Obama stated he would repeal the don't ask don't tell but has thus far not made any action. However, in interviews, key military leadership have stated the policy will change.
Is this something that should be pushed for by the gay community or should it wait behind things like marriage? Conversely, is this something that should be fought now, or should resources be allocated towards other issues such as gay marriage first? Does don't ask don't tell matter at all?
Obama stated he would repeal the don't ask don't tell but has thus far not made any action. However, in interviews, key military leadership have stated the policy will change.
Is this something that should be pushed for by the gay community or should it wait behind things like marriage? Conversely, is this something that should be fought now, or should resources be allocated towards other issues such as gay marriage first? Does don't ask don't tell matter at all?
I honestly don't think of this as a gay rights issue, or as a civil rights issue. I honestly think of this as a national security issue.
We don't have enough troops, or we wouldn't be hiring contractors (or at least not as many as we do). We have loosened all sorts of restrictions about who's allowed to be in the military to try to get more people. We still don't have enough. Some gay people would like to join. We need them too badly to say no unless there was a particularly good reason, and there isn't.
Obama says he's waiting for Congress to act. The military seems to be waiting for Congress to act. There is a House bill floating around that hasn't quite been made formal yet. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) is one of the leaders on this one (goooooo smith!), but interestingly enough, Barney Frank isn't a co-signer. I guess he's been quoted saying he thinks that pending lawsuits have a better chance than a bill in Congress.
As time goes on, momentum for gay rights increases. I do not know if DADT or DOMA will be repealed in the next several years. But they will be repealed eventually. And eventually the country will be embarrassed that they existed at all.
__________________
Visit my non-fencing blog, mostly about food, at Coset The Table!
I think this is something that should not be just pushed for by the LGBT community, but by the greater American community as a whole.
Under DADT the country is made fundamentally less safe by prohibiting highly qualified people from serving in the military because of their sexual orientation. In addition to being a pure civil rights issue, it's obviously a national security issue.
Also, on an unrelated note, MP totally beat me to the punch here.
Oh Snap, as the kids say.
__________________
Does it sound logical that I would talk about the mother of a big white guy with a gun?
^[:wq
Last edited by migopod; 09-15-2009 at 10:25 PM..
Reason: Snap.
The Palm Center released a study this spring showing that the president has the power of "stop-loss" which he could use to halt all discharges under "don't ask, don't tell." While some worry this would be a temporary solution, it would actually be the wisest way to lift the ban permanently, as part of a one-two punch: Obama could suspend discharges using stop-loss and then, six months down the line, point to the success of openly gay service and ask Congress to repeal the policy once and for all.
__________________
Visit my non-fencing blog, mostly about food, at Coset The Table!
We don't have enough troops, or we wouldn't be hiring contractors (or at least not as many as we do). We have loosened all sorts of restrictions about who's allowed to be in the military to try to get more people. We still don't have enough. Some gay people would like to join. We need them too badly to say no unless there was a particularly good reason, and there isn't.
That is no longer the case. The military is exceeding recruiting quotas. For instance, the Army Reserves was closed the month of August (I don't know if it reopened this month). They had so many people they wouldn't let new ones in.
And actually I support a lot more contractor involvement in support areas. I think the military should be a little more combat arms and a little less shower repair technician. Although that is neither here not there.
__________________ >:U
Last edited by erooMynohtnA; 09-15-2009 at 10:55 PM..
I think it is important to repeal DADT, but where it falls on the national priority list is somewhere in the middle.
I don't think the administration can afford to spend political capital on any but the most crucial issues at the moment. That would be the war, the economy, and health care and the many sub-categories under those headings.
__________________
- Wisdom is the knowledge of how much you don't know.
I agree with MP and migopod that this is not only a civil rights issue but also a national security issue. Highly qualified GLBT personnel like Lt Col Victor Fehrenbach and Lt Dan Choi are being thrown out while education and criminal background requirements are being lowered. What's more, DADT contributes to a hostile climate for female personnel because they are frequently pressured into sexual activity with "outing" them (whether they're really gay or not) being used as blackmail.
