Homosexuals in the Military - Research Paper Example

Homosexuals in the Military Early in the 1992 presidential campaign, then-candidate Bill Clinton commented that, if elected, he would “lift the ban” on homosexuals serving in the military.1 Existing policies had been in place since the Carter Administration and, historically speaking, homosexuality had not been tolerated in the military services. The issue drew heated debate among policymakers and the public at large (Burrelli and Feder, p.1). Homosexuals serving in the military are not a new issue. “Homosexuals” in military is not a new thing. Plato has mentioned the presence of gays in ancient Greek military in some of his books. Moreover, the presence of homosexuals was reported in the Napoleonic wars. In short, because of the peculiar life military personal forced to lead, many of them become homosexuals. The military life is not like normal life. The soldiers forced to interact mostly with only the male community and that also under tight disciplinary procedures. As in the case of normal life, the soldiers may not be able to express their emotions, feelings or desires freely. They forced to work under a disciplinary frame work in which only the military goals and functions overrule their psychological or physiological necessities. Most of the soldiers get only a few months holidays to spend with their families and hence they are unable lead a normal family life or sexual life. The unsatisfied soldiers often select homosexuality to release their sexual energy. This paper briefly explains homosexuality in military. Homosexuals in the Military Even though United States legally prohibited homosexuality in military, it is an accepted fact that many of the military men in US military are homosexuals. Homosexuality prohibition was not done strictly until the World War 2 even though explicitly it was prohibited. But the Second World War revealed the necessity of prohibition of homosexuality in military because of some of the unfavourable incidents happened during the war. After the Second World War many of the military men from US military have been rejected from their services because of their homosexuality. In many cases, US youths pretend like homosexuals in order to avoid the compulsory military service. This was more evident during the bloody Vietnam War. In 1968 Perry Watkins, a 19-year-old from Washington, was drafted despite checking the "yes" box in the category "homosexual tendencies" during his preinduction physical examination. After 16 years of service, the military discharged Watkins for his sexual orientation in 1984; he promptly filed a lawsuit and went on to win his case in 1990 (Webley). Homosexuals have been excluded from most of the societies because of the non-acceptance of homosexuality among the majority of the public. Naturally, sexuality is associated with all the living things; but homosexuality is something against the natural principles. In fact nature has given sexual energy to the living things for the reproduction purpose. In the absence of sexual pleasure, many people may stay away from having a sexual relationship with the opposite sex. In order to force the people to engage in sexual relationships and to sustain the life on earth, nature has given the sexual pleasure to the living things. Homosexuality is against the norms of nature’s principle and hence it is rejected widely across the world. The public has different opinions about the acceptance and rejection of homosexuality in our social life. Same way in military also, this topic has provoked hot debate. Military life is somewhat different from the social life. It is difficult for military personnel to lead a life as he likes even though he fights for the safety and security of the country for many years. While the issue of homosexuals in the military has only lately become a point of great public debate, it is not a new issue; it derives its roots from the time of the military's beginning. Reports in the media over the last several years have stated that since the implementation of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in 1993, the number of discharges for homosexuality has increased. According to data provided by Department of Defense (DOD), from the early 1980s until Fiscal Year (FY) 1994, the number of personnel discharged for homosexual conduct (including statements) decreased. From FY1995 to FY2001, the numbers rebounded, only to begin leveling off thereafter. In April 1998, the Department of Defense released a review of the implementation of the “Policy on Homosexual Conduct.” This review was instituted after complaints were aired that the increasing rate of discharges was a sign of “witch hunts” or anti-homosexual harassment (Burrelli and Feder, p.5). Don't ask, don't tell (DADT) is the common term used in American military to restrict or prohibit homosexuality in American military. This principle prohibits anyone who exhibit an intent to engage in homosexual acts" from serving in the armed forces of the United States. According to the US military principles, homosexuality would affect the cohesion of the military personnel and it can create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline. Cohesion and cooperation among the soldiers are essential for the smooth functioning of a military. Two types of people with respect to sexuality in military can create lot of conflicts and clashes among the military personnel and hence homosexuality was avoided in US military. The “Don't ask, don't tell” (DADT) policy prohibits any military personnel; homosexual or bisexual, from disclosing his or her sexual orientation. It also prohibits unnecessary talking about the personal sex related beliefs or opinions or relationships, including marriages or other familial