Posted on 07/07/2008 8:16:52 PM PDT by markomalley
Congress should repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law because the presence of gays in the military is unlikely to undermine the ability to fight and win, according to a new study released by a California-based research center.
The study was conducted by four retired military officers, including the three-star Air Force lieutenant general who in early 1993 was tasked with implementing President Clinton's policy that the military stop questioning recruits on their sexual orientation.
"Evidence shows that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline or cohesion," the officers states.
To support its contention, the panel points to the British and Israeli militaries, where it says gay people serve openly without hurting the effectiveness of combat operations.
Undermining unit cohesion was a determining factor when Congress passed the 1993 law, intended to keep the military from asking recruits their sexual orientation. In turn, service members can't say they are gay or bisexual, engage in homosexual activity or marry a member of the same sex.
Supporters of the ban contend there is still no empirical evidence that allowing gays to serve openly won't hurt combat effectiveness.
"The issue is trust and confidence" among members of a unit, said Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis, who retired in 1993 after working on the issue for the Army. When some people with a different sexual orientation are "in a close combat environment, it results in a lack of trust," he said.
The study was sponsored by the Michael D. Palm Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara, which said it picked the panel members to portray a bipartisan representation of the different service branches.
According to its Web site, the Palm Center "is committed to keeping researchers, journalists and the general public informed of the latest developments in the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy debate." Palm himself was "a staunch supporter of civil rights in the gay community," the site says.
Two of the officers on the panel have endorsed Democratic candidates since leaving the military - Army Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, who supports Barack Obama, and Marine Corps Gen. Hugh Aitken, who backed Clinton in 1996.
Air Force Lt. Gen. Robert Minter Alexander, a Republican, was assigned in 1993 to a high-level panel established by the Defense Department to examine the issue of gays in the military. At one point, he signed an order that prohibited the military from asking a recruit's sexual orientation.
Alexander said at the time he was simply trying to carry out the president's orders and not take a position. But he now believes the law should be repealed because it assumes the existence of gays in the military is disruptive to units even though cultural attitudes are changing.
Further, the Defense Department and not Congress should be in charge of regulating sexual misconduct within the military, he said.
"Who else can better judge whether it's a threat to good order and discipline?" Alexander asked.
Navy Vice Adm. Jack Shanahan said he had no opinion on the issue when he joined the panel, having never confronted it in his 35-year military career. A self-described Republican who opposes the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq war, Shanahan said he was struck by the loss of personal integrity required by individuals to carry out "don't ask, don't tell."
"Everyone was living a big lie - the homosexuals were trying to hide their sexual orientation and the commanders were looking the other way because they didn't want to disrupt operations by trying to enforce the law," he said.
If evidence showed that allowing gays and lesbians to serve is likely to pose significant risk to morale, good order, discipline or cohesion, would they tell us?
“Haven’t homosexuals been in the military forever?”
Being free to flaunt it is quite different. And like my husband says “if they can’t tell, I can pretend none of the dudes I have to shower with while deployed are gay”. “As soon as I know they are, I’m not getting in the same shower or sleeping quarters”.
So your husband has to lie to serve with homosexuals, but if he has to admit the truth he can’t serve? Interesting.
“If evidence showed that allowing gays and lesbians to serve is likely to pose significant risk to morale, good order, discipline or cohesion, would they tell us?”
And I doubt the “evidence” gathered that says it hasn’t posed a risk to morale and cohesion in Britain and Israel is coming from anonymous polling of the troops. Somehow I suspect it is coming from a few generals at the top who haven’t bothered to take a survey of all the troops and how it really affects them.
Not very likely, unless you're a junkie.
“So your husband has to lie to serve with homosexuals, but if he has to admit the truth he can’t serve? Interesting.”
What the hell are you going on about? Knowing that there might be a gay guy in your unit but there also might not be, at-least prevents the extreme uncomfortableness that would be there if you knew someone was. I was in the AF and had to shower with a bunch of women in Basic. Since I didn’t know that any of them were lesbos, I could just get in there and get out and not have to worry about it. If I had known one was, I would not have felt comfortable at all showering with her.
