What's So Wrong With Don't Ask, Don't Tell?
Posted by Jake G. on 06.21.2009
And why does Obama have to fix it today? Can't it wait a bit?
Over the past few months but especially the past few weeks one item we keep hearing from bloggers on the right is that Obama hasn't lived up to his end of what I'd like to call, "The Big Gay Deal". What is the Big Gay Deal? Apparently it was a secret agreement that our new President made with homosexuals in order to get elected. This deal was kept in the closet and no one knows about it, except bloggers on the right. Basically Obama agreed to grant all sorts of freedoms to the gay and lesbian community even if he never once said it and often said things to the contrary.
However the one public portion of the gay deal is to get rid of the "Don't ask, Don't Tell Policy"... Of all the portions of the Big Gay Deal, this one was actually pretty public as Barack did say that his plan was to get rid of it. Point for the right?
Of course I personally don't recall when exactly Obama said he would end this on his first year in office. He's got a four year term at the very minimum, so maybe he's waiting for the opportune moment? Maybe he's busy with oh, I dunno, everything else? In fact they said as much earlier this year, "there are many challenges facing our nation now and the president-elect is focused first and foremost on jump-starting this economy... so not everything will get done in the beginning, but he's committed to following through."
But it brings me to an overall larger point... What's so bad about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? For years I've heard people knock this policy but I've yet to hear a better solution to the problem. Make no mistake, I personally feel that gays should be able to openly serve in the military. Let them wear rainbow uniforms for all I care. The problem is that the US Military and a large portion of the American populous don't agree.
When Bill Clinton came up with the policy, gays were very much still in the closet. They didn't have a channel on TV, hell they didn't even have 15 TV shows like they do today. There were a handful of famous gay people, but none of them were allowed to get married. It was very much a different time. Clinton came up with a compromise that I personally think is probably one of the greatest pieces of policy written in the last 50 years and it can be summed up in one simple phrase: Don't ask, don't tell.
I believe John McCain said it best when he offered up that, "right now the military is functioning extremely well in very difficult conditions so we should leave well enough alone." It makes a good point. Perhaps Obama is waiting for the Iraq conflict to draw a little closer to an end before enacting a new policy overturning the Clinton ideology. It makes sense to me, as in the midst of this battle the last thing our troops need is a whole bunch of controversy at home on whether they can serve or not.
If you are gay and want to serve in the Military, don't tell anyone you're gay. If you're a member of the Armed Services you are not allowed to ask another member his or her sexual orientation. What's so bad about that? Prior to this piece of policy the Army was slowly working to witchhunt homosexuals out of the service. Once "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" came around that was stopped. In fact almost all of the gays who have been dishonorably discharged from the Military since then have been so because THEY choose to reveal they were gay.
Contrary to all the angry bloggers on the right who have suddenly found the need to champion gay rights, and as a sidebar we all know the current push from the right to have Obama overturn "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is just a ploy to help get public opinion against Obama. I'd bet dollars to donuts that 95% of the right wing bloggers who currently harp on this issue would suddenly find a major fault with super liberal Obama gaying up our Military. I can almost hear Rush Limbaugh running a campaign about it now.
So what am I getting at? In the overall scheme of things "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" isn't such a bad policy. It protects gays by obscuring them. It's certainly not fair. It's homophobic. But you can be gay and be in the Military, you just can't let anyone know it. Eventually I'm sure President Obama will work towards making gays openly serving in the military more acceptable, but at the current state of things the status quo isn't so bad and when the time is right, we're bound to see a better solution come along.
Gays, be happy you have "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and wait it out a bit. Good things come to those who wait. Civil Rights don't come overnight. Right wing bloggers who are so obsessed with gay rights, quiet down. We know none of you really want gays in the Military. You're the same ones who wanted a damned amendment to the constitution banning gay marriage. You're the ones who objected so strongly to gays in the Army during the Clinton administration. Besides, right now our troops need to finish up the conflict in the Middle East. When that's settled we can all come home and have the big gay national equivalent of "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?".
