Deaf man wants to be commissioned
The Professor of Military Science of the ROTC detatchment at California State University, Northridge stepped on his dick and allowed deaf man, Keith Nolan, audit Military Science courses. Now Nolan thinks that academic experience should qualify him to be a lieutenant in the Army according to Fox News;
Nolan became a top performer in the ROTC program’s Bravo Company at California State University at Northridge, and his instructors were so impressed they let him wear a uniform. He was distraught when he turned it back in and said goodbye to the other cadets in May. He could advance no further under the military’s current policy that requires cadets pass a hearing test to be commissioned by the Army.
It was a stinging moment that burned in the soul of the bespectacled 29-year-old teacher, who is determined to break that barrier and achieve his lifetime dream of working in military intelligence.
“All I really want to do is join the Army,” said Nolan, a confident, clean-cut man with a boyish face who signed to an interpreter in an interview at the university’s ROTC office. He was flanked by posters with inspirational messages urging people to join. “I want to do my duty, serve my country and experience that camaraderie, and I can’t, owed to the fact that I’m deaf.”
Of course, it’s not hard for him to find a Democrat to help him – Henry “Nostrilitis” Waxman has told the young man that he wants to help him circumvent Army medical standards so he can join the Army.
Nolan needed someone to sign the drill and ceremony commands so he could function in the formations. I guess no one is willing to point out to him that the Army would have to pay two people for the work one fully functioning person could do so they can provide reasonable accommodations in order for Nolan to serve.
I guess this is somewhat related to TSO’s post the other day related to the midget who couldn’t reach the coffee machine at Starbucks. the Army takes people into the service who they think will be an asset to the mission, not someone they have to make special accommodations for and ends up costing them more money than one person is worth. I understand Nolan’s desire to become a soldier, but who is next? A blind man?
Nolan says that the military makes accommodations for people who’ve been wounded and severely injured, but he’s overlooking the fact that the military has already trained them as whole people and has invested some money in them before they were injured. They have experience, Nolan doesn’t. He just has the desire – the Army can find a million people like that who would cost them a whole lot less to train. Nolan has proven himself in the classroom, but we all know that ROTC and commissioning is a whole heluva lot more than classroom work.
And it doesn’t surprise me in the least that Nostrilitis wants to help Nolan join the military. Waxman has no idea what it takes to be a military officer, so why would he care?
Category: Military issues
At the very least, it would be interesting to see him call cadence during a run.
Not going to happen. If he is a smart man and at all familiar with the missions of the military, he should understand that there’s really no place for someone who cannot hear the commands of his leadership.
Really? The whole “deaf” thing didn’t seem like a issue? How’s this dude gonna hear the incoming sirens or even reall the faint whistle that mortars/RPGs make? How’s it going to look when this guy doesn’t dive for cover and everyone else does? Sorry I can deal with diminished hearing but none? For safety reasons alone he CAN’T be a soldier
Why am I having visions of the movie “Major Payne”?
Waxman is one ugly dude. Not just on the outside. In a ny case I’m saddened to see this. I don’t fault the rotc instructor though. It was a kindness that got taken advantage of.
Even they let him run some office somewhere, that’s still taking a shore billet away from others who can and do deploy.
I guess they could assign him to a blind forward observer. Give them a driver with no arms, and a mute radioman.
Put the whole team under the command of a Wiccan transvestite and you’d give the Diversity Zampolits wet dreams.
Make a great motivational poster too. :0
Somebody needs to talk to him about the military options available to him outside the military.
I got turned down due to eyesight. Ended up becoming a DOD contractor. You don’t get the uniform, or the respect, or a flag over your box if worse comes to worse but the pay’s better and I can quit anytime I want.
After I got out, I went to Cal State Northridge (called CSUN) for a second degree. CSUN has the largest program for deaf students outside of Gallaudet University (where all the students are deaf). Very quickly the appearance of sign language interpreters in classes is routine.
My experience was that some of the deaf students had little to do with the hearing world (communicated only with other deaf students and interpreters, made little or no effort to interact with classmates, etc.) while others, like Mr. Nolan apparently, wanted to engage the wider world.
I believe that it is settled law that the military can set physical standards for entry; height/weight, chronic conditions, etc., as well as requirements for specific jobs. I commend Mr. Nolan on his apparent patriotism and hopefully there is a civilian billet in the DOD or intel community that he is capable of filling.
