RSS Feed MenuThe debate over “don’t ask / don’t tell” in the military is often presented as a battle between liberals and conservatives. That’s not correct – and not fair to conservatives.
In fact, a strong majority of conservatives also want to see the policy ended. According to a June Gallup poll, weekly churchgoers (60%), conservatives (58%), and Republicans (58%) effectively favor ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” A Washington Post/ABC News poll last year concluded 64 percent of all conservatives and all Republicans supported open service. There has no doubt been a sea change since 1993 among conservatives in how they view this issue.
Attitudes of military personnel have changed, too. Seventy-three percent of returning Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are “comfortable” with gay people (Zogby International, 2006).
Conservatives have not lost their support for traditional values. They are learning from experience – and especially from military experience.
They have seen too many translators kicked out of a military that desperately needs linguistic skills. They have heard of too many skilled intelligence operatives lost. They have watched the poignant interview with a decorated Gulf War F-15 aviator who was recently served discharge papers after 18 years in the military.
Six hundred military personnel are discharged every year under DADT – 13,000 since the policy was commenced – at a time when our military needs every qualified and willing service member it can enlist and retain.
Like any community, the gay community includes people of more and less conservative values and opinions. Gays serving this country are among some of the more conservative members of the gay community. Yet these are precisely the people targeted by current policy. Military service does not lend itself to leading flamboyant lives under those buzz cuts. They are threatened with expulsion if they answer, “I went to a movie with my partner” when asked what they did over the weekend.
When DADT was introduced in 1993, it was justified by warnings that straights would flee military service if gays served openly. Attitudes have changed. Many soldiers know exactly which of their colleagues are gay. They feel no need to quit. There has been no exodus from the armed forces of Britain or Israel (no shabby military here) after both changed their policies to allow gays to serve openly.
Laura Miller of the conservative RAND Corporation concluded in 2008 there are “no associations between knowing a lesbian or gay unit member and ratings of perceived unit cohesion or readiness.”
Gay Americans are asking for an equal opportunity to enlist, to serve, to fight and if need be, to die to protect their fellow Americans. American conservatives, with their special respect for the military vocation, should be ready to answer: Yes – and thank you.
midcon // Aug 18, 2009 at 6:45 pm
And the aviator never even told. He was ratted out. Most of the military members have always known which of their fellow members are gay. Just like most NFL players know which ones are gay or straight. This is really a no-brainer. I’m sure the policy will not last much longer.
SFTor1 // Aug 18, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Maybe a couple of Republican members of Congress could write a bill to end the nonsense.
ottovbvs // Aug 18, 2009 at 7:16 pm
sftor1 // Aug 18, 2009 at 6:55 pm
“Maybe a couple of Republican members of Congress could write a bill to end the nonsense.
……..What a good idea…..Issa? Inhofe? DeMint? Bunning? ……The Bunning Gay Military Equality Act……I can see it now
barker13 // Aug 18, 2009 at 7:26 pm
I’m with Mid; end the policy.
The President could do so with a stroke of his pen. (*SHRUG*) And he should.
BILL
pnwguy // Aug 18, 2009 at 7:56 pm
Agreed. Nice to see that most of the crowd here can agree on something……
Wasn’t it Barry Goldwater who remarked that it didn’t matter if a soldier was straight, just that he could SHOOT straight?
sinz54 // Aug 19, 2009 at 9:34 am
I would agree to change the policy, except for one thing:
Unlike Britain or Israel, a disproportionate number of religious, socially conservative American men volunteer for the American military. Surveys and even TV news reports have shown that the U.S. military contains a larger percentage of devoutly evangelical Christians than their percentage in the general population. Some of them have threatened to refuse to sign up for any more tours of duty after their current tour is over–if gays are allowed to serve openly. I believe them. That hostility could adversely affect enlistment rates and reinlistment rates.
The majority of Americans want the ban lifted. But that majority includes a lot of Blue State liberals and moderates who would never volunteer for military service anyway. The U.S. military includes a lot of devout Christians from Red States who just don’t want to serve with gays.
Why isn’t this a problem for Israel? Because they have a military draft. Even Orthodox Jewish young men are drafted and forced to serve alongside gays.
This is NOT a trivial problem; and the effect on enlistment rates and re-enlistment rates from conservative Red districts needs to be determined before the ban is lifted.
sinz54 // Aug 19, 2009 at 9:41 am
Back in World War II, when America really wanted to win that war and fundamentalist Christianity wasn’t such a potent political force, America had a more enlightened attitude about sexuality issues in the military.
