• Chaplains are advised to consult with their endorsers and commanders for issues in which they may find themselves unable to provide care for LGBT couples, based on those chaplains’ religious principles.
• Chaplains who are unable to provide marriage seminar/counseling to LGBT couples are to refer those couples to other chaplains/installations or comparable civilian care.
• Chaplains who welcome LGBT couples into marriage seminars/counseling are to notify their other couples/members of the participation of those LGBT couples.
• Chaplains are required to notify their command if they choose to perform same-gender weddings, and remain at the discretion of their endorsing body in choosing whether or not to perform those weddings.
• Chaplains remain at the discretion of their endorsing bodies in choosing whether or not to allow an LGBT service member to volunteer during services (choir, teaching, other leadership capacities).

The chaplain’s memo seems to begin and end with a commitment to honoring LGBT service members and their families, stating, “We remain committed to consistently providing religious and spiritual care to all,” yet some of the guidance issued seems to alienate some LGBT couples based on the sole discretion of various endorsing agencies. Why should chaplains who openly welcome LGBT families notify their straight members ahead of time of LGBT participation? And why should chaplains be required to notify their command of the performance of LGBT weddings? I applaud the Air Force’s initiative in providing more specific guidance to chaplains, but did they take it a step too far in outlining provisions that seem to discriminate against our LGBT service members?

Read the memo here.

The Evans-Nethers Family
(L to R): Emma, Zachary, Marshall, Taylor and Marley
Photo: Tatjana Plitt // www.tatjanaplitt.net.au

How long have you and Marshall been together? 

We have been together since December 25, 2005, and we were married on April 28, 2012.

Where do you currently live?

We live in Dublin, Ohio, which is a lovely little suburb of Columbus!

What is a typical day like in your home?

Our days are pretty hectic! The kids wake up for school at 6:30 a.m., and we get them on the bus by 7:30 a.m. Marshall works from home, so he’s usually working by 8 a.m., and Zachary is usually off to work around 7:30 a.m. as well. Once the kids get home from school, we help them get their homework done and then get dinner ready for everyone. Once we’ve eaten, it’s time to get the house and bedrooms cleaned for bedtime. Both of the kids are in bed by 9 p.m., and then Marshall and Zachary work on their homework until around midnight, and it’s all over again the next day.

 What do you do for family fun? 

This year has been really hectic with Zachary working on his doctoral degree, but we like to travel, especially going to the beach! We also like to visit amusement parks, go to the zoo, and take our dog Marley for walks!

How does DOMA affect you as a military family?

DOMA affects us as a military family because we’re missing out on benefits that are provided to the same heterosexual counterparts that are serving in the military alongside Zachary. If Zachary were to be deployed and something happened to him, Marshall would receive no benefits and it would be very hard to take care of the children on his own. Marshall is also covered on Zachary’s health insurance plan, and because we’re in a same-sex relationship, the additional taxes he pays for me as a domestic partner are 200 percent more than what a heterosexual person would have to pay. Also, the social stigma around DOMA and what a marriage “should be” is detrimental to children.

I am married to Lieutenant Gary Ross. He graduated from high school a year early and he enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1995 at the age of 17. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) was already in effect and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) went into effect the following year. After a few years, Gary decided to become an officer and he received an appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy. He began school in 1998 and I met him on a dating website in 2000. We have been in a committed relationship for over 13 years. Gary graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 2002 and his class was the first class to graduate into war after the terrorist attacks on 9/11. He has been assigned to several ships and he is currently the Combat Systems Officer on U.S.S. ANCHORAGE (LPD 23) in San Diego.

Dan and Lt. Gary Ross

DADT forced us to hide our relationship from everyone except for a handful of trusted friends and family members. The law required Gary to keep me a secret and it forced him to lie to his shipmates on a daily basis. DADT was repealed in 2011 and we were finally able to be open and honest about our relationship for the first time. We waited more than 11 years for that moment and we were legally married in Vermont at the exact moment the repeal went into effect. DADT was a tremendous burden and it was exhilarating to finally be able to express our love openly. However, DOMA continues to cast a dark shadow on our marriage and it prevents us from receiving equal recognition, benefits, and family support for equal sacrifice and service in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Gary does the same job as service members who are married to someone of the opposite sex, but he does not receive up to $6,000 per year in compensation because we are the same sex. Gary does not receive the “with dependents” Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) rate as a married service member. Instead, he receives the “without dependents” BAH rate which is $246 less per month in San Diego. When Gary’s ship is away from port for more than 30 days, he does not receive Family Separation Allowance (FSA) as a married service member. Instead, he receives nothing which is $250 less per month. Gary does not receive the “with dependents” Permanent Change of Station (PCS) weight allowance as a married service member. Instead, he receives the “without dependents” PCS weight allowance which is 1,500 pounds less.

Gary does the same job as service members who are married to someone of the opposite sex, but I do not receive receive vital benefits because we are the same sex. I have traveled to Mexico on numerous occasions for affordable healthcare because the cost of private insurance is prohibitive. Two days after our wedding, I was returning from the doctor in Mexico when gunfire broke out at the San Ysidro border crossing. A customs agent and several civilians were hurt. Gary and I feared for my life that day. A few years earlier, I went to the emergency room after cutting my left index finger on a table saw and the medical bills totaled about $2,000. On another occasion, I went to the dentist because I was experiencing severe tooth pain and it required a costly root canal and medication. Unfortunately, the tooth had to be extracted six months later and it took several years before Gary and I could save enough money to have my tooth replaced.

Last year, I received medical, dental, and vision insurance benefits through my employer, but I still paid about $4,500 on out-of-pocket healthcare expenses including premiums and deductibles. This year, my insurance benefits were converted to COBRA after a reduction in hours. As a result, I may return to Mexico for affordable healthcare because COBRA premiums are $548 per month.

My husband, Lieutenant Gary Ross, has served in the military for his entire adult life and he took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Ironically, DOMA denies us hundreds of federal benefits and many of the same rights he supports and defends for others. DOMA makes second-class citizens out of first-class service members. DOMA is a domestic enemy of the Constitution of the United States. Gary and I are #DONEwithDOMA and we are fighting for equality.

****

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Dan Ross is the husband of Navy Lieutenant Gary Ross. The two were married at the stroke of midnight on September 20, 2011, the day of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal. They are plaintiffs in OutServe-SLDN’s federal court challenge to the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), McLaughlin v. Panetta. They live in San Diego, CA.

By David Small

Charlie, Karen & Casey Elena

Charlie Morgan’s voice has been muted by cancer. It has spread and is putting pressure on her vocal cords. But while she speaks with a soft whisper now, her voice has never been louder. Her fight to ensure her small and loving family is taken care of in the event the cancer overcomes her life is being heard loudly. From the local papers in New Hampshire to the halls of Congress, Charlie and Karen Morgan are the national faces of resistance to the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

EARLY YEARS

Charlie, now a chief warrant officer in the New Hampshire National Guard, met her wife to-be, Karen, in 1997 while working for the local newspaper in Lexington, Ky. They were introduced through a mutual friend on casual terms. Their first date was to a Lilith Fair concert—a fitting beginning to their 15-year relationship where their family enjoys activities based on musical events, especially at wineries.

As soon as Vermont made civil unions available in 2000, the two tied the knot there. “We thought civil unions were equal to marriage until last year,” relayed Karen, who spoke for both her and Charlie through the interview, given Charlie’s difficulty speaking. The two officially wed only recently in a small ceremony among family and friends in New Hampshire on the same day their civil union was dissolved. They wanted no gap in time for their relationship. “It was very important to us emotionally.”

The two changed their name to Morgan during their original commitment. They had talked about hyphenating their name, but decided a new name was symbolic of starting a new life together. They chose Morgan because of its water element symbolism and the water’s references to strength and commitment. In the dawn of their biggest fight later in life, they have found that water has provided them solace and comfort.

Charlie is the first woman Karen had ever been with and she came out to her family after the two made a commitment to each other. “At that point, I realized I’d tell the people important in my life. I was going to be who I am, and I’m very happy with who I am,” said Karen.

Charlie, on the other hand, came out much earlier in life. She had been on active duty as a motor pool clerk and returned from her post in Germany to Fort Hood, Texas in 1984, at only 19 years old. Before signing in, she visited her mother and brought a friend with her. She wanted to talk to her mom about her friend, but her mom replied before Charlie could say anything, “If you’re going to tell me you’re gay, then I already know that.” Charlie was speechless and maintains a good relationship with her family today.

The two met while Charlie was a civilian, having separated from the Army in 1992, but she hadn’t been a civilian for long. “I remember when we met, she still did things like she was in the military, folding her clothes and organizing her drawers,” said Karen.

MAKING OF A FAMILY

During the winter, the two live in a quaint, ranch-style home overlooking the sea coast in Rye, N.H., just outside of Portsmouth. From their kitchen table, they enjoy the calming view of the sea. On warmer nights, the two enjoy a glass of wine on their deck where they listen to the bell buoys ring in the ocean. In the summer, when their daughter Casey Elena, 5, is out of school, they stay with Karen’s elderly parents in the lakes region, making their winter rental near the beach affordable. Water is indeed an important element in their family.

It was Casey Elena, though, that brought the family north from Kentucky, where the three had built a home. There, Charlie had been a business teacher in a rural community, and Karen worked in equine management and at the newspaper. Before Casey Elena was born, the two had been foster parents.

“Being foster parents was something we felt strongly we needed to do to give back to the community,” they said. “We knew we wanted to be parents and it absolutely changed our lives in a positive way.”

But working didn’t suit the parental lifestyle Karen had fallen into, so she became a full-time mom, while Charlie became the family’s full-time breadwinner. Charlie re-entered the Army as a National Guard soldier in 2004, while still teaching high school business.

“I love my family. I love Charlie. And I love my country,” said Karen. “I’m so proud of Charlie’s service.”

Wanting to move to a place where they could find more acceptance of their family and be closer to grandparents and cousins, they headed to New Hampshire. Casey Elena attends a small Montessori school with a diverse curriculum, and they now live in a more supportive community.

“She has the best possible place to grow up,” the couple said. “As a family, we love to do outdoorsy things like hiking, biking and going to the beach. Our daughter loves to bowl, and within a few years, she is going to be better than either of us. We do things that draw us together as a family.”

Karen takes Casey Elana to the beach almost every day, while Charlie’s unit has accommodated her health issues by allowing her to telecommute from home. There, she is able to manage the state Guard’s education services. On days she isn’t up to it, she curls up on the couch under a blanket that Casey Elena brings her “mama” and watches the sea from their large picture window as Casey Elena frolics in the sand. Charlie is mama while Karen is mommy.

“She’s a really creative child,” they said. “She’s very into painting, drawing and projects. She also does gymnastics, dance, and she loved her preschool soccer camp last summer. We want her to grow up honest and proud. After ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ (DADT), we could teach her those lessons.”

A TRIP TO REMEMBER

The family also loves to travel when they can, learning about new people and cultures. In fulfilling something on the family’s bucket list, OutServe raised money for them to go to Hawaii over Valentine’s Day 2012, as they didn’t have the financial resources for such a trip. People donated airline miles, paid for their hotels, gave them tickets for activities, and lent them a Jeep.

“This is the way the military takes care of its own,” they said. “OutServe took care of us the way the rest of the military does for others. We want to say thank you to everybody, especially Jeffry Priela-Tam, one of the OutServe Hawaii chapter leaders, and Sue Fulton, who facilitated so much of the trip. It was life-changing and created a whole new book of family memories for us.”

LIVING UNDER DADT

To the casual observer, there is nothing different about their family than any other. But they have had their trials and tribulations, especially living under DADT.

“Before DADT, we really had two separate lives,” they said. “We had our personal life with our family, and Charlie had her military life. We didn’t let the two mingle.”

It was an isolating time for Karen because she didn’t have the ability to freely converse about her experiences as a military wife to other military spouses. This emotion really came to a head when Charlie was given less than 24-hours notice to deploy for three weeks to the gulf coast in response to Hurricane Katrina. There, she supported a unit that hauled food and water to people in need. Charlie, the ever-organized professional, quickly made her business class lesson plans available to a substitute in a scramble.

But from Karen’s perspective, it was scary. “What if something happens while she’s away? Will they know to contact me? The answer was no,” she said.

Hurricane Katrina happened only a year after the couple deliberated what it meant for Charlie to re-enter service after a 12-year break. At the time, the couple was living openly.

“We were true to ourselves. Everybody in our life knew about our relationship and our family,” they said. “What that meant, essentially, was that for the first time, we couldn’t be a part of each other’s life.”

The two endured another deployment as Charlie left for a year in September, 2010. She had just been given a clean bill of health from her first bout of cancer and the brigade needed an equal opportunity officer in Kuwait. It was an interesting deployment as she got an inside view of the demise of DADT, given her official duties.

With eight months’ notice, the two also had more in place for this deployment, especially communication. At Casey Elena’s stage of development, it was important for the couple to ensure the bond remained strong between momma and daughter. At the same time, communication for Karen and Charlie was difficult because they were on constant guard, even afraid to sign cards “with love.”

To other couples facing deployment, the two advise, “Plan your communications as much as you can in advance and make that commitment to each other. It’s really important to take that time. You’re living two different lives, apart. As a married couple, our priority was the few minutes we had to talk.”

They also said it is important for each person in the relationship to have a source of support. For Charlie, it was her first-line supervisor and her roommate, 1LT Jenifer Donovan. Lieutenant Donovan’s experience as a conservative person against same-sex marriage changed upon meeting Charlie. Her story is told in a sidebar to this article.

For Karen, she applauds the end of DADT as spouses at home will be able to access family readiness groups as a source of support in the future.

Charlie redeployed during DADT’s 60-day certification period in August 2011. The family celebrated in Boston like it was New Years’ Eve. The eve of the Repeal, Charlie was approached by OutServe to be on MSNBC, where she came out nationally on Sept 20, 2011.

“I felt really proud to do that,” said Charlie. “It was the first time I could, in a professional capacity, say that I was a lesbian in the military and that I loved my family and my country.”

The two kept Casey Elena home from school that day, as it was a family celebration. “She understands in some capacity that it was a very special day,” they said.

STRENGTHENING MARRIAGE

The couple’s first experience as LGBT advocates occurred when Charlie requested an exception to policy to allow Karen to attend the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program from New Hampshire’s Adjutant General, Air Force Maj Gen William N. Reddel. The Yellow Ribbon Program exists for all services’ guardsmen and reservists who return home to civilian life after deployment and must reintegrate into their former lives. Whereas active duty soldiers have such resources on their bases and from their units, citizen soldiers often spread with the four winds upon returning and don’t have easy access to such programs and resources.

General Reddel, acting on inaccurate information from his lawyers, returned a letter to the Morgans denying the exception to policy and barring Karen from attending the program, citing DOMA.

“It was heartbreaking,” they said. “The purpose of Yellow Ribbon is to support families. We wanted to go as a married couple and attend a specific session called ‘Strengthening Marriage.’”

Note that this denial occurred after DADT repeal certification but before Sept. 20’s repeal. New Hampshire Sen. Jean Shaheen got wind of the situation and intervened on the couple’s behalf, allowing Karen to attend.

“I was so nervous about going after the hoopla,” said Karen. “It became a big deal. I wondered if it would be hostile or friendly. But the brigade commander and deputy adjutant general welcomed us and were very supportive and cordial. On the way out, the general told us, ‘Please don’t stop here. Continue to fight what you’re fighting for.’”

Ironically, the contractor hired to teach the Strengthening Marriage session was a lesbian, using her own experiences with her partner as examples during the class.

Returning from the desert, it was nice for Charlie to return to her seaside home. “It’s uplifting and spiritual to live near the ocean,” they said.

CANCER STRIKES AGAIN

But after her return, Charlie’s cancer came back. She has a reoccurrence of stage IV breast cancer, which has spread to her lymph nodes. It is metastatic. It is incurable. Today, the last session of chemotherapy is working its way out of her body and she is feeling a little better. But doctors say this last treatment wasn’t effective. By the time of this publication, the couple will have travelled to Boston for a second opinion, but Charlie has already decided she doesn’t want to go through chemo again.

“It completely takes you down. It’s exhausting. I don’t feel like myself,” she said. “I’m willing to listen to what they have to say. And we’ve talked about our needs, physically and spiritually.”

A typical appointment now is an all-day affair. By the time they get home, they are whipped, but their family, community, Unitarian Universalist church, and Casey Elena’s school have rallied in support. Together, they provide logistical help like preparing meals and watching their daughter. Charlie’s unit and her family readiness group have also helped.

“People have reached out with those really practical needs, but also on an emotional level,” they said. “The commitment we’ve made to each other is really strong and that carries us through.”

ADVOCATES FOR CHANGE

But despite the love, strength and support that exists for the Morgans, their biggest worry is that they could lose Charlie without resolution to the question of future support for her family, which Charlie has clearly earned through her service to the country.

Despite being legally married (and being the epitome of a loving, stable family in every way), Karen, who is a full-time, stay-at-home mom today, will not have the luxury of health insurance, Veterans Administration benefits, access to base, or social security that a straight couple in their situation would have if Charlie dies. Next year, Karen plans to begin teaching special education, having earned another degree to become the new breadwinner for the family.

Together, these benefits, known as “survivor benefits,” are the same things Charlie’s mother used to sustain her family when growing up after losing Charlie’s military father. Survivor benefits are a monthly allotment meant to help care for family in cases where a military spouse passes away during service or in retirement.

These benefits do not exist for gay and lesbian military families because DOMA prevents the Department of Defense from officially recognizing such relationships, effectively creating a two-tier system of benefits that divides gay and straight families.

Charlie took her story to Congress to advocate repeal of DOMA. When she met with her district’s congressman, Rep. Frank Guinta (R-NH), he wasn’t aware that gay couples were denied federal benefits. He had thought that because his state recognized same-sex marriage, military and federal employee spouses were entitled to the same benefits to which a straight couple in New Hampshire had access. But that’s not the case, and Charlie relayed to him her frustration with DOMA.

She then took her message directly to Speaker of the House John Boehner.

“I would like the Speaker to know, as a member of the Active Guard, that I laid my life on the line for my country,” said Charlie. “Now I need my country to protect and take care of my family. My wife and daughter face an uncertain future, unable to receive the same family support and services as our counterparts who render the same service, take the same risks, and make the same sacrifices. Time is of the essence.”

After a public status-check to Speaker Boehner’s office by the Huffington Post regarding Charlie’s request for an audience with him, she was able to personally deliver her message to his chief policy advisor, but not directly to the Speaker himself. The meeting went well, and she left behind a pamphlet for the Speaker with photos and information about her and her family.

Charlie’s former business students, with whom she left a positive, lasting impression, joined in the Morgans’ advocacy efforts, writing to Speaker Boehner’s office.

LAWSUIT

Because of Charlie’s cancer, the Morgans are one of the better-known co-plaintiffs among eight other couples in McLaughlin v. Panetta, a lawsuit filed on behalf of gay troops and veterans by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, pending before the District Court of Massachusetts.

Despite the Obama Administration’s refusal to defend DOMA in court, Republican leaders have spent more than $750,000 defending the law, and the Congressional Budget Office estimates that figure to soar to $1.5 million by the end of 2012.

Despite the ongoing litigation, their lawyers have advised that there are things the military can do to ease the burden, but they couldn’t comment further, given the ongoing legal proceedings.

Before entering this fight so publicly, the Morgans discussed it. “This was a family endeavor, and we support each other in it,” they said. “It needs to be done. It is an important issue in our life, but it reaches so far beyond our lives. There are other families out there who can’t speak openly because of where they live, their rank or other factors. We can speak, so we should.”

Time really is of the essence for the couple, given Charlie’s declining condition.

“We are optimistic that we’ll have a positive outcome, but the truth is we don’t know for sure,” they said. “We want to stay optimistic, enjoy life, and not take any moment for granted.”

To help pass the time, Karen and Charlie have worked on a memoir of their life and experiences, titled, “Personal Courage,” for which they are currently seeking a publishing agent.

For more on Charlie Morgan’s story, including photos, letters from friends, and a moving story about her trip to Hawaii, view the May/June issue of OutServe Magazine here.

