Rich Cleland And here's the real problem right here: [McCain says,] "...We have the best trained, best equipped, and most professional force in the history of our country, and the men and women in uniform are performing heroically in two wars. At a time when our Armed Forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy."
This statement exposes to two-pronged disconnect between conservative rhetoric and reality:
1) Unless he's just employing baseless platitudes (likely), the "most professional force in history" should be able to do what the (by logical extension of McCain's argument) less professional army did fifty years ago integrating the services during a time of war (sorry, Korean Police Action).
2) (a.k.a., the most morally disgusting part of the conservative argument) Some of the heroic men and women that John McCain so eagerly annexes into his argument are sacrificing in two wars while simultaneously fighting to hide themselves in plain sight and fearing that a discovery in their personal lives might end their professional career.
They're already 'over there.' They're fighting for you. Fight for them.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/02/gays_military_1
Benjamin Doyle Dont ask dont tell works!
February 5 at 7:56am ·
Rich Cleland For whom? At what cost?
February 5 at 9:01am ·
Kathryn Palmer Because this change in policy would change military operations how? Memo to troops: You can come out of the closet. Oh, shit, they've all gone clubbing--who will fight the war???
February 5 at 9:40am ·
Rich Cleland Well, i'm not saying it would be that easy. I'm not saying it would be easy at all. In fact, i think it will be very hard, but hard is not a valid excuse to not do something that should be done.
I'm also not saying every gay or lesbian needs to be out. I'm saying that, being a discovered homosexual should not be used to drum you out of the service. We lose good personnel that way and maintaining DADT is a powerful institutionalized statement that says, you homosexuals are not full citizens (despite your service to your country) and we will punish you because you are a minority and we can get away with it.
February 5 at 9:51am ·
Kathryn Palmer We agree, Rich. I was just mocking the assumption that it would hurt current military operations.
February 5 at 9:55am ·
Benjamin Doyle Since I have spent all of my adult life in the US Army I can only give my opinion, and my experience. I have served with gay and lesbian soldiers, and have seen both extremes of how a person can carry themselves. I have had the honor of serving with one of the best medic in the army in two comabt tours having recieved a bronze star and purple heart who happens to be gay. He will be the first one one to tell you that Dont ASK Dont tell works for now. He keeps his personal life personal The can of worms this would open is very large. and in my opinion this is not the time.
February 5 at 10:41am ·
Rich Cleland I understand. I was also pointing out that it wont be as easy as some proponents of repeal say it is either. Fortunately we have a good logistical and moral model to follow in the integration of the forces in the 50s. Which, by the way, seems to have turned out ok.
February 5 at 10:53am ·
Rich Cleland In any event, McCain et al. dont get to claim all the heroes in arguing in favor of repressing the civil rights of the minority because some of those heroes are in that minority.
(Ben, I don't know the specifics of your argument for continuing dadt so I'm not saying that this is your opinion on the matter.) I find it extremely typical of people in the conservative movement to despise government invasion into personal lives except when it can be used to enforce their particular moral code.
February 5 at 10:53am ·
Rich Cleland (fb is being weird, sorry for the choppy post).
Ben, I definitely acknowledge your close perspective on this situation. I totally believe that there are gay and lesbian soldiers, sailors, and marines who would not push to repeal DADT. Just like there are heterosexuals in the force too who support repeal.
If not now then when? I ask because it's been 15 years since we enacted this temporary fix and "now's not the time" has been the mantra in the past to justify continued suppression of civil rights. I'm not saying that you are using it this way, i'm mentioning it to point out how minorities process that phrase.
February 5 at 11:12am ·
Rich Cleland I think it will be hard to change minds and, again, i'm not suggesting that everyone be "out." But a policy that boots arabic linguists from the service because of they happen to be gay doesn't seem like a good idea right now either. Why isn't it not the right time to be depleting our force of trained arabic linguists or highly-qualified, decorated medics?
February 5 at 11:12am ·
Rich Cleland I also believe that people will not overcome their prejudgments about minorities if the institutions of government reinforce them. When the government says that a group of people is subhuman deserving of diminished rights, the larger citizenry is inclined to agree. So I guess what i'm saying is that this needs to happen for our society to develop. If that means we have to ask one more hard thing from the men and women serving in the military, then that's just one of the many hard things we ask of them (you), but it's no different than asking them to engage in the experiment of integration so that our society could begin to heal our racial divide.
February 5 at 11:12am ·
Rich Cleland case in point.
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/02/09/Dan_Choi_Back_in_Active_Duty/
11 minutes ago ·
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment