March 13, 2007
-
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
I asked the wrong question in my last post. I made mention of how the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Pace said that homosexuality was immoral. What I was trying to get at was that Gen Pace’s comments were consistent with the position of the military and government. Gen Pace has come under fire for his statements but his statements only match the position of the government.
Gen Pace referred to homosexuality as immoral. He also referred to adultery as immoral. Both are not allowed in the military. My thinking is that Gen. Pace is coming under fire for the position of the government.
The military has a policy of “Don’t ask, Don’t tell.” At some level, the military is saying that there is something wrong with homosexuality.
Does the policy of “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” imply that the U.S. government looks at homosexuality as immoral?
Comments (85)
a bit, i suppose.
at the very least, frowned upon.
Yes they do
No, not necessarily. It means they’re willing to accept it but they don’t want it to be marked as OKAY, Do whatever you Want in the Military
That would cut back on discipline.
hmmm…
sometimes i think it’s just better if people don’t know so much…
yes…as a non-normative practice that has negative implications for their stated purposes.
If they felt neutral about it, they wouldn’t have a policy
Isn’t it Immoral? If not….then is it Moral?
let’s just sit and think about it….is it normal/natural for the same sex to try to mate?
just putting it out there…this does not mean i hate gay people…i have some as my friends…
Certainly sounds like it.
Yes, that is the implication.
I don’t think so. If that were the case then they would have a “Don’t ask don’t tell” clause in regards to adultry.
Your question implies that the U.S. military and the U.S. government are all one big, happy, agreeable family. Trust me, that’s not the case. The government and the military often have conflicting ideologies.
yep. *Risky comment deleted*
Well yeah. If you look at the majority of those who enlist, they would probably kill their own gay comrades. I would
I would think so.
I read the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy as the government keeping its nose out of an area where it has no right….The personal bedrooms of ANYONE have no concern to anyone but the people in that bedroom…. I don’t think the Church or State should be concerned about the sexuality of any people…Immoral?? HOW is love immoral, isn’t that what Jesus was preaching? “Love is the greatest..” “Love thy neighbour as they self”… Love is love, how can you condemn someone because they disagree with your beliefs or your lifestyle?? People are people NOT what their sexuality or skin colour are….Sometimes your Politicians says things that really reflect badly on your country.. ‘Til The Next
You can’t say immoral, Rich, seperation of church and state, Morality is governed, or at least has been determined, by religion.
It may be wrong, but you can’t say immoral.
Definitely yes. By say that it is something that should be kept secret they are implying there is something wrong with it.
: )
The problem is that one can’t cite the “US Government” (as a whole) of having a certain viewpoint unless it’s codified in some law or declaration that has widespread agreement. Maybe you could say that certain lawmakers view it as immoral, but I don’t think it can be said that the government has taken a position on homosexuality one way or the other. Propers on the site by the way, just found it today. Keep up the interesting entries!
Duh.
If it wasn’t considered Immoral, then it wouldn’t have to be hidden. . .
That obviously implies is “wrong” with being gay.
Actions speak louder then words.l
It’s what’s NOT said that tells all!
i guess on some level yes… i never really thouguht about it that way though.
I get a little bit sick of people thinking they can have a morality or a “right/wrong” dichotomy outside of a religion with a higher power (i.e. God). Fools, the lot of them.
If adultery is considered immoral, and homosexuals can’t be married, wouldn’t homosexuality (when acted upon) by extension be immoral?
To building a mystery who said the following on the last post:
“Evolution implies that the only purpose in life is procreation of the species. Which clearly doesn’t work if you are confused and having sex with members of the same gender. Oops, explain that one please… or can you?”
Posted 3/13/2007 8:19 AM by Building_A_Mystery
What the heck does evolution have to do with homosexuality? ? ?
I think the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy doesn’t imply immorality.. it implies it’s not important.
one could look at it that way. however i view it more of an issue of fear. the don’t ask don’t tell policy came into being when i was younger and it was quite a discussion in many of my classes in elementary school. (i went to a very socially aware high achiever school, we debated who should be elected president in 1992, oh yeah i picked clinton even then!) as a friend of multiple male and female homosexuals in the military the issue is one of fear by the old guard, so to speak. the older generation, as is generally true in all aspects of society, has a fear of anyone who is different. this fear carries to homosexuals obviously. however it should be remembered that all branches of the military at one time had a strict no tattoos policy, it was viewed as different and deviant, like homosexuality. the friends i have in the military point out that many people are gay who serve, they can’t tell their family and so to compensate they serve in a masculin or honorable position where other homosexuals tend to congregate and thus are part of community of hidden individuals. this is not true of everyone, please note that i said many, not all! yes, homosexuality as immoral is the general position of both the military and the government but it is a position of fear, not morality. morality is what fear is called when admitting to fear is not honorable.
