In what can be described as “we already knew that,” the Pentagon released an extensive, nine-month report this week that says allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces posed a "low risk" of disruption, and it should deal a death blow to the discriminatory and unconstitutional “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
Overall, the study showed that “about 70 percent of active-duty and reserve forces saw little or no problem with ending the 17-year-old policy,” and that overwhelming 70 percent reflects about what the general public believes.
In fact, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, urged the Senate to pass legislation killing DADT before it adjourns this month, with Gates saying "This can be done, and should be done, without posing a serious risk to military readiness.” That’s simply a no-brainer.
Granted, the 30 percent is very vocal, and the 30 percent in the military also expressed similar false arguments, such as “I cannot rely on someone who I don't feel comfortable with, nor can they trust me," one respondent wrote in one of more than 100,000 surveys returned by service members and their spouses, and comments collected from about 72,000 unsolicited opinions from service members submitted to an Internet drop box. "A lack of trust turns into a lack of cohesion, which eventually leads to mission failure."
Another said, “I believe this is not the time for us to make huge changes in the military. We are at war and our men and women overseas do not need any more distractions. This issue should be addressed at the appropriate time. That time is not now."
I’m sure similar responses were heard back in 1948 when President Truman integrated the military, but one thing I have admired about the military is that it is the most equitable organization I have ever been a part of, and people advance simply on their demonstrated ability.
As for combat troops, among our allies serving along side our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, England and Canada allow gays to serve openly in the military. In fact, more than 25 other countries also allow gays to serve openly in the military with no problems, such as Australia, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and Uruguay. Like “Mr. Conservative” Arizona Senator and Republican Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater once said, “You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."
A Senate panel hearing on the Pentagon report continues today, where Arizona Republican Senator John McCain continues to flip-flop on the issue and embarrass himself.
7 comments:
Conservatives ascribe to a white, christian, heternormative worldview. Years ago they saw an opportunity to infiltrate and evangelize the military.
So, it doesn't matter how many reports come out and it doesn't matter how many Generals or Admirals call for it's repeal.
Conservatives have to put homosexuals into their enemy camp for eternity and will never support the repeal.
They are trying to evangelize the military, but it’s simply not working. The fact that 70 percent of the troops say killing DADT will not be a problem speaks volumes. It will be repealed.
You are right, however, that conservatives hate gays.
You socialist Democrat liberals couldn't be more wrong. But first, I'll deal with the gays in the military.
I don't care if it's a "none month" (sic) study or not. I don't care if it's a "none year" study. The military is not a social club. The military is not a democracy. There is no reason for gays to stand up and say "I'm gay" in the military or outside of the military. There is no reason for a person to stand up and say "I'm heterosexual" in or out of the military. What happens in the bedroom is between the person, their partner, and their God.
You call the argument by the 30% "false". It's not false. If they have a problem with it, it's a very real problem. These people are out there to kill the enemy. Not to decide if the soldier next to them is checking out their junk.
You're also wrong about Conservatives hating gays. You're painting with a broad brush. There are "PEOPLE" that don't like being around gays. There are gays that don't like being around "straights".
I am a straight male. If you want to be stick it to another gay, you're free to do so. I just don't need to see it paraded in front of me. I have no interest in knowing if you're married, single, straight or gay.
I happen to believe in God and the bible. It explicitely states that man should not lay with man. If that bothers you, don't believe in God. It's your problem, not mine. Don't make it mine by parading your sexual preference in front of me.
It's not a matter of hatred. It's a matter of class, taste and decorum. If you're gay, good for you, but you shouldn't be provided special rights just because you prefer to stick a round peg in a square hole.
You liberals are always claiming that anyone that disagrees with you is full of hate. You seem to be incapable of seeing both sides of an argument and respecting that someone doesn't agree with you. What next? Are you going to claim that all cars should be green and if you drive a silver car that you're not supporting global warming?
I want the military there to shoot the enemy so that the enemy doesn't shoot me. Take your social programs and do them yourself, but to expect me to put time and effort and money into something that goes against what I believe in is you forcing your will on me. You can get upset with me when I refuse to honor the rights of those that are different from me, but there isn't one gay person out there that is being deprived of any rights. Comparing this to slavery is asinine at best.
I don't read responses to these any longer because I know that you're going to reply with name calling and silly statements. So have at it. I'm sure others will see the ridiculous statements you make and they too can make their own decisions. I just wonder if they'll make their decisions based on the information or the party that they deem someone is a part of. But I don't wonder that much.
I don’t know any “socialist Democrat liberals.” In fact, anonymous coward, there is no such thing as a Socialist Democrat in the United States or even a “socialist Democrat liberal,” and that is just a false, Republican smear.
Thinks for pointing out that typo. If you would like, anonymous coward, I will point out all of your numerous typos and misspellings. But like any mistake I make, I admit it and correct it.
No one ever said the “military is a social club.” However, it is a democracy in that discrimination is not tolerated, or it should not in this case. There is also no reason for anyone having to hide their sexual orientation, and if they don’t lie they lose their career.
That is correct, the argument by the 30 percent of bigots like you is “false. “Not to decide if the soldier next to them is checking out their junk?” I hope you are aware, anonymous coward, that women serve in combat roles, so they could be looking at your “junk.” Why is it not a problem with the NATO troops serving alongside us in Afghanistan, such as Germany, Australia, New Zealand and England that allow gays to serve openly?
No, I am right about conservatives hating gays.
No one is “parading anything in front of you, nor does anyone want to. They just don’t want to hide who they are and their relationships just to save their career, nor should they have to.
The Bible “explicitly states that man should not lay with man?” It also says you can be put to death for eating shellfish, a married couple having sexual intercourse during a woman's period or talking back to your parents. It’s a good thing we don’t get our laws from the New Testament. So, the Bible has no problem with lesbians?
It is a matter of hatred. “Special rights?” What special rights are we talking about? They just want the same rights everyone else has.
I’m more than capable of seeing both sides of an argument; if it’s based on fact.
I also “want the military there to shoot the enemy so that the enemy doesn't shoot me.” Like Barry Goldwater says, you don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."
“What time and effort and money is going into something that goes against what you believe?” A gay person is being thrown out of the military, and you claim they are not being deprived of any rights? No one compared it to slavery; I compared it to segregation, and it fits.
You don't read responses to these any longer because your arguments are so lame and weak, and they are easy to debunk.
Once again, anonymous wimp, I am still waiting for you to back up your outrageous lie that we were “nearly shoulder to shoulder once.”
Good to know about the troops and also about the panel is useful to know.
__________________
Media Dissertation Proposal
Did Strom Thurmond come back from the dead to comment as Not Anon? Geez. If I'd been sitting on the fence about DADT, I'd be for repeal now just to take the Not Anon's down a peg.
Who said gay soldiers wanted to parade around or check out anyone else's "junk," especially Not Anon's? Anyway, with the out-of-control sexual harassment and rape in the military, it's heterosexual junk we should be concerned about.
Still, I oppose repeal of DADT. John McCain says the report is flawed and John McCain is a maverick who talks straight. You can always believe every word he says. When he was for comprehensive immigration reform, he was for it. Then when McCain was against immigration reform, he was against it. It was just a coincidence that it helped him politically. Yessir, that's the kind of guy you want in a foxhole with you.
Conservatives ascribe to a white, christian, heternormative worldview. Years ago they saw an opportunity to infiltrate and evangelize the military.
Send gifts to Karachi
Post a Comment