The problem is that over 11000 people have been kicked out of the military for being gay over don't ask don't tell. For legislation that's supposed to make it easier for homosexuals to serve in the military, that's an awful lot of people being kicked out.
Posted By: Ray Church (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 07:44 PM
The problem is that "Don't ask don't tell" implies that there's something inherently wrong with being gay. There isn't. It shouldn't be an issue one way or the other.
Posted By: Dave (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 08:01 PM
There are 435 Congressmen and 100 senators. Within the last 20 years there have been so many unrelated "urgent" measures crammed into bills that there was an attempt to give the President the line item veto. Even when the urgent bailout bill had to be passed this instant with no scrutiny, there was time to cram it full of pork. But when it comes to DADT, all of a sudden those who said they would end it are much too busy.
Just wait until the economy is fixed, all wars are ended, and there's universal health care, and just maybe after that there will be time for civil rights. It's the dumbest excuse for inaction I have ever heard. Washington Democrats have shown for years they are spineless cowards. They don't dare look like they approve of something many find "icky" or sinful. They are the final proof that no matter who we elect, they will never do a damn thing unless there is a heavy price for inaction.
This is how Republicans will eventually gain power back. Dems standing around, keeping their fingerprints off everything so they can cry "It's all Bush's fault!" for what they seem to think will be forever. Rachel Maddow isn't a right wing blogger. Neither are gays, or many straight Democrats. If they think the GOP is fractured right now, just keep doing nothing for a while longer. You won't be able to tell the parties apart. Worthless sacks.
Posted By: Shockmaster (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 08:20 PM
It was integration in the arms forces that went a long way towards allowing the at least reasonably harmonious racial climate we now inhabit (I know, I know, it could be better) to blossom. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the kind of families which raise their kids on traditions of military service--and there's nothing wrong with that--happen to also vote consistently against gay rights. Maybe if some soldiers knew some gay guy had saved their lives in combat, they'd think twice about the ol' homophobia.
Posted By: Andytobo (Registered) on June 21, 2009 at 08:25 PM
The problem is that Don't Ask, Don't Tell treats gay and bisexual patriot soldiers differently than heterosexual soldiers simply becaus of the gender they love or marry. That is the very definition of invidious, heinous bigotry. The other problem is that the US is the only Western nation in the world with a primitive, ignorant policy that treats gay soldier differently than heterosexual soldiers. Since recent polls show that 70% of Americans support gays serving openly, now is time to extinguish this ignorant policy.
Posted By: Javier (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 09:11 PM
Watch the first season of West Wing. They have the black Joint Chief go into the room where they are discussing gay rights. His speech should be sent out to every introduction video when you join the military. We need more people in the military and if they want to serve God bless them.
Gays also need to realize that Obama has been here for less then six months. If they think he is going to waive a wand and make everything magically happen, wake-up. He has more then three half hours or more considering how badly the GOP is polling to help with gay rights. He has other problems like the economy, North Korea shooting missiles at us, the GOP being the party of "no". and a middle east in utter chaos, have a cosmo and relax.
Posted By: AFan (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 09:15 PM
whats wrong with gays in the army? if they want to inlist, go to iraq, and get thier heads blown off, who are we to stop them?
Posted By: guest 50 (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 09:37 PM
The problem with DADT is the military can ask a member their sexual preference and if they do not answer then the military can start separation proceedings. And times were very different when this policy was put in place as the AIDS epidemic had happened not too long ago and there was still a lot of fear in regards to homosexuals, but now most people do not have as strong of feelings towards homosexuals, and it can be argued that the Supreme court has said homosexuality is a fundamental right.
As for your argument that homosexuals should wait like civil rights did and women did for there equal rights is idiotic. When you see injustice and bigotry occuring you should not have to wait, we as a country should have learned from the past and put a stop to this as soon as it happened.
