New ALARACT 250/2014 outlines absences for same-sex Soldiers; What are your thoughts on this?

2014-11-18T15:11:49-05:00

Just released!

ALARACT 250/2014 outlines the criteria in order to award non-chargeable absences for same-sex Soldiers wishing to get married.

Included in the policy:

. Soldier must be assigned OCONUS, or at least 100 miles from the nearest State or U.S. jurisdiction that allows same-sex marriage.

. Soldier is authorized "Up To" 7 days if CONUS, or 10 days if OCONUS.

. Soldier must provide his/her Command with a copy of the marriage certificate upon return. Failure to do so will result in the entire absence being charged as leave.

Do these conditions make the issue of "non-chargeable marriage leave", less controversial?

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 18 at 2014 5:26 PM

2014-11-18T17:26:39-05:00

SFC Private RallyPoint Member, I think they do. If same-sex troops want to get married and can't do so where they are, then the Army appropriately (in my opinion) allows time to get it done at the nearest location where same-sex marriage is allowed. Seems like a reasonable accommodation.

Response by SN Jennifer M. made Nov 19 at 2014 12:32 PM

2014-11-19T12:32:53-05:00

I think it is controversial. Why not give all service members 7-10 days when they are getting married. Don't get me wrong I am not against same sex marriage, but I feel if you give something to one group you need to give it to the entirety.

Response by SSG Lisa Rendina made Nov 19 at 2014 12:49 PM

2014-11-19T12:49:46-05:00

While I understand the limitations on which states currently legally perform same-sex marriages and the hindrance travel to one of those states puts on same-sex couples wishing to be married; "free" leave is not the answer. When my husband and I were first engaged and discussing where the wedding would be held (and needing a marriage license) we decided on my home town for the legal portion and after we saved some money, a big wedding with reception in his home town. Guess what...we both took leave for both occasions. We submitted our requests and hoped the were approved and not subsequently cancelled. If "free" leave is going to be offered to one group, it should be offered for all. That's what "they" want after all, right, equality?

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 19 at 2014 2:52 PM

2014-11-19T14:52:50-05:00

Why not just give all SM non-chargeable absences for marriage one time in their career? Problem solved no more "its not fair"

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made Dec 4 at 2014 11:06 AM

2014-12-04T11:06:41-05:00

Leads me to wonder if they will, in the future, need to grant the same for divorce since you can not be divorced in a state that does not recognize the marriage to begin with. Just a thought.

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Dec 12 at 2014 1:49 PM

2014-12-12T13:49:20-05:00

ALACRACT 250/2014 Absences for Same Sex Soldiers.
- Standards should apply to all Soldiers regardless of sex, religion, sexual orientation, or other non relevent categorizations. Goes to standards and discipline.
- Carve outs of special rules for special classes for whatever reason only works to divide rather than to unite and standardize. Creates different standards which goes against what Army should be about.
-Even same sex advocates generally argue that they do not want special treatment, only equal treatment. Interesting that the Army is trying to provide something that advocates are arguing against.
- Interesting the the Army seems to be changing or bending its rules in certain circumstances for a nebulous short term gain but that will lead to long term problems. I am referring to the prohibition of uniformed service members participating in political activities. A few examples from this past year of participating in uniform in gay parades and political events that are obviously political speech for which Army leadership seemed to either look the other way or condone this activity which for other issues or events are obviously prohibited.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 8 at 2015 12:20 PM

2015-10-08T12:20:31-04:00

The non-chargeable part is definitely the sore topic about the whole thing from what I've experienced. If you give that type of leave to one, it needs to go to all. The military is all about making everyone feel like pretty unique snowflakes anymore.

Here's the big points and such that's been brought up in my area and branch:

1) it insinuates that them getting married is more important/special than a "traditional couple" getting married. It's not, it's a breakthrough of local(US) human rights, but it's nothing really new, particularly since the don't ask/tell procedures were revoked.

2) Implies that the only reason they will get married is because it's federally recognized and now they CAN collect benefits for their spouses. (BAH, Tricare, etc). Example, one of my shiny leaderships on the "O"-rank side married their spouse a few years back. they didn't wait for a change or do it for benefits, but because they were(and presumably still are) happy with each other. Nothing changed for them except full spousal benefits, which congrats to them both.

3) it shows a favoritism to same-sex couples by awarding them non-chargeable leave to go get their marriage on, which violates EO policies. How long to most couple spend planning a wedding? long enough to research locations, venues, states, setting dates, making reservations, etc etc. And normal leave is spent attending said wedding. Exceptions are gundecked courthouse paper signings.

I haven't seen if there were any updates to the instruction(s), because frankly I don't care enough to look and even if I did I won't get the leave retroactively, but unless it was just a temporary thing during the "rush." But if it's still a standing policy, it's one that could cause actual, valid complaints if anyone wanted to press the issue.