Reserve recruiters dream of people like Morgan Wade walking into their office. She had a sterling service record, was on the fast track to chief petty officer, and qualified in a field where the demand for skilled individuals is high. Top it off with a clear background check and a clean bill of health, and it should be easy, right?

The problem: Morgan Wade is female now, but that is not what was on her original birth certificate. It wasn’t what was in her records when she joined the Navy. Even before she joined the Navy, though, Morgan was already dealing with gender dysphoria. She treated it as something chronic but manageable.

“The first time I figured out I had body image issues was actually before I joined the Navy, though at that point I didn’t know what it was or meant,” she said. “I just tried to ignore it. At that moment in my life, I didn’t know what I could do other than just try to deal with it the way I always had.”

Joining the Navy

Morgan’s father, Mark, saw someone looking for a calling and not just a job. “Diving is Morgan’s passion,” he said. “She was not happy at Chico College and spent her summer vacation on our sofa just watching TV. When we told her to go out and get a job, she went to military recruiters and decided on the Navy… Morgan found the dive program and pushed for that.”

Morgan saw a great opportunity: “I wanted money for school and needed some time to figure out what I wanted to do with my life.”

When it came to her dysphoria, she counted on her newfound endurance. There were hard times early in her Navy career, but those hardships also reinforced her confidence in her own abilities. “At my first command, I was treated so badly, and hazing was such a regular thing that I sort of figured that if I could survive that, I could deal with my own personal issues.”

Despite the hardships, she loved her job. “When I was diving, nothing else in the world mattered. It didn’t matter how bad things were topside. As long as I got to be in the water it was a good day.”

She was stationed on the USS Safeguard, a salvage ship based in Sasebo, Japan. “Being that it was a small ship, and the cruise was an independent steamer, I got to go to a lot of small ports that the rest of the Navy doesn’t normally go. I loved the travel on that ship.”

Unfortunately, during the time on board the USS Safeguard, Morgan’s dysphoria began to catch up with her. “I came to the conclusion that I wasn’t going to be able to deal with my gender issues indefinitely. I did, however, make the decision to make it to the end of my contract.”

Falling in Love

After returning from Japan, Morgan met her future spouse. Katie described meeting Morgan: “We met online on a singles/friends website. We seemed to have a lot of common interests, but I think above all we were both thirsty for friendship on a deep level, and Morgan seemed lonely.”

The online, friends-first nature of the relationship led Morgan to believe they were unlikely to meet. With no expectation of romance, she opened up about her dysphoria. “I told her online, so she knew that much about me from the very start. I didn’t really know her at the time, there wasn’t the same sense of risk that I got with coming out to friends and family.”

This marked the first time Morgan had come out to anyone. She was rewarded with Katie’s unconditional support. “It was more or less a non-issue to her.”

Morgan moved to Washington, a few hours from Katie. “We had talked online for a little while, and Morgan said she was bored one weekend,” Katie said. “I invited her out to hang with me and my friends at a nightclub. Morgan hopped a ferry and came right over, and within five minutes of us being in each other’s presence, we felt very comfortable, as if we had known each other our entire lives. Morgan ended up staying for the entire weekend, and we ended up falling in love.”

Dysphoria Takes Hold

Katie could see how the dysphoria affected Morgan. “She tried very hard to be optimistic, but she was incredibly lonely. Ultimately, the Morgan I met was sort of locked in place by her choice of desperately trying not to reveal her true self at work or to those around her.”

They married in February, 2007. Katie went in knowing Morgan would finish out her time in the service, then transition. “It was a fun time, as we were in our honeymoon phase.” Still, Morgan sometimes talked of trying to tough it out to retirement, Katie said. “She kept fighting with herself saying that if she just stuck it out, she could retire. But I could see how damaging it was for her to have to be a man every day… She had come to terms with the idea that she could finally be herself at some point.”

Increasingly, Morgan struggled at work. “Toward the end of her ten-year career, she started to feel overwhelmed,” Katie said. “She had to put up with misogynistic jokes in the dive locker and jokes about her ‘putting on weight’ when she was on estrogen. Morgan hated the male part of herself and hated changing in front of other people. She had to face that daily as a diver.”

Still, it wasn’t always bad, and the solace that diving offered was what tempted Morgan to stick it out to retirement. “Some of her best days were when she got to dive and see neat things along with doing her job. She feels most at peace underwater, so at least the Navy offered that,” Katie said.

Morgan’s burden also weighed heavily on Katie as time went by. “I was the first person she openly told in person that she was trans. I was the person she spent almost every day with up until her Gender Reassignment Surgery (GRS), and I can say that it is a very heavy weight to carry. Where trust goes, there follows a huge amount of responsibility.”

Taking the Leap

Katie was convinced Morgan could not continue with the Navy or to even live as a male. “She had to pursue herself in a much more dedicated, in-depth way than she was able to do in the Navy.”

Morgan finally began getting help and taking positive steps towards dealing with her dysphoria. She sought psychological and medical services outside the Navy medical system, and in the process risked the consequences of violating UCMJ Article 92 and an administrative discharge.

Morgan also took the step of getting a prescription for Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT). It was easier than might be expected. “I got a recommendation from my therapist for a doctor out in town, and he prescribed them for me. I actually brought him my military medical records. He even charged me less because I made his job so much easier.”

She began HRT six months before she left the Navy, and the positive effects were noticeable. The changes helped her feel at peace, happier, and easier to communicate with. The depression lifted.

“I understood completely and put everything I had worked for over the last two years on hold to cope with transition,” said Katie, who paused her efforts in nursing school to support her family. “I was prepared to be the bread winner. We were scared of how hard it would hit us financially. She was so sad to not get to dive almost every day. I’m very disappointed she never got to make chief, because she was a shoo-in.”

Despite the necessity of leaving the Navy, it was still hard for both of them. Katie described it as a grieving process. “The Navy gave her a sense of pride, accomplishment and identity. Being a Navy diver was a very large part of who she is. Diving is something that gave her the confidence that only a job you’ve done for 10 years at the top of the pack can do. Leaving the Navy was almost like mourning the loss of a friend.”

Morgan left the Navy in 2010. She gave up a $45,000 selective reenlistment bonus, a promotion to chief petty officer, and the diving she loved.

Transition

About three months before leaving the Navy, Morgan came out to the rest of her family. Her brother just thought she was gay. “My mom sat me down with the psychiatric Diagnostic and Statistical Manual and tried to convince me I was just depressed,” she said. “Now, I think she’s accepted that I’ve done the right thing, even if she doesn’t really understand it.”

The news surprised her father. “Sara and I were shocked when Morgan told us. I wondered what I had or hadn’t done during Mo’s upbringing to cause it. We are still having problems with pronouns.” Both of her parents tried to dissuade her from leaving the Navy. “We were not happy with her decision. She had ten years invested in a career field that she loved. She was so good at what she did.”

Yet, over time, Mark made a discovery about his newfound daughter. “I have realized, no matter what the outer wrapper is, Morgan is still Morgan after transition.”

