What are your thoughts on "Don't ask, don't tell"?

Question

In the military, that is.

Answer 1

Sex fairy: this question relates to gender (sex partners being of the same gender is the reason for discrimination) so certainly, it does belong in this section.

It is what it is. Institutionalized discrimination against gays. It works in the same way as not disclosing the fact that you're a murderer. As long as the military doesn't find out, you're o.k.

However, a policy that's only been around for 15 years, and was introduced as a compromise, is not going to be around for an eternity. Polls among military personnel are looking more favorable. We are evolving.

I'll say it again, it's time for us to get past the idea that the straight, Christian, White, male is the default human being in this country.

Answer 2

Sounds like a cop out on the part of the military and resulted in the death of one gay male as I recall. Even the department of defence needs to be held accountable.
They allow these young men and women to give their lives to protect their countries but what protection is being afforded them against discrimination. The country was founded on freedom of choice.

Answer 3

I think it was and is total crap. Clinton said he was going to allow gays, lesbians, and bi folks to serve in the military no strings attached, and then came back with the whole "don't as don't tell" BS, which boils down to queer folks who serve in the military still being second class citizens, and having to hide their personal lives from their buddies, while straight folks, (or bi folks in ostensibly heterosexual relationships), do not.

Answer 4

it is wrong. a gay person should be able to work anywhere they want, and mention their sexual orientation if it is appropriate. it is an unfair biased against gay people to set a "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military concering homosexuality. not only that, but it's archaic. it's almost 2008!

Answer 5

It's an asinine policy to gloss over an even more asinine policy and it is applied hypocritically.

Note: it isn't just about homosexuality.

The UCMJ also criminalizes consensual oral sex between married couples.

Ridiculous!

EDIT

One of my heroes (referring to another question today) was a homosexual (or bisexual) man who served with distinction and won many medals and honors for courage and gallantry under fire. being gay has nothing to do with what makes a soldier. (And he published one of the top 10 most important philosophical texts of the 20th century while he was a POW, but that's another matter.)

Answer 6

"Don't ask, don't tell" still doesn't de-criminalize homosexuality in the military. I think it's inadequate. Sexual orientation shouldn't be an issue; I think Clinton wimped out with that.

Answer 7

I agree with some of the other answerers that Clinton wimped out on this. The whole phrase should have been "Don't ask, don't tell, and don't pursue." like he had originally proposed.

Answer 8

It's a reasonable compromise in an unreasonable age. That's not to say that it's the best compromise, but it's an attempt.
___Gay relationships are not the same as heterosexual relationships, and the way the gay-rights issue has been framed over the past several years is an example of how the public debate on matters of ethics and social policy have lost anything resembling nuance, and how left-wing fundamentalism is dumbing-down to the same sort of intellectual extremism of far right fundamentalism.
___'Post-" modernism and its close cousins are not subtle thinking in any valid way. They don't reflect a true complexity of reality, but merely an obfuscating tactic of intellectual manipulation, employed by skeptics who, having given up on seeking something like truth, have reduced public discourse to a fencing match in which celebrity intellectuals seek to be the "winners". Arcane and esoteric skepticisms regarding anything traditional, in a culture that often appeals to arguments from genetics and evolution to make claims about "natural" human behavior is a kind of intellecutal hypocrisy. It's bait-and-switch credulity.
___If the skeptical arguments aplied against anything traditional per se are taken as having any force, they apply just as well to claims of "rights", and to the presuppositions and methods by which human persons are defined in terms of rights without obligations, and in terms of nature and nurture without considerations of how humans form their personal selves by their behavioral choices. In this sort of intellectual climate, whole classes of behaviors can be dismissed as making no difference.
___Toleration is one thing, denying distinctions is another. Humans are imperfect, and judging other persons as persons isn't appropriate. But this doens't mean that behavioral choices don't matter.

Answer 9

It is a silly compromise that does nothing to address the basic unfairness of banning willing gays and lesbians from serving their contry.

Answer 10

-It's as effective as "Just Say No" to drugs and sex.
-It's homophobic and sexist, since it is used to drum women out of the military, for being accused of being gay, not for necessarily being gay.
-It costs the US taxpayers millions of dollars, since we kick out all sorts of qualified service people that we've invested millions of training into, for either being accused of being gay or for actually being gay.
-I've talked to gay guys in the military, and they say it's the "straight" married guys having sex with each other. The gay guys stay to themselves. How ironic. Hypocrisy at its finest.