Poll: Gays should be allowed to serve openly in the Military

[Green Gaia]

Link

A new poll from Harris Interactive found that 55% of Americans think gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the military.

By comparison, 19% of the 2,337 Americans polled said gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve "only if they keep their sexual orientation a secret," and 18% said they should "not be allowed to serve in the military at all."

The survey, conducted online between Jan. 11 and 18, also measured American attitudes toward the U.S. military's "Don't Ask, Don't tell" policy, which prohibits the military from asking personnel about their sexual orientation, but allows homosexuality to be a cause for discharge from the military.

Forty-six percent of respondents said they oppose the policy, unchanged from a Harris poll in 2000, and 36% said they favor the policy, compared with 34% in the previous poll. However, the policy is supported by far more men (43%) than women (29%). And among political parties, Republicans are more likely to support this policy (51%) than Democrats (25%) or Independents (31%), while 18% of Americans remain undecided about the policy.

The poll also asked whether Americans agree with comments by John M. Shalikashvili, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who wrote in a recent New York Times editorial that if gays and lesbians served openly in the U.S. military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces. Fifty-seven percent of respondents said they agree with his comments, compared with 31% who disagree.

See all results

I'm going to post one of the poll questions here to see RF's outcome.

 

[astarath]

I agree, gay or straight makes no difference in how you fight.

 

[Mike182]

i voted "Gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the militaryiy"

makes no difference so far as i can see, but i have no military experience. i can understand concerns that a gay man in the military is likely to get a bad deal from his comrades, but that's because the military is a very macho playground - if a gay man knows what he is getting himself in for, and still wants to, then he should have his countries support.

 

[jonny]

I honestly don't care if gays and lesbians serve openly in the military, but I believe that there needs to be some policies implemented that restrict behavior and conduct of both homo- and heterosexual members of the military, along with addressing privacy issues, if the rules were changed.

 

[Booko]

As I've mentioned before, the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) already has provisions for those serving in the armed forces who act in disruptive ways (sexually speaking), so having homosexual troops is no different than heterosexual ones.

We've had gays in the military before and the Republic didn't come to an end, so I really fail to see why, in this day and age, this should even be an issue.

If someone is qualified to serve and wants to, then by all means let them do so.

 

[Booko]

I honestly don't care if gays and lesbians serve openly in the military, but I believe that there needs to be some policies implemented that restrict behavior and conduct of both homo- and heterosexual members of the military, along with addressing privacy issues, if the rules were changed.

Jonny, the current rules already cover situations that might come up. Sexual harassment is sexual harassment, no matter what orientations are involved.

According to the UCMJ, any sex outside of marriage is not ok. That already covers arguments about how having gays in a unit might be disruptive, because they may be up to something within the unit, which might affect morale.

Obviously this code is "winked at" in a huge way, and usually is not invoked unless there's some adultery going on between an officer and another officer's spouse. But the provisions are already there to deal with issues that come up.

 

[lizskid]

I think anyone who is physically fit and wants to should be allowed to serve in the military. Other countries allow it without issue, but, of course, they also enforce their conduct codes for all military. I think all of that is an issue with our military, but bad conduct by all does not excuse it. There are many fine people serving that have appropriate conduct, but they are also all humans. Gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve without harrassment or fear, and so should anyone else.

 

[Pardus]

Like anyone is going to openly vote against them being able to serve openly on this board.

The extreme right doesn't quite exist on this board.

I personally have no problem with anyone serving in the military, tho i do know that the guys in the military are ego heavy and homophobic, stories of guys being forced to rape old woman because of a rumour of them being homosexual and the like are not uncommon.

 

[michel]

Like anyone is going to openly vote against them being able to serve openly on this board.

The extreme right doesn't quite exist on this board.

I personally have no problem with anyone serving in the military, tho i do know that the guys in the military are ego heavy and homophobic, stories of guys being forced to rape old woman because of a rumour of them being homosexual and the like are not uncommon.

tho i do know that the guys in the military are ego heavy and homophobic,

That's the only reservation I have -although I see no reason whatsoever why Gays shouldn't serve - but it scares me to think that they would get a really hard time.

The military surroundings can be dreadfully cruel; there have been "suicides" in the U.K by young soldiers in training, which have been seen as not being suicides at all. And some of the bullying has been abhorrent.

 

[Pardus]

What do you expect when you train someone to be a killer, you have to make them somewhat uncivilised.