When the opportunity to live as a woman finally came, she did not waste any time. “I went full time while I was on terminal leave. That was less than a month after my last day at work. I figured I was already going through so much change, what’s a little more?”

She used her educational benefits to go to culinary school. “Morgan has always been a creative, mad scientist in the kitchen,” said Katie.

At the same time, Morgan went to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs (VA) for access to psychological services and continued access to HRT. The VA benefits were a blessing, given the financial difficulties they were having. “We went from making very good money to us being afraid every day that some service was going to be disconnected since we couldn’t pay the bill,” Katie said.

The process of transitioning wasn’t easy on Katie either. “It has been an emotional roller coaster. I was so glad she was finally finding herself, and I think that is what the transition is all about. It has been a humbling journey, but it almost broke us right before her GRS. I felt like I had a big responsibility, and I tried my best not to let her down.”

After a clean bill of health from the VA, Morgan and Katie scraped up enough money to pay for GRS. By December 2011, her transition was complete. In every legal sense of the word, Morgan was female, and her body and soul were finally aligned.

The effects were profound. “She has grown into a woman with so much strength and courage, who is more outgoing, who is more self-possessed and feels more at peace with herself than I have ever seen her,” wrote Katie. The therapists with the VA agreed. They concluded she no longer had any reason to see them since her dysphoria was gone, she wasn’t depressed, and she was well adapted to her new life.

Trying to Re-enlist

With her life back together, Morgan wanted to try to re-enlist in the Navy. “I decided to try to get back in once DADT [Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] was repealed. I knew I would have to get a waiver, but figured I could prove that I was more fit to serve now than I was when I got out.”

That recruiter she found was Petty Officer 2nd Class Kevin Campbell of Navy Recruiting Station Everett, Washington. Where others saw a hopeless cause, he saw an opportunity for continued service. “It is my job to help transition prior-service personnel into the Navy Reserve. Ms. Wade was no exception. I will do my best and continue to help every veteran re-affiliate that I can,” Petty Officer Campbell said. It didn’t hurt that Morgan was up front with the situation from the beginning. “Ms. Wade was very honest, sincere, and overall a pleasant person to speak with.”

Morgan went through exam after exam to prove she was mentally and physically fit to serve. “It seemed like every time I gave them one piece of paper, they would ask for two more. Eventually, they accepted the doctors at the VA examining me and clearing me.” In the end, all of the doctors, psychologists, surgeons, psychiatrists and therapists declared her fit to serve. The package she submitted was almost 150 pages long and documented her exemplary prior service and current fitness.

When her application was denied without explanation in August of this year, Morgan wanted to know why, so she asked for help from her congressman, Rep. Jim McDermott. His office pressed the Navy for answers and received one several weeks later:

“Standards preclude from acceptance those individuals with contagious or infectious disease who would be likely to endanger the health of other personnel; those who are likely to require repeated admissions to sick list, prolonged hospitalization, or invalidating from service; or those who present any condition that would be likely to form a basis of a claim for physical retirement benefits. The standards, therefore, are intended to define a degree of physical fitness in applicants that best meets the Navy’s needs and yet incur an acceptable minimum risk of liability in regard to health hazards, repeated or prolonged medical care or hospitalization, assignment problems, and eventual pension or retirement benefits … To authorize Ms. Wade’s enlistment in the Navy would expose her to increased risk or injury.”

None of the reasons given by the Navy made any sense to Morgan or her family. Gender dysphoria isn’t a communicable disease, she doesn’t need more medical care than any other woman, and the law specifically prohibits treatment of dysphoria as the basis for retirement benefits. The diving community is open to both men and women, so there was no reason to believe that her gender would lead to unacceptable risk of injury.

“The rejection notice was ridiculous,” said Katie. “I actually ended up laughing for a good five minutes at it.”

Her father was similarly unimpressed with the Navy’s explanation. “We heard her congressman sent a letter explaining the reason she wasn’t allowed back was because she was no longer capable of performing the duties of the job. I have no idea where that came from, and I am angry with whomever was involved with that decision.”

When Morgan heard the waiver was denied, she simply felt sad. After receiving the explanation, her frustration simmered over. “Now I’m more frustrated and mad. Every doctor that has seen me says there is no physical reason why I shouldn’t be able to serve. Every therapist and psychiatrist that has seen me says that I am healthy and well adjusted.” For Morgan, it begged the question of why she needed doctors and psychiatrists to examine her examinations if the Navy wouldn’t follow their recommendations anyway?

Life Goes On

Yet, life goes on for Morgan and Katie. Budgets are still tight; they still have to finish getting Katie through school. Morgan’s family is still adapting to her transition. Still, they can’t help feel that Morgan and the Navy would both be better off together.

“They spent a lot of money to train her, and she proved herself amazingly and boundlessly worthy of that investment. She gave 150 percent of herself to her job,” Katie said. “It seemed like a no-brainer that she would be an even better diver now that she has nothing to hide.”

Despite rejection, Morgan remains optimistic that someday she will be able to reenlist. “I’m hoping that the new [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association] and the changes regarding gender dysphoria will make it easier to argue that I am healthy and able to serve. I want to finish my career. I loved the job, serving my country and the community. It hurts to be denied that opportunity.”

There are days that will stand out in your memory as being a moment when history turns around an event or series of events. Last Thursday was that kind of day.

My family and I traveled from our home in New Durham, NH to Concord to attend the inauguration of Governor Maggie Hassan, who made history this fall by being elected to the governor’s office at the same time that New Hampshire elected an all-female congressional delegation. In addition, Governor Hassan was sworn in by New Hampshire’s female Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Linda Dalianis. We were honored to be present to meet Governor Hassan and congratulate her with our family. It was important to us to bring our daughter so that she might see strong, compassionate women working to make a difference in the world.

The Morgan family in front of the New Hampshire State House.

The Governor had asked Charlie to lead the Pledge of Allegiance at the opening of the ceremony, and I was filled with pride to watch her speak.  Just a few short weeks ago, I would have wondered if it would be possible at all because Charlie’s battle with cancer required every bit of energy that she could muster.  Last week, she was able to speak with a strong voice and a strong spirit and represent our family, the New Hampshire National Guard and our state in a historic moment.

Back in October 2011, Charlie and I decided, as a family, that we would do what we could to fight for marriage equality.  When Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was repealed last year we were finally allowed to be recognized as a couple by Charlie’s employer, the New Hampshire National Guard.  We converted our civil union to marriage, and I was finally allowed to be officially recognized as a mother to the beautiful little girl I had been caring for since infancy.  Our fight was made more urgent because Charlie was diagnosed with a recurrence of the breast cancer she had beaten just a few years earlier.  Marriage equality is a social and financial issue that affects same sex couples around the country, and we vowed to fight not just for our family but for others who lived in places or under circumstances that prevent them from speaking out for themselves. 

