American military don't ask don't tell policy
- Thread starter DOD_bld
- Start date
lol yeah I guess that makes sense. Okay Pesheh... here you go...
Sodomy has been grounds for discharge from the American military since the Revolutionary War, but the LGBT-related policies changed over the course of the 20th century. The subject remains a debate in Congress, the topic of political campaigns and activism, presidential speeches, and popular opinion polls. Lieutenant Gotthold Frederick Enslin was the first soldier discharged from the U.S. military (at that time, the Continental Army) for sodomy, in 1778. Starting in 1916, neutral blue discharges were often given to gay personnel. As the U.S. prepared to enter World War II, the military added psychiatric screening to its induction process. At the time, psychiatry labeled homosexuality as an indicator of psychopathology, and this notion was added to military practices. The first time "homosexual" people were differentiated from "normal" people in the military literature was in revised army mobilization regulations in 1942. In 1947, the blue discharges were discontinued and instead labeled "general" and "undesirable". Under such a system, a servicemember found to be gay but who had not committed any sexual acts while in service would receive an undesirable discharge. Those found guilty of engaging in sexual conduct were dishonorably discharged. From the 1940s through the Vietnam War, some notable gay servicemembers avoided discharges despite pre-screening efforts, and when personnel shortages occurred, homosexuals were allowed to serve. In the 1970s, the gay and lesbian rights movement emerged in the U.S. and chose the anti-gay military policy as one of its main targets. Partially as a response to this movement, the Department of Defense issued a 1982 policy (DOD Directive 1332.14) stating that homosexuality was clearly incompatible with military service. The policy garnered public scrutiny through the 1980s and 1990s, and it became a political issue in the 1992 U.S. presidential election with Bill Clinton and others citing the brutal murder of gay U.S. Navy petty officer Allen R. Schindler, Jr. After Bill Clinton won the presidency, Congress rushed to enact the existing gay ban policy into federal law, outflanking Clinton's planned repeal effort. Clinton introduced Congressional legislation to overturn the ban, but it encountered intense scrutiny by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, members of Congress, and portions of the U.S. public. "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" emerged as a compromise policy
Now the government is reviewing whether to repeal this policy and allow gays (both m/f), and bi-sexual enlisted to serve openly without fear of random unprovoked, and often unconstitutional discharge from military service.
So in a nutshell:
If you are for don't ask don't tell, and don't think gays should be in the military... why?
If you are against don't ask don't tell, and think it doesn't matter if gays are in the military... why?
I'm against. sexuality has nothing to do with your abilities and how you function in the army in my opinion. I don't feel like giving a big explication but just look at the movie American Beauty. The neighbour is gay and eventually he goes killing someone because he suppresed his true nature. Is that what you would want?
Juvia Loxar
Active member
I'm totally against it, an individuals sexuality has no baring over the said persons ability and aptitude as long as the person in question is not discriminated due to it, oppression and discrimination creates resentment which will lead to other problems, the ideal world should be a place your treated equally regardless your sexual orientation, whether this is in the military or any other institution.
EDIT: Doctor; don't get ahead of yourself, or you could end up with a infraction or even worse!!!!
EDIT: Doctor; don't get ahead of yourself, or you could end up with a infraction or even worse!!!!
Last edited:
Really? ... That's all you've got? ... This is a serious issue about human civil liberties, -- and all you've got to say is "Takai is a tard" -- you're worthless... you could have at least commented on the topic at hand.You are right,i guess its time,all others are expired,i hate not having infractions.
Takai is a tard,and an helpless idiot.
Scarface,i expect my infraction soon. U_U
The only reason I even brought it up here was to get opinions from those that are completely different from those of politicians. I was just curious how people from around the world viewed the issue.
Civil Liberties?
Dude,you watch too many movies,no such thing as conspiracies,or secret army bases,or anything like that,it is all a lie.
A government,is a government,they can`t strip you off your rights,and neither can they make you silence,its called Freedom of Speech.
Concerning military stuff,the don`t ask don`t tell policy is a way of anti-racism,i think even you don`t know the exact meaning of that policy,here,brush up your brain son :
You must be registered for see links
Did you even read that page you linked in? Because it is the exact same thing that I posted as my second comment...
Freedom of speech has nothing to do with this issue... This pertains to the Constitution of the United States of America, where in the document, it states that all Americans without prejudice shall have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness... There are also various sub sections that reference and point out how civil liberties are to be assured regardless of a persons position in society. Because of this little insignificant document, the army telling troops that they can't be gay and in the army at the same time, and if they are gay, they are not allowed to be gay while they are IN the army. It most defiantly is a civil liberties issue.
Maybe YOU should brush up a bit SON!
Actually, I've been to two "secret Army bases." One in North Carolina and one in Nevada.
I don't know anything about the Greek Government, but here in the US we now have The Patriot Act. It effectively removes our rights and freedom.
Jokes apart, I don't understand the problem with this whole thing, the DADT mean that the military doesn't ask a recruit of there sexual orientation and prohibits them on speaking, practising or simply living the lifestyle they choose to live, which according to my interpretation of the constitution violates the individuals right to lead a fulfilling life without discrimination.
The point is it shouldn't matter in the first place, if they are gay or bi !!!!
EDIT: Gama is absolutely right, but the unfortunate thing is it's not just limited to the US, all over the world civil liberty is being curtailed at an alarming rate, soon the day will come where governments will install CCTV in our bloody living rooms.
Last edited:
I guess leaving off an "s" and using lots of "..." not placing and apostrophe after a word, placing a "," instead of a ";" and having one run on sentence causes me to win the debate that isn't even the issue. O.O Please if you are able to, put the DADT Policy in to words that my simple mind can understand. In doing so, attempt to prove your side of the issue, I have yet to see it posted.
P.s. I'll attempt to prioritize my arguments next time, grammar first, facts second!
So it's alright for a couple of heterosexuals to meet and fall in love and even get up to the dirty in the armoury, but if a homosexual act's are prohibited, as I said it's a violation of the constitution itself!!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
You are wrong. Pure and simple, you just don't seem to understand, yet you are willing to argue to death without knowledge at all.
Before I just stop giving a crap about you again, I offer this...
I hope you get your trachea kicked off by a zebra, and your mom dies in a car crash upon hearing the news.