But there's also an interesting way in which the ban also has a wider impact outside of the GLBT community and the short-term impact on national security and military efficiency. DADT was one of the things which caused a notable contraction of the ROTC program because schools rightfully had to ban ROTC due to its violation of their nondiscrimination policies. This led to a smaller proportion of the officer corps coming from civillian universities that had been feeding in more center and left leaning individuals. In general ROTC grads are more representative, politically and socially, of society as a whole than are the grads of the service academies. So DADT -> less ROTC -> more politically conservative officer corps. The Christian Right has really been capitalizing on this with their campaigns to dominate the culture at the service academies, particularly the USAFA. It would be good to reverse this trend, and I think repealing DADT is key.
What's more, DADT contributes to a hostile climate for female personnel because they are frequently pressured into sexual activity with "outing" them (whether they're really gay or not) being used as blackmail.
And actually I support a lot more contractor involvement in support areas. I think the military should be a little more combat arms and a little less shower repair technician. Although that is neither here not there.
Given the number of electrical problems found with contractor (Blackwater, specifically) electrical work and esp one shower-related death, I'm in favor of more oversight for those contractors. Note that the government DOES have some civilian personnel providing oversight so this can be done by non-military personnel.
if letting gays in the military is such a good idea, why havent we heard more from, oh, i dont know, THE MILITARY?
fact: our military is THE BEST IN THE WORLD. other militarys let gays in, and they are inferior to ours. we let them defend us at our peril.
So you've expressed that criticism of Israel is anti-semitism.
Israel has gays serving openly in its military.
You claim that militarys[sic] that allow gays to serve are inferior to those that don't.
Hence your claim is that Israel's military is inferior to oh... say that of Iran.
You are criticising Israel. Are you an anti-semite now?
__________________
Does it sound logical that I would talk about the mother of a big white guy with a gun?
It's not that surprising, at least on the assumption that a higher percentage of women homosexuals serve than men. Link ("The proportion of lesbians among active duty female personnel is approximately four times higher than the proportion of gay men among male personnel")
Given the number of electrical problems found with contractor (Blackwater, specifically) electrical work and esp one shower-related death, I'm in favor of more oversight for those contractors. Note that the government DOES have some civilian personnel providing oversight so this can be done by non-military personnel.
I am an Army electrician. I have been shocked and repaired a faulty shower. I was also seriously injured by faulty wiring. Trust me, this matter is something near and dear to my heart.
Blackwater are private military contractors and have nothing to do with wiring. The construction guys are KBR. The KBR electricians are competent, more competent than their military counterparts. I would rather have a contractor fix something than almost any Army electrician I know.
The problems that led to the electrocutions were not from the incompetence of the contractors, but of the bureaucrats and organization surrounding them. I think the logistical cooperation between contractors and between military services needs to be seriously overhauled.
I could just as easily say that I would tell everyone she does drugs, called the commander and asshole, pooped on a sidewalk, stole a TV, or anything else bizarre like that to coerce sex.
Sexual assault is a huge problem in the military, but I think that linking it to DADT is a disservice to issues, because it is a such weak argument.
I could just as easily say that I would tell everyone she does drugs, called the commander and asshole, pooped on a sidewalk, stole a TV, or anything else bizarre like that to coerce sex.
Sexual assault is a huge problem in the military, but I think that linking it to DADT is a disservice to issues, because it is a such weak argument.
I don't agree with the validity of the comarison you're trying to set up. To a lot of people, the mere fact that a woman showed a disinclination to put out for douchebag guys constitutes proof that she's gay. The connection between harrassing a woman for sex and accusing her of being a lesbian is different from harrassing a woman for sex and accusing her of petty theft, etc. And then, what if she really is gay? Her commander is going to have an obligation under the UMCJ to follow up on the accusation, and then poof! there goes her career. Even if she isn't gay, she's still going to have to endure a grueling investigation and a cloud of suspicion -- assuming a conservative commander doesn't railroad her out. Not to mention, pressure to "prove" she's straight by, oh yeah, putting out. It all seems to depend on the luck of the draw -- are you lucky enough to get a decent commander who's not angry about women/gays in the military, and are you lucky enough to serve alongside decent fellow servicemembers. I can't believe how open some gay people are able to be while serving in the military; others live in fear every minute that they're going to be found out.
Linear Mode
