Gay, Lesbian, Bisexuals Soon To Be Granted Protected Class Status By DOD: Is this policy consistent with the UCMJ and Service Culture?

Wait just wait when these protected classes start to get promoted solely because of iy

CW5 (Join to see) Those are very thought-provoking points. I suppose I find it difficult to imagine a straight person claiming to be gay for the purpose of a frivolous complaint. Regardless, I was tracking that most complaints have to be heavily substantiated with evidence.
With respect to gay people identifying their sexual orientation on the ERB/ORB, is it possible that a lot of the reluctance to "come out of the closet" can be attributed to their fear of discrimination and reprisal? It seems to me that when gay people openly identify as gay, straight people respond with disgust and act as if homosexuality is being thrown in their face.
Finally, as I alluded to in my comment, straight people are ostensibly protected as well by this change (since it prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, which does not necessitate straight-on-gay discrimination).

LCDR Margaret Trombley Ma'am, as I stated in my comment, this change does not explicitly create a "protected class." It seems to simply prohibit open discrimination based on sexual orientation. I have (perhaps misplaced) faith in the military's evaluation systems that justice will prevail and the cream will indeed rise to the top (whether the cream in question is gay or straight).

CPT (Join to see) Ma'am, coming out of the closet is a personal choice that not all will want to do for whatever reason they have until they are ready. As to frivolous complaint, is it really frivolous when the new normal is to state "we just elected/appointed the first "name your color" "name your gender/identity" to the office of "name your office". It seems that is the criteria these days rather than who is the best qualified. My rationale: it is posted in the media the color and gender of a person more than their qualifications. That means we have a focus and inertia in government that will most likely extend to the armed services. I understand 'needs of the Army', I don't understand Affirmative Action, even if we fail to recognize that we are doing just that without saying it out load.

So the whole EO program vision should be: An equal opportunity for all to be given the wherewithal for success without regard to any item or characteristic that may distinguish them from another. I see what you are saying but you have to spell it out for the lawyers and ACLU.

Actually, SSG James Doherty in re-reading your question, that kind of IS my view. Most EO programs list multiple conditions, demographics, etc., which in my opinion is a little bit self-defeating because by listing protected classes, the program is by default not protecting any other class not listed.

@SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4',
While I hold a similiar view as to what you present...when communicating, it would be a major improvement to not use the term “ lifestyle.” What is a gay "lifestyle”? The manner in which LGBT people live their lives is as varied as the manner in which heterosexual people live theirs.

The gay and transgender people I know have “lives”, not “lifestyles”. If you feel compelled to condemn the way others express their sexuality, it might be more honest to stop using silly clichés. What many people really want to say is “I don’t like the concept and thinking about same-sex sex.” Simple, then don’t participate in it. And, if it bothers you to simply think about people having same-sex sex, easy, don’t think about it.

Your “heterosexual lifestyle” is not the same as other heterosexual men. I have a life, not a lifestyle, and I conduct my own according to my faith, values and ethics. Likewise, it is also true with gay and transgender people. Grouping about 5% of the population together under one “lifestyle” umbrella is foolish.

Just as it wouldn’t be appropriate to reduce me or you to a sex act, the same is also true for my gay and trans friends. We are each humans with beautiful diversity, that includes the way we express ourselves sexually, romantically, and emotionally.

SSG (Join to see) While I don't disagree with what you're saying, I think it's really a semantic issue. In this case, I think that "lifestyle" pretty much just gets used interchangeably with "demographic" or any other grouping term. I don't think there was any intent to offend.

What is naive here? Discrimination, unfair treatment - none of it is needed in the military. Period. Religions, race, sex, sexual preference... Treat Soldiers with respect and dignity regardless... Nothing naive in there.