The Tennessean is a daily newspaper in Nashville, TN. On 7 August, they published three opinion pieces regarding Don’t ask, Don’t tell. The first, Pentagon in-the-closet policy still doesn’t seem necessary, comes out against DADT and was written by the paper’s editorial board. The second piece was written by Chris Sanders, and it also comes out against DADT: It’s time to change discriminatory policy. Finally, someone speaks out in favor of keeping DADT, retired Colonel John Furgess, past national commander of Veterans of Foreign Wars: Because problems are few, keep policy as is.
Let’s take a closer look at what COL Furgess wrote. Overall, I appreciate COL Furgess’ piece because he does NOT attack and condemn gay people as immoral nor does he promote a particular view of morality. Very few opponents of repealing DADT do that. I appreciate the opportunity to focus on DADT as a military issue and not lump it together with everything else as part of the so-called “culture war.”
While campaigning for president in 1992, Bill Clinton promised to open the military to those espousing the gay and lesbian lifestyle.
There’s an issue with the way people think about gay and lesbian people. The colonel, like so many others, thinks the words “gay” and “lesbian” describe a pattern of behavior, but not an ingrained personal characteristic. There is this idea that one communicates by using the phrase “gay lifestyle” that tells the reader homosexuality is a choice and that it dictates every other aspect of that person’s personality. When I was a soldier, I had a soldier’s lifestyle, and I just happen to be gay.
Veterans of World War II, Korea and Vietnam have told me of very few problems relating to gay military members.
With all due respect, Vietnam ended over thirty years ago! There are very few Vietnam veterans serving today. While I respect their service and the wisdom they accumulated while serving (and since leaving the service), I don’t think they would necessarily be experts on the current attitudes regarding gays in the military.
In fact, even if a young trooper doesn’t care whether or not someone in his platoon is gay, he probably assumes that his dad or uncle - who served in Vietnam - opposes gays serving honestly in the military, so he is likely to say what he thinks his dad or uncle wants to hear. Sure, there are some of us who like to argue, but not all the time and not with everyone. So he says, “Yeah, dad, I agree.” But he’s probably thinking, “Who cares?”
Recent history seems to reflect that sexual preference isn’t the best barometer of a person’s success in the military. Veterans will tell you that a person’s willingness to do his or her job to the best of their ability, and to dedicate themselves to help the unit accomplish the mission, is the better indicator.
Yes, sir. I agree with that.
Finally, I think there is a theme to COL Furgess’ piece that is summed up in one word in the title: “problems.” It seems the colonel needs to see that there is a problem to be fixed if we are going to change the current law. Well, sir, there are problems. They may not make headlines, but that doesn’t make them any less problematic. For starters, this law automatically cancels out his comments regarding “the best of their ability.” DADT prejudges that a gay person doesn’t have enough to contribute to the unit to cancel out the contributions of those who don’t like gay people. It also prejudges the attitudes of the men and women serving in uniform - namely deciding, by law, that they are all prejudiced against gay people - and that they are untrustworthy by possibly abandoning the defense of their nation if gay troops are honest about their sexual orientation. That’s definitely a problem.
And the actions of a single company or platoon rarely make headlines - only the most exceptional events are reported. But the effects of DADT reach that company or platoon and can make a difference in the lives of those men and women. It’s hard to lose a leader, especially one that has years of experience and/or training. It’s also hard to lose someone who sets an example for others to follow. Harding than losing them is finding a replacement. More than training and experience, the loss of someone the soldiers trust is even more difficult to replace. What’s sad is that after the gay soldier is gone, others may try to portray him as a liar because he didn’t tell anyone he was gay - even though that is exactly what the law requires of him.
Sir, we’re not making headlines because we’re just like everybody else. By repealing DADT, we just want to be treated like everyone else.
Post a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.