During World War II, many lesbians volunteered for service in the newly created Women’s Army Corps (WAC). So many, in fact, that newspapers in socially conservative states like Texas began publishing embarrassing stories of what these women were doing on weekend furloughs off their military bases.
The political pressure grew on General Eisenhower to purge all the lesbians from the WACs. But the director of the WACs told Eisenhower bluntly: If you purge all the lesbians from the WACs, there won’t be enough WACs left to make up an effective force! So Eisenhower dropped the issue, and lesbians continued to serve.
BillyFLA // Aug 19, 2009 at 10:40 am
“The debate over “don’t ask / don’t tell” in the military is often presented as a battle between liberals and conservatives. That’s not correct”
So what are we sayin’ here? That it is a battle just among Conservatives? I thought conservatives all agreed to a set standard of what is right. No moral relativism, etc. Is this writer bashing fellow conservatives? Say it ain’t so!
DFL // Aug 19, 2009 at 12:31 pm
I don’t support “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as that was the Clinton policy in the 1990s. A return ot the Weinberger policy on the 1980s is in order. If the Republicans wish to rupture conservatism, then go ahead and adopt decadent modernism on the issue.
liv&win // Aug 19, 2009 at 12:33 pm
I think DADT was an policy compromise which ended up being incremental in nature. if it is true, that”Attitudes of military personnel have changed, too. Seventy-three percent of returning Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are “comfortable” with gay people (Zogby International, 2006),” then the DADT has outlived its usefulness in getting people more comfortable with gays. Scrap the thing.
rickandgary // Aug 19, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Not to mention the fact that the greatest benefit ever conferred upon middle-class gay couples is raising the exclusion on estate taxes. Suddenly, we don’t have to worry about losing our houses if a spouse dies.
sricher // Aug 19, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Excellent piece Kevin. Thank you.
liv&win // Aug 19, 2009 at 2:25 pm
dfl: since when is individual liberty decadent. GCUAR
barker13 // Aug 19, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Re: Sinz54 // Aug 19, 2009 at 9:34 am (#6) –
“I would agree to change the policy, except for one thing…”
So… (*SCRATCHING MY HEAD*)… you’re OPPOSED to changing the policy…??? Is that what you’re saying?
You’re saying you “would” but… er… you won’t. (You wouldn’t.) Is that right?
I don’t know what you can’t just spit it out, Sinz. Please clarify/verify.
BILL
ccco // Aug 19, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Do not be distracted by any suggestion that enlistment/re-enlistment rates would suffer if DADT was eliminated. The integration of the military service in 1948 had the potential to cause an even more catastrophic effect on those rates and, by most indications, did not. Regardless, if troops are desperately needed the draft can be immediately restarted; not a great solution but a valid one.
What seems to be in great contention is how DADT is to be eliminated. CCCO invites you to imagine what would happen if all 65,000 LGBTQ service members “came out” all at once. http://www.objector.org/NOV_11__2009.html
midcon // Aug 19, 2009 at 4:36 pm
The number 65,000 came from the report “Gay Men and Lesbians in the U.S. Military
Estimates from Census 2000″ by Gary Gates (Sep 2004). Gates used a statistical procedure
using Bayes’ Rule, as a mechanism to estimate the fraction of military personnel who are
gay or lesbian. He applied the procedure to estimates of gay and lesbians in the general population. So his estimates are estimates based on estimates. I would not put too much credence in the number 65,000. Also, that number includes the Guard as well as active duty. That active duty estimate is 36,000. I would not worry too much about gays exploding out of the closet.
JohnMcC // Aug 19, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Back when men were drafted one great benefit for the nation-as-a-whole from that policy was that boys from NYC met and served with boys from Alabama, Jewish boys and Boston southies served together and so on. It led to an appreciation for what a great big wonderful country we have. It seems that young Americans now are carrying with them into The Service an open attitude. Kind of a shame, seems to me, but long overdue.
chgok9dad // Aug 19, 2009 at 5:30 pm
To sinz54 and others with a similar quotation: “Some of them have threatened to refuse to sign up for any more tours of duty after their current tour is over–if gays are allowed to serve openly.” Have you actually talked to anyone in the military who is social conservative, devoutly evangelical? I have, and I was totally surprised that they don’t have a problem with someone being gay and serving. When you serve alongside someone who is gay, you discover that they’re just as competent, and want to do their job. These are people who are trained for months to do one thing, serve their country and win the war, to the best of their abilities. Just as they might have a problem serving alongside someone who is racially different, if they weren’t brought up with racially different people, these young men and women are dedicated to the service they provide. Hiding the fact that they are gay puts even more strain on them, and yet, thousands continue to serve under these conditions now. Why is it that gay men and women serve can serve openly in the NSA, CIA, Secret Service and FBI? Are there no devoutly evangelical individuals in those organizations? This IS the only federal organization that doesn’t allow someone to serve simply because they are gay, whether or not they are competent.
