Soldiers say they'd leave military if 'gay' ban lifted

Hmm, but how do you truly demonstrate that it’s more effective for America without doing it?

The biggest issue is the threat to morale and unit cohesion. That is to say, the majority of people in the military aren't comfortable with the idea of sharing sleeping quarters, showers etc. with open homosexuals. So long as that remains the case, then I don't support any changes to the current policy. However, if some time in the future, people in the military stop caring about this issue, then it would be appropriate to abandon the policy.

Other countries’ militaries, for the most part, have not had a huge problem with open homosexuals, so perhaps one could argue based on that, but then the reply will be that America is not like those other countries, so it’s irrelevant.

It would be something to look into to see what kind of effect allowing open homosexuals has had on the militaries of other Western democracies. I know the Brits and Canadians allow it, and their militaries are quite effective. The Israelis allow it, too (though, in their case, it comes down to need- Israel needs every soldier it can get, considering its small population).

There will always be those gays who fantasize about military guys due to the macho aspect of it, but they’re not the ones who will be signing up to die for this great country.

The current policy works for everyone other than (a) homosexual advocates who are more interested in making a political point than in national defense; and (b) religious zealots who want to engage in witch hunts to kick out gays who are discretely serving in the military.

There are plenty of homosexuals serving in the military today. Any homosexual who wants to serve his or her country can do so, they just have to exercise a little discretion (which isn't that hard, frankly- they basically just can't "come out" at work. Their personal life is hardy effected)

I was not simply referring to your prediction, but what I inferred as you’re approval. Maybe I am mistaken.

I support "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" because, in my opinion, it is the best policy when it comes to military effectiveness.

If, in the future, the policy is no longer needed to maintain military effectiveness, then I would support scrapping it. The only thing I am concerned about is having as effective a military as possible. If allowing open gays to serve does not hurt that, then I am fine with letting them do so. Any other political, sociological, religious or moral issues should not be considered, IMO.

I can't predict the future, but I think this will become less of an issue as the views of people in the military will continue to trend in the direction of the population at large.

“Any other political, sociological, religious or moral issues should not be considered, IMO. “

Wow. That is so backwards.

You cannot have an effective military without all of those considerations. Especially the last three.

Its no wonder we are doomed as a country, party, and ideology when we have conservatives who don’t see a problem with homosexuality. Unfortunately, I think you are right. The moral decay of this nation has gotten to the point where only %58 of active duty see the problems with homosexual in the military. That means more and more people are starting to think like you. More’s the pity.

Have you ever been in the military? Just curious.

Newsmax.com

Obama Expected to End Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
Thursday, January 8, 2009 9:04 AM

WASHINGTON – Sixteen years after Bill Clinton tried to end restrictions on gays in the military, the US armed forces under Barack Obama may be forced to give homosexuals the same welcome as non-gays.

Under president Clinton, the policy that once saw homosexuals discharged from US military service evolved to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” allowing gays to remain in the military so long as they did not reveal their sexual orientation.

Obama has pledged to overhaul current law.

“The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Discrimination should be prohibited,” reads an entry on the president-elect’s transition website.

Shortly after taking the oath of office in 1993, Clinton originally moved for an outright ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation in the military. excerpt

Unbelievable!
Once upon a time, whites feared allowing blacks in the service, and once they did, would not give them guns out of fear of retaliation for the way whites treated blacks. Many of our service people are black, and fight with more bravery than any white man. Not only did they have to fight and kill the enemy, they had to fight bigotry within the ranks. And with their head held high. These men were maimed, and killed by the enemy the same as any white man. Once upon a time, those of German and Japanese ancestry were eyed suspiciously when it came to fighting in WWII. The fear was they would turn their guns on Americans because of the war. This did not happen, aany served, and died defending a country that saw them as less than human or not as American. Once upon a time women were seen as weak, and should not be in the service except in support capacity (nurses, secretaries, etc) It was feared they would run from battle, and could not physically handle the job. These women fought, been maimed and died for this country. Not many in the ranks believed any of these groups would have their back in combat. They were proven WRONG! Of course some did leave the military when blacks, Germans, Japanese, and women were allowed to fully serve. Didn’t exactly kill the military, did it? In short, it’s all a non-issue these days, isn’t it?
Gays have and always will serve and die in the armed forces with pride. Whether you know about it or not. It should also be noted the 1st American soldier injured (lost a leg, many other serious injuries) and one of the 1st to die in the current war was... GAY! and Prez Bush acknowledge the injured one at the 2004 Republican convention. So, you all see, it REALLY does not matter what race, sex, national origin or sexual orientation is. The hard truth, not published in the article, whether you like it or not, is the overwhelming majority who took the survey, 71 %, basically said repealing DADT would not affect their decision to serve. These are ACTIVE Duty personnel! Maybe the 10% and 14% are cowards and are looking for an out? I wonder why there is no outrage expressed here about that!
We’re all American, and those who want to serve proudly and as who they are, should! Unless there is some sophomoric reason. Leave the fear, name calling, and ignorance on the playground where it belongs!
The only thing you have to fear, is fear it’s self.

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.