Should Gays be Allowed to Serve in the Military - Research Paper Example

Should Gays be allowed to serve in the military? Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….3 Don’t ask don’t tell policy………………………………………………………………………...3 Graph showing opposing views concerning the policy…………………………...………………4 Military preparation and readiness………………………………………………………………..5 Troop morale and cohesion…………………………………………………..……………………6 Compatibility of homosexuality to military service………………………………………………6 Retention and recruitment………………………………………….……………………………..7 Rights of citizens………………………………………………………….……………………….8 Privacy in the military camp………………………………………………………………………8 Lifting the ban on the don’t ask, don’t tell policy…………………………………………………9 Controversies over gays serving in the military…………………………………………………9 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….……….10 References……………………………………………………………………………………… 12 Should Gays be allowed to serve in the military? Introduction Whether gays should be allowed to serve in the military or not has elicited reactions from several quarters. Proponents and opponents of the idea have attempted to front various opinions in relation to the sides they take in this debate. The United States is one of the countries that arguably have been in limbo over this contentious matter for a very long time. For the sake of this particular argument, the American challenges and the views fronted by various people become beneficial in analyzing whether gays should be allowed to serve in the military or not. The Don’t ask, don’t tell Policy The “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue policy is one the policies in the USA that cannot be overlooked in such a debate. The question therefore, is whether it is a good policy or not. It is important to look at several views whether this policy harms or boosts military readiness. The other factor is the impact of this policy on the morale of military, whether it harms or boosts troop morale and unit cohesion or not (Berlatsky, 2011). In addition, I think it is significant to look at service compatibility aspect; this tries to deduce if in any case being a gay is compatible with military service. The other factor is whether ‘the don’t ask don’t tell policy’ has improved military retention and recruitment or whether it has harmed these efforts. Furthermore, its consistency to citizen rights is a matter not worth ignoring when handling this topic. Considering whether homosexuality is moral or not and whether this should play a role in driving States policy should also take preeminence. Ultimately careful evaluation of these considerations can result to the bearing taken in analyzing whether gays should serve in the military or not. The don’t ask, don’t tell policy was adopted during President Bill Clintons’ regime in the Year 1993. It prohibits openly accepting if one is a gay and it prohibits one being asked his sexual status when being recruited in the military. In my opinion, it is not resonant for open declaration that one is a gay since such declaration automatically discharges one from his duty in the military service. The main reason cited for this move was that, homosexuality destabilizes good order and it is against the good morals of the larger American society. Again many opinions have continued to emerge in regard to this policy. Some people have argued that this policy is selective and undermines basic freedom stipulated in the Bill of rights. Their argument being that this policy locks out patriots who would like to put their lives in the front line to serve their country in the military (Frank, 2010). Graph showing opposing views concerning the policy The graph below shows the trends in public opinion concerning the policy of don’t ask, don’t tell. The graph indicates solid base that allows lesbians and gays to serve in the military without hiding who they are as compared in 1993 when the policy was adopted. I think the Congress and President Obama should overturn this policy to allow all patriotic and selfless Americans serve their country. Military preparation and readiness On to the point on whether gays harm military preparations and readiness, a former secretary of defense and a senator known as Cohen William is quoted to have said that he believes that lesbians and gays allowed to serve openly in the United States army would not in any way undermine readiness of the States military. On the other hand, an army surgeon during the adoption of don’t ask don’t tell policy admitted that homosexual life is an unhealthy lifestyle behavior. There are wide claims that HIV/AIDS prevalence rate has reduced in great bounds since the policy of prohibiting gays from serving in the military was introduced. Those opposing the idea of gay service have argued that homosexuality is likely to increase infections in the military. This in turn translates to high tax burden to the taxpayers. They have also argued that HIV/AIDS positive military members cannot be deployed for operations oversees though still retained in the army. The don’t ask, don’t tell policy has also been cited to be putting commanders in a compromising position. People of this opinion argue that, Commanders should be in a position to know everything about their troop members which makes it easier to handle them during operations. However, they claim that the policy prohibits the commander from asking his troops finer details with the fear that they may be infringing in their privacy (McGowan, 2005). Troop morale and cohesion On whether gays undermine troop morale and unit cohesion, those against the don’t ask don’t tell policy have argued that, according to the 2006 poll carried out by Zogby reaserch, 72% of the servicemen responded that presence of gays or lesbians had no negative effects on their units and the straight service colleagues had no issues in interacting with their gay counterparts. To counter this perspective, those in support of the policy have argued that the fact that homosexuality is against the natural order and the facts that it demeans morality standards is enough reason to dismantle military unit cohesion and harm morale of troops. They have also presented the fact that, despite the poll by zogby indicating that a higher percentage of service men had no problem with gays in their units, the minority of percentage uncomfortable with gays is enough reason to damage unit cohesion and lower their morale (Berlatsky, 2011). Compatibility of homosexuality to military service Reservations have been made in regard to the compatibility of homosexuality with the military service. Proponents of gay service have quoted president Obama in Stars and Strips which a military newspaper that, “The key test attributed to military service ought to be sense of duty, patriotism and in general willingness to serve one’s country”. According to this statement, they have interpreted that the president did not take sexual orientation as a hindrance to anyone who wanted to serve his country as a service member. To contradict this perspective, other quarters have held onto the fact that homosexuality is incompatible with military service because it goes against military key principles which they have listed as, discipline, integrity, focus on mission, service and overall control of a service man’s impulses. This claim has been associated to Leighton Smith, a former commandant of Marine Corps (Mitchell, 2002). A female military officer is also reported to have sentimented that, lesbians and gays should be allowed to serve in the military so long as they are able to perform as required of them. However, she advised that if allowed to serve, gays and lesbians should do the honorable thing of keeping their private lives out of the work place. In 1993 during a senate hearing, General Collin Powell remarked that despite doing so in private, gay troops have served the United States army with honor and dignity and that they still continue to do so. Retention and recruitment Questions have been asked on whether the policy undermines the retention and recruitment of service men in the United States military. Some are of the opinion that, the policy locks out much potentiated servicemen that can make due contribution in the military service. Discharge of personnel from the time the policy was initiated has cost the country a huge shortage of experienced servicemen that played a great role in serving the country. Rights of citizens Furthermore, the don’t ask don’t tell policy has been critized to be inconsistent with the rights of the citizens in the American constitution. It has been compared to the World War II scenario where African American citizens were not allowed to fight in the war. The policy is said to base its foundation on beliefs that are fictious in nature that gays are not able to represent their country in war like other citizens. Those opposing gays service on the other hand, continue to argue that by virtue of law, which is effected by the policy that bans gays from serving in the military, confirms the fact that gays have no constitutional rights to serve in the military (Merritt, 2008). Privacy in the military camp Issues on privacy in camps have also come up with some of the opinion that gays are likely to disrupt privacy in the military camps. This they say is likely to lead to distrust in units because of the variety of sexes in a camp. Conversely, proponents are of the view that matters on privacy can be resolved just the same way privacy still exists in a camp that include both men and women. Whether homosexuality is a matter of choice or just an unwilling occurrence is also a great factor to consider. According to the views of one of the serviceman, after being discharged from service on the basis of being an open gay, he said “I wish I could always be able to make a choice on who to fall in love with, if anybody thinks that I would willingly choose to live a life always fearing and hiding then, they must just be crazy”. This apparently was his way of passing a message out there that homosexuality is not a choice one makes but a situation one is driven to by his feelings. In contradiction, those against the idea of homosexuals serving in the military have insisted that homosexuality is by choice and sexual acts between people of the same sex is not only immoral but also a great sin that cannot be tolerated in a civilized society (Mitchell, 2002). Lifting the ban on the don’t ask, don’t tell policy Moreover, questions have been asked if at all lifting the ban on don’t ask, don’t tell policy would decrease violence on the gays. Opinions from the service members have indicated that lifting the ban in no way has got any consequences on violence against the homosexuals. Compared to the Britain scenario, it was established that the bashing of gays in the army had sharply reduced after lifting a ban on homosexuality. This was attributed to the reasons that the victims abused were most likely to report cases of abuse. Controversies over gays serving in the military All in all, one fact stands out that the issue of gays serving in the military draws a lot of controversies whenever the topic comes up. The basis on whether they should serve in the military or not, must take into considerations the basic rights of the general population. Firstly, establishing the general objectives of the military should be considered before being punitive with the gays. Military focuses on serving and protecting its nation and this remains the most important underlying factor. Being a gay does not wash away patriotic ideals of a citizen. Service to the nation is basically driven by patriotism and not sex affiliations. The society should become tolerant to the gays so long as they do not interfere with military terms of service. It is impractical that by just being a gay, one can harm troop morale. When analyzed critically, some of the issues presented do not qualify as genuine reasons against gay’s service but just open hatred to the homosexuals (Travis, 2012). According to McGowan (2010), the military is one of those areas of service with strict and outlined disciplinary measures. For this reason, it concur that it is prudent to allow the gays to serve as service members so long as they adhere to military regulations that do not affect military operations. For example, new rules taking into consideration the conduct of gays when in service can be drafted. The consequences of failing to adhere to the rules drafted should also be known to them to limit chances of violations. Gays, just like those who are straight, are able to follow rules as required of them and therefore, there are still no convincing reasons to lock them out of military service. Moreover, it is also important to go back on the American history prior to the adoption of don’t ask, don’t tell policy. In my view, fact be told, a number of the service members at this time were gays but that never stopped them from faithfully serving their country (Frank, 2010). This proves that in no way have gays since history compromised military readiness and efficiency when in line of duty. This sentiment has also been echoed by straight servicemen who have openly admitted that gays make equal contribution in troops just like their straight counterparts. Conclusion Summarily, I think gays still continue to serve in the United States army currently despite the ban. They hold onto this secret because of the policy that was adopted. However; the United States have fought several wars with the contribution of these gays. It has never been reported where participation of a gay hindered any operation in the United States army. This can be attributed to the patriotic aspect of them and their selfless contribution just like the rest of the service members. To be fair and considerate to the basic rights of every citizen, gays have got every right to serve in the military. References Berlatsky, N. (2011). Gays in the Military (Opposing Viewpoints). Virginia: Greenhaven Press. Frank, N. (2010). Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin. McGowan, J. (2005). Major Conflict: One Gay Man’s Life in the Don’t –Ask-Don’t-Tell Military. New York: Broadway. Merritt, R. (2008). Code of Conduct. Washington, DC: Kensington Books. Mitchell, C. (2002). Marching to an Angry Drum: Gays in the Military. New York: Prentice Hall. Travis, A. (2012). Military Discipline. New York. The Aaron Travis Publications. Read More