attributes, while serving in the United States armed forces. The growing popularity of homosexuality among the public is a big headache for the administration in keeping homosexuality away from military for a longer period. Many people argue in favour of injecting homosexuality in military. These people believe that the soldiers may do their duties more efficiently, if they allow leading a normal life just like other people in the society. In their opinion, since bisexual life is restricted in military, encouraging homosexuality in military is a better option to get rid of the emotional problems of the soldiers. More than 25 countries allow gays to openly serve in their armed forces, including the U.S.'s closest neighbor, Canada. The British military began allowing gays to serve in 2000; members of the Ministry of Defense told The New York Times in 2007 that there had been no reported incidents of harassment, discord, blackmail or bullying, nor any erosion of unit cohesion or military effectiveness. In Israel, which has had no restrictions on gays serving in the military since 1993, the army magazine, Bamahane, showcased two men hugging each other on a 2009 cover. In Russia, people "who have problems with their identity and sexual preferences," as the military guidelines put it, are allowed to serve only during times of war. Many other countries ban homosexuality in society in general, making gays' military service there a nonissue(Webley). President Obama is under immense pressure to take a decision in favour of allowing homosexuality in American military. Most of the gallop polls conducted among the Americans, argued in favour of allowing homosexuality in American military. The acceptance of gays and lesbians are increasing in the American public life. People have no hesitation in revealing about their sexuality and private life nowadays. Since United States is a nation of democracy which values liberty, freedom, equality in all respects, it is difficult for America to keep a blind eye towards the issue of allowing homosexuality in American military, especially when other prominent countries like Canada, Israel and Britain already allowed it in military. Israel is a country in which the religion Judaism has deep roots in politics and social life. Many people accuse Israel as a fundamental society because of their strict adherence to the norms of biblical or Torah principles. Jews are adamant in their religious beliefs and customs. Yet, they found no harm in allowing homosexuality in military. For the last 17 years, homosexuality was allowed by law in Israel’s military. “Rabbi David Rosen, the Jerusalem-based international director of interreligious affairs for the American Jewish Committee, noted that the same ultra-Orthodox leaders who regularly decry gay pride parades never tried to stop openly gay soldiers from Israel Defence Forces service”(Chabin). United States and other countries which are still reluctant in allowing homosexuality in military, can take lot of lessons from the Israeli military. So far, Israel has not found any problems in allowing homosexuality in military. Moreover, many of the Israeli military officials are of the view that the permission to given to practice homosexuality in military has increased the overall efficiency of the Israeli troops. Many of the protests against allowing homosexuality in military are based on the ethical considerations rather than any other social or political concerns. Ray Morgan (2010) has pointed out that “homosexual conduct is considered immoral behavior and punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, just like adultery and other such conduct. The basis for that is biblical (see Leviticus 18:22)” (Morgan). If homosexuality is an unaccepted principle, then it should be prohibited completely in our social life. Military personnel alone should not be kept away from homosexuality while most of the other people freely engage in such homosexual relationships. Killing of another person is an unethical behavior according to any of the moral codes or principles. Military personnel are forced to do such ethically wrong acts, but the society considers it as a noble act. In other words, disallowing homosexuality in military on moral grounds cannot be justified when we consider the forceful killing of human being conducted by them and accepted by the society. Conclusions Homosexuality in military is a controversial subject in America. Even though, many other prominent countries like Israel, Britain and Canada have no problems in allowing homosexuality in military, America still disallow it in military, citing moral reasons and the possible consequences of it. America has no problems in allowing homosexuality in social life, but they perceive military life entirely different from the social or normal life. Killing of a human is not an ethical act according to the biblical principles; but America has no ethical problems in conducting wars or killing innocent people. At the same time they are citing ethical reasons for disallowing homosexuality in military which is contradictory to moral laws and principles. Homosexuality should not be limited to a particular segment of people if it is acceptable; otherwise it should be prohibited from all forms of public life; military or social. Works Cited 1. Burrelli, David F and Feder, Jody. 2009. “Homosexuals and the U.S. Military: Current Issues”. CRS Report for Congress. Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress. 10 November 2010. 1-5 2. Chabin, Michele. 2010. Gays in Military? Israel Could be a Model. 10 November 2010. 3. Morgan, Ray. 2010. Letters: Homosexual Conduct Ban Nothing New. 10 November 2010. 4. Webley, Kayla. 2010. “Brief History of Gays in the Military”. TIME CNN. 10 November 2010. Read More