Amber Grangruth
Online Blog Assignment
Brian Lewis
Better Left Unsaid
Secrets are sometimes better left unsaid. According to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy any homosexual enlisted in the military should keep quiet about their sexual preference if they want to serve. This policy made some homosexuals discharge themselves from the military, for they felt it was unfair. In reality, the view that America has forced upon homosexuals is stuck in peoples mind and is hard to change, so keeping sexual orientation a secret helps keep issues from arising in the military.
Online Blog Assignment
Brian Lewis
Better Left Unsaid
Secrets are sometimes better left unsaid. According to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy any homosexual enlisted in the military should keep quiet about their sexual preference if they want to serve. This policy made some homosexuals discharge themselves from the military, for they felt it was unfair. In reality, the view that America has forced upon homosexuals is stuck in peoples mind and is hard to change, so keeping sexual orientation a secret helps keep issues from arising in the military.
In the beginning, there was a ban against any homosexual to enlist in the military, but many had problems with this, so changes had to be made. With much debate and compromises the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy was signed in 1993 by Clinton (Burrelli). This policy basically says that homosexuals can enlist in the military if they were not flamboyant about their sexual orientation. Many felt that if others in the military knew about ones sexual orientation it would cause unneeded issues in the setting. I definitely agree with this, the military is for fighting for our country and nothing else. On the other hand, homosexuals felt it went against their human rights to keep their sexual orientation a secret (Johnson).
The new policy resulted in some homosexuals discharging themselves and being discharged because of their sexual orientation. About 17,000 militants were alienated from the military in the category of homosexuality (Burrelli). This count starts before the policy came into play. I think it is wrong to discharge one because of their sexual orientation, but the law was made and should be followed. If one wants to serve in the military and they are homosexual, then they should keep quiet.
Overall, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy was made for good reason. Issues not involved with the military should be kept quiet to make things run smoothly. I agree that it is wrong to discharge one from the military due to their sexual orientation, but the law was made and should be followed.
Works Cited
Burrelli, David F. “96029: Homosexuals and U.S. Military Policy: Current Issues.”Congressional Research Service. 12 Dec. 1996. Web. 8 Sept. 2009.
Johnson, Ramon. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” New York Times Comp. 2002. 8 Sept. 2009.
I agree that sexuality in the military is better left unsaid - my issue, however, is the hypocrisy in the policy. A hetersoexual can speak about their sexuality with no problem stemming form it. A homosexual, however, is discharged once they mention it. It seems grossly unfair to me.
ReplyDeleteAmber,
ReplyDeleteThere are many points made in your argument that I agree with, however, there is a major issue in discriminating against homosexuals. I see you disagree with discriminating against homosexuals in the military, but you agree that since the policy was made it should stay? Maybe in 1993 the policy made sense, but now, I don't think it does. More and more often we Americans are becoming more accepting of people different then us. Allowing the military to ignore the rights of some soldiers goes against what this country stands for. There is no reason why the sexual preference of another soldier should come in to play when deciding if their allowed to be in the military. Like Amanda said, heterosexuals are allowed to express the sexual orientation, but homosexuals are not? A right as an American citizen, is the right to express oneself however they please. Once you take that away, you take away the basic fundamentals of what this country was founded on. You state in your post that you don't agree with discharging a soldier because he or she is gay, but you think that because they made the policy that it should just continue to be in effect? My question to you is, if you do not agree with a person being discharged for being gay, wouldn't that mean you disagree with the policy itself? You made a point that homosexuals should just keep quiet because that way they can still be in the military. That view is exactly what I am arguing against. It is not fair that homosexuals are forced to keep quiet. It is just plain wrong that a persons sexual preference is more important then their actual performance. A question for you is, what if you were told you could not express the fact you like men? If you were to say one word or hint that you are interested in men, you would be discharged from the military. Think about how different your life would be if you had to hide your interest in men. Just because the minority is being affected by this policy, doesn't mean that it's okay to uphold it. The military has one job, and that is to fight for our country, not to worry about the sexual preference of others. Soldiers are mentally strong people, and if they cannot accept the simple fact that someone is different then them, then we have other issues then just the "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy.
After reading Andrew's post, I feel that there is more that I need to expand upon. Amber, the point you are making is that because of America's view of homosexuals, they shouldn't mention their sexuality. Am I correct in assuming that if America changed it's views on homosexuality, then you would find it acceptable to speak about it in the military? So the best solution to this problem would be to change America's perception of the military, and then to renounce the policy.
ReplyDeleteLike I said before, though, a warzone shouldn't be the place for discussion of sexuality. But aren't the loved ones of the fallen veterans notified when they die? If a soldier is gay (but can't admit to it) then how would he or she be able to relate the urgency of this to the person who is notifying the family and loved ones?
However, despite these questions, we need to conclude this blog on a high note. I think that America has the ability to change – to find acceptance for everyone. And if we get to this place of truth, where we can say that we are truly free with complete honesty – then everyone will be satisfied with getting rid of this hypocritical and pointless policy. Until then, though, it doesn’t matter if not everyone is satisfied—the policy still needs to go.
I would love for America to put the negative reactions to homosexuals under the rug, but I think that it is easier said than done. I completly understand what you guys are saying; it is wrong to make a homosexual stay quiet about their sexual preference in the military. You would think that of all places, America, would not have this law against homosexuals due to the fact that we are the land of the free. However, the law was made up years ago to help protect people from humiliation and falling out of line. The view America has placed on homosexuality is the reason why the law was informed. They didn't want anyone to be boxed out because of their sexual preference, but they still wanted them to fight. If they were quiet about their orientation then they could stay and fight, but if they were not then they would be discharged. It is a law that they need to stick by, no matter how stupid it is.
ReplyDelete- I mentioned in another blog that there are anti-gay crimes in the military still occurring. The one I mentioned was about a soldier murdered plainly because he was gay. The man was sentenced to 12 1/2years in prison but was dismissed early, only serving 7 years in jail (The Raw Story). That is just plain wrong that he gets out early, almost saying what he did was right. Another story I read about was a Navy man who was shot multiple times while standing guard on June 30th (The Associated Press). This one is more recent, really showing that this law should not be uplifted yet. His family mentioned that he complained about being harassed due to his sexuality just days before his death (The Associated Press). These men that harass homosexuals must be missing something in their life, or are just very angry souls. They could have been beaten themselves as they were growing up which would result in them feeling they need to do that to feel superior. They could also just be violent people with angry souls. They feel they need to hurt people in order to feel good about themselves. I think there should be a psychologist just for the military base. Everyone in the military would need to go see this doctor a couple times a week, so he could keep these things in control. If a doctor was there I feel that a lot of hate crimes and murders would stop because soldiers can get the things they want to say out. The psychologist would be able to really help soldiers while they are away from home.
ReplyDeleteWork Cited
The Associated Press. “Navy: Murder charge filed in gay seaman’s death.” Viacom Int. Inc. 24 July 2009. Web. 11 Sept 2009.
Overall, is it worth being killed over speaking out? It is Americans right to speak freely, but many Americans don't believe in homosexuality. They sometimes take things to an extreme. To kill or harass another because they are gay, just so they can feel better about themselves is morally wrong. But, these people also have a right to speak freely about what they believe in, so they do and take things farther than they should. If the law was uplifted, I believe hate crimes would just sky rocket because straight men in the military would be so outraged to the number of them enlisted. By keeping the law in effect I believe we are saving more hate crimes and other issues from arising.
ReplyDelete