Serving America: Ending don't ask don't tell will draw well-qualified people into military careers

The Columbus Dispatch ^ | Saturday, February 6, 2010 | Editorial

[Comparative Advantage]

Tuesday's unequivocal statement by the Pentagon's top two officials that openly gay men and women shouldn't be barred from serving in the nation's military should be the beginning of the end of an outdated policy.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that repealing the Clinton-era "don't ask, don't tell" policy is "the right thing to do" because the policy forces service members to lie about themselves or abandon their careers. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said ending the prohibition is inevitable, because attitudes toward gays have changed among the public and in the military.

Unfortunately, the change likely won't come quickly. Congress must overturn the 17-year-old law, and several Republicans on the Senate committee quickly blasted the idea -- even though some, including Arizona Sen. John McCain, earlier had said they would consider a change if military leaders ever called for it.

[manc]

not one person I know serving and wanting to serve will stay or join if don’t ask gets overturned.

this is an attack on our military while they fight two wars and being defunded on many different fronts

[Centurion2000]

The only thing worse than a Senior Drill Instructor in boot camp would be a GAY Senior drill Instructor in boot camp that wants to F#$% you.

At least 8 generations of military service in this family. I will be the last of the line if they allow gay soldiers in the ranks.

[manc]

we were in the Arctic and it was the time when the orders came down to lets see how women will be in the service

we were deployed into minus 70 for a few days living in snowholes
she could not carry her pack, she went on her period, she left a scent for animals to follow, we had to wait a few times for her to be ready or go somewhere for a piss or crap.
we had a couple of guys always trying to get into her panties and want sex where she flirted back knowing they will carry her pack etc.
when we got back to base we were asked off the higher brass how was she and we all said it was a useless experiment.

guess what the top brass ignored us and so they went in.

Homosexuals is all about sex and sexual pleasure, it is sick and no way do I as a vet want this overtured

I’ll say they should not serve anyway but that’s me

[pepsionice]

After twenty years of service and another eleven in support of the service...I’ve come to agree on DADT. In fact, there could be one or two slight changes and it’d probably satisfy everyone and fix all problems. Note, you have jealous lovers who now run...dump evidence on a guy who kept his mouth shut...and the jealous lover screws over the guy. It would fix this issue if the rule was to discount and throw out jealous lover report unless it involved an actual security violation or such.

The truth is...the less you have guys talking about their normal or irregular sexual practices...the better off you are. It makes no sense for anyone to have to stand there and listen to some guy go into great detail about comparing his lady lover over his current wife.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Gay people serve now, have always served, and will continue to serve in the U.S. military. Due to their right to privacy, nobody has to ask and they don't have to tell; due to everybody else's right to privacy, the gays don't make an issue of their sexuality. Private means private. This seems to work well enough.

IMHO, the whole purpose of abolishing don't-ask-don't-tell is opening the door for lawsuits. Lots and lots of lawsuits:

• To force military mental health services to engage in gay relationship counseling.

• To force the recogntition of the odd coupledom known as "gay marriage", rejected in every state that has had a vote on it, and compel recognition by people who reasonably see it as a perversion.

• To insist on spousal benefits for boyfriends’ boyfriends and girlfriends' girlfriends.

• To create constant, morally repulsive conflicts in the military chaplaincy.

• To establish a “right” to military-funded “sex-reassignment” surgery and other accommodations to mental disorders.

• To drum out servicemembers who can’t stomach open sodomy in their living, sleeping and recreational areas.

They'll run every one of those items up the flagpole. And they'll sue anyone who doesn't salute.

[Eska]

You're correct. I remember back in early 70's of having queers in my unit in Korea & at Ft. Bragg. Actually, it wasn't a big deal; always gave me another angle to raz the blk guys in my company; as both gay guys I knew of were African-Americans, ha ha. I'd forever call the blk guys I worked with the gay guys names, ha, really stir it up. Both were E-5's had re-enlisted so you know everybody was looking the other way even back then.

I think most gay military people are in support units anyway; just a career for them. I don't figure they'd last too long other than in support units though. This is all just political bull, shouldn't even be addressed.

I remember the one queer guy at Bragg, he was ok, didn't cause any problems, professional and all; then he got busted down on Hay Street in Fayetteville dressed like a woman, they tried charging him for prostitution. Ha, he never lived that one down; pretty hilarious actually.

So many more important issues they should be concerned about.

[manc]

same here
my ancestors have always served from what I know the first world war to korea to me and now my two sons will not be joining if this is overturned

[Freddd]

THEY ARE NOT BARRED FROM SERVING, NOW!

The media, the lefitists, the gays/homosexuals & Obama completely misrepresent the debate. Gay Americans are not denied “the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.”

