Sailor: Discharged For Being Gay?

[rockin'robin]

Navy Discovered Graphic Pictures On His Phone

KINGS BAY, Ga. -- A sailor said he was discharged from the military because of what his commanding officers found on his cell phone.

He said they found out he was gay. However, even with the Pentagon's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy still in place, he said no one asked, and he didn't tell.

At 21, Jarod McIntosh spent more than a year under water in submarines. Now, he said he's back on solid ground left high and dry because he is gay.

"Everybody that I worked with thought I was a valued member of the crew. I did my job. I did it just as good, if not better, than my fellow sailors," McIntosh said.

He said he is being discharged from the Navy because of his sexuality. He said it's unfair, however, because he never told anyone about it. He said his commanding officers stumbled upon it themselves.

Video: Sailor Says Navy Discharged Him For Being Gay

McIntosh said he brought his phone down to the dock even though he was not allowed. When he pulled it out to check the time, his superiors confiscated his phone and were required to go through the pictures for security reasons. He said they did not find anything top secret, but they did find graphic pictures of him and his boyfriend.

"This is why I'm being discharged, is because of pictures that have nothing to do with why they were looking at my phone in the first place," he said.

He is filing an appeal and is waiting to hear back. He said if that does not go through, however, he's out of options.

McIntosh said the classification of his discharge limits his benefits.

"I joined the Navy so that I could afford to go to school and be a productive citizen and get a good job and take care of my family," McIntosh said. "Now I can't do that. I'm back to step one."

Sailor: Discharged For Being Gay? - Jacksonville News Story - WJXT Jacksonville

 

[Reba]

Example that cell phone records aren't used against homosexual military members only:

Suspicions were first raised, Urban said, during a “routine cell phone records inspection aboard the ship.” The inspection indicated an “unusually high number of calls” between the two service members. Urban said such inspections are conducted periodically “to make sure we’re good stewards of the taxpayers’ money.”

The discovery prompted the investigation, which began Aug. 27, Urban said.

Amphib New York’s CMC fired for frat - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

 

[DDU]

this is a case of " loose lips sink ships"

 

[jillio]

Example that cell phone records aren't used against homosexual military members only:


Amphib New York’s CMC fired for frat - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

But the fact is, this was evidence of sexual orientation. Should not matter what sexual orientation is.

 

[netrox]

Example that cell phone records aren't used against homosexual military members only:


Amphib New York’s CMC fired for frat - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

Where did it say that he has having a relationship with a fellow soldier? With that logic of the military, we should do the same with all straight men who have pictures of their girlfriends.

 

[TXgolfer]

McIntosh said he brought his phone down to the dock even though he was not allowed

Smart move

 

[jillio]

Where did it say that he has having a relationship with a fellow soldier? With that logic of the military, we should do the same with all straight men who have pictures of their girlfriends.

There you go.

 

[jillio]

Smart move

But obviously not a reason for dismissal. It took photos for that.

Here is the issue:

"Everybody that I worked with thought I was a valued member of the crew. I did my job. I did it just as good, if not better, than my fellow sailors," McIntosh said.

Why should his sexual orientation be an issue?

 

[netrox]

right, he was NOT dismissed for bringing the phone, he was dismissed SOLEY because he's gay. If it had pictures of his girlfriend, would he be dismissed? I don't think so.

That's lame.

 

[Reba]

But the fact is, this was evidence of sexual orientation. Should not matter what sexual orientation is.

Any evidence of any activity that is against regulations can be used against a military member, regardless of sexual orientation. In both cases, the parties participated in activities that are prohibited under the UCMJ, and in in both cases, that evidence was found on their cell phones.

 

[Reba]

right, he was NOT dismissed for bringing the phone, he was dismissed SOLEY because he's gay. If it had pictures of his girlfriend, would he be dismissed? I don't think so.

That's lame.

In the example that I gave, the straight male CMC was fired for his relationship with a straight female shipmate, using cell phone records.

So yes, pictures of girlfriends can also get sailors dismissed.

 

[jillio]

Any evidence of any activity that is against regulations can be used against a military member, regardless of sexual orientation. In both cases, the parties participated in activities that are prohibited under the UCMJ, and in in both cases, that evidence was found on their cell phones.

In this case, evidence of sexual orientation.

 

[Jiro]

eh? this sailor needs to man the F up and take it like a REAL MAN. he got discharged for breaking the rule.... not for being gay.

 

[netrox]

In the example that I gave, the straight male CMC was fired for his relationship with a straight female shipmate, using cell phone records.

So yes, pictures of girlfriends can also get sailors dismissed.

but they were shipmates. That's a big difference.

 

[jillio]

eh? this sailor needs to man the F up and take it like a REAL MAN. he got discharged for breaking the rule.... not for being gay.

How can you be sure?

 

[Reba]

In this case, evidence of sexual orientation.

Actually, from the description of the pictures, it was evidence not just of orientation but of sexual activity. That is a chargeable offense under the UCMJ.

The question isn't whether or not it's a fair, good, or likable law. It was the law, and enforceable.

 

[Reba]

but they were shipmates. That's a big difference.

Big difference of what? They both committed offenses against the UCMJ.

 

[Jiro]

How can you be sure?

here -

McIntosh said he brought his phone down to the dock even though he was not allowed. When he pulled it out to check the time, his superiors confiscated his phone and were required to go through the pictures for security reasons.

that's how I am sure he was discharged for breaking the law. now how can you be sure he was discharged for being gay?

 

[jillio]

Actually, from the description of the pictures, it was evidence not just of orientation but of sexual activity. That is a chargeable offense under the UCMJ.

The question isn't whether or not it's a fair, good, or likable law. It was the law, and enforceable.

Where does it say that his boyfriend was a fellow soldier? All sexual activity is not prohibited. Soldiers are not required to take a vow of chastity.

 

[jillio]

here -



that's how I am sure he was discharged for breaking the law. now how can you be sure he was discharged for being gay?

I can't be 100% certain. Neither can I rule out that his sexual orientation was not a huge factor in the decision.