Gay Civil Rights - Essay Example

GAY CIVIL RIGHTS Throughout human history, homosexuals have had a difficult time. They have often been discriminated against. Sometimes this discrimination has meant they have been denied benefits such as jobs and housing, and sometimes it has been much worse. For many years, homosexuals were often subject to violent attack and ostracization. This led many to deny or hide their sexual identity in the hopes of escaping these forms of discrimination. Thankfully, in recent years, laws have been changed and social attitudes have evolved. It is no longer nearly as hard to be gay in many countries in the western world. Homosexuals have risen to positions of power in the business, political, and artistic community, and discrimination has been dramatically reduced. In this respect, their civil rights battle and their victories have in some ways paralleled those of African-Americans. One of the biggest issues relating to their civil rights has been the American armys policy of Dont Ask, Dont Tell. America is almost alone in having a policy that discriminates against homosexuals openly serving in the military. Many other countries allow homosexuals to serve openly in their militaries. For example, Israel, Canada, and the U.K., all comparable democracies to the United States allow this to happen. All of these armies are considered to be world class and the presence of homosexuals does not “create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.” Indeed, in Canada, Canadian Forces officers have even been married on Canadian army bases. While this might be unthinkable in the United States, there is no good reason for it to be so. Many American officers are now comparing their own army to international ones and determining that it is time to bring American practices more in line with practices around the world. These countries’ experience shows that an army does not fall apart when homosexuals are allowed the serve openly; there are no reported negative effects whatsoever. One of the main reasons that other countries allow homosexuals to serve openly is because courts have recognized that homosexuals have the right to be free of discrimination. In Canada, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. It simply isn’t possible to deny homosexuals the right to serve their country. These legal reasons have been recognized in other countries too and form the basis for many countries’ rejection of similar don’t ask, don’t tell policies. In the United States such rights have not yet been granted. There is still a big argument about gay marriage which shows no sign of being resolved any time soon. America appears to be a more culturally divided country on the issue of homosexuality. That may be the way it is, but that is not a very good reason to deny a person the opportunity to serve their country because of an immutable characteristic that really has no connection with the morale or standards of the troupe. The argument against giving homosexuals such rights holds little water. The American army is currently fighting two big wars: one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. It is short of soldiers and needs more. Since the don’t ask, don’t tell policy came into effect, thousands of soldiers have been forced to leave service. This is not right. The military needs more soldiers. Disallowing the service of homosexuals reduces the number of soldiers too much. They can fight well, according to the standards, and should be allowed to serve openly. In these tough times, beggars cannot be choosers. It is not only discriminatory to deny homosexuals the right to serve openly, but it is against the interests of the American armed forces in a time of war—they require more people and they should not waste this untapped resource. This is all part of a broader debate which is very polarizing. Throughout the early 20th century, homosexuals largely hid their identity or shared their identity with only a small group. Following the Second World War, the American government began a campaign that explicitly denied them civil rights. For example, the right to employment. During the feverish anti-communist spirit that overtook the United States in the late 1940 and 1950s, homosexuals were blacklisted by the federal government because it was believed they were more open to being blackmailed than heterosexual employees (Adam, 46). Thousands had their job applications denied not just from the federal government, but also from the military. Certainly the numbers would be even higher in the private sector. In the medical community, homosexuality was considered by many to be an aberration or a personality defect. It was not until 1956, when a scientist was able to do a study showing that an openly gay man was as well-adjusted as a heterosexual man, that this way of thinking slowly began to change (Fejes, 122). Homosexuality stayed in the medical books as a problem for many years after this too. The big event in the history of gay civil rights occurred in New York City with the Stonewall Riots in 1969. When police raided a gay nightclub, a riot ensued (Duberman, 83). Following this, many gay activists groups were created to lobby for rights and for protection against arbitrary police action. In many respects, the 1960s and the counterculture of that era engendered many civil rights movements, including the African-American one led by Martin Luther King Jr. The time was ripe for all sorts of people who had been oppressed by the culture and the system. Gays and African-Americans both marched together, galvanized by the changes that were happening all around them. Blacks were once unable to stay in certain hotels or restaurants and so were gays. The events of the 1960s galvanized both groups. The huge protests, the assassinations, the “fierce urgency of now” (to quote King), led both groups to say “Enough is enough,” and to begin to organize to increase the power of their voices. There were some important differences. While blacks worked hard to get voting rights acts passed to ensure their power at the polls, gays were more concerned with access to public facilities, avoiding malicious prosecution, and avoiding violence (which they were often subject to). The other difference is the current status of both groups. In some respects, the election of Barack Obama marks the bookend of the African-American civil rights movement: the most powerful position in the country belongs to a black man. For homosexuals, however, there is still much to be done. Although the 1990s saw huge gains for homosexuals who came out of the closet—for example the frequent depiction of homosexuality on TV (for example, Ellen) and books, and the passage of human rights legislation and hate crime legislation—discrimination still exists (Marcus, 342). Especially in rural areas, homosexuals are often ostracized. They are also under-represented in the politics. What is the next step? What lessons can homosexuals today take from their history and apply to their future? How can they be integrated into the military? The key is organization and solidarity. It is important not to rest on your laurels and keep arguing and fighting to ensure your rights are protected. Just because Barack Obama was elected president doesn’t mean that the NAACP should disband. All of these civil rights groups need to work together and work hard ensure everyone’s rights are respected equally. Gays should be allowed to serve openly in the American military: it is only natural. Works Consulted Adam, Barry. The Rise of a Gay and Lesbian Movement. New York: G. K. Hall & Co, 1987. Carter, Chad C. and Kolenc, Antony B. "Dont Ask, Dont Tell:" Has the Policy Met Its Goals? University of Dayton Law Review, Fall 2005. Duberman, Martin. Stonewall. London: Penguin Books, 1993. Fejes, Fred. Gay Rights and Moral Panic: The Origins of Americas Debate on Homosexuality. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008. Jones, Major Bradley K. "The Gravity of Administrative Discharges: A Legal and Empirical Evaluation" The Military Law Review 59:1–26. January 1973 Marcus, Eric. Making Gay History. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2002. Shilts, Randy. Conduct Unbecoming: Gays & Lesbians in the U.S. Military Vietnam to the Persian Gulf. New York, St. Martins Press. 1993. Read More