Last week, Governor Hassan spoke about the importance of being inclusive.  She spoke about bringing people in from the margins of society and of how these actions can make our state and our nation stronger.  As I listened, I reflected on how the military became a stronger institution when it began to allow gay people to serve openly.  I also reflected on how New Hampshire refused to repeal same-sex marriage earlier this year and the relief that I felt when that happened.  Businesses that welcome lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees and provide benefits to their families have stronger and more diverse workforces.  I recalled how proud I felt ten years ago when I worked for a Knight Ridder newspaper that extended benefits to Charlie as my spouse.  It allowed me to provide health insurance for her while she went back to school.
 
Although our federal government prevents me from obtaining benefits as a military spouse today, I listened to Governor Hassan, and I knew that there are good people out there supporting us in the fight for marriage equality.  It gave me hope and renewed inspiration to keep up our efforts even when times are tough for our family.

Although much work remains to be done, today was a very good day and I know we will get there.  I anticipate that eventually there will come a day when young people of my daughter’s generation will read about our fight for marriage equality and equal rights and wonder why it was ever an issue at all.  That’s my goal and the best way I can think of to give back to a world that’s given me so much.

About the author: Karen Morgan is the wife of CW2 Charlie Morgan, and the two are plaintiffs in OutServe-SLDN’s federal lawsuit challenging the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). For more information on the Morgan family and their fight for equality, click here.

Left: Ashley Broadway. Right: her wife, Lt.Col Heather Mack, and their son Carson

By David Small

After posting a response to an on-base club’s refusal to grant her membership, Ashley Broadway, wife of Army Lt. Col. Heather Mack, has been in the news, and now the Department of Defense General Counsel staffers are reviewing the situation.

While the Association of Bragg Officers’ Spouses at Fort Bragg, N.C., is a non-federal entity, they must adhere to certain DoD instructions if they want access to base facilities, according to Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, spokesman for the DoD General Counsel’s office. “This is the sole legal framework around which the Department and its agencies exercise control over non-federal entities,” he said.

The specific instruction in question, though, has some interpretation problems. While it includes a non-discrimination clause, it does not reference sexual orientation, despite other federal family readiness programs inclusiveness.

Department of Defense Instruction 1000.15 states, “No person because of race, color, creed, sex, age, disability or national origin shall be unlawfully denied membership, unlawfully excluded from participation or otherwise subjected to unlawful discrimination by any non-federal entity or private organization covered by this instruction.”

The Fort Bragg club’s bylaws do adhere to the DoD instruction, however according to BuzzFeed, after the controversy, the group added the requirement to have a dependent military ID card to be granted membership.

The Defense of Marriage Act does not prohibit issuing a military ID card to legally married, same-sex spouses, according to a formal request by OutServe-SLDN to Leon Panetta, the Secretary of Defense, however the department has yet to respond.

According to the letter, “a military ID is required for on-base activities, and there is no statute preventing issuance of IDs to same-sex spouses. An ID would also allow the same-sex spouse to bring dependent children on base without being accompanied by the service member. The ability to bring a child to on-base services such as health care facilities is essential. Currently, DODI 1000.13 governs eligibility for ID cards, and should be updated to extend IDs to same-sex spouses.”

Other areas OutServe-SLDN have asked DoD to extend benefits to same-sex spouses include morale, welfare and recreation facilities, military family housing, commissary and exchange access, family programs, legal services, hospital visitation rights, joint duty assignments for dual-career military couples, exemptions from hostile-fire areas, command-sponsored dependent status and space-available travel, and spousal privilege in courts martial. 

“The Department is conducting a deliberative and comprehensive review of the possibility of extending eligibility for benefits, when legally permitted, to same-sex domestic partners,” spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen wrote in an email. “The benefits are being examined from a policy, fiscal, legal and feasibility perspective.”

That review has been ongoing since August 2011 when SLDN wrote Panetta. To date, DoD has refused to move on these suggestions and was unable to say where they were in the process of their review, or why it was taking more than a year.

“The Pentagon has dragged its feet on this issue for far too long, and it’s time for the Secretary to act. Situations like the one at Fort Bragg could be avoided if commanders were given the guidance they need to address these issues with consistency and equity. All it takes is the stroke of a pen,” said Army Veteran and OutServe-SLDN Executive Director Allyson Robinson.

“The facts here are simple: there is no legal need or justification for any spouse to be excluded from a group like this, which exists to provide support to the spouses and families of our military men and women and the communities they serve,” she said.

Though the organization operates on Fort Bragg with permission from the commanding general, the group is not formally affiliated with the military and is not required to bar membership to Broadway under DOMA. As a private, non-profit organization not governed by laws that apply to the federal government, OutServe-SLDN has established that there is no legal basis that would require same-sex military spouses to be excluded from the Association of Bragg Officers’ Spouses.

 “With programs such as these, which are not bound by a federal definition of marriage, commanders at all levels should use their influence to ensure all service members’ families are treated equally,” said Robinson.

Broadway’s open letter to the president of the Association of Bragg Officers’ Spouses was posted Dec. 10 to the American Military Partner Association’s website. Broadway has been with Mack for 15 years and married Nov. 10.

Her letter also references a similar incident at Little Rock Air Force Base where Tanisha Ward, wife of deployed Airman 1st Class Hensley, was denied access to the Little Rock Air Force Base Spouse’s Club.

Robinson said there are many such organizations on bases across the U.S. and around the world where same-sex families have been included and welcomed since the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in September 2011.

“Our Commander-in-Chief supports us; I was the first same-sex military spouse invited by the First Lady to attend her Mother’s Day Tea,” Broadway wrote. “We are a part of the face of this country’s future, and the White House, Pentagon, and many other posts are leaning forward to embrace this progression.”

While such clubs maintain their own charters, official family support programs, governed by Department of Defense instruction 1342.22, can support same-sex spouses and other unofficially sanctioned dependent family members.

This instruction states the family readiness system will “address the varied composition, cultural diversity, and demographics of service members and their families.”

“The Department knows that family support is critical to mission readiness and we value the service and sacrifices of each and every family member,” said Breasseale. “Unlike non-federal entities such as the various Officers’ Spouse Groups, the [Family Readiness System] is an officially sanctioned, service-governed entity that is inclusive of all family members identified by each individual service member, regardless of sexual orientation or marital status.”

According to a statement on the Fort Bragg club’s webpage, due to “recent interest in the membership requirements of our organization,” the club plans to discuss the issue at their next board meeting. “As an all-volunteer board during this busy holiday season, we request your patience in allowing us to properly address and review this membership issue while fulfilling our obligations to our current membership as well as to our families.” 

“‘Equality can wait’ has never been the answer, but that’s the message the club sent with this tepid and dismissive statement today,” Robinson said in a release today. “It’s certainly not the answer for Ashley Broadway or the families of gay and lesbian service members at Fort Bragg and on military installations across the country, who like all our men and women in uniform, need support during the holiday season perhaps more than any other time of the year. The group doesn’t need a meeting; Ashley clearly qualifies under its existing, approved bylaws. It simply needs to accept Ashley into its membership, and it should do so immediately.”

For those not familiar with the procedural machinations of the Supreme Court, today the Court ordered writs of certiorari, aka approval for judicial review, to hear two landmark cases concerning same-sex marriage in America.  In order for the Court to take a case, only four Justices need to approve a case (of course five votes are ultimately needed to decide it).  With that being said, what really matters when the Court decides to hear a case is what “questions presented” the Justices ask the parties in a case to argue to them, and that is why today was so important.  More on this in just a moment.

For court watchers, today was so suspenseful because the Court had ten different cases concerning same-sex marriage to choose from when they met in conference.  Would they take the case out of Massachusetts, Gill v. Office of Personnel Management (profiled in this magazine in our May/June 2011 issue), thus denying a full review by the Supreme Court since Justice Elena Kagan would likely have recused herself due to prior work on the case?  Or would the court take the famous “Prop 8” case out of California, where the blockbuster lawyers David Boies and Ted Olsen (famous for being on opposite sides of the Bush v. Gore case that decided the 2000 election) who are arguing the pro-gay marriage side?

At 3:13 eastern time today, the Court put all that speculation to rest.  It would take not one, but two same-sex marriage cases.  The first, Hollingsworth v. Perry (the Prop 8 case) has the court considering perhaps the most monumental judicial question of our lifetimes: does the constitution allow for states to ban marriage between same-sex couples?  The Justices could have gone small, asking the parties to answer only case-specific questions, for example, only reviewing whether the act of taking away a right to marry was constitutional, a decision whose implications would have only affected the citizens in California.  If you remember, gay marriage was legal for a short time in California until voters in 2008 took that right away.  But the Court did not take up that narrower question.

The second case the Supreme Court granted review on, United States v. Windsor, concerns Edie Windsor and her now deceased spouse Thea Spyer.  The two had lived together as registered domestic partners since 1993.  When Windsor’s wife died in 2009, Windsor was forced to pay $363,053 in estate taxes that she would not have had to pay if the federal government recognized their marriage.  The case directly challenges section three of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as between a man and a woman for the purposes of over 1,000 federal benefits.  More broadly, this case concerns issues of federalism, specifically what power states have to enforce certain rights and how the federal government can influence states to do its bidding.

Of the two cases at issue here, the Windsor case looks particularly appealing for a win, as its ruling could potentially not be as sweeping in scope.  If the court were to rule in favor of Windsor, for example, it would not necessarily mean that DOMA would be completely overturned; in fact, the Court could rule that only section three is unconstitutional and still allow the states to individually enforce the other sections of DOMA as they saw fit.  Crucially, the powerful emotional story of Edie and Thea could possibly sway enough Justices with more conservative notions of what it means to be married into a pro same-sex marriage position.

Finally, the Court in its order today also allowed for another possible outcome: none at all.  In a rare move, the Court issued questions it wanted answered to parties on both sides of both cases (usually the questions are presented to the Justices and they pick which ones they want to consider).   The court asked if both parties had standing to even challenge the case, in other words, could these petitioners even challenge the law.  Theoretically, the Justices could rule that neither party has standing and dismiss both cases from the Court until the issue resurfaces with parties that do indeed have standing.  This is unlikely, but still well within the realm of possibility.

The only sure thing we know from today is that at some point around March, the Supreme Court for the very first time will consider issues of same-sex rights as it relates to marriage.  A momentous, albeit terrifying moment for many gay and lesbian Americans to be sure.  At a time where public opinion is rapidly shifting to a more inclusive definition of marriage, the Supreme Court has firmly inserted itself into this historic debate.  Will the Court aim for a Brown v. Board of Education type of outcome?  Only time will tell of course, but this writer (not so) secretly thinks yes.

Next up: oral arguments!

–

This article is the sole opinion of OutServe Magazine contributors and does not reflect the position or official endorsement of OutServe-SLDN organization.

West Point (Nov. 24, 2012) Army 1st Lt. Ellen Schick married Shannon Simpson in an intimate ceremony here at the Old Cadet Chapel in the first LGBT wedding at West Point since the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

WEST POINT, N.Y. (Dec. 1, 2012) —While the rest of the country awaits a decision by the Supreme Court on which Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case it will hear, West Point was atwitter with love today, having hosted its second lesbian couple to legally marry on the hallowed military grounds within a week—the first same-sex weddings at the U.S. Military Academy since New York legalized same-sex marriage last year.

Brenda S. “Sue” Fulton wed her partner of 17 years, Penelope Dara Gnesin, in the Academy’s cathedral-like Cadet Chapel during a traditional ceremony Dec. 1.

Nov. 24, after three years together, Army 1st Lt Ellen Schick, who works at Keller Army Community Hospital at West Point, married Shannon Simpson in an intimate ceremony with a handful of close friends and relatives at West Point’s older, original cadet chapel, built in 1836. The two Pennsylvania natives were unaware of their status as the first gay couple to marry at West Point until they connected with Sue.

“Ellen is very proud to serve her country and wanted a Military wedding,” Shannon told OutServe Magazine. “We felt that we should be allowed the same opportunity to marry on a military post as any heterosexual military couple.”

For the Fulton-Gneslin wedding, the significance of the location dates back further.

“West Point holds special significance to both me and Penny,” said Sue, a 1980 graduate and presidential appointee to its Board of Visitors. “From the time I was a cadet, what West Point stands for – integrity, leadership, selfless service – have been my touchstones. When Penny and I worked on ending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ we kept coming back to the core value of integrity, and that’s what made a difference. To be able to legalize our union here, especially at the Cadet Chapel, is really important to us.”

West Point (Dec. 1, 2012) Sue Fulton and Penny Gneslin, the first LGBT couple to marry in the U.S. Military Academy Cadet Chapel go through the saber arch provided by members of OutServe, Knights Out, USMA’s Spectrum, and one straight ally. Four Army lieutenants and four West Point Cadets formed the arch. Photos by Jeff Sheng

The two pioneers in LGBT military rights had planned to marry in their home state of New Jersey when their state assembly passed a marriage equality bill, however, Gov. Chris Christie vetoed the measure, forcing the couple to rethink plans.

“I just didn’t want to wait any longer,” said Sue, who proposed over the summer. The couple had held a commitment ceremony in 1999, though it held no legal significance. “I still hope that our home state will recognize marriage equality, but Penny—as strong as she is—is a breast cancer survivor, and has been dealing with Multiple Sclerosis for more than ten years. We cannot wait for a governor who thinks everyone should get to vote on whether, after 17 years together, we are really married.”

Despite Penny’s health challenges, Sue says it doesn’t affect their relationship.

