To include straights. That is, should straights not be able to admit to being in a heterosexual relationship for fear of being subject to a discharge. I just think that openly heterosexual servicemen and women in the Military might be demoralizing for some of the troops, y'know?
2007-02-20 10:20:45 · 15 answers · asked by collegedebt 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
El P, while I might be incorrect I believe that the marine corps has the highest boot camp drop rate at 15% while the other services hover between 8 and 10%. Where is the 45% coming from?
2007-02-20 11:19:44 · update #1
When Clinton put this policy in place it was one of the biggest blunders next to, well his 8 years.
Prior to this policy, people that enlisted had to get strong both physically and mentally in order to pass the training. The drop out rate was around 10%. Then over night this number jumped up to over 45% because of this policy. Now if it was to hard the soldier only had to say 2 words "I'm gay".
This cost the government millions, in training, wages, housing, and travel. And let us not forget the ROTC officers that completed collage just to find out that they were gay. The government then let them go without requiring them to pay a penny back for the education.
Please don't think that I am gay bashing here. The soldiers that stayed in are stronger for it and deserve our respect. They are straight and gay alike. Those that took the gay route out, are pieces of digested MRE's that deserve no respect. And they are straight and gay alike.
As a PSG I had a female soldier that had to get out because she was outed as being gay. She was a very good soldier and had to leave not of her own will.
The higher percentage was not the failure to complete boot camp but failure to complete the 1st term of enlistment. The paper I read this in was back in the 90s while I was still serving. It provided a break down by gender and race, and the percentages were all close together. I do not have a copy of the paper.
2007-02-20 10:48:18 · answer #1 · answered by El P 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Oh, I think you want to take this a bit too far. As far as the "Don't ask don't tell" policy is concerned, I am for it. Whether a person is gay or not has no meaning when a person is on the front line.
Gay people do not approach a hetrosexual person, they know the difference. They stick with their own, almost without exception.
The Greeks had all gay men in some of their armies & they were noted fighters. The Greeks felt that if you loved your partner it would make you a better fighter, to protect each other. Also, they did not want their troops to become attached to the women in conquered lands, thus leading to a lack of loyalty to the rest of the troops.
2007-02-20 10:42:06 · answer #2 · answered by geegee 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The policy is in place because society as a whole has not come to terms with the issue. It's similar to women being barred from ground combat specific jobs. Nothing says they can't do it. Society is not ready for it. If you've watched the movie Starship Troopers, there is a shower/quarters scene that depicts no separation of the sexes. In my mind that is where we need to be before we can remove all barriers. I've seen recently the large expenditure of resources and oblivion to common sense just to keep the females separated in the combat environment.
2007-02-20 10:45:22 · answer #3 · answered by usmcrtr 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The military should never be a social experiment lab. Clinton and his cronies thought nothing of it, because they never served.
Just as another person mentioned, we don't have co-ed rooms in the barracks for a reason. Allowing homosexuals unfettered access to the military puts the service member in an awkward situation. Is his/her roommate a homosexual? Does the roommate look on him/her in a wanton way?
Until (and we shouldn't ever) have co-ed close quarter living conditions as a standard, then we shouldn't allow homosexuals the same kind of access to straights.
2007-02-20 11:34:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
you say that heterosexuals might be demoralizing troops, that's funny. in the military often while in the field, you have open showers, that means 10+ shower heads in one room no privacy, no curtains.to raise moral i think that all people should shower together. men and women, gays and lesbians. Talk about raising moral for hetero men....lol
2007-02-20 11:21:46 · answer #5 · answered by rsltompkins 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Who cares so long as they aren't making a nuisance of themselves. Same as heterosexuals who have been conducting inappropriate relationships.
There have always been gays in the military and they have done as good a as anyone else, their comrades knew who they were and it has never been an issue for anyone except officialdom.
Grow up for God's sake.
2007-02-20 11:04:33 · answer #6 · answered by Chris H 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think time has come for a new idea here, "Don't Say", "Shut Ya Mouth". This would confuse everyone and the gays would have to comply or be court-martialed.
2007-02-20 10:36:10 · answer #7 · answered by americanmalearlington 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democracy does no longer artwork contained in the military. are you able to imagine the vote on "might want to we typhoon that mine encumbered sea coast and run into the device gun fireplace?" this should be a range made completely by the Joint Chiefs and the purely topics they ought to guage at the same time as making the decision are military topics at the same time with unit solidarity and morale and any skills possessed by homosexuals who were discharged because of the coverage. it will be a standard weighing of professional vs con and politics might want to no longer be an situation in any respect..
2016-10-17 08:17:40 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All the immoral fags should be discharged by sundown and get the Military cleaned up from this dredge upon our society.
2007-02-20 10:52:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
No, they need to put all the gays on the front line in Iraq.
Canon fodder.
2007-02-20 13:23:40 · answer #10 · answered by Kevin A 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