By the way, Waxman is a major ass.
I believe it was also settled law the the government had a legitimate interest in excluding people with homosexual tendencies, but that didn’t stop judge after judge from ruling otherwise and trying by judicial fiat to repeal DADT.
Except settled law in that case was based on subjective morality……homosexuality isn’t a physical impediment to performing the mission of our Armed Forces.
“Except settled law in that case was based on subjective morality….” Really? I do not recall subjective morality ever being part of the rationale of DADT. That argument belonged only to its opponents. And please do not refer me to any politician’s statements on the matter. Just provide the case cite in which that rationale was argued by the gov’t and I will look it up myself. Thanks.
Now think about this. Why should we always send our strong and healthy men/ women off to war to become injured or killed? think of the saving by using the disabled!!!
A deaf soldier would require no hearing protection on the weapons…and EID would not harm his hearing…
Use the blind as “night fighters”. They would save money on NVGs and could easly sneak up on the badguys.
Use those in wheelchairs with mounted crew served weapons…to and those with walkers etc to clear mind fields…
Why blow the leg off a healthy soldier? Use the disabled.
Turn loose those who are autistic and tell them to use their quiet voice on missions…then yell and scream to draw fire.
I know…I’m going to hell.
He wants to serve his country, working in intelligence, let’s see, there is the CIA, or the NSA and several other agencies…except for working intelligence, he is perfect for the White House, which currently doesn’t listen.
You know that Waxman never gets invited to Hollywood cocaine parties. Could you imagine how much that dude could snort in one go?
“I do not recall subjective morality ever being part of the rationale of DADT.”
It wasn’t. I was referring to TopGoz’s statement: “excluding people with homosexual tendencies.” The ban on homosexuality was based on societal mores of the time. The ban and DADT are two different beasts.
He should be commissioned, right now, as a General Officer. He’s already got the #1 requirement met: he doesn’t listen to anyone.
Military intelligence has GS Civilians in it – so “dream” handled. And, it pays better, lets him stay until dementia sets in, or beyond collecting Social Security, and with cubicles, there’s no need to hear.
Otherwise, put him in the Field Artillery.
To a liberal, there is no rational reason to treat one person differently from another. It’s all irrational prejudice. And it hurts people’s feelings, dashes their dreams, etc.
HE JUST WANTS TO SERVE HIS COUNTRY!!!
So what if he’s deaf? We’ve got women who can’t carry their rucks in the military, so why not have a guy who can’t hear when the enemy is coming up behind him?
It would really contribute to the diversity of the force. And diversity is a such a self-evident good that it should be celebrated for its own sake.
Serving in the military is a right. I know this because the homosexuals told me so.
Nothing can stop an American patriot from serving his country. And while serving, he doesn’t have to obey the rules of the force he voluntarily joined. Because rules discriminate against those who break them.
so DADT has been repealed, screwing up retired pay is on the table and now a deaf guy wants to serve. Why does it always seem to be democrat administration who fuck over the military? Why not go ahead and lower the mental requirements so that morons, window lickers, inbreeders, democrats and other feeble minded individuals could enlist? Don’t know if I’m going to last for 30…
“homosexuality isn’t a physical impediment to performing the mission of our Armed Forces.”
Neither is pedophilia. Ready to sign them up?
OldCavLt:
That too would fall under the category of “subjective morality”, as CI put it. And because “subjective morality” is no longer be considered for military fitness, CI would have to answer yes to that question.
Or be a total hypocrite.
But one thing to consider between the two is that children are minors and cannot give legal consent. That is not the case for two legal adults and what they do in the bedroom.
The hearing is a big deal because you kinda need that. To say otherwise is a joke. The military should not have to take him because he does not meet the requirements of service. It the reason that there are physicals in MEBs and to become Airborne, Flight School, Ranger, SF and so forth. Not everyone will meet the requirements for service for good reason.
Maybe I ought to sue the US Navy for discrimination. They refused to accept me for flight training, even though I passed all their damned tests. Their reason? I didn’t have 20/20 vision. I needed to wear glasses, even though it was only a slight vision problem. I had all the other qualifications but had to settle for an enlisted aircrew spot instead of a commissioned flying job. Those discriminating bastards! they owe me!….. /sarc
Seriously, I hated that I couldn’t be a pilot, but I took the next best job and I have no regrets. The military set down the physical requirements and in one area, I was found wanting.