“Many people see Penny and focus on her disability, but I don’t see it anymore,” said Sue. “Instead, I just delight in the cockeyed way she sees life. What’s important to us is laughter. I am a very mercurial person; Penny’s spirituality and unique view of the world always bring me back to center.”

Their service was mostly traditional, though Penny’s Jewish heritage was reflected by sounding the Shofar, a symbolic call to gather people for a momentous occasion.

Walking down the aisle together, following their two attendants, they had two friends help Penny from her trusty scooter onto the raised nave and into a chair for the balance of the service.

Tears were seen on many cheeks as each answered the question, “Will you have this woman to be your spouse…” Each vowed to one another, “No matter what may come, I pledge to stand by you. I promise to respect your unique talents and abilities, and your journey. I promise to be true to you, and to my own path. Now we stand together; may it always be so.”

Heard often at weddings, and cited here was the Book of Ruth, “Wherever you go I will go, and wherever you stay I will stay…” Overlooked by many, however, is the fact this phrase was said by Ruth as she clung tightly to another woman, Naomi—making the phrase all the more special for a marriage between two women.

Music being a focal point in their lives, Sue and Penny entertained onlookers by joining the chorus, Giving Voice, during their ceremony. Sue took the solo, and Penny, who directs two women’s choruses, directed the song “Welcome Table.” Hijacking the chorus, not unsurprising for the mischievous pair, was a nod to how they met in 1995 during a community sing. Seventeen years ago, Penny, director of a local community chorus, attended a local event with singer-songwriter Carolyn McDade. While most of the participants sang melody, Sue’s contralto harmony caught Penny’s ear and ultimately brought the two to meet. Penny was in charge of selecting all organ music for the wedding, filling the church from one of the largest pipe organs in the world.

While their God-daughter served as the ring bearer, Unitarian Universalist Minister Vanessa Southern, their home church’s pastor, co-officiated with Episcopalian Chaplain (Col.) J. Wesley Smith, the senior Army chaplain at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware. Smith oversees the dignified return of Soldiers killed in action to the military mortuary there.

The wedding ceremony included the customary military tribute of an arch of sabers through which the couple passed, smiles on their faces. The image of walking out of her wedding through arched swords at the Cadet Chapel was something Cadet Fulton had dreamed of 35 years previous. Four Army lieutenants and four West Point cadets made up the arch, straight and LGBT members of Spectrum, Knights Out, and OutServe-SLDN. The Schick-Simpson wedding also included the traditional saber arch.

At the reception, held at the historic Thayer Hotel, Sue jokingly thanked Penny “for giving (her) one more chance… to be the center of attention,” and directed the focus briefly on the LGBT movement’s marriage equality agenda.

“Everyone here, directly or indirectly, has been part of this movement, to acknowledge the full humanity of gay, lesbian, bi, trans, and queer people. I’m honored, because you know that the movement is about this. It’s about love. It was always about love.”

Despite now being legally wed, the two face difficulties that their straight, married counterparts do not have to endure.

“We’re selling a house right now, which will have tax implications to us even though we both own it—we are not viewed as married in the eyes of the law,” said Sue. Although she is fortunate to work for a pharmaceutical company which offers benefits for same-sex partners, those benefits are taxable while the same benefits for married couples are not.

“We’re always conscious that if the worst happens, we aren’t married in the eyes of the government. We have taken the extra measures necessary to protect ourselves legally,” said Sue. “But even then there will be an extra tax liability. We’re lucky compared to the Soldiers we serve, because we’ve had time and the means to protect ourselves. People like [Army Warrant Officer] Charlie Morgan are relying on the military to protect their families when they die, and that protection isn’t there.”

Morgan, a member of the New Hampshire National Guard, is dealing with end-stage cancer. She and her wife are plaintiffs in a lawsuit against DOMA.

Sue, 53, works at a pharmaceutical company in New Jersey, and is a presidentially-appointed member of the Board of Visitors of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. She serves as Board member of OutServe-SLDN, an organization supporting lesbian, gay, transgender, and bisexual military service members and veterans. She graduated from West Point in the first class to include women, and was honorably discharged from the Army at the rank of captain.

She is the daughter of Benjamin D. and Clara Bevis Fulton of Lakeland, FL. Her father, a Navy veteran, was a teacher at Martin County High School. Her mother, who is also retired, was the first female principal at Martin County High School.

Penny, 52, is a holistic healer and director of the women’s choir, Giving Voice. She graduated from Rutgers University and is medically retired from AT&T.

She is a daughter of Oscar and Sylvia Katz Gnesin of Long Branch, N.J., both deceased. Her mother was a history teacher and an attorney for the local teachers’ union. Her father worked as an electrical engineer for the U.S. government.

Giving Voice, a women’s a cappella chorus, was founded by Penny 18 months ago, and is based at the Universal Unitarian Congregation of Monmouth County, Lincroft, N.J.  Giving Voice was joined by three members of Olympia’s Daughters, founded and directed by Penny from 1989 to 2009.

The couple is postponing their honeymoon until next year.

This is the first presidential election debate cycle in 20 years to omit any question of whether gays, lesbians and bisexuals should be able to serve openly in the military.  With President Obama signing DADT repeal into law, and it taking effect more than a year ago with no discernible impact on military effectiveness, there’s only the slimmest of chances it will be re-instituted under a GOP White House.

What’s missing however, is something that SHOULD have been discussed – the future of the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as Gov. Romney’s pledge to push for a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. In recent comments, Gov. Romney’s campaign has said he believes hospital visitation rights for same-gender couples are an issue that should be put before voters at the state level.

The issue has been suppressed as the conversation has been redirected toward the issue of the economy.

For members of the military who identify as LGBT, the issues of DOMA and marriage equality ARE economic issues.

The President is in a very different place on these issues than this opponent.  He has stopped defending challenges to DOMA in the federal courts.  He has become the first sitting President in our nation’s history to publicly support marriage equality for LGBT couples.  He has issued an executive directive to incentive equal visitation rights at hospitals receiving federal money. He signed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill into law.  He has invited LGBT military families to White House events, and made it clear that all Americans deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.

Most of us who are connected with the LGBT community are very aware of where the President stands.  We may be equally aware of where Gov. Romney stands.

Unfortunately, the debates didn’t draw this line between the two men for the general public.  The extreme ends of the civil rights spectrum they represent is significant.  One man would support a repeal of DOMA, the other would push to make it ironclad by supporting efforts to write discrimination into our nation’s Constitution.

It is up to those affected to reach out and share this important distinction with friends and family, as soon as possible.

Without DOMA’s demise, military same-gender families will continue to bear an extra financial burden and have to jump through hoops to be a part of the larger military family.  They will pay out of pocket for moving their family during a PCS. They will continue to be denied access to military healthcare, base facilities, and certain support services available only to military spouses.

This is an economic issue, just as much as it is an issue of dignity, respect, and integrity.  Don’t let your friends choose their candidate until they have the entire story.  Your rights depend on informed voters doing the right thing.