Tomorrow - The End of a Really Bad Idea

[NeedleCast]

Tomorrow the Dept. of Defense is set to repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell legislation which - as a former service member - I thought was one of the worst pieces of law ever written. It's been too long coming, but it's a step in the right direction.

In 1997 I joined the US Army. I did so with the understanding that with the career field I had chosen the Army would get four years service out of me and I'd get a high level security clearance and a large bullet of desirable experience to put on my resume out of them. Off to basic training I went at Ft. Leonard Wood, Missouri.

Part of basic training for any new soldier focuses on military procedure. Learning the ranks and roles of other soldiers. Understanding the basic field manual. Understanding the rules of war. Understanding the uniform code of military justice. About two weeks into training, we also (very briefly) cover Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Homosexual troops were allowed to serve in the military as long they didn't tell other people they were homosexual, and we straights, in turn, were not allowed to ask people about their sexual preference. It struck me as odd that a military force created to defend the ideas of freedom was telling a group of people that they would have their freedom limited and I voiced that opinion to one of my Drill Sgts who promptly told me to shut up.

To his credit, that Drill Sgt. did pull me aside later and say that he was against DADT but that he didn't want to get into a political discussion in front of the rest of the platoon. Understandable in a very mixed group of 40 people.

I did my four years (although it turned into five) and DADT rarely came up. I served with one soldier in DC and another in Korea who were both widely suspected of being gay. The sexual orientation of both never had an effect on their ability to serve nor - at least in the units I was in - did it ever effect unit cohesion. This despite conservative politicians constantly barking about how openly serving homosexuals would destroy morale.

In the end, there wasn't, and never has been a case for DADT. It was strictly a political issue, manufactured as a talking point by conservatives.

As usual in the US, it has taken us a decade or more to catch up with other western nations on social issue like openly serving homosexuals. That being said, I'm glad that we have finally ended this really bad idea.

[RaleighNCDUer]

1. Of course, in its origins DADT was a move in favor of gay rights.

Its intent was, as you said, a guarantee that gays COULD serve - something which was NOT the case before DADT. Prior to DADT the rule was, if you were gay you did NOT have a right to serve, whether anyone knew you were gay or not.

DADT acknowledged that gays had a right to serve, and that nobody had a right to question their sexual orientation, and on the surface it LOOKED like a move in the right direction. What it actually was, was a way to prevent any legal challenge to discrimination against gays because anyone making the challenge would automatically be in violation of the "don't tell" part and be subject to dismissal, not because s/he was gay but because s/he was in violation of DADT. Kind of a catch-22. (Of course, the "don't ask" part was generally ignored, as well).

Maybe, in the end result, it was necessary to have a DADT in order to establish the right for gays to server. I don't think so. Or, maybe it was necessary to simply start the conversation in the general public about the role of gays in the military - as before DADT there simply was no such conversation.

I don't know. But it is a good thing that we've finally moved past it.