This kid has a great heart, but he needs to ranger the fuck up and accept that what he wants isn’t going to happen. There are many things he can do, but serving in the military isn’t going to be one of them.
[…] Deaf and Blind […]
>But one thing to consider between the two is that children are minors and cannot give legal consent. That is not the case for two legal adults and what they do in the bedroom
Consent laws can be changed… If you don’t think they are pushing this in the psyche world and the legal world read some briefs and some psyche papers.
I think the point was that DADT opponents had more than just morality concerns i.e., billeting, fraternization in line units and the chaplain corp. All of which has been swept under the rug by the military. Heck, we lose more in three year based on the “weight” policies than we lost in 17 due to DADT. Should we start allowing the overweight. There are a lot and I mean a lot of military servicemember (especially older) who can’t make weight, but have served in war just fine. It’s the issue of when you start changing standards. This deaf guys is probably going to say.. Why can’t they find a place for me..? I can serve my country. There is somewhere in the military that I can serve. It is the attitude that the military must accomodate the individual instead of the individual conforming to the military.
But you it has not changed in the eyes of the law. It is kind redundant to make a point on something that has not happened yet.
>But you it has not changed in the eyes of the law. It is kind redundant to make a point on something that has not happened yet.
I only bring it up, because the law(with judicial activism etc) today is “static” as morality is…/sarc
But again that is assuming a extreme will happen on a what if is walking right into a logical fallacy.
>But again that is assuming a extreme will happen on a what if is walking right into a logical fallacy.
You do realize that this is a position that people were taking to gay marriage 15 years ago right?
But what about before women, African Americans and people over 21 could vote? Or the laws that prevented the consumption of booze? Are those extremes too?
But, but, but…
I wanna be a ROCK star!! So. Does it really matter that I can’t sing, have stage fright and the vision of me in tight pants leaves something to be desired? NO – y’all can just pretend it away, maybe run a track of someone who CAN sing, put me on a stage where lots of people pay big bucks to NOT be there, and have a poster of some super looking chick on the stage instead of me?? Who cares if there are empty seats, someone else does the actual singing and the idea of making money by not doing something is patently absurd? It’s the way we do things these days.
Where’s my check for wanting to be a ROCK STAR? (I’ll be in the basement in my cammo tin foil hat…)
Hey, I’ve got another idea. We can let colorblind people do EOD too…okay, just gotta cut the green wire…
I currently go to CSUN and can tell you that the person heading the ROTC program is a complete douche nozzel. I can see why this guy wasn’t discouraged even though he is deaf, at CSUN everyone is special! Hell, how fucked up of a program do you have to be to realize that your program’s website is down? http://csunrotc.org/
maybe there’s an opening in the Army band?
>But what about before women, African Americans and people over 21 could vote?
Not behaviors– sexuality a behavior…see the difference..pedophilia, heterosexuality, homosexuality.. When you start protecting behaviors that are largely SUBJECTIVE and rely on the person to TELL you whether they are one or the other you are in Constitutional and legal gray area, especially when someone can suddenly change their sexuality (see Ann Heche etc.)
Or the laws that prevented the consumption of booze? Are those extremes too?
Can booze be consumed on duty… or is that discrimatory?
BTW, Just to show that I am not a conspiratorial nut… Via the Daily Caller this week(Its called the B4U-ACT):
“If a small group of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals have their way at a conference this week, pedophiles themselves could play a role in removing pedophilia from the American Psychiatric Association’s bible of mental illnesses — the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), set to undergo a significant revision by 2013. Critics warn that their success could lead to the decriminalization of pedophilia.
The August 17 Baltimore conference is sponsored by B4U-ACT, a group of pro-pedophile mental health professionals and sympathetic activists. According to the conference brochure, the event will examine “ways in which minor-attracted persons [pedophiles] can be involved in the DSM 5 revision process” and how the popular perceptions of pedophiles can be reframed to encourage tolerance.
Researchers from Harvard University, the Johns Hopkins University, the University of Louisville, and the University of Illinois will be among the panelists at the conference.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/15/conference-aims-to-normalize-pedophilia/#ixzz1VzXEsc7O