The topic I have chosen to discuss this week is President Obama's plans to change the don't ask don't tell policy in the military which prevents open gays from serving. The President has recently commented on the topic and has not set a timetable as to when the change will happen, but expressed how he was addressing the issue.
During his political campaign President Obama expressed his opinion that gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military and now the one thing people who support it are asking is when? It seems that the President has his plate full with more important issues to include: the economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and healthcare reform. The President claims he is working with the Pentagon on the issue, and that during his years America will experience a stop against discrimination whether it be in the office or the battlefield.
Having served six years in the Ohio Army Guard with two deployments overseas, I am quite familiar with the military policies. I think what people have to understand is that the military operates under completely different guidelines than the American workforce. What some may seem as discrimination is only typical military policy. I do believe gays are one of the most discriminated groups of people today in America, and it shocks me that the land of the free which has broken its barriers against discrimination of blacks and women still struggles to let gays be open completely about their sexual preference.
If we are to argue why gays should not be open in the military than we should also argue the regualation the does not allow females to serve in combat roles. The whole time I was in the military I was in combat arms and the regulations still are that women will not hold a position in a combat role. Yes, G.I. Jane is not a true story, and Hollywood may show women acting with males in combat situations, but it's simply not that way. Have women fired their weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan against enemy combatants? I most certianley believe so, and women may serve as military police officers, but the point is that the military has its standards for reasons. Women are not allowed in combat roles simply because they are physically not built like men.
So why are gays not allowed to be openly gay, sexual preference has nothing to do with physical strength? I think the policy is in place to protect servicemembers. From a personal experience I don't think many other straight males would feel comfortable serving around openly gay men. This is not necessarily because gay men can't be good service members, but in the military lifestyle people serve closely to one another. Showers are often open areas and sleeping arrangements are usually close. The military already has a problem with sexual harrassment between males and females, and allowing gays to be open may bring on more problems.
This issue is more than whether or not gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. This affects how the military operates as a whole, and I think what is being analyised is where do you draw the line between operation and discrimination. It is wrong for people to be discriminated against, but the military has set its standards for reasons. I don't view the standards set in the don't ask don't tell policy any different than any other military regulation. The military has to operate under different guidelines in order to stay strong and keep its members safe. The fact is that when someone enters the military and they sign the dotted line they give up certain rights that they had as civilians.
Here is a list of other military regulations that may seem as discrimination: 1. Officers and Enlinsted members may not have an open relationship or marry if they are in the same unit and were not previously married. 2. Members who fail to meet physical requirements may be discharge. 3. Specific age requirements. 4. People that are disabled or many other medical issues that might affect the ability to operate under the physical and emotional stresses of the military lifestyle.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Oh my goodness this blog needs published in a nationwide newspaper! This is a GREAT blog! i have a gay family member in the Army. He is openly gay but not in his military life. He understands why there are regulations and he respects those regulations and those he serves with. i do not think they should be punished or discharged because they are gay if they are not harassing anyone though.
ReplyDeleteI agree that women should not serve in combat roles. They simply are not as strong as men and they are way too emotional. If my son was injured in war I would want to know that he had someone with him that could physically move him to safety.
Thank you for serving our country and keeping my family safe! Aslo, than you to your wife/family for supporting you. They too have helped keep my family safe.
Hi Christian, I also want to say thank you for serving our country and protecting our ideals. Our service men and women do not get enough credit for their efforts.
ReplyDeleteI believe this issue is riddled with misconceptions, fear and just simply the issue of right and wrong. If I were a gay man, I would take offense to the notion that I can't sleep or bathe in a common area because it is feared I will "come on" to a man within my unit. Just like any other person with a hidden agenda, any situation can be compromised. What should be the focus of any policy is the inclusion of all people who are covered under the policy and the consequences of any abuse or violation of said policy. I am more concerned with the sterotyping/generalities being portrayed. The military can set and enforce policies that are not discriminatory and the effectiveness of that policy is how people who violate the policy are held accountable.
I do agree with you that the policies of the mainstream workforce are not as appropriate as policies that need to be set and adhered to in the military. I also agree with you that the physical and pyschological nature of the duties and responsibilities of serving in the miltary, requires a different set of norms.
I beleive people should be held accountable for their actions regardless of their sexual preferences. If a peson's overt sexual advances jeopardize a military unit by creating an environment of sexual tension, then the issue at hand is the infraction. How the military enforces the consequences of violating a policy is what will deter infractions. A gay man can decide to serve his country appropriately without coming on to the men in his unit.
Just food for thought as this topic is messy...