Allowing Gays In Military Won’t Impact Unit Cohesion
With my Mom doing much better, I returned to LA as planned today, but feel pretty drained, having chosen to spend more time with my brother (father to an energetic nephew) last night rather than go to bed at a decent hour, especially given my early departure (6 AM LA time) from Cincinnati this morning.
As I was perusing my e-mail and checking the blogs, I chanced on an unusual amount of information on gays in the military. Apparently it its Sunday evening broadcast, 60 Minutes included an update on Darren Manzella, an out and active duty openly gay Army Sergeant, reporting that since their first story on this soldier, he has since been discharged under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law.
A reader linked me to one news report of a story I had wanted to blog on when seeing it linked somewhere else. (I’m pretty sure it was an e-mail I received from the Michael D. Palm Center containing this release.) And Glenn Reynolds linked Ed Morrissey’s piece on the study.
Anyway, the study “conducted by four retired military officers” found that “allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline or cohesion.” Allowing gay people to serve openly in the armed forces of the United Kingdom and Israel did not undermine “the effectiveness of combat operations.”
Given that the most serious objection raised to lifting the ban on gays in the military is that it would compromise the cohesion of military units (and thus their effectiveness), this report should help erase doubts harbored by those who favor the ban. To be sure, as Ed Morrissey notes, the “Michael Palm Center [which] sponsored this study . . . is not a disinterested party to this issue.“
No wonder that in commissioning the report, the center tooks pains to ensure its accuracy. The officers on the panel “required a written pledge that the Center would publish their recommendations regardless of the political implications, and would not seek to influence conclusions.” And if this pledge were not enough, the report is consistent with past studies on allowing gay people to serve openly in the military, including a 1993 Rand Corporation study.
Another piece of evidence that it’s long past time to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell. This isn’t really an issue about gay rights, but about increasing the number of qualified citizens to serve in our armed forces.
Let’s hope this latest study gets wider attention.
22 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Or let’s point out the gays like Mark Sanchez who, in the course of banning JROTC in San Francisco schools, made it clear that supporting the military and being gay are incompatible.
Wonder where SLDN is on that? Oh, right; god forbid they actually support the military that they claim to revere against the hatemongering leftist gays like Sanchez for which they provide cover.
Meanwhile, surprise, surprise; a leftist group that wants the ban repealed finds that it should be repealed. Ironic, when these are the same people who scream “conflict of interest” at the drop of a hat.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 9, 2008 @ 5:53 pm - July 9, 2008
Makes you wonder what liberals will saddle us with next. Whatever it may be, the slobbering gayleftborg will shower them with cash to do it.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 9, 2008 @ 8:08 pm - July 9, 2008
I’m ex Army. And have been gay all my life. But it wasn’t til I was 39 that I really came out. My life in the Army for those two years ‘72-’72,
I was celebate. It was hard but back then I didn’t feel I had any choice. Being a young kid, if I was straight I probably wouldn’t have horsed around either. Young and inexperienced. It’s my opinion that America should move to allowing gays in the military but only after an extensive education program for those currently serving. Lots of straight guys think they can “catch” being gay from homosexuals. Or it grosses them out. An education program that stresses that gays would like to serve their country just like anyone else. And gays can contribute in an equal way on the battlefield would do wonders for acceptance. For most of my life I viewed the military as a closed club or one that should be allowed to accept those they felt comfortable with. They have such an enormous responsiblity, I felt it wasn’t up to a bunch of sissy civilian polititians to tell warriors how to run their business. But now, I know they can do it, they can adjust. They are heroes, they should let all Americans feel the passion for laying it all down in service of one’s country. I’ve heard stories of gays currently serving honorably in Iraq, known to their fellow soldiers. Those kinds of experiences will help as well. It took a Republican to go to China, it may take a Republican to allow gays to serve openly. Would be great if a hero like McCain did it next year.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 9, 2008 @ 9:15 pm - July 9, 2008
I was disappointed that Sgt. Manzella was discharged, but not at all surprised. He was discharged nearly a month ago, but I have not seen it covered by the MSM. It seems very odd that it took the military six months to discharge him after the story broke. I was beginning to hope against all odds that maybe they wouldn’t discharge him after all.
