Skip to comments.Don't Ask/Don't Tell Should Go
Posted on 07/28/2010 5:42:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
Click here to find out more!
America is one of many countries that forbid openly gay people to serve in the military. Others are: Cuba, China, Egypt, Greece, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Turkey and Venezuela.
See a pattern?
With a few exceptions, those are not countries where free people want to live.
By contrast, Australia, the United Kingdom, Israel, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia and Spain all allow gay people to serve.
No country has America's in-between policy: Gays can serve -- as long as no one finds out about it. Where did that come from?
It happened because Bill Clinton campaigned for the presidency promising to allow gays to serve. After his election, the Democratic Congress decreed that "the presence in the Armed Forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk ... ."
So a compromise was born. The media labeled it "don't ask, don't tell."
Since then, nearly 12,500 service members have been discharged because of their sexual orientation. These have included 800 "mission critical" troops such as Arabic linguists (59 of them), Farsi linguists (nine), medics, pilots and intelligence analysts.
In May, the House of Representatives voted to repeal "don't ask, don't tell," but only after the Defense Department studies the matter and the president, secretary of defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff declare that ending the policy would not reduce military effectiveness. The Senate has not voted on its version of bill.
So, should it be repealed? Here are some things to consider:
The American Psychological Association states: "Empirical evidence fails to show that sexual orientation is germane to any aspect of military effectiveness including unit cohesion, morale, recruitment and retention. ... When openly gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals have been allowed to serve in the U.S. Armed Forces, there has been no evidence of disruption or loss of mission effectiveness."
OK, of course they said that. It's the APA. But that doesn't make them wrong.
The Government Accountability Office studied four countries that allow gays to serve -- Canada, Israel, Germany and Sweden. It found that "military officials from each country said that, on the basis of their experience, the inclusion of homosexuals in their militaries has not adversely affected unit readiness, effectiveness, cohesion or morale."
How would members of America's military feel about repeal of the policy? A Military Times poll found: 71 percent of respondents said they would continue to serve if the policy were overturned, 10 percent said they would not re-enlist or extend their service, and 14 percent said they would consider terminating their careers after serving their obligated tours. That's a pretty strong majority for acceptance.
Where do I come down on this issue? It's easy. I'm a libertarian, not a conservative. I don't think government should have any role in our sex lives.
Just as I see no reason why gays should not be free to marry, I see no reason why they shouldn't be free to be in the military. As I wrote in the conclusion to "Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity": "I want government to leave people alone. I think people should be free to do anything they want -- as long as they don't hurt anyone else. I may disagree with their choices, but I don't think The State should take their choices away."
I draw my inspiration from Nobel laureate F.A. Hayek. He wrote a postscript to his classic, "The Constitution of Liberty," titled, "Why I Am Not a Conservative," in which he said, "One of the fundamental traits of the conservative attitude is a fear of change, a timid distrust of the new as such, while the liberal (today I call it "libertarian") position is based on courage ... to let change run its course even if we cannot predict where it will lead ... ."
I'm with Hayek. Unless we do identifiable harm to others, the State should leave us alone.
Stroker and his Marxist Minions need to GO!
Stossel is totally dead wrong about this. Homosexual “marriage” means forcing all other citizens to accept and praise homosexuality. Homosexuals in the military means they’ll have a protected status with innumerable possibilities for the disruption of the mission.
Maybe other countries don’t have the same problems ... but it’s interesting that most of the countries he mentions aren’t defending themselves, anyway, so using their militaries as a opportunity for homos to get a uniform doesn’t mean anything.
The majority of the military disagrees...and so do all people who still have a moral compass.
Stossel is a perfect example of how doctrinaire libertarianism rots the mind.
Repealing DADT will adversely affect unit cohesiveness and our recruiting efforts. Who in their right mind wants to go to war with a queer?
The reason Stossel is wrong is because the military isn’t a job, it’s a lifestyle. Likewise gayness isn’t a medical condition or a handicap, it’s a lifestyle. And the two lifestyles don’t mix, period.
Which is why Stossel, in a remarkably weasely fashion, cites the study that says 71% of troops would still remain in the service if the policy changed.
He tries to trick his reader into thinking that soldiers who oppose any change in policy - but who do not want to throw away their careers - are somehow supporters of a change in policy.
The fact is the vast majority oppose it, and one out of every three in service would leave the armed forces if the policy changed - they feel that strongly about it.
Besides he is entitled to his opinion, just as you and I are to ours
????? Free to do anything they want?? Gay marriage, open homosexual behavior in the military? The military is the government dim-wit. Legal marriage is the government. Government is not intended to be freedom. Am I free to not pay my taxes? Even for others aids treatments ??? Idiot.
If he is worried about freedom he should start else where like taxes and mandates not getting homosexuals special behaviour rights.
DOD just recently asked a random sampling of all service members to complete a survey on just this subject.
WE’ll see what the service members actual say back to DOD.
all the huge problems the country is facing and some people want to focus on pushing the gay agenda
Questions to which you know the answers:
Who would want the military to be ineffective, incohesive, and unable to defend America’s interest?
Who would want the military to drain off it’s majority of Christian conservative patriots?
Who would have doubts as to whether the current military would back him if he tried to crack down on America’s citizens using the force of the military?
homosexuals have the choice to serve and be celibate, or to have sex and not serve. Military service is a privilege, not a right.
Who suggested he wasn't? A defense of his opinion would have to be a lot stronger than that!
Excellent point, SpaceBar.
Stossel seems to be reasonably bright, so I have to question his sincerity on these points. The effects of public promotion of homosexuality can be clearly seen in our society and others; pretending otherwise is disingenuous.
Unfortunately, you are right. Yes, of course, we need to have “military” like Denmark’s. I’m sure the Euroweenie military machine would have whipped through Iraq in record time. Moreover, the larger issue is social. Europe is rotting because of its social liberalism, which is why the Mohammadans may conquer Europe without firing a shot. If it happens, acceptance of sexual deviance will be no small part of what caused it.
Not only going to war with them. The left is handing them protected status and they will use it to gain rank and power even when they are not ready or capable of using it for the better of the military.
Homosexuals will cry "foul" if another does not agree with them, refuses to date them (or worse), or another is found more worthy of promotion.
The entire military structure will be fractured to accommodate these perverts and they will keep everyone at risk to ensure they get everything they want, whether they deserve it or not.
“...By contrast, Australia, the United Kingdom, Israel, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia and Spain all allow gay people to serve....”
What the Western Euro-Weenies do is so trendy and smart that we must blindly follow. I notice Poland, Finland, Switzerland, and Latvia are not on the list. Are they old-fashioned like America?