• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Don't Ask Don't Tell

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
I've heard that there is a good chance that the Clinton compromise "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy in the U.S. military will be reviewed under the Obama administration. What are people's views on this policy?
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
I don't see it as much of a compromise. As I understand it, you still get a dishonorable discharge if anyone finds out you're queer. How is that fair?
 

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
I know this is going to sound pathetic..But in todays world still..I think the dont ask dont tell policy was neccessary to protect gay people from hate crimes in the military..

Love

Dallas
 

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
Auto,

What exactly are they reviewing it for?..I mean do you know if they are leaning towards changing it?

Love

Dallas
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I've heard that there is a good chance that the Clinton compromise "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy in the U.S. military will be reviewed under the Obama administration. What are people's views on this policy?
Get rid of the "Don't Tell" part, IMO. It still fulfills no valid purpose for a commander to demand to know what a soldier's orientation is, but I don't think that a soldier should be subject to sanction or punishment for letting it slip that he or she is gay or lesbian.

And frankly, I think it would be a positive thing for the American people to realize that it's not just heterosexuals who fight and die in service to their country.
 

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
And frankly, I think it would be a positive thing for the American people to realize that it's not just heterosexuals who fight and die in service to their country.

I think any American who actually believes that Isnt the case already and has been since our country was born?..Has their head too far burried in the sand already to be helped.

Love

Dallas
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Auto,

What exactly are they reviewing it for?..I mean do you know if they are leaning towards changing it?

Love

Dallas

Yes, Obama says he would prefer to get rid of this policy. "There's increasing recognition within the armed forces that this is a counterproductive strategy - ya know, we're spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of our military, some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need. That doesn't make us more safe," he said.
 

DallasApple

Depends Upon My Mood..
Yes, Obama says he would prefer to get rid of this policy. "There's increasing recognition within the armed forces that this is a counterproductive strategy - ya know, we're spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of our military, some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need. That doesn't make us more safe," he said.

Smart man..makes total sense to me..but that because its logical..

Love

Dallas
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Yes, Obama says he would prefer to get rid of this policy. "There's increasing recognition within the armed forces that this is a counterproductive strategy - ya know, we're spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of our military, some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need. That doesn't make us more safe," he said.

However, I imagine that a certain segment of American society will hear that as "what the Army needs is more gay Arabs", which they'll fail to accept for a few different reasons.
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Well to no ones surprise, I'm sure, I think it's a stupid policy, because in practice it requires service-members to lie, and encourages distrust in the ranks. I actually think a straight (so to speak) prohibition would be better. My understanding is that other than the theocratic types in the military, most of the commanders at this point think it's counter-productive. Not to mention the 20 or so countries that have gotten rid of it.

Also, frankly, if all the lesbians in the military came out tomorrow, the ranks of female soldiers would be cut by half.
 

texan1

Active Member
Also, frankly, if all the lesbians in the military came out tomorrow, the ranks of female soldiers would be cut by half.

I heard someone talking about this once.....in the past, women in the US military were not allowed to get married, or get pregnant. So you couldn't be married or get pregnant, but then everyone would sit around and go "where did all of these lesbians come from"? Ha!
 

Napoleon

Active Member
That policy cost the American tax payers $363.8 MILLION from 1994-2003. Well over a quarter of a BILLION dollars spent all because some people don't like gays in the military.:rolleyes:
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
I've heard that there is a good chance that the Clinton compromise "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy in the U.S. military will be reviewed under the Obama administration. What are people's views on this policy?

I think Obama should ditch it as soon as he can do so. I don't want to see him loose his political shirt over this thing -- like Clinton did in implementing it -- but the policy is wrong on several levels, needs to go, and should be replaced with a policy of treating homosexuality the same as heterosexuality.

As for the timing, my hunch is that changing the policy will be more possible during a second term than during a first term. I think it will be easier to bring it about after repealing DOMA and making civil unions the legal equivalent of marriage.

So far as I understand it, older people might not be ready for that new policy, but most youth is.

Once you acknowledge that gays legally fight for their country, full inclusion in citizenship isn't far behind.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
The next step would be to make everyone exactly equal. Separate but equal is not equal right?

Everyone in the military should share the same sleeping quarters and shower facilities right?

I see no difference between a hetro man watching a woman shower and a gay man watching another man shower.

Don't ask don't tell was an improvement for Gays in the military back in the day. So was it a mistake when Clinton implemented it?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
You know, of course, that the military can conceivably establish a policy of more private showers and sleeping quarters, right?
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
The next step would be to make everyone exactly equal. Separate but equal is not equal right?

Everyone in the military should share the same sleeping quarters and shower facilities right?

I see no difference between a hetro man watching a woman shower and a gay man watching another man shower.

Don't ask don't tell was an improvement for Gays in the military back in the day. So was it a mistake when Clinton implemented it?

Assuming you're being deliberately sarcastic and dumb in the first part of your post, I'm ignoring that. I understand that this was "progress," but from a military (as opposed to a gay) point of view, I think it's a bad policy. It foments distrust and dishonesty, which is bad for morale.

btw, a retired army vet. told me yesterday that if a soldier fighting in Iraq says, "I'm gay," the command structure tells them that's nice, now go back and fight.
 

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
My idealistic response is that the military should not discriminate based on sexual orientation. The military was one of the first institutions to become racially integrated despite resistance, and part of that is because when your life depends on your fellow soldier, it becomes much clearer that his or her bravery and skills are more important than skin color. The same should be true for sexual orientation.

My pragmatic response is that we are in so many wars right now that we are short on soldiers to fight them for us. So why would we reject women and men who are willing and able to serve and possibly die?

I read a while back about how some queer servicemen/women who speak Arabic were discharged at a time when we desperately need people who can speak Arabic. It's insane.
 

Apex

Somewhere Around Nothing
I don't care if it goes away, and I am in the military. Although I won't be able to say "You can't ask and Ill never tell" anymore.

You know, of course, that the military can conceivably establish a policy of more private showers and sleeping quarters, right?
Not really.
 
Top