I don’t think that this new study on DADT will have much impact. The source is too biased. They seem to have at least made an effort to be non-partisan about the whole effort, but I don’t that will influence those who oppose repealing DADT. The study is too easily dismissed as part of an agenda.
Comment by NaturallyGay — July 9, 2008 @ 9:33 pm - July 9, 2008
I hope that the Congress sees that all its NATO allies (except Turkey) all Gays to openly serve in the military. The fact of the matter is that if the federal government allowed Gays and Lesbians to openly serve in the military that it wouldn’t need to relax standards to allow known felons and those with less then proper credentials to serve in the military. Added to that, it would save the government millions of dollars in enforcing “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and not do stupid things like discharging linguists and qualified military personnel simply because of their sexual orientation.
It makes fiscal sense and practical common sense.
Comment by Rocket — July 9, 2008 @ 11:46 pm - July 9, 2008
I would hope that Congress would use common sense in allowing Gays and Lesbians to openly serve in the Military. It would save millions in not having to enforce “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and solve the recruit gap that has occurred no less save having to discharge qualified linguists and exemplary members of the military simply because they are Gay or Lesbians. No less, we only need to point to all our NATO allies (except Turkey) that allow Gays and Lesbians to openly serve in their country’s military.
Comment by Rocket — July 9, 2008 @ 11:50 pm - July 9, 2008
What’s so frustrating about the whole thing is that only the bureaucrats and political creatures in the military use DADT against servicemen. Most of my family is military, many of them serving in Iraq, and people actually on the ground really don’t care. They all know who’s gay, but no one actually in the field cares.
Only the brass meddling from a distance give a crap about people being gay.
Comment by DoDoGuRu — July 10, 2008 @ 9:59 am - July 10, 2008
I’ve got sons that are 25 and 29. Both are straight, both have friends that are openly gay. They don’t care. Our youth today DON”T CARE - the majority of them judge on character, not sexual orientation, or race. It gives me hope for the whole of humanity.
Comment by tt — July 10, 2008 @ 11:18 am - July 10, 2008
Personally, I’ve always thought that having an all-gay platoon would be the logical solution. Not to mention the plot for the next Kristen Bjorn video. But I digress.
And wouldn’t it be poetic justice if they were the ones who either (a) captured OBL or (b) took out the Islamofascists who executed summary justice on gays in the Middle East? Roll on, boys!
Along the same lines, I also advocate having all-female platoons, 12 in all. Why twelve? Because when women live together, they start their cycles at the same time. Send ‘em out when they’re all on the same time of month; we could call them the All-Amazon-Brigade.
Just my $0.02, girls.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — July 10, 2008 @ 3:45 pm - July 10, 2008
mmmm nice.
Comment by Vince P — July 10, 2008 @ 4:33 pm - July 10, 2008
#10 - Vince, I bet you’d see gay enlistment skyrocket if they announced “all-gay platoons.”
PS: Don’t anyone ever tell you we are all “girly-men.” I have met some wonderful men in uniform from Great Britain to Israel who happen to be gay, and trust me - you don’t want to piss them off. HOO-RAH!
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — July 10, 2008 @ 4:59 pm - July 10, 2008
Operation “get behind the homos?”
Comment by American Elephant — July 10, 2008 @ 7:52 pm - July 10, 2008
Sorry, you are wrong on that. Open homosexuality in the military would be destructive. Imagine how many seconds after DADT is abolished before gays start suing for affirmative action in the military, every gay not already promoted to general claiming descrimination. Worse, imagine how many straight 17-19 year old Christian boys refuse to even think of joining.
