Don't ask don't tell. Our current policy stopping gays and lesbians from serving in the military spells like bad faith. The practice karks back to 1916, to the so called "neutral blue discharges" given to homosexual servicemen. Up to 1947, a servicemember found to be homosexual but who has not committed any homosexual acts while in service, would receive an undesirable discharge. Those who were found guilty of engaging in homosexual conduct were dishonorably discharged. We know that homosexuality was taboo in the 1950's. But the 1960's Civil Rights Movement changed that false perception. Let's see what the present science says:
1- Empirical evidence fails to show that sexual orientation is germane to any aspect of military effectiveness including unit cohesion, morale, recruitment and retention (Belkin, 2003; Belkin & Bateman, 2003; Herek, Jobe, & Carney, 1996; MacCoun, 1996; National Defense Research Institute, 1993). 2- Most experts believe that military effectiveness is related to military service members’ shared commitment to a common goal that motivates them to work together to achieve the goal (MacCoun, Kier, & Belkin, 2006; MacCoun, 1996). Leadership of the group is also considered crucial. Sexual orientation is irrelevant to task cohesion, the only type of cohesion that critically predicts the team’s military readiness and success (c.f. Herek & Belkin, 2005). (Taken from WKPD).
What do we learn? That other than sexual preference, there is NO DIFFERENCE between a homosexual and a heterosexual person.
Does that matter? Yes and no. There's the ideological power of dogma and plain unfounded hate. For some people homosexuality is wrong because of their religious views. God doesn't like it.
Here, again, the science:
Homosexuality refers to an individual’s sense of personal and social identity based on those attractions, behaviors expressing them, and membership in a community of others who share them. Sexual orientation is distinct from other components of sex and sexuality, including biological sex (the anatomical, physiological, and genetic characteristics associated with being male or female), gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female), and social gender role (adherence to cultural norms defining feminine and masculine behavior). Sexual orientation is matter of important choice and self-definition.
Coming back to the argument above: Some people talk about the problems of sharing quarters with a homosexual in the military, (as if homosexuals were predators by nature). How about heterosexual stalking? Is it any different?
BREACH OF ARMY DISCIPLINE: If heterosexual harrassment is treated as a breach of army discipline and decorum, why can we not do the same with homosexual harrasment?
This is a hot topic and I want the class to probe it. Again, you can see where I stand. If you disagree with my take it's Ok. Just be ready to support your views.
___________
FACT: Of the 26 countries that participate militarily in NATO right now, more than 22 permit gay people to serve; of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, two (Britain, France) permit gay people to serve openly, and three (United States, Russia, China) do not.
