Although there are many reasons this policy should be repealed, one fact that may surprise those who approve of DADT is its financial cost. Since its introduction, more than 13,000 soldiers have been discharged under the terms of the policy. Recruitment costs and costs of training have deprived the US of nearly $200 million from its start until 2003; that number has likely doubled since.
The glaringly obvious reason that the policy should be repealed is that it discriminates against GLBT soldiers serving in the military. Our nation's history is scattered with discrimination against gays, blacks, women, and a variety of other minority groups. At the time, there was vast support for many of these policies; in retrospect, however, the majority of such laws seem senseless and just plain stupid.
Every day that goes by, DADT comes closer to being repealed. Many celebrities, such as comedian Kathy Griffin, actively protest it, encouraging their fans to do the same. Other notable figures such as Lieutenant Dan Choi, who was recently discharged after coming out during an interview on The Rachel Maddow Show, work to spread the word about the injustice of DADT. The day this discriminatory law becomes history will be a victory for those who value equality.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I have heard of “Don’t ask, Don’t tell,” I did not know exactly what it was other than it had to do with gays in the military. For instance, I was not aware that gays are prohibited from joining, I just thought it was frowned upon, not that a gay person could get dishonorably discharged if discovered to be homosexual.
ReplyDeleteI also did not think about the cost. You’re probably right about numbers of DADT cases doubling since 2003 due to the fact that America (in general, civilian life, not the armed forces) is getting more and more accepting about people being openly gay therefore more and more people are “coming out.” I wonder if military members who get dishonorable discharge have to pay anything back, though. I have heard some cases of guys who got out of the military (though I’m not sure the circumstances) and ended up actually owing money and having to pay them back for the school expenses previously paid for by the military.
I am somewhat on the fence about homosexuality. On one hand, I feel that it is everyone’s choice and we all deserve to be loved and happy. I think as humans some of us are wired differently to be attracted to different types of people. Whether he likes blonde women or she prefers tall men…or he prefers shorter men and she prefers brunette women…we are not all the same in our attractions. So who’s to say what’s right or wrong for someone else without having been in their shoes? I’ll tell you who: God. In the Bible it says that homosexuality is a sin, and although it is the human condition to sin, we are to try to avoid it and choose not to sin when given an opportunity to make a conscious choice.
Also, you should know that before January 2010 I had zero exposure to the military. Since then, I have been dating an air force pilot who has taught me a lot about how the military works and our necessity for it that I never realized. From a heterosexual soldier’s perspective, they are often in life or death, war situations, living in close quarters, and even if a straight man in the service thinks it is fine if people choose to be gay, it can still make him feel a little uncomfortable and it’s just not safe. These guys need to be able to make decisions under enough stress as it is. I do see your point when you say it’s a shame that homosexuals can’t serve in the military because there are probably many who would want to, and many would argue that sexual preference has nothing to do with one’s ability to serve his or her country.
am fairly new to this concept of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". As a heterosexual male, I support the inclusion of homosexual and bisexual individuals in the military. From my perspective, I view it as another form of discrimination - nothing new in the history of America. In the Civil War, the inclusion of black soldiers in the forces was a very controversial topic. Surely, the majority of soldiers were uncomfortable fighting alongside those, who in normal times, were their servants and slaves. During the Spanish-American war, our forces were in need of men and looked for help from black volunteers. However, unsurprisingly, this met with much opposition. Ultimately, more than ten thousand black soldiers were recruited to fight in the battlefield.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to homosexuality and bisexuality, I believe people are entitled to their own personal sexual preferences. I truly do not understand why people are bothered by the sexual preferences of someone other than themselves. From a religious perspective, I can understand; however, religion does not play a significant role in my life to dictate how I perceive other people.
In my opinion, in times of need, I think soldiers should suspend their personal beliefs, for the sake of our country. However, I realize that most people are not comfortable enough to do that. I think it's fairly obvious that I am all for equality. I believe DADT is merely modern-day discrimination and with time, I hope the military will someday realize this.
This blog entry written by Alex, a student attending the University of Texas, explicates the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. It provides just enough information to enlighten the reader about the policy, yet, it teases the audience with few facts.
ReplyDeleteDADT was well defined at the beginning of the article. This quick punch of information was like jumping into a cold pool on a hot summer day, I was alert and ready for more.
He provided further information about the fact that it has "deprived the U.S. of nearly $200 million from its start until 2003." This shocking statistic supports his argument that the policy should be repealed due to the cost itself.
He further expresses his belief that the policy should be repealed by stating that DADT "discriminates against [LGBT] soldiers serving the military." The sentence following this statement lacks support, He reminds us that "our nation's history is scattered with discrimination..." If he mentioned a few examples regarding discrimination it would have supported his argument. It lacked concrete details, such as the beginning of militias and how Louisiana segregated theirs and etc.
The reference to Lt. Dan Choi in this post made the problem real. It supported Alex's argument that the policy is "senseless and just plain stupid." It makes no sense that the military would discharge an outstanding Lieutenant just because of his sexuality.
The question that should be asked is why aren't we as a whole fighting for their freedom? Soldiers are fighting for our freedom, so why can't they be freed from such discrimination? I agree that this policy should be repealed. There isn't a strong enough reasoning behind having such a policy.
This would have been a stronger argument if Alex included a reference backing up his beliefs. The Washington Post featured an article titled " Don't ask don't tell survey released," regarding this policy that would have taken his argument to a different level. The questions asked on the survey were enough to leave me pondering what idiot would take credit for writting such crap. You may read the article by following the link provided below.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2010/07/a_pentagon_survey_sent_this.html