What they are prohibited from doing is flaunting their sexuality. The Pentagon’s policy guidelines on homosexuals in the Military state:

“Sexual orientation will not be a bar to service unless manifested by homosexual conduct. The military will discharge members who engage in homosexual conduct, which is defined as a homosexual act, a statement that the member is homosexual or bisexual, or a marriage or attempted marriage to someone of the same gender.”

It’s open homosexuality that the military prohibits.

It’s not even about that, it’s about benefits and getting sex change operations paid for....lawsuits to be filed against our military...the continued attack from the inside...yes, they are in our Capitol, congress, pentagon, media, army and white house. They lie in wait.

[SumProVita]

You are absolutely correct...as we have many friends who report the same. This would be disastrous for our military ....and for our nation!

[achilles2000]

It might attract some qualified clothing designers and hairdressers that could improve the military’s image ;-)

[999replies]

I can hear the argument now, “It is okay for homos to openly serve in the military, but they can’t get married?”

[vc79]

ADM Mullens’ reputation as a yes man proceeds him. Great- just another reason that I tell young people to join the Corps vice the navy, which I was associated with for 30 years. At least the Corps has the fortitude to say no at this point. The navy is just a social engineering experiment. We have gone away from being war fighters to just placating society in general. I saw the beginnings of this years ago as a midshipman, when skin color dictated the harshness of punishment. As for having homosexuals (gay is not the proper term, there is nothing gay about it) openly serve in the military, this would be the final straw. Sorry, having deviants openly parade aboard ship or next to me in an cockpit (no pun intended) would make me cringe. No it is not homophobia, which technically means I am afraid of queers, it is just that I do not approve of the behavior. If they want to blow pipe, great, but, not in, what used to be, my navy. Heaven help us.

[Bryanw92]

I live in a Navy town (but got out of the Navy 20+ years ago) and judging from the drastic uniform changes every few months the Navy is trying, I think the “clothing design corps” is already working at full strength!

[boomop1]

They will co**suck their way up the chain of command.

[Jim Scott]

Not one person I know serving and wanting to serve will stay or join if don’t ask gets overturned.

this is an attack on our military while they fight two wars and being de-funded on many different fronts

Agreed. As others have correctly noted, this insane policy, if actually implemented, would absolutely destroy the morale of the mostly-heterosexual military, give homosexuals a basis for demanding 'gay marriage' be legalized in every state - or federally - and have a devastating effect on military enlistments (in an all-volunteer military) as well as triggering massive numbers of retirements. Homosexuality is a perversion and simply incompatible with a heterosexual society, which pretty much defines the U.S. military.

Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen are out of touch with reality if they believe that the U.S. military can accommodate openly homosexual men (and women) into the armed services with no disruptions or negative consequences. Homosexuals are infamous for their insatiable sexual appetites and to believe such people can be integrated into a military structure with young, virile men (to whom the word 'gay' is an epithet) borders on sheer delusion.

I'm especially disappointed that Admiral Mullen endorses this troubling policy. I won't speculate on his motives or those of Secretary Gates (an Obama appointee) but I have to assume they're acquiescing to what they claim to believe is a 'changed view' of homosexuality by most Americans but in reality, they're doing a great disservice to the military and, by extension, their country. This is tragic.

[MCF]

And, to top it off, they will be in the whole chain of command from the Pentagon on down.

[dfwgator]

The dirty secret is that liberals hate the all-volunteer military, and many would love to bring back a draft. And indeed if having homos discourages people from signing up, there may be no choice but to bring back the draft.

[TLI]

What they are prohibited from doing is flaunting their sexuality. The Pentagon’s policy guidelines on homosexuals in the Military state:

“Sexual orientation will not be a bar to service unless manifested by homosexual conduct. The military will discharge members who engage in homosexual conduct, which is defined as a homosexual act, a statement that the member is homosexual or bisexual, or a marriage or attempted marriage to someone of the same gender.”

One full blown all out shooting war will clear the military of the flamboyant, in your face screechy poofters. They will either be killed by combat because they are incompetent, fragged, commit suicide or get dishonorable discharges.

[Scotsman will be Free]

My guess is that the asshat who wrote the editorial was never in the service.
Yeah, a real morale booster to come strolling into the barracks and catch Billy stroking Bob.

[truthguy]

This is what happens when the military (or politicians) promotes the types of generals and admirals who are interested in furthering their political careers rather than defending the country. If you took a poll of everyone above Colonel or Captain in the military you would find that greater than 90% of them are absolutely against open homosexuals serving in the military.

But Adm. Mike Mullen doesn't care about this at all. He's a political admiral who wants to finish out his career and get his fat pension. The whole reason he was promoted was because he was political in the same way Wesley Clark and Colin Powell were. Even at the highest ranks of the military you have rotten apples.