Hegseth orders Navy ship USNS "Harvey Milk" to be stripped of its name

Somewhat of an incomplete narrative you have posted here. Milk did not receive an Other Than Honorable Discharge (OTH) for “being gay.” He received it (in lieu of court-martial) for behaviors that violated the rules and norms of military service. Among these, he admitted to sexual relations with enlisted men as an officer (fraternization, still a UCMJ offense today), sexual relations with married men (adultery, still a UCMJ offense today), and the offense which ultimately got him caught: having sex in a public park (at the very least lewd and lascivious conduct as well as conduct unbecoming an officer). Take “gay” off the table, and they wouldn’t have given a heterosexual officer the option of a face-saving discharge in lieu of court-martial in 1955 for the exact same list of charges. You’d go down hard and publicly for those things today. We certainly wouldn’t be naming a ship after your dumb ass. Renaming this ship after someone who served honorably is absolutely the right thing to do. There are plenty of gay servicemen and women who served honorably and within the rules.

 

And after all you said about that man... that same man got a Navy ship named after him? Unfreaking believable. I'm with Hegseth on this one.

 

Virtue signaling gone awry. Seems to be a theme when politics becomes sport.

 

Milk a big fan of Jim Jones …

The Cult City Triumphant - LewRockwell

 

One would think that a Secretary of Defense would have something better to do with his time than renaming Navel vessels or military bases for that matter but then let's not forget that the reason Trump selected Hegseth in the first place was based on his profile as a Fox News infotainment star.

 

Given that they are also considering renaming ships named after Harriet Tubman, Cesar Chavez and others we can safely guess this has nothing to do with their decision.

 

The ship wasn't named for him solely because of his naval service, it was named because "the ship was part of the John Lewis class of oilers, a class named after leaders who fought for civil and human rights. Milk's legacy as a trailblazer for LGBTQ+ rights" was the prime reason.

That it happened during Gay Pride month isn't a coincidence and as others have stated, other ships having nothing to do with homosexuality are also under review - it has to do with politics and political leaders who are hypocrites - look no further than Trump's really close relationship with Roy Cohn or all of the Lindsey Grahams, Josh Hawleys and Trey Gowdys for the right.

The closeted homosexuals that the right elects to represent them by attacking those are who refuse to stay in the closet.

Or as a reader for the NYT appropriately noted:

"Tom Debley
Walnut Creek, CA June 3

The proposal to strip Navy ships of names honoring Harvey Milk, Cesar Chavez, Medgar Evers, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Thurgood Marshall, Harriet Tubman, and other iconic figures is deeply troubling. To be blunt, it is un-American. These names are not political statements. They are tributes to individuals who expanded the boundaries of freedom and justice in the United States — values at the very heart of our Constitution and national identity. E pluribus unum — out of many, one — has long been our national motto. It is not a slogan of uniformity, but of unity through our diversity. It reflects the very essence of who we are: a country made stronger by the courage, struggles, and contributions of people from all walks of life. To erase names is to erase American history. It sends a chilling message that heroism must conform to the prejudices of those in power rather than rise from moral conviction. We should be proud that our Navy — an institution rooted in tradition — has found room to honor those who broke barriers and expanded liberty for all Americans. To reverse that not only is wrongheaded, but it is also the antithesis of what we stand for as a nation. In America, true patriotism lies not in exclusion, but in the courageous embrace of our shared humanity. We are, under the Trump administration, tragically on one of the cruelest paths we have ever trod as a nation."

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/03/us/politics/navy-ships-harvey-milk-renamed.html#commentsContainer

 

If they do, I recommend starting new threads to that effect. Cesar Chavez had honorable if unremarkable service in the Navy but went on to a noteworthy career after, so there’s precedent for naming a ship and no reason to rename it. Harriet Tubman is a little stranger, having never served in the Navy or been, like, a major advocate for the Navy, President, etc. But no reason to rename it either. If people want to get stupid about why this ship is being renamed, then let’s get stupid. Break out the old investigation and go through it line by line in Congress and decide if his discharge (the nature of which the media was able to hide for decades) was unfairly awarded “because he was gay” or if we would do the exact same thing to a white heterosexual male officer for the same offenses today.

 

They've named plenty of ships after people who weren't in the Navy or military at all. Its not inconceivable they name a carrier after Trump at some point lol. I think you are sophisticated enough to understand that the review of the names of these ships has nothing to do with the facts of Milk's service. I can certainly concede that naming the ship after Milk didnt have anything to do with his unremarkable stint in the Navy. But there are plenty of other ships in the Navy that are named for similar reasons, just as we had military bases named after unremarkable and inept Confederate generals.

 

For the moment, I’m only challenging the media narrative that Milk receive an OTH discharge “because he was gay” and not the myriad of offenses he had committed. And I don’t think we should name a ship after someone who justly received an OTH. I make no bones about Cesar Chavez et al.

 

Please read my post more closely. I specifically referenced Presidents and those who had been major advocates for the Navy, such as Carl Vinson. I didn’t say it was offensive to name a ship after Harriet Tubman. I just said it was more strange than Chavez. Tubman’s place in history is well secure, and I think we can agree that it was associated with the land (though not literally underground) and not the sea.

 

I don't think it would be going out on a limb to suggest that in those times they might have enforced/policed those rules differently against a guy screwing guys than a sailor who was banging female prostitutes when he could. Probably less opportunities for coed fraternization with the makeup of the Navy then too.

 

I'm simply suggesting like Tubman the ship was named for his status as a civil rights figure, not because of his Navy service, though I think that adds another dimension. And that is the reason they reviewed this and other names. Look its totally fair to say people named these ships to reflect their values, and its totally fair for me to say the people taking the names off are reflecting their values, namely, bigotry and contempt for the people that see these people as good Americans.

 

Here’s what I recommend then: win back the White House. And when you do, instead of hiding, mischaracterizing, minimizing, or cloaking Milk’s willful misconduct under “because he was gay,” just openly pardon him for it. Then have the VA readdress the characterization of his service to Honorable and name the next Aircraft Carrier after him. Done and done.

 

Clearly you dont have to do that all, you can just name the ship, like they already did

 

But naming a ship after this clown...that somehow wasn't virtue signaling???

 

LMAO! POTUS Barry had enough time on his hands to make re-namimg bases and such, a big deal...

But the SOD, why surely HE must be far busier than the POTUS ever was...

Y'all are funny as hell, when Y'all get a taste of your own meds...

 

Interesting way to characterize a civil rights figure who was murdered by a right-wing lunatic who got off with saying he ate too much sugar that day

 

And undid … just as easily.