The End of Don't Ask, Don't Tell - Gays In The Military May Now Serve Openly

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The U.S. Senate voted to do away with the military's ban on openly gay troops, which not only repeals "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," but also repeals all policies banning gays from openly serving that were in place before the 17 year old compromise went into effect. The new policy only awaits President Obama's signature, and the application of the policy military-wide.

The supporters of the new policy called "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" discriminatory, forcing gay and lesbian service members to "hide who they are." They equate the battle to allow people who engage in homosexual behavior as being yet another civil rights fight, and considered DADT to be a policy that weakens our national security and military readiness, while (in the words of Obama) "violating the fundamental American principles of equality and fairness."

It will probably take a few months before the changes to military policy will be fully implemented, which includes a process through military advisers that must certify that lifting the ban on gays in the military will not be detrimental to the military's ability to carry out its primary mission: to fight and kill the enemy.

"It is time to close this chapter in our history," Obama said in a statement. "It is time to recognize that sacrifice, valor and integrity are no more defined by sexual orientation than they are by race or gender, religion or creed."

The vote to lift the ban on gays in the military was 65-31, which means a significant number of Republicans also voted for lifting the ban. Along with the eight Republicans, two independents also voted in favor of lifting the ban. The House of Representatives voted for the repeal with a vote of 250-175, earlier this week.

Proponents of the new policy believes that this will also help in enabling greater acceptance of homosexuals in the civilian world.

Senator John McCain led the opposition to the new policy. On the floor of the Senate moments before a crucial test vote, the Arizona Republican blamed elite liberals with no military experience for pushing their social agenda on troops during wartime.

"They will do what is asked of them," McCain said of service members. "But don't think there won't be a great cost."

Combat personnel, unlike support personnel, have been largely opposed to the lift of the ban on gays in the military, and they are the ones that carry out the mission of the United States Military. "I don't want to lose any Marines to the distraction," General James Amos, head of the Marine Corps, has told reporters. "I don't want to have any Marines that I'm visiting at Bethesda (Naval Medical Center) with no legs be the result of any type of distraction."

This is where the real crux of the issue lies. There is no doubt that most personnel have served with gays in the past, and that homosexuals can fight as well as any of their brothers in arms. The fact that a gay is on the battlefield has no effect on their units' morale or effectiveness as long as their sexual orientation remains outside of the realm of the military scenario. However, the dynamics that arise regarding the psychological tension created by having an openly gay person in a unit creates a compromise to the proper operating procedures of the unit.

The U.S. Military cannot be, and should not be, compelled to be treated similarly to the civilian world. Political Correctness, self-esteem, stress-cards, and social experimentation has no business in the military. The military units must be able to function at top capabilities, and the heavy discipline that pushes service members to their utmost edge, is the method used to ensure the best results are extracted from the service members. Discipline is of the highest priority. Capabilities without any distractions are incredibly important. Otherwise, the units cannot fulfill their missions at the highest level of efficiency, and effectiveness.

What is next? Will people previously deemed as too uncoordinated be demanding their rights to serve? Will the height and weight requirements be done away with? Will cross-dressers and trans-gender individuals be demanding equal opportunities to serve? Will every unit have their own Corporal Klinger?

Nonetheless, despite the serious danger that this new policy of allowing openly gay individuals to serve provides, the military must now adjust to the new policy. The no-fraternization rule must be heavily enforced, openly gay sexual tendencies during duty must be completely disallowed, and military discipline must not be allowed to wain the slightest bit. For the most part, the majority of gay service members will probably abide by the rules, and won't be a problem. The militant gays that desire to push the envelope will be the ones to create difficulties, and they must be dealt with swiftly, and severely. Any deterioration of military capabilities to accomplish the mission must be monitored, and if the lift of the ban on gays in the military diminishes the capabilities of the units to perform at full capabilities, the Congress will need to seriously reconsider their decision, and be willing to reverse this new policy.

Remember, this is a policy that a bunch of non-military civilians, with little or no understanding of the dynamics that occur on the battlefield, have decided to force upon the greatest military in the world despite the protests of combat personnel. If it results in the death of our troops because of the internal distractions this policy enables, the Congress has the responsibility to reverse the policy immediately - or risk losing lives, and personnel who do not re-enlist because of the policy, at a time when we can't afford such madness. . . after all, we must not forget that we are currently at war with Islamism, and any weakness that emerges due to distractions caused by factors such as the repeal of DADT will be used by the enemy against us.

With this victory, it begs one to ask, what will be the gay agenda's next move against the military? Will it be to disband the Chaplain Corps for daring to teach biblical text that proclaims homosexuality is a sin, and a sexual abomination?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

DADT Stays in Effect as Officials Tackle Plan - Military dot com

Senate votes to end ban on openly gay troops - Associated Press/Yahoo News

Gays see repeal as a civil rights milestone - My Way News

Troops oppose repeal of 'don’t ask' - Military Times

Corps presents most resistance to DADT repeal - Military Times

USMC commandant: Ending DADT could cost lives - Navy Times