PS, here is something that makes the argument that gays are just like straights except in the privacy of their bedrooms: http://minx.cc/?post=268263
Comment by Smarty — July 10, 2008 @ 8:54 pm - July 10, 2008
BTW, how many more qualified ppl would be eligible? How many qualified ppl would refuse to serve because of it? Berthing on ships is tight, with no privacy. It is bad enough that Clinton forced women into combat units/warships, but homosexuals too? Is there ONE aspect of life where PC divirsity/tolerance horseshit isn’t forced on the straight, white Christian males that built this country and who currently maintain it, it’s tax base, it’s social structure and it’s military?
Comment by Smarty — July 10, 2008 @ 9:00 pm - July 10, 2008
#11
And we have all seen how ineffective those militaries have become.
Comment by Smarty — July 10, 2008 @ 9:01 pm - July 10, 2008
smarty: I’m sorta with you.
Why this need to creat upheavel in every aspect of Americans society?
There’s so much shit going on in the world. Like any gay guy who wouldn’t join teh militay because of DADT alone would join it if it wasnt’ there? Please
But I know.. so many gay people stake their entire self-worth on forcing the rest of the country to change the rules to give them warm fuzzy
Comment by Vince P — July 10, 2008 @ 9:39 pm - July 10, 2008
Hey, I know how we can make everyone happy - allow gays into the military AND keep DADT. Just quietly change the DADT policy mission from “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Torture”!
Comment by sonicfrog — July 11, 2008 @ 11:58 am - July 11, 2008
Thats a very important point, and true I think. Although I reject Smarty’s assertion that only straight, Christian, white males built this country.
Rather than repealed, I think DADT should be weakened and expanded. In other words, the military should discourage everyone from talking about their sex lives at work, the same way its not an appropriate topic for discussion in the business world. But no one should be kicked out for it either. A slap on the wrist will suffice.
Comment by American Elephant — July 11, 2008 @ 10:51 pm - July 11, 2008
So the answer is, if we don’t elevate homosexuality in the military, to lower heterosexuality? To make discussions of normal family as verboten as discussions of sucking off strangers in the bushes???
And yes, straight white Christian men are the bulk of the military, the bulk of military and US culture.
And like I said, the moment DADT is removed, there will be liberal Jew lawyers lining up to sue the military for not being gay-friendly enough. And standing behind them will be the ghosts of the USSR, wishing that all this had happened 30 years ago while they were still around to capitalize on our weakness.
Comment by Smarty — July 12, 2008 @ 3:36 pm - July 12, 2008
You and your wife suck off strangers in the bushes?
Sorry smarty, you don’t get credit for everything every straight white Christian male has done. You get credit for what you’ve done, that’s it. And no matter how much you’ve done, I can find a homosexual who has done more. Did you give your life defending Washington DC from a terrorist attack? A gay man did.
And liberal “Jew” lawyers, as you say, will fail in court for the same reasons they failed before. The military is not subject to civilian employment law.
I really hope you aren’t a conservative. You’re exactly the type of racist bigoted f**k that gives us conservatives a bad name.
And by the way, trust me, nobody wants to hear about your pathetic sex life, spare your co-workers, spare us all.
Comment by American Elephant — July 13, 2008 @ 12:39 am - July 13, 2008
One, I don’t need credit for what others have done, but I know dicksuckers, muslims, feminists, communists and a mayriad of others did not create this nation. But they sure to step up to the plate to make their demands known.
And yes, all of the above keep Liberal Jew Lawyers ™ on retainer.
Nice attempt at cheap shots, but gay promiscuity is pretty commonly known and understood to be far, far worse than what we find in heterosexual life.
Comment by Smarty — July 14, 2008 @ 9:43 pm - July 14, 2008
And if you don’t think that we have a problem with Liberal lawyers (who just happen to be disproportionately Jewish, you explain it, not my job) playing the modern-day Sonderkommando to the Muslims, communists and everyone else who is trying to weaken us then you are insane.
Comment by Smarty — July 14, 2008 @ 9:51 pm - July 14, 2008