To The one who said the following:
“I’m not saying that I hate homosexuals or even that I’m better than them. I just happen to think that the homosexual lifestyle is a lifestyle of sin.”
Well it’s because of Adam and eve’s SINNING that heterosexuality is even happening. We needed to “reproduce” to keep man (and woman) alive after sin entered the world and man became mortal.
Heterosexuality we have BECAUSE OF SIN.
Yes.
Yep.
Yes, they are.
And it is wrong.
yes, that or they jsut find it icky and gross. Either way I agree.
regarding your question: don’t ask.
as for my response: I’m not telling.
I liked the following comment that was left by someone in response to buildling_a_mystery:
Actually, FKIProfessor, have you ever considered that homosexuality is evolution in action? It’s a form of population controll as the world gets more and more overpopulated.
Just an idea.
I think the military (and thereby, the government) regards homosexual activity as highly inappropriate behavior showing a lack of the character necessary to serve in the military. Same as adultery, etc.
is it the military sayin it’s immoral? or is it the christian influence talking?
No. It implies that the military realizes what happens when *sex* gets in the way of *thinking.* The fact that heterosexual displays of public affection are also frowned upon says much in response to the gay-agenda morons that insist on making everything into an issue that it’s really not.
No question is a wrong question.
No necessarily, i think it looks at homosexuality as a hindrence – simply because you are in a very close environment and i could see where it would be awkward to be around a homosexual male or female if you were having to shower and/or dress and undress around them.
I think about this at colleges with commuity showers.. its not like it bothers me all the time but from time to time it crosses my mind.
- Daniel (doubledb)
that makes more sense.
Ok, in a way they do. If a homosexual joins with military and has a legal union, then they should be aloud to be with their other.
Of course this goes back to gay marraiges be legalized. It should be. But it isnt at the moment, so we need to accept that and strive to change that acception.
It is prejudiced. It is a masked prejudice. It must be changed and unmasked. We need to stop avoiding this topic in our votes.
Its time.
Derek
Just started storming so I wont explain as I have to turn the computer off
My answer: yes
Maybe it just means sex is a personal issue – I don’t really want to hear the details of anyone’s sexual relationships. That scares me.
That is so like ignoring the problem. We should just round them all up and like gas ‘em. That’s what like Jesus would want anyway. My preacher was telling me that faggots are spawns of Satan.
yes they dont wanna know so that cant discriminate against u for it
Yes. They’re essentially saying “You’re a bad person, but as long as you keep it your own dirty little secret we’ll allow you to risk your life for us.” When you’re asked to hide something about yourself, it’s usually b/c that something is looked down upon.
No, it just means that the conservatives had a strong lobby when Clinton wanted to make homosexuality irrelevant when joining the army so he had to compromise.
Duh.
If it wasn’t considered Immoral, then it wouldn’t have to be hidden. . .
That obviously implies is “wrong” with being gay.
Actions speak louder then words.l
It’s what’s NOT said that tells all!
Posted 3/13/2007 2:04 PM by TransexualTwat
Exactly my thinking.
Well yeah. If you look at the majority of those who enlist, they would probably kill their own gay comrades. I would
Posted 3/13/2007 1:44 PM by PSUnited1
glad we have people like him in the country.
that makes me want to vomit.
Are “heterosexual acts” allowed in the military?
By saying to keep it a secret, the rule does very strongly imply that there is something wrong with homosexuality… whether “immoral”, “bad”, or even “icky icky eww eww.”
It’s outdated at best, unconstitutional at worst, and should be done away with.
The way society and military views ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’. Yes…
You know, whether or not Homosexuality is wrong isn’t the point for me. I’m in the military. I’ve had a gay roomate before and it didn’t bother me. However, it would bother some. It would take the focus off of training and accomplishing our mission, and that’s the bottom line. WHAT WE DO IS A SERIOUS BUSINESS. The right to be openly gay is only one of MANY rights that we give away when we sign on the dotted line. Openly active homosexuals, sadly, would stand a risk of coming under persecution, which would only demoralize and cause division within our forces.
We have enough distractions to deal with as it is.
I don’t believe that civilians who have never served should have any say in how the military handles things like this. Instead, they should allow us to train for when we eventually go down to the two-way life fire in Iraq.
It could certainly be taken that way. I think it’s less reflective of that bias in just the gov’t and military and more in the culture as a whole. Surely, some of the gov’t and military higher-ups have that bias and consider homosexuality as immoral, but the policy could also be seen as a response to the potential reaction within the ranks caused by someone coming out of the closet. It’s distracting, the military has no business dealing with the sexuality of its recruits and the disputes caused the revelation, and I’d like to think of it as a policy to protect the homosexuals from coming under fire within the military and, once the news leaks, from newspapers &c. Because you know he/she would.
Wishful thinking, probably. But nice thinking.
ugh, yes!
