Posted on Nov 18, 2014
New ALARACT 250/2014 outlines absences for same-sex Soldiers; What are your thoughts on this?
8.55K
17
14
1
1
0
Just released!
ALARACT 250/2014 outlines the criteria in order to award non-chargeable absences for same-sex Soldiers wishing to get married.
Included in the policy:
. Soldier must be assigned OCONUS, or at least 100 miles from the nearest State or U.S. jurisdiction that allows same-sex marriage.
. Soldier is authorized "Up To" 7 days if CONUS, or 10 days if OCONUS.
. Soldier must provide his/her Command with a copy of the marriage certificate upon return. Failure to do so will result in the entire absence being charged as leave.
Do these conditions make the issue of "non-chargeable marriage leave", less controversial?
ALARACT 250/2014 outlines the criteria in order to award non-chargeable absences for same-sex Soldiers wishing to get married.
Included in the policy:
. Soldier must be assigned OCONUS, or at least 100 miles from the nearest State or U.S. jurisdiction that allows same-sex marriage.
. Soldier is authorized "Up To" 7 days if CONUS, or 10 days if OCONUS.
. Soldier must provide his/her Command with a copy of the marriage certificate upon return. Failure to do so will result in the entire absence being charged as leave.
Do these conditions make the issue of "non-chargeable marriage leave", less controversial?
Soldiers
Marriage
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 7
4
4
0
Leads me to wonder if they will, in the future, need to grant the same for divorce since you can not be divorced in a state that does not recognize the marriage to begin with. Just a thought.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
While I understand the limitations on which states currently legally perform same-sex marriages and the hindrance travel to one of those states puts on same-sex couples wishing to be married; "free" leave is not the answer. When my husband and I were first engaged and discussing where the wedding would be held (and needing a marriage license) we decided on my home town for the legal portion and after we saved some money, a big wedding with reception in his home town. Guess what...we both took leave for both occasions. We submitted our requests and hoped the were approved and not subsequently cancelled. If "free" leave is going to be offered to one group, it should be offered for all. That's what "they" want after all, right, equality?
(3)
(0)
SGT(P) Patrice Martinez-Simpson
The difference lies in the part of the message that is often missed by others. As I am currently on leave for this very reason and I have soldiers that will be affected by this I made sure to know what was available. People appear to focus only on the SM ability to be granted either 7 or 10 "free" leave days. The "Up To" is rarely noticed. It is up to the command to some extent how many of the available days will be granted. For instance, SM stationed in TX wants to get married in NY for whatever reason. Same-sex marriage is currently legal in OK, NM, CO, and KS. Command has the ability to approve the days it would take to have the marriage performed in one of the closer options. If all available days for farther location as stated in leave packet are approved and SM comes back with a marriage certificate from the closer location command also has the option of charging some of the days granted.
(0)
(0)
SSG Lisa Rendina
I can see and understand your point. However, a Commander does not have to grant anyone leave at any specific time. Both myself and my husband took leave in order to get married. We took 2 weeks in order to fly back to the US from overseas. Our leave could have been denied, cancelled, early re-called, etc... That is the risk with any leave requested. So, would it be unfair to deny the time to any Soldier wishing to be married, of course. However, it could happen to any couple. Imagine a male/female couple wishing to be married. They put in a request for leave to travel from North Carolina to Vermont because all of their family is in Vermont. The Commander says I can't grant you the leave because you are mission-essential, but I will give you a 3-day pass to go downtown to the courthouse so that you can be married, maybe your parents could fly in. I just don't agree that the issue is with same-sex marriages...the issue is granting one group "free" leave but not the other.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
The Command could say the same to same-sex couples in your scenario, SSG Lisa Rendina, as they too could be mission essential.
The difference is all about where you are stationed. If you're already stationed in a State (or within 100 miles of a State) that allows gay marriage, then no free leave.
This isn't a blanket allowance, it's an area-specific entitlement.
The difference is all about where you are stationed. If you're already stationed in a State (or within 100 miles of a State) that allows gay marriage, then no free leave.
This isn't a blanket allowance, it's an area-specific entitlement.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
ALACRACT 250/2014 Absences for Same Sex Soldiers.
- Standards should apply to all Soldiers regardless of sex, religion, sexual orientation, or other non relevent categorizations. Goes to standards and discipline.
- Carve outs of special rules for special classes for whatever reason only works to divide rather than to unite and standardize. Creates different standards which goes against what Army should be about.
-Even same sex advocates generally argue that they do not want special treatment, only equal treatment. Interesting that the Army is trying to provide something that advocates are arguing against.
- Interesting the the Army seems to be changing or bending its rules in certain circumstances for a nebulous short term gain but that will lead to long term problems. I am referring to the prohibition of uniformed service members participating in political activities. A few examples from this past year of participating in uniform in gay parades and political events that are obviously political speech for which Army leadership seemed to either look the other way or condone this activity which for other issues or events are obviously prohibited.
- Standards should apply to all Soldiers regardless of sex, religion, sexual orientation, or other non relevent categorizations. Goes to standards and discipline.
- Carve outs of special rules for special classes for whatever reason only works to divide rather than to unite and standardize. Creates different standards which goes against what Army should be about.
-Even same sex advocates generally argue that they do not want special treatment, only equal treatment. Interesting that the Army is trying to provide something that advocates are arguing against.
- Interesting the the Army seems to be changing or bending its rules in certain circumstances for a nebulous short term gain but that will lead to long term problems. I am referring to the prohibition of uniformed service members participating in political activities. A few examples from this past year of participating in uniform in gay parades and political events that are obviously political speech for which Army leadership seemed to either look the other way or condone this activity which for other issues or events are obviously prohibited.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google