Also, to those who are socially conservative, there are documented cases where DADT dismisses straight women due to harassment from other servicemembers; they are, essentially, threatened to be called a lesbian if they won’t submit. In a number of ways, DADT is just plain wrong, and needs to be repealed.
A Majority of Conservatives Want "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" Eliminated » Equal Roots // Aug 20, 2009 at 12:45 am
[...] President last year supported keeping “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in place, the majority of conservatives favor a repeal of the discriminatory military policy. And that’s both a good thing for LGBT rights, and for U.S. national [...]
barker13 // Aug 20, 2009 at 11:47 am
Re: Barker13 // Aug 19, 2009 at 3:18 pm (#14) –
Hmm!
Like Elvis, Sinz appears to have “left the building.”
(*SHRUG*)
BILL
Johnathan L. Abbinett // Aug 21, 2009 at 3:34 pm
The DADT policy has been a failure and violated the civil rights of the GLBT community from day one – it’s past time to end this egregious policy – and President Obaman, as Commander-In-Chief can do so, and should do so, immediately with a stroke of his pen in an Executive Order!
Sinz54 is simply wrong about appeasing the evangelicals in the military that threaten to not re-enlist if the DADT policy is ended! If anyone is that closed minded about the diversity of our democracy – I don’t want them anywhere in American government or our military services!
I’m straight, and served honorably for over 22 years – and I never had a single serious problem with any GLBT soldier – in fact, I found them to be some of the best, brightest and most worthy people I ever had the honor of serving with, as peers, as a subordinate and as a leader!
ProudPaleoCon // Aug 23, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Re #8 by BillyFLA
This truly isn’t a battle between Conservatives & Liberals. Nor is it a battle within Conservatives alone. The issue of allowing Gays & Lesbians is a battle between those who value the spirit and original intentions of our democratic republic & this who attempt to impose a particular religious outlook upon all Americans, regardless of the belief systems of others. The so-called “Religious Right” has hijacked the Republican Party for long enough. Not everyone in the United States is a fundamentalist Christian. Not everyone in the United States is even Christian!
The Constitutional arrangement surrounding Religion & Government has been consistently misinterpreted by Atheists for almost a century as the complete and total separation of Church & State. The wording in our Bill of Rights is very specific and shows that his complete separation is not what is mandated. Instead, the Congress is banned from making any laws that somehow establish the views & beliefs of one religious group as normative and giving those beliefs the force of law binding upon all citizens regardless of whether they share those beliefs or not.
DADT is an extreme example of how the “Religious Right” hijacked the Republican party & attempted to do exactly what the Constitution prohibits. They have attempted to give the force of law to their religious belief that homosexuals cannot be tolerated due to sinful acts. However, this is not a universal belief of all citizens. In fact, a sizeable majority of Americans belief in equality for all regardless of sexuality.
It is not just the religious wing of the GOP that has attempted this. The large African-American bloc, guided by the Black Churches, has imposed the same religious agenda on the Democratic Party as well.
We are currently under an Administration that believes that there is no part of our lives that Government shouldn’t control. As Conservatives we are hypocrites if we fight those attempts to expand government into those arenas that our Constitution rightfully reserves for the States or to Individual conscience, but then attempt to establish one religious belief as superior and the official Government position while excluding all other religious or secular viewpoints from discussion.
We are in a battle between those who wish to protect our Constitutional guarantee of individual freedoms from government intervention & those who wish to violate our Constitution by establishing on particular religion as our official guide on who can & cannot serve in the Military. There are Liberals and Conservatives on both sides of this issue.
If DADT continues and the idea that Government can and should intervene in even the most personal aspects of our individual lives, then there can be no logical argument from excluding the power of Government from any and all aspects of our lives. At that moment, the Socialist/Communist dream of the complete control of a subject population by a Liberal Elite will have been brought to reality and our glorious democratic republic will have been destroyed.