I know several ex-sailors who said life got very complicated when they put women on ships. We don’t know how it’s affected combat readiness because we haven’t been tested. Some famous general said “Everything is theoretical until the shooting starts.” Okay, maybe I said it, but the point is training and maneuvers aren’t the real thing. Social experimentation with our military right now would be suicidal.
Yep.
No women in the military, either.
Otherwise you are introducing sexual politics at every level, promotion, demotion, morale. . .
That’s how I see it.
We need the best military we can possibly achieve. It is a critical issue, more important than the price of gas.
When I was in Afghanistan, no one I knew wanted to take a shower with a known homosexual in the area. There’s just something creepy about them being in a communal shower with the rest of us.
Are those guys French?
“Yep.
No women in the military, either.
Otherwise you are introducing sexual politics at every level, promotion, demotion, morale. . .
That’s how I see it.”
And when we go to this all male military, will we not allow the men to have wives since their wives might cheat on them with other men in the military? I can’t believe you can actually believe women shouldn’t be allowed in the military as if it’s the same as having gays openly serve. I’m not for them in all combat roles, but good grief!....not allow them to serve at any level?
I served 6 years and I certainly was professional enough to not let myself get involved in sexual politics regarding promotion or anything else. Normal men do not seem to have a problem with women or feel uncomfortable around them. They do seem to have a problem with having to share close quarters with gay men. I question the heterosexuality of any man who says he would have no problem with showering with a guy he knows is gay. That is just disgusting.
I had to laugh the other day I heard on NPR radio a doctor who was explaining that the rise in MRSA “super-staff” infection could NOT be due to gays high use of antibiotics for infections when their immune systems are compromised, (the staff adapting so it is not susceptible to known antibiotics anymore) then he said the best way to avoid contracting MSRA
was good hygiene, like wash your hands after you go to the bathroom. LIKE GAY SEX HAS ANY POSSIBLE LINK TO GOOD HYGIENE! The gay lifestyle is not a healthy lifestyle.
Some scenarios I envision re: female troops (by troops I mean in the bunkers, in the battleship, in the basic training, etc., to be clear).
Drill sergeant Man takes a liking to Private Woman. Special treatment ensues.
Drill sergeant Woman takes a liking to Private Man. Special treatment ensues.
Drill Sergeant Man likes Private Woman, who spurns him. Special (bad) treatment ensues.
Vice versa, Drill Sergeant Woman likes Private Man, who spurns her. Special (bad) treatment ensues.
Promotion time! What must the women in the corps due to advance their cause?
What punishment should be given to the pretty troops? The same as to the ugly?
What will men do to impress the ladies that they would not normally do in a group of men?
What sort of rivalry will develop between men who like the same fellow soldier?
Mixing heterosexual troops male and female together, OR, mixing homosexual troops into a hetero population, introduces a sexual component to the military that is not the same as your army wives scenario.
That’s how I see it. It is human nature. I do not think it provides the best military.
Listen I have no problem with the Brits. There are some pretty bad ass warriors in their ranks. Don't mess with the United States Marines though. The US military, especially the Marines are an unrivaled fighting force anywhere on the planet. Ask anyone who's ever been on the opposite side of the US Marines. The Somali's wouldn't f*** with them back in the '90's, no one who has an interest in living(sane or insane) will mess with them either. Allowing the openly gay in their ranks would forever change that special brotherhood of Marines.
What if the very best Iraqi or Farsi interpreter in our ranks happens to be gay? Does National Security override "don't ask, don't tell"?
I really don't have an answer, but I can tell you as someone that has access to veterans medical records via the VA there are a lot more gay veterans than anyone could ever imagine. There are quite a few transgender individuals to, all of which our VA is supplying medical care to.
If gays want to serve, let them serve for Israel or Britain.
You can make up what ever gets you through the day, but if you’re showering with a bunch of people you can bet some of them are homosexual. You’re saying the military policy should be set up so that you can avoid the truth. That’s what I’m going on about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.