Saxby Chambliss is wrong on "don't ask, don't tell"
As you may know, there is a debate taking place over the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which allows gays to serve in the military provided they keep their sexual orientation to themselves. During his State of the Union address to Congress, President Barack Obama called for the repeal of the law (it may be the only thing he said that I agreed with), which is supported by the Joint Chiefs of the armed forces and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (who was originally appointed by President George W. Bush).
It's not a secret that I'm not a fan of Sen. Saxby Chambliss. The man is a fiscal fraud that has never met pork he didn't like and he voted for every bloated budget during the six years the Republican Party maintained control of Congress. Unfortunately, he has chose to demagogue the issue during a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Chambliss says that if "don't ask, don't tell" is repealed that it'll open the door to "alcohol use, adultery, fraternization and body art" in the military. He added, "the presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would very likely create an unacceptable risk to those high standards."
Really, Senator? Why should we treat these individuals, who just happen to be gay, any different from any other soldier. Why not let them serve openly if they are willing to put their lives on the line for their country? A 2006 poll of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans overwhelmingly shows that they are comfortable serving with fellow soldiers that are openly gay. So why should they have to serve in secrecy?
H/T: Below the Beltway
Comments
I believe "don't ask, don't tell" is a dumb policy. They know certain people are gay, but it's OK as long as they don't come out and say it? What possible difference could it make?
But I'm even more puzzled with how a change in this policy will lead to alcohol use and adultery. I didn't realize that no one in the military uses alcohol and that none of them cheat on their spouses. That is truly amazing. And body art? Is that really something Saxby is worried about?
Posted by: DonnieChaffin | February 3, 2010 02:59 PM
You mean you don't fear teh gayz?!
Posted by: Jason | February 3, 2010 05:43 PM
Nope. I guess I was raised like Gator McKlusky - "Only two things in the world I'm scared of...women and the police".
Posted by: DonnieChaffin | February 3, 2010 06:48 PM
I guess you don't care about manpower requirements.
Posted by: Joey | February 3, 2010 08:48 PM
Jason,
What do you expect from Saxby Chambliss? I can tell you that the overwhelming majority of Soldiers that I serve with over here couldn't care less if they served with an openly gay guy. Most of the fear-mongering politicians who trumpet the "dangers" of teh gayz, have either (1) Never even served in the military or (2) Have served in the military, but have never been in combat. They have no clue what Soldiers think about issues these days. It's high time to end this dumbass policy and let anyone who is qualified to serve, serve.
Posted by: Jace Walden | February 3, 2010 11:59 PM
The notable exception to the above statement is Sen. John McCain. But all of his fearmongering is bullshit too.
Posted by: Jace Walden | February 4, 2010 12:03 AM
Why must everyone know what you do in your bedroom?
Keep it to your damned self.
Let "don't ask, don't tell" stand.
Posted by: Charlie D | February 6, 2010 05:58 PM
How is repealing DADT telling people what you do in the bedroom?
Posted by: Jason | February 6, 2010 08:00 PM
I don't usually comment on websites but I had to stop in and say thanks for writing this, I absolutely agree and with a little luck other people will understand your argument.
Posted by: green golfer | February 6, 2010 09:20 PM
Jason's comments are precisely the reason I am not a member of the Libertarian Party. They have no moral compass. I totally agree with their fiscal positions. Homosexual conduct is not conducive to good order and morale in the military, both of which are higher requirements in the military than civilian life. Something no one talks about is that military retirees like myself have helped a lot of young people in their consideration of military service. Should this unacceptable conduct be forced upon the military I will immediately cease pointing young people in that direction. Will somone please read te 1993 law regarding this matter........there is no such thing as "don't ask, don't tell." Under the 1993 law it is still clear that homosexuals are not allowed to serve.
Posted by: Fred | February 9, 2010 07:32 AM
The experts agree with you Fred. General Bradley testified. "I consider that a unit has high morale when the men have confidence in themselves, confidence in their fellow members of their unit, and confidence in their leaders. If we to to force gays on the Army before the country is ready to accept these customs we may have difficulty attaining high morale along the lines I have mentioned."
Pardon me, that quote isn't exactly accurate. I put in "gays" where the original quote had "integration" and the quote was from many years ago. But the fearmongering bs was wrong then and it's wrong now.
Posted by: DonnieChaffin | February 9, 2010 07:55 AM
My moral compass is a personal belief. I believe the guiding principle for government is a the recognition of individual sovereignty. That has nothing to do with the Libertarian Party.
As noted above, 75% of Iraq and Afghanistan have no problem serving with an openly gay fellow soldier.
Sounds like you're just homophobic more than anything else.
Posted by: Jason | February 9, 2010 07:57 AM