Will eliminating "don't ask-don't tell" improve the military?

[G.T.]

No doubt that there are, And as long as they do not identify themselves as such no one will ever care. They do not need special treatment and special rules to serve.

DADT is a "special" rule.

 

[The Rabbi]

No doubt that there are, And as long as they do not identify themselves as such no one will ever care. They do not need special treatment and special rules to serve.

DADT is a "special" rule.

Not really.

 

[rightwinger]

No doubt that there are, And as long as they do not identify themselves as such no one will ever care. They do not need special treatment and special rules to serve.

DADT is a "special" rule.

Under DADT you are still kicking out qualified soldiers for issues that have nothing to do with their ability to do the job

 

[G.T.]

Not really.

Why was it designed? Shh.

 

[The Rabbi]

Not really.

Why was it designed? Shh.

To allow the military to work effectively.

 

[G.T.]

Not really.

Why was it designed? Shh.

To allow the military to work effectively.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why was it designed? Shh.

To allow the military to work effectively.

So you think it was done to hamper the military from working effectively?

 

[bodecea]

To allow the military to work effectively.

So you think it was done to hamper the military from working effectively?

Ask those who have been kicked out and those who have to pick up the slack in their commands.
Ask those COs who PURPOSELY do not report their gay soldiers/sailors because they cannot afford to lose them.
Ask their fellow soldiers/sailors who know they are gay and still RELY on them to cover their six in combat, at work, etc.

Gay soldiers/sailors are NOT being kicked out for failure to do their job....they are NOT being kicked out because their commands are suddenly not able to work effectively with them there. That's the proof.

 

[The Rabbi]

So you think it was done to hamper the military from working effectively?

Ask those who have been kicked out and those who have to pick up the slack in their commands.
Ask those COs who PURPOSELY do not report their gay soldiers/sailors because they cannot afford to lose them.
Ask their fellow soldiers/sailors who know they are gay and still RELY on them to cover their six in combat, at work, etc.

Gay soldiers/sailors are NOT being kicked out for failure to do their job....they are NOT being kicked out because their commands are suddenly not able to work effectively with them there. That's the proof.

You know this how?
There is no reason for any gay soldier to be kicked out other than his own actions.

 

[G.T.]

So you think it was done to hamper the military from working effectively?

I think it was done because there's an underlying societal taboo against being Gay..... and so the institution followed suit; however, I also feel that the taboo is petty and lacks integrity.

 

[rightwinger]

Our view on gays in the military: Historic votes don't assure end to 'don't ask, don't tell' - USATODAY.com

Public opinion has shifted as well. In a Gallup poll in May, 70% of the public —including 53% of self-described conservatives— favored allowing openly gay men and women to serve, up 30 percentage points since 1993.

 

[The Rabbi]

So you think it was done to hamper the military from working effectively?

I think it was done because there's an underlying societal taboo against being Gay..... and so the institution followed suit; however, I also feel that the taboo is petty and lacks integrity.

OK. You are entirely welcome to your opinion. So is the opinion that homosexuality is disgusting and foul and contrary to Gd's law.
Do you really want to impose your view on other people?

 

[The Rabbi]

Our view on gays in the military: Historic votes don't assure end to 'don't ask, don't tell' - USATODAY.com

Public opinion has shifted as well. In a Gallup poll in May, 70% of the public —including 53% of self-described conservatives— favored allowing openly gay men and women to serve, up 30 percentage points since 1993.

That's nice but irrelevant. What is relevant is what the commanders think since they're the ones stuck with the policy.

 

[bodecea]

So you think it was done to hamper the military from working effectively?

Ask those who have been kicked out and those who have to pick up the slack in their commands.
Ask those COs who PURPOSELY do not report their gay soldiers/sailors because they cannot afford to lose them.
Ask their fellow soldiers/sailors who know they are gay and still RELY on them to cover their six in combat, at work, etc.

Gay soldiers/sailors are NOT being kicked out for failure to do their job....they are NOT being kicked out because their commands are suddenly not able to work effectively with them there. That's the proof.

You know this how?
There is no reason for any gay soldier to be kicked out other than his own actions.

Serving. I know for a FACT that in most cases, your gay soldier/sailor is a valuable member of the command. So much so, commands do NOT report them. The only time I ever saw someone discharged was: 1) they were a no-load, 2) they wanted out themselves, 3) the command was homophobic. These were rare conditions...one reason why many many gay members stay in. I've had commanders, when told by NIS (now NCIS) that a member is gay, had told the agent "so what" and told them to leave.

What's YOUR personal experience on this topic?

 

[G.T.]

OK. You are entirely welcome to your opinion. So is the opinion that homosexuality is disgusting and foul and contrary to Gd's law.
Do you really want to impose your view on other people?

What's the difference if I do? DADT does just that, it's no different.

 

[The Rabbi]

OK. You are entirely welcome to your opinion. So is the opinion that homosexuality is disgusting and foul and contrary to Gd's law.
Do you really want to impose your view on other people?

What's the difference if I do? DADT does just that, it's no different.

Thats the whole point of DADT. It imposes no policy other than shut up about who you like to sleep with. It does not say gay people cannot serve in the military. And there are probably plenty doing so now. But if you change the policy you force the military to make a value judgment.

 

[G.T.]

Thats the whole point of DADT. It imposes no policy other than shut up about who you like to sleep with. It does not say gay people cannot serve in the military. And there are probably plenty doing so now. But if you change the policy you force the military to make a value judgment.

It's designed because society has been traditionally homophobic. Now that we're (or we'd like to think) advancing to become a more empathetic species, you'd like to think pussies wouldn't cry when a policy designed around a bigotry is abolished. Just a nice thought I suppose, but I'm willing to just laugh off the bigots wherever possible.

-->

Especially the ones who like to disguise their bigotries as something else and don't have the testicular fortitude to stand behind their convictions.

 

[The Rabbi]

Thats the whole point of DADT. It imposes no policy other than shut up about who you like to sleep with. It does not say gay people cannot serve in the military. And there are probably plenty doing so now. But if you change the policy you force the military to make a value judgment.

It's designed because society has been traditionally homophobic. Now that we're (or we'd like to think) advancing to become a more empathetic species, you'd like to think pussies wouldn't cry when a policy designed around a bigotry is abolished. Just a nice thought I suppose, but I'm willing to just laugh off the bigots wherever possible.

-->

Especially the ones who like to disguise their bigotries as something else and don't have the testicular fortitude to stand behind their convictions.

Well, there you go with your own agenda. Opposing homosexuality is "bigotry". That is a value judgment on your part, happily not shared by many people. You really are jsut trying to impose your own views.

 

[G.T.]

Well, there you go with your own agenda. Opposing homosexuality is "bigotry". That is a value judgment on your part, happily not shared by many people. You really are jsut trying to impose your own views.

I'm in favor of not discerning between Gay and Straight, which is to say: no policy. Non-imposing.

Instead, we have a Military where straights can talk about banging girls with no repurcussions, and it's not the other way around for Gays. That's what's called imposing a view. Not the other way around.

The policy was made to address Gay. Nothing more, nothing less. That's imposing a view, and everything else you think it was created for is ignorance and/or skirting of the truth.

 

[G.T.]

Don't ask, don't tell (DADT) is the common term for the policy restricting the United States military from efforts to discover or reveal closeted gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members or applicants, while barring those that are openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual from military service. The restrictions are mandated by federal law

That's imposing a view, numbnuts. A repeal of this is the exact opposite of imposing anything.