Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Idaho homophobes ban elderly lesbian Navy veteran from burial Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Madelynn Taylor is a 74 year old lesbian who served six years in the Navy: she bought herself a plot in Idaho’s state run Veteran’s cemetery a while back. Jean Mixner, her spouse of no less than 17 years died in 2012. Taylor wanted her wife’s ashes placed in her plot but officials in charge of the cemetery told Taylor to take her wife’s ashes and get lost.

    If Taylor were going to be buried in a federal military cemetery, like Arlington, her partner’s ashes could join her. But because same sex marriage is not legal in Idaho, officials refuse to allow the two to be buried together. Taylor, who wants to be buried near her hometown despite the stupidity of Idaho’s bureaucracy, has vowed to not give up the fight.

    "It's not taking up any more space to have both of us in there,” Taylor said, “and I don’t see how the ashes of a couple of old lesbians is going to hurt anybody,” ( ) Which is a pretty good point. Fearing a dead gay person? That’s award winning levels of homophobia.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ex-unions.html
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    "If a man lie with a man as he lie with a woman", so women are off the hook here. Then you have repeat punishing for sodomy, but historically that means anal sex so......lesbians pretty much in the clear again, pretty obvious old YHWH don't mind dat girl on girl.

    Seriously though, it's hardly surprising, many folks still very homophobic over there and the military just makes that worse.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joey11223)
    Seriously though, it's hardly surprising, many folks still very homophobic over there and the military just makes that worse.
    Explain?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Explain?
    Historically, since we're talking about older folks here, gays cannot serve, post 1993 gays can as long as they do not reveal their sexuality (don't ask don\t tell), which is amusing since...how can you know who's homosexual to view them as unfit for service unless you ask orientation.

    I mean she's in her 70's, if other veterans of a similiar age are the ones stopping her, it is all they know. After all despite eventually conceding in the 50's that homosexuals are not a risk to the military compared to heterosexual soldiers, the same report still said they should be immediately thrown out of the military if discovered to be homosexual because "Homosexuality is wrong, it is evil, and it is to be branded as such."

    I wonder if transgendered are still barred (after ending don't ask don't tell) from service here as they are across the pond though.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joey11223)
    Historically, since we're talking about older folks here, gays cannot serve, post 1993 gays can as long as they do not reveal their sexuality (don't ask don\t tell), which is amusing since...how can you know who's homosexual to view them as unfit for service unless you ask orientation.

    I mean she's in her 70's, if other veterans of a similiar age are the ones stopping her, it is all they know. After all despite eventually conceding in the 50's that homosexuals are not a risk to the military compared to heterosexual soldiers, the same report still said they should be immediately thrown out of the military if discovered to be homosexual because "Homosexuality is wrong, it is evil, and it is to be branded as such."

    I wonder if transgendered are still barred (after ending don't ask don't tell) from service here as they are across the pond though.
    That's not the same as "the military making it worse", though, that's the case of "the civilians in charge of the military making decisions for them". And that's the case here too, there's no evidence that it is Veterans in the department making those decisions, just people in local government.

    Your last sentence doesn't make sense. We've never had DADT.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    That's not the same as "the military making it worse", though, that's the case of "the civilians in charge of the military making decisions for them". And that's the case here too, there's no evidence that it is Veterans in the department making those decisions, just people in local government.

    Your last sentence doesn't make sense. We've never had DADT.
    My apologies, my point was homosexuals were banned from military service here until 2000. I was wondering since transsexuals are banned from service in the USA, how it is here these days.

    Ah I see, so the civilian leaders/commanders of the military are not representative of the military, so actual personnel would have found the army/navy etc to be more accepting of homosexuality than the rest of the population, just those darn civilians making the military look bad?

    Still, Navy ain't helpful...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crittenden_Report

    But honestly no point derailing the thread, we're hardly going to reach some sort of agreement, you're ex services, I'm a civvi.

    Best just to say, I assume, we all agree it's poor form in this day and age not to let her have her wish.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joey11223)
    My apologies, my point was homosexuals were banned from military service here until 2000. I was wondering since transsexuals are banned from service in the USA, how it is here these days.

    Ah I see, so the civilian leaders/commanders of the military are not representative of the military, so actual personnel would have found the army/navy etc to be more accepting of homosexuality than the rest of the population, just those darn civilians making the military look bad?
    They can serve openly in the UK Armed Forces.

    Whether they would have been open/accepting is a secondary thing, if they were told "they can serve" then the military would get on with it. Might cause some friction in the early days, but the job would get done. Same thing happened before/after they allowed different races to serve alongside one another.

    I'm ex-services, yes, but a product of the military post the changes, I've never known anything else but openness.

    But yes, couldn't agree more, the 'rules' in this sense are moronic and not based on any form of rational thought.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    All I can do is wish her luck
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 7, 2014
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.