Posted By: Guest#0122 (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 10:02 PM
Tell you what, Jake, when you can live your life without ever talking about the person you love, never ever talk about dating exploits, never wear a wedging ring, never go to a straight bar, never ever do anything at all that would indicate you are straight, THEN come back and tell us to wait. Till then, it is not YOU that is getting [expletive] over, so you, quite frankly, do not know what you are talking about.
Posted By: frank (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 10:07 PM
The military says that the reason for DADT is to keep the morale and unit cohesion up; however studies have shown that about three times as many homosexuals are kicked out during peace time than it is during wartime. Now wouldn't unit cohesion and morale be of more importance during wartime and thus it would make more since for more homosexuals to be discharged during wartime?
Posted By: Guest#8599 (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 10:08 PM
I refer back to what 'Mr. Conservative' Barry Goldwater once said, “You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”
Posted By: Guest#5065 (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 11:00 PM
From a Washington Post article from a few years back...
"oday, Americans have become more supportive of allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the armed forces. Support from Republicans has doubled over the past 15 years, from 32 to 64 percent. More than eight in 10 Democrats and more than three-quarters of independents now support the idea, as did nearly two-thirds of self-described conservatives. "
So why the hesitation, Obama? Doooo it. There's no excuse for this. We need all the help we can get for the wars, and dismissing hundreds of gay Arabic translators strikes me as counter-productive.
Fuck bigots. They're in the minority now more than ever, and they shouldn't be allowed to have this much of an impact on civil rights as well as the war effort itself.
Posted By: Zack (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 11:07 PM
In 1948 Harry Truman signed an order forcing desegregation and integration in the armed services. 1) It didn't happen overnight. 2) The Military, especially the Marine Corps at the time, dragged it heels in enacting these policies. The reasoning was basically the same excuses they give for not allowing homosexuality. It really took until the Korean War for the military to accept these changes.
Posted By: MydniteSon (Guest) on June 21, 2009 at 11:10 PM
I assume the G in Jake G stands for Grand Dragon.
The problem with DADT is that if you're outed in any way, shape or form, you're done, finished, out, gone, dishonorably discharged, period. You have to live a life of secrecy, because if your fellow soldiers get a hint that you're gay and start asking questions, getting the boot is the LEAST of your worries. You could easily be in a position where you're being blackmailed or victimized by other soldiers over it. You live a lie every single day you serve because to the US military, loving your country and wanting to serve just isn't good enough if you're gay or lesbian.
Posted By: EPIC CAT (Guest) on June 22, 2009 at 12:23 AM
What's so bad about Don't Ask, Don't Tell?
Well I am a college student in ROTC preparing to be a military officer and I happen to be homosexual. I am on a full scholarship, but during my interview for the scholarship, I was told that if I was found out to be gay, I would lose my scholarship, and since I don't come from a wealthy family, I will be forced to return home. SO there is a lot wrong with it. It is extremely difficult having conversations with my fellow service men and women because I have to constantly hide a part of who I am. I don't like lying about who I am, so I often force myself to be an outsider so that I don't have to lie (which is actually a violation of the honor code). So this policy is asking people like me to break their own rule.
I know a few men and women in the military now who are homosexual as well and we all have our individual struggles within our divisions. Consider this when you think about the policy.
Posted By: Kevin (Guest) on June 22, 2009 at 10:09 AM
The only reason DADT exists is because of the (thankfully) shrinking number of ignorant straight redneck soldiers that are convinced that every gay man wants to have teh buttsecks with them. It's a policy that is supposed to keep homophobes from beating up gays. Here's a thought - if the homophobes are a problem, get rid of them. That's how things are supposed to be done... get rid of the jackass that can't do his job, not the guy that wants to do his job. Of course this is America, where we rarely do that... usually the incompetent twit that can't do his job stays and the good guys are shown the door.