“It would take the focus off of training and accomplishing our mission, and that’s the bottom line. WHAT WE DO IS A SERIOUS BUSINESS.”
Anymore so than the hot chick you met the night before at the bar who crammed her boobs in your face? My family has been in the military for years, so I know this kind of stuff happens. So, having a gay dentist in the base hospital would distract you from performing your job duties in Iraq? Come on…
Nah, I don’t really think so. I think they just want to prevent conroversy between the homosexual supporters and those that do believe it is immoral.
The only difficulty with concluding that the “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy is unimportant is that if it was simply unimportant, it would not have likely been an issue requiring a policy statement. I think it is in fact an important issue to the military otherwise they would not have fabricated a policy statement to the effect that they don’t want anyone asking or telling anyone else if they’re gay…why? They have concluded it to be a negative reality that they do not want emerging in the military.
Yes.
And why are numbers counting backwards? Or did you know that you were making a msitake, and so started at 2, and are not writing #1?
They are trying to protect gay people, and themselves.
I agree strongly with Belagast_the_Naugrim.
yes, and I think they are right.
Absolutely. It’s like saying that separate but equal was a good idea.
it’s better that no one knows
Promiscuous homosexuality is as immoral as adultery, which is also illegal in the military. Other things that are illegal in the military: Oral sex, anal sex, fraternization, etc…..
It is about discipline and individuals are fairly told the rules before they enlist.
-Isaac
I think it depends on the interpreter. I think it also protects people who are homosexual from being discriminated against in the military.
yes, because otherwise it wouldn’t be an issue of confidentiality.
The military has its own set of rules to go by and it doesn’t matter the reason for setting the rule. The military has to set guidelines of the type of personnel they want in the military. Just like any employer has its set of rules to go by when they hire an employee.
I’d say so.
Maybe it’s because it’s none of the government’s business what anyone’s sexual orientation is. It’s just rude to go around saying what you do in the bedroom. It’s nooobody’s business.
Yes.
yes.
wasn’t homosexuality a way of avoiding the draft also? just a thought on why its now become don’t ask don’t tell…
It implies that the US Government is less than progressive, and likely homophobic.
Yep
We look the other way, or we may have to kill you.
Imply? No. It downright says it.
About ten years ago, some guys in my old division (the 101st) found out one of the dudes in their platoon was gay. He “told” and was scheduled to be discharged in a week or so. They beat the piss out of him with a baseball bat, and hung him in the “back forty,” the huge field training area behind the base.
While I don’t completely condone the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy, I think, given the culture of the US military as a whole, gays who choose to join would be better off not telling.
While it does come off like the military thinks homosexuality is immoral, I think they’re telling the truth when they claim it’s about morale and unit cohesion. Most soldiers say they’re ok with gays in theory, but no one wants to be in the cot next to one.
I do think so.
Yes
Ok this has always been a bit of a “huh ??” point for me.
My whole family is/has been in the military. Army, Marines, Navy…pretty much every branch. Not once have I ever heard a rousing tale of “Thank God that gay guy was in our group”. Is there some extra talent a gay person brings to the military.
If I am a dominatrix by night is that something that is important. If I am bi-sexual…does that give me an extra boost among those no talents??? When did whether you are gay or not become so important for everyone to know.
Me personally, I don’t care what you are…Just as long as you protect me from the bad guys and serve my country with respect. Honestly I don’t think any Iraqi’s care if you are gay…Only gays I guess.
I think the “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy is another way of saying…it’s stuff we just don’t care about and really just don’t want to know, serves no purpose.
not necessarily. It doesm, however, imply that it’s not very well accepted by the masses
is the government not bush? well, DUH. (i meant to sound ignorant here btw)
Yes.
I think it’s respectful of people’s right to keep their personal lives personal. Plain and simple.
If you ask me, it’s really stupid, because it does absolutely nothing for either side of the argument. I feel like of course we should let gay people in the army. I mean, gosh, they’re willing to give their lives to fight for their country! I can see it being a problem with sharing bathrooms and stuff, but they can just get their own bathrooms and stuff, or something. I don’t see what the big deal is, so yeah, it does make America look like we think homosexuality is immoral, or at least whoever came up with that, and I heard at least one of the people behind it on the news saying that he thought it was immoral.
yes. and they’re right. homosexuality is a sin.
It sure does!
No, I think the policy is to protect soldiers because those who are over zealous will attack them if they knew their sexual orientation.
I’d like to make a reply to kboy..
MAN MANY MANY many many many animals of the same gender mate..
They perform sex acts..
They even nest!
There are many homosexual mammals, such as dolphins, whales, monkeys, and types of cat.
FISH, INSECTS, there are documented cases of just about every species having homosexual tendencies.. The denial of any creature having homosexual relations is just plain ignorance..