Columns

Continuance of ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ based on irrational logic

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips ruled Sept. 9 that the U.S. Department of Defense’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which bars openly gay, lesbian or bisexual service members from the military, is unconstitutional in the case Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America.

Phillips issued a permanent worldwide injunction Oct. 12 ordering the military to immediately “suspend and discontinue any investigation, or discharge, separation, or other proceeding, that may have been commenced” under “don’t ask, don’t tell”.

In response to this Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that there will be “enormous consequences” for men and women in uniform if the judge’s order abruptly allowing gays to serve openly in the military is allowed to stand.

There is no reason that gays should be denied their right to serve. Opponents argue how it will weaken the military and only serve to lower overall morale among troops. These arguments are false.

It’s been brought up many times before by men like Air Force Col. Om Prakash that there simply is no scientific or battlefield observational evidence leading to the conclusion that unit cohesion is compromised by the presence of openly gay personnel.

Instead, it seems the opposite, as in the case of Joseph Rocha a gay improvised explosive device expert who was alienated from his fellow soldiers because he couldn’t explain to his peers why he didn’t join in their parties or risqué conversations, and when finally admitting to being gay, Rocha was rewarded with a discharge from the military.

However, if the “don’t ask, don’t tell” is repealed, Rocha and many others say they are willing to serve again.

In 2007, it was reported that there were at least 65,000 gay men and women in the military and one million veterans. There were 114 retired generals and admirals who signed similar statements that the policy should be repealed.

As retired Army Gen. and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili wrote, “Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job.”

There are plenty of men and women both willing and able to serve in the military. Let’s not deny them because of intolerance masked by unjustifiable and irrational reasons.

Marcus Smith is an English freshman and may be reached at [email protected].

4 Comments

  • this is so sad gay people are forcing thier ways of sickness on anybody who does not accept this warped behavior.they want nothing to do with the bible satan and his coharts hate the bible. i guess they think we got here from the air.in the beginning god created man name him adam then he saw that man was alone then he created a woman name eve.they are confused they are employed under the government its funny when you go apply for a job and read the rules and get hired you cant just demand to change everything if i wanted to go to my job in a dress, the code states pants only well i will come to work dress correctly not trying to make the .these people think something wrong with straight people .can anybody imagine viewing this crap in public men kissing each other women kissing each other men wanting to be women women wanting to be men transgendered trans confused omg legalizing gay marriages .i dont blame those straight servicemembers these gay people will infringe on thier rights if they lift that ban you will see all types of illucite lusty behavior these service men will have to fight the enemy in the field but in the bunkhouse .

    • Talk about "sad" and "sickness"… Are you for real? You seem pretty warped. The Bible? Satan? Kissing? Men/women wanting to be Women/men? Huh? The topic here is military service, specifically willing and able-bodied citizens who are prevented from serving. Your post reveals a rather fascinating personal preoccupation with homosexual "illucite [sp] lusty behavior." Perhaps a cold shower and a long, hard look in the mirror is in order.

  • Not to knock the topic but your argument was piss poor:

    "there simply is no scientific or battlefield observational evidence leading to the conclusion that unit cohesion is compromised by the presence of openly gay personnel."

    "as in the case of Joseph Rocha a gay improvised explosive device expert who was alienated from his fellow soldiers because he couldn’t explain to his peers why he didn’t join in their parties or risqué conversations,"

    Sounds like a lack of cohesion to me. You can't logically assume there would still be a lack of cohesion if DADT is repealed but also you most certainly cannot automatically conclude that there would be automatic cohesion under the same circumstances (that DADT is repealed).

Leave a Comment