Exclusion: Homosexuals and the Right to Serve

by Melissa Wells-Petry

Overview

Highly readable, precise and meticulously documented, Exclusion is the most comprehensive study ever published on the question of homosexuals in the armed forces.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780895265043
Publisher:	Regnery Publishing
Publication date:	04/28/1993
Pages:	237
Product dimensions:	6.10(w) x 9.20(h) x (d)

Editorial Reviews

The author of this timely, sure-to-be-controversial study maintains that the rationale behind the ban on homosexuals in the military is ``the result of applying common sense and experience to discernible characteristics of homosexuals. . . .'' Wells-Petry argues that federal courts over the last few decades have generally ruled that the homosexual exclusion policy does not violate civil rights and that the ban is justified, at least in part, by abundant evidence of the dire medical consequences of homosexual practices (which require expensive specialized treatment). The author, a major in the Army Judge Advocate General's Office, question s the Kinsey Report statistic that approximately one-tenth of the American population is gay (a figure often cited to support the argument that homosexuals already constitute a significant proportion of the military). A more accurate estimate, she contends, is 1% or 2%. The ban should stand, Wells-Petry argues, because open admission of homosexuals into the armed services would adversely affect morale and combat-readiness. The book will be a much-cited reference in the continuing national debate. (May)

Publishers Weekly - Publisher's Weekly

Wells-Petry, a major in the US Army and an attorney, does what she has been doing for the Army for some ten years: she defends the legality and, in her view, necessity of excluding homosexuals from the military. Annotation c. Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)

Booknews

With the assertion that courts would eventually compel the military to enlist gays, the Clintonites are pressuring the brass to preempt judicial edict and accomodate the new dispensation. What substance hath the assertion lies in the dozen antiban suits litigated and rejected in the past 20 years. Taking different routes, each claim had to reach a conclusion that the exclusion policy was "irrational" to the military's requirements, and this author, an army lawyer, delves into the arcana that led to the rejections. With extensive quotes and footnotes, the Wells-Petry brief counters the plaintiffs' claims, for example, that being gay threatens neither unit cohesion nor security. As this rests on an asserted status/conduct distinction, her basic retort is that status can't exist without certain conduct, conduct inherently inimical to the military's purpose of victory in war. The other prong of attack asserts infringements of constitutional rights, which in this advocate's view confuses rights with privileges, as well as ignores the surrender of freedom implied in putting on a uniform. In the remote event that courts find for the "rights" argument, she predicts a litigation avalanche over the services' obligation to provide facilities, pensions, leaves, etc. Not light reading, this defense of the status quo would normally head for the law library, but when Clinton announces a decision in July, public libraries will surely hear baying from both sides of this red-meat issue. Conservatives will find succor in these arguments, and liberals a red herring.

Gilbert Taylor