Tho i might be biased as i draw no line when it comes to killing for any reason other than survival, it is all murder to me.

 

[Moni_Gail]

tho i do know that the guys in the military are ego heavy and homophobic

I'm a bit confused here. A few of you know that I'm a military spouse who lives on base. I must admit to ignorance because I have yet to see this personality in my husband's unit at all. On the other hand, right across the street from us is a very nice young man who doesn't try too hard to hide the fact that the same guy has been spending the night over for the past year. Also, during work he continuously makes comments on how the one thing he misses about being civilian is being able to wear makeup. Though he's pretty blatant, he's still very well liked, treated, and respected around here.

Btw, I voted that everyone should be able to serve. This so called law is rather archaic and I'd hoped we'd moved past this mentality decades ago.

ETA: I guess the fact that we're AF does make a small difference.

 

[Pardus]

Airforce is a huge difference, you need to do a shload of studying etc, it means you get a very different type of people.

 

[ALifetimeToWaitFor....]

I put "Not Sure" because the stereotypes invovled with being homosexual can lead to mistrust especially in situations that require bravery.

However I believe it was the Athenians, one greek city-state not sure which, whose elite guard was made up of 48 pairs of male lovers. They were feared throughout all Greece, I think Alexander conquered them again not sure.

I don't believe sexual orientation dictates how well i person can fight, but having that in the back of some males minds will be cause for greater conflict than good. Gays are normally viewed as "sissies" no matter how unfair the stereotype is.

 

[Green Gaia]

I don't believe sexual orientation dictates how well i person can fight, but having that in the back of some males minds will be cause for greater conflict than good. Gays are normally viewed as "sissies" no matter how unfair the stereotype is.

I understand what you're saying, but shouldn't we confront those stereotypes and overcome them down instead of hiding from them and letting them perpetuate?

 

[standing_alone]

Of course homosexuals should be allowed to openly serve in the military (and by open, I don't mean flaunting their sexuality, as some people always seem to interpret it). For one thing, homosexuals are already serving in the military (I've actually met a homosexual Iraq vet) and I think homosexuals should be allowed to acknowledge that, yes, they are homosexual, and continue on with their service. If the homosexuals aren't making a big deal out of thier sexual orientation, why should the military or anyone else?

 

[jonny]

Jonny, the current rules already cover situations that might come up. Sexual harassment is sexual harassment, no matter what orientations are involved.

According to the UCMJ, any sex outside of marriage is not ok. That already covers arguments about how having gays in a unit might be disruptive, because they may be up to something within the unit, which might affect morale.

Obviously this code is "winked at" in a huge way, and usually is not invoked unless there's some adultery going on between an officer and another officer's spouse. But the provisions are already there to deal with issues that come up.

I did meet a girl whose husband was thrown out of the military for having an affair.

If the provisions are there, that's great. Now, if they'd address privacy concerns in some way (if they already haven't) I'll be completely on board.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It used to be the quickest route out of the forces here in the UK to say you were homosexual. You had a quickie court marshall, a dishonerable discharge to a civillian open prison for a few months and you were out... and not even on the reserve list.
They would not even send them to a military prison in case the contaminated others.

An officer in our regiment took this route... I thought he was rather brave to do it.

To day I think they can serve in all armed forces and the police. I think the navy was the last to give in.

 

[astarath]

if gays are not allowed then straight people shouldnt be allowed either, force the soldiers to take vows of celibacy and become a race of warrior monks...like jedi!!! Cool! Genecosta would love this idea

 

[Booko]

I put "Not Sure" because the stereotypes invovled with being homosexual can lead to mistrust especially in situations that require bravery.

The thing that strikes me is, I remember when there was great debate over what roles women could have in the armed services. It all turned out ok and we've managed pretty well.

I hear the same arguments made regarding homosexuals in the military today, and expect if we actually just let people serve, the arguments against it will be shown to be just as irrelevant as those against women.

It would be well worth our while to examine what happens in other countries that don't discriminate against homosexuals and see what sorts of problems they've had (nor not had).

I haven't seen anyone come up with any examples of what a disaster it's been anywhere else, so until I see some, I'll probably just keep thinking there's no serious reason to deny gays the honour of serving their country.

 

[Quiddity]

I understand what you're saying, but shouldn't we confront those stereotypes and overcome them down instead of hiding from them and letting them perpetuate?

I think we should, but is the military the place for that? I mean there are lives on the line and that just seems the place to start, don't you think?