in the military.

They echo the views of the nation's top military leaders, who also have come out against the idea.

"I think it is very unfortunate," said Moran, a Vietnam veteran. "I think it will severely weaken and demoralize our military."

Moran, who is active in the American Legion and the VFW in the Sikeston area, said he was concerned that lifting the ban might lead many career military officers to resign.

"The military is for the defense of our country, not for social experimentation," he said.

Woodford said he agreed: "The do-gooders here are trying to use the military as social tinkering."

A retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who is active with American Legion Post 63 in Cape Girardeau, Woodford said he doesn't question the patriotism of homosexuals and their desire to serve in the military.

"I don't doubt their patriotism at all, but they are disqualified because of this orientation," he said. "We wouldn't take a one-legged man and make him a place kicker on a football team even though he loved the game.

"Nobody feels comfortable around these people," he added. "It's a threat to good order and discipline."

Adm. William Crowe, the retired chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and a Clinton adviser, has expressed strong concern about lifting the ban. Gen. Colin Powell, current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, opposes the move.

Officials with the Army and Air Force ROTC units at Southeast Missouri State declined to comment on the issue, saying their units would abide by whatever orders are issued.

But both Moran and Woodford said that veterans and those currently in the military are solidly opposed to the idea.

"If you are in a combat situation, you need a cohesive fighting force, and most people think that type of lifestyle is very disgusting. (I)t just undermines the morale of your unit to have those types in it," said Moran, a decorated Army veteran.

Had gays been allowed in the military during the Vietnam War, Moran said, "We would not only have had to watch for the enemy in our kill zone, but also roving hands within our own perimeter."

Moran contended that allowing gays in the military would be detrimental to efficiency, discipline and morale.

"I just think it would be extremely demoralizing for the vast majority of people who now wear our uniform to have to associate with these types of individuals," he said.

Both Moran and Woodford said military and civilian life are far different. In military life, service personnel generally live in close quarters with each other.

"It's not an 8 to 5 job," Woodford said. "Particularly in the Navy it would create a lot of havoc since you are confined aboard ship in very, very close quarters," said Woodford, who served three years in the Navy during World War II. He later joined the Air Force. He also has been active in the Army National Guard.

Woodford said he doesn't believe the issue is a civil rights matter. The issue, he said, is that from a practical viewpoint it would weaken the military.

He said he's concerned that if homosexuals are allowed to serve in the military, it could ultimately lead to a quota system in which the armed forces would have to include a certain percentage of homosexuals.

Both Woodford and Moran expressed concern that allowing gays in the military could lead to a greater risk of AIDS. "That puts you in a life-threatening situation," said Moran.

Woodford thinks opposition from military and veterans groups will keep the ban in place.

"I really don't think it is going to happen," he said of the proposal to lift the ban. "I think the president-elect is just going to have to 'fess-up some time and say, `Well, I made a mistake and I'm sorry, I was wrong.'"

But Dunlap believes that sooner or later the ban will be lifted.

"Clinton has already said he is not going to back off this issue," said Dunlap. "I think Clinton will do everything he can to lift the ban."

Opposition to such a move comes from the fact "people are afraid of change," he said.

"The same things that are being said now to keep gays out of the military were said previously to keep blacks out of the military." Those same concerns were also expressed about letting women serve in the military, he said.

"The military hasn't crumbled to death since we have had blacks and women in the military," said Dunlap.

If and when gays are allowed in the military, there will be no appreciable change in the operations of the armed forces, Dunlap predicted. There's no logical reason, he said, to keep gays out of the military.