Posted By: Scott B (Guest) on June 22, 2009 at 12:03 PM
The problem is that "Don't ask don't tell" implies that there's something inherently wrong with being gay. There isn't. It shouldn't be an issue one way or the other.
umm there is something wrong with being gay. It is immoral and a sin. Be gay and go to hell for it but do not cram it down all of America's throat. So other than this...I suppose your "hero" Hussein Obama will save you all? You are fucking idiots and LONG LIVE CANADA!!!
Posted By: Rich Thomas (Guest) on June 22, 2009 at 01:48 PM
"Of course this is America, where we rarely do that... usually the incompetent twit that can't do his job stays and the good guys are shown the door."
I take it you have job security, eh Scott?
(ooh...you might want to put some lotion on that sick burn!)
Posted By: Internet Toughguy (Guest) on June 22, 2009 at 04:37 PM
So the most powerful military in the world and the great defenders of freedom everywhere are given the "weebie jeebies" by homosexuals? Wow.
Posted By: Josh (Guest) on June 22, 2009 at 06:08 PM
"umm there is something wrong with being gay. It is immoral and a sin. Be gay and go to hell for it but do not cram it down all of America's throat. So other than this...I suppose your "hero" Hussein Obama will save you all? You are fucking idiots and LONG LIVE CANADA!!!"
You utter creep. Separation of church and state and a damn good thing too with trogledytes like that trying to apply what they've been told in church to other people's lives.
This policy is something I can never understand about America. My country simply has an Employment Equality Act that applies across the board in all employment so anyone can serve in the defence forces, no fuss. Bring that in to America and problem solved.
Posted By: Dr. John Smith (Guest) on June 22, 2009 at 08:14 PM
I understand the sense of urgency, and I applaud it and encourage it. At the same time though, you have to realize it really is tough to get things done and there are so many problems right now that need to be fixed. Obama, nobody, has a panacea for all ills that they can just administer instantly.
So essentially, I'm perfectly cool with more lobbying and more demands. I am against this article's message of having patience or ever being inactive. That is the absolute worst thing to do. You should always keep pushing at all times, just with the realization that you won't get what you want overnight. And as far as I can tell, that seems to be the current philosophy anyway. Pointless article in that regard, although highlighting serious issues is never a bad thing so in that regard it's useful.
I do think once more people are back at work and the economy is stronger, we'll get to see more progress. I know for me at least, I have to worry about myself and my loved ones first before I can begin to help others. If I don't have anything to give, what can I give exactly?
Posted By: Guest#1363 (Guest) on August 12, 2009 at 02:11 PM
The problem is that "Don't ask don't tell" implies that there's something inherently wrong with being gay. There isn't.
**************************
Actually there IS something inherently wrong with being gay. Just like there's something wrong with bestiality or pedophilia. It's got nothing to do with the Bible or religion. Don't ask, don't tell means the military can't ask homosexuals if they are gay. So if they can't ask, how will they find out? They only find out when gay people talk about being gay, and gay pride and all that crap. It's simple. Don't ask. Don't tell. You live your life. I'll live mine. The problem is gay pride, and gay activists. If you wanna be gay fine, but do it within the four walls of your house. Don't cram homosexuality down my throat.
Posted By: Joe (Guest) on October 11, 2009 at 12:07 AM
I'm not American, but I was always under the impression that your military is just like every other military in the Western World. That being, it is A) effectively an arm of the government B) Thus a Public service and C) Thus funded by taxpayer's money.
Therefore, discrimination based on sexual preference is in fact quite illegal. Also, I believe this policy can be acted upon even if the gay person is discovered outside military action. Example, he's in a bar kissing his boyfriend and his commanding officer just unfortunately happens to enter the bar at that exact moment. He could be kicked out then, and it's entirely at the discretion of the officer in question.
It's BS, a total shame on your country, and you need to get it fixed as soon as.
Posted By: Frank (Guest) on October 21, 2009 at 05:42 PM
STAY CURRENT