# Is "Don't Ask - Don't Tell" a reasonable law or not? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 8, 2008, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791 "2008-11-08T11:26:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/21 "2008-11-08T19:06:33Z")
> [@LilShieste](#): > > The only way DADT could possibly be seen as a reasonable policy is if it applied equally to heterosexuals, as well. But because it singles out homosexuals (and bisexuals), I have to agree with **Der Trihs** ; it’s discriminatory. > > They’re required to explicitly suppress anything that might indicate their sexual preference. The same thing doesn’t apply to a straight guy saying, “Check out the fine ass on that chick.” you’re missing the point. they aren’t discriminating in any bigot, immoral way. the policy is simply to erase the element of romance/emotions filtering over to the battle field. it’s not a moral issue the way this world makes it out to be. so getting booted for being gay is not a moral thing…it’s a policy thing. when i first got to boot camp, i almost got tossed for an unpaid speeding ticket simply because it was policy ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/22 "2008-11-08T19:09:00Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > you’re missing the point. they aren’t discriminating in any bigot, immoral way. the policy is simply to erase the element of romance/emotions filtering over to the battle field. > > it’s not a moral issue the way this world makes it out to be That doesn’t make sense. Female soldiers serve in war zones, and they get pregnant in record numbers. At least gays don’t threaten readiness by getting pregnant. ---
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/23 "2008-11-08T19:10:53Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > you’re missing the point. they aren’t discriminating in any bigot, immoral way. the policy is simply to erase the element of romance/emotions filtering over to the battle field. > > it’s not a moral issue the way this world makes it out to be. > > so getting booted for being gay is not a moral thing…it’s a policy thing. when i first got to boot camp, i almost got tossed for an unpaid speeding ticket simply because it was policy and in the marines if you said to a female or in her presence “check out that fine ass,” there would absolutely be consequences ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/24 "2008-11-08T19:11:20Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > so why the policy? 2 simple fundamental reasons: back in the day if you were exposed as being gay, it was trouble for you. now there is protection and consequences for those that act out on gay people…whether they admit it or are suspected. in the Marines i was military police and have seen the horror of what happens to gay people…so it’s not anything Marines, if they are gay, are trying to get out of the closet about. Bringing an end to “don’t ask, don’t tell” would not require soldiers, sailors, and marines to be open about their sexual orientation. It would merely make it unacceptable to discharge them from service should that orientation become known. Individual service members would have the freedom and the discretion to let everyone or no one in their platoon, squad, team, ship, or assignment know whatever they wanted them to know. The very same arguments were made back in the late 1940s when Truman ordered the military to be desegregated. While it’s very likely that there were ugly and even violent incidents between service members following desegregation because of race, people got over it. The job of the military is to follow orders. They would not and shall not fail in this instance just as they have not in the past. There is no prejudice too great - be it against gender, race, religion or even sexual orientation - that it cannot be overcome through a combination of orders and bullets flying at you. > [@](#): > > 2nd…war. your entire world and concept of life changes once you are in a situation where the panic and horror force the reality on you that this isn’t a game, and the rounds are real. so any sort of a romantic and emotional attachment towards someone can break down “unit cohesion” and cost lives. you see, it all makes sense, wrapped up in some pretty little package…until you really realize your life is at stake. so at that point, you need things to be as simple as possible, because your happy, philosophical brain is out to lunch…and things aren’t making sense the way you’re used to. and when all that is slammed in your face…all you want to do is come home alive. There are already regulations governing and in many cases prohibiting romantic/sexual relationships between service members, particularly when one outranks another. Women in the military have certainly complicated these kinds of matters, but they have not broken down unit cohesion and instead have shown naysayers that they have every bit the discipline and courage that male soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines have. Having known gay men and women nearly my entire life, I can tell you that just because they are gay does not mean they are attracted and fall in love with any person of the same sex they are in close proximity to. This is a ridiculous argument (that was also made against female service members). ---
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/25 "2008-11-08T19:16:33Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > That doesn’t make sense. Female soldiers serve in war zones, and they get pregnant in record numbers. At least gays don’t threaten readiness by getting pregnant. being in a war zone is not the same as being able to serve in combat. females don’t “rush the front lines.” they are part of support units, which are still subject to attacks. and pregnant females don’t threaten any sort of readiness ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/26 "2008-11-08T19:21:30Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > you’re missing the point. they aren’t discriminating in any bigot, immoral way. the policy is simply to erase the element of romance/emotions filtering over to the battle field. Then why doesn’t it apply equally to heterosexual soldiers? > [@usmc8408](#): > > and in the marines if you said to a female or in her presence “check out that fine ass,” there would absolutely be consequences Consequences as in a reprimand, or consequences as in a discharge from the service? > [@usmc8408](#): > > being in a war zone is not the same as being able to serve in combat. females don’t “rush the front lines.” they are part of support units, which are still subject to attacks. In the context of this discussion, though, this is a distinction without a difference. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/27 "2008-11-08T19:25:43Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > being in a war zone is not the same as being able to serve in combat. females don’t “rush the front lines.” they are part of support units, which are still subject to attacks. > > and pregnant females don’t threaten any sort of readiness Oh, pregnant women most certainly effect readiness in war zones. Here’s [just one article.](http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_200705/ai_n19431431) Other gynecologic problems also contribute to women spending a significant more amount of time on sick-call. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/28 "2008-11-08T19:26:43Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > i don’t care what the guy next to me does either, gay or not. > > what i’m saying is that it’s not a “gay is bad thing.” it follows the same principle with females not being allowed in combat. romantic, emotional attachments are not safe in combat. > > so i never said anything about the moral issue of “don’t ask don’t tell” and gays in the military. > > i’m just talking about the purpose it serves I don’t know about the Marines, but when I was in the Army it was professional enough that people of all kinds lived and worked together, overcoming individual prejudice to accomplish the mission. It was probably my favorite part of the Army and one of the few things I miss about it. I worked with plenty of homophobic, ignorant racist soldiers, but however they might have talked in private, they kept it out of the workplace. There is no Mexican unit in the military, no Black Battalion or Asian Brigade. If the rednecks can get over working with minorities, homophobes can get over working with gays. I know because not only have I known both homophobes and gay people work together in civilian jobs, but there were known gay guys in my Army unit and the homophobes got over it. And Don’t Ask Don’t Tell has nothing to do with preventing romantic relationships in the Army. First of all, straight soldiers aren’t prevented from having romantic relationships with each other, outside of the fraternