Really, I fail to see why gay rights supporters make a huge big deal out of don't ask don't tell. Personally, it de facto has no effect. I would understand if they required you to deny being gay, but they don't. They also don't pass restrictions on your private life. They simply tell you not to talk about it, this does not seem unreasonable to me.
Before you argue "Well straight people can talk about being straight," first of all, being straight is normal in the US. Being gay is not normal. While I personally think it is also wrong and voluntary, that is not the implication of the above, and I understand the disagreement about the morality, but, simply put, gay people are the exception, not the rule, and it is very easy to become uncomfortable around a gay person. I myself share this discomfort in real life, which is not the same as an online forum.
I personally don't see how you can disagree with the above. For many people, being around someone they know is gay is an awkward experience, even if you think there is no moral issue with being gay. For instance, nobody would say being straight is wrong, but to be around someone of the opposite gender you think likes you can be a bit awkward. Now, when that person is the same gender, it is even more so.
Also, gay people are the exception that's a fact, and regardless of that, an employer has the right to ask people not to talk about certain things on the job. Now, regardless of my personal opinions, I can understand not being allowed to refuse employment because of someone's race or gender, because that cannot be changed. However, you can easily just not bring up the fact that you are gay, and if an employer wants to expect that, he has the right. In this case, the government is the employer, but it doesn't make a difference.
Also, if you require sexual orientation to not be a factor in employment, you cause a lot of problems. Imagine Christians being required to hire a gay man as their pastor because they had no other reason not to hire him. You are forcing them to do something immoral, essentially, persecution.
I can understand the vocalization for marriage and adoption rights, but I fail to see how Don't Ask Don't tell is against gays at all. It's not about not being gay, its just the employer demanding you keep that one thing to yourself, something which can make a lot of people uncomfortable if known and compromise their effectiveness in battle. I see nothing wrong with the law. If someone who supports gay rights wants to prove it wrong, they can feel free.
You're making a lot of assumptions about people. And I've found some of what you've said as offensive, while I myself am straight I have a number of friends who are gay. I know you tried to be polite about the who issue but you've left some serious implications in your arguement.
Mm I think it is? I have a Lesbian Cousin but I am okay with it. She is my family . I be nice to her and respect who she is. After all she is a person.
Actually as part of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy you must also take into account the portions of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) that allow for immediate discharge under less than honorable circumstances if you are found to have engaged in anal sex. To quote article 125 of the UCMJ "Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.
(b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall by punished as a court-martial may direct."
And according to other articles of the current UCMJ, if you engage in any other practice which identifies you as homosexual it is grounds for immediate court martial.
The real issue is that gays of either gender are simply not welcomed by the military, and I think that needs to be rectified. Our nation's military should represent an accurate cross section of our society.
And according to other articles of the current UCMJ, if you engage in any other practice which identifies you as homosexual it is grounds for immediate court martial.
Half the crap in the UCMJ isn't even applied anymore, do to it not being applicable.
As for the policy, I see nothing wrong with it. In fact, if I had it my way, sexual orientation shouldn't even be applied to anything, and follow the rule, whether you be straight or gay. The military shoots people, not have sex within the ranks.
In fact, marriage shouldn't be allowed between two members either. It just creates problems that shouldn't be there.
Being around a gay person isn't awkward at all. Really, it's only awkward if you make it awkward or want it to be. I know a couple people that are gay, and they're just like normal people to me. So I dunno... I don't agree with some of the things the OP said.
You're being trained to go to a country to shoot men and women. You're being told to do pushups. If you don't make your bed right, they will make you run laps. If you talk back, they will disban you.
If you are a part of your military, they own your ass. They own the air you breath. They own YOU.
You play by the rules of the military.
Don't ask don't tell is just one way to get a point across to soldiers to break them. You don't go to the military for rights, you go there to become a machine of war. You go there to defend your country. You go there to prove yourself. You don't go to the military to make friends.
That being said, I don't think the policy needs a change.
I really don't see what's so bad about Don't Ask Don't Tell, the Military isn't a place for any sexuality period...
Well let's take a hypothetical scenario.
Two soldiers together, say in a fox hole.
Hetero Soldier: This is a picture of my wife back home, she's why I'm over here fighting.
Nothing wrong with that right? Let's say the soldier was gay.
Gay Soldier: This is a picture of my boyfriend back home, he's why I'm over here fighting.
Now in this second case with the Don't Ask Don't Tell in place, this soldier could be booted with a dishonorable discharge out for doing that.
That's the issue with the policy, it's one sided.
Now with talk of eliminating the policy there have been a number of soldiers who have become open about there orientation and out of the ones that weren't booted out for it there has been no ill effect from them being open about it. Keep in mind they're in the military to serve their country, not to bone every guy in sight.
There is a difference between being gay and acting overtly gay.
There seems to be a disparity between what DADT actually is and what some people in this thread think DADT entails.
Obviously the Army is not a place for homosexuals or heterosexuals to act overtly romantic. For a homosexual, that would entail acting gay, and for a heterosexual, that would entail acting heterosexually.
What I perceive to be the problem with DADT is the fact that if a heterosexual soldier conveys the fact that he/she is attracted to members of the opposite sex, he/she will not be punished at all, while if the homosexual soldier ever says that he/she is attracted to members of the same sex, he/she will be immediately discharged.
I am against such discriminatory double-standards.
Imagine Christians being required to hire a gay man as their pastor because they had no other reason not to hire him. You are forcing them to do something immoral, essentially, persecution.
Right, making christians choose a perfectly qualified gay dude for pastor is persecution? What about telling the same man 'no' simply because he is gay? Isn't that persecution?
They also don't pass restrictions on your private life. They simply tell you not to talk about it, this does not seem unreasonable to me.
How is having to keep your sexual orientation secret from all your workmates not a restriction on your private life?
being straight is normal in the US. Being gay is not normal.
So your argument that gays should have to keep their sexual orientation secret is because they are not normal. Maybye we should also make sure abnormally tall people never tell their superiors they have tall parents, so as to prevent any loss of unit cohesion.
and it is very easy to become uncomfortable around a gay person.
Your opinion. The idea this unverifiable sentiment sould be condoned across the board is laughable. If the 'don't ask don't tell' policy was really acted out, you wouldn't even know who was gay, indicating there is nothing intrinsically terrifying about them. If they really are such frightening creatures, why are people like you only afraid once they are aware of their sexuality?
Now, when that person is the same gender, it is even more so.
Sources. Until you use them I have no reason to believe anything you say. I also happen to be a serving member of the UK military and think you're talking out of your arse.
You are forcing them to do something immoral, essentially, persecution.
It isi the gay man who wants to be a priest who is being persecuted, not the organisation denying him that right.
Half the crap in the UCMJ isn't even applied anymore, do to it not being applicable.
Actually you are wrong. Gays can be barred in the US for 'ropensity to commit'. Simply being suspected is often enough for expulsion.
something which can make a lot of people uncomfortable if known and compromise their effectiveness in battle.
Again sources.
Really all your don't ask don't tell arguments can be summed up as simply as:
''All straight people who are aware of the presence of gays in the workplace become so uuncomfortable, they cannot perform their function, whilst gays are likely to be sexual predators''.
Seriously? Please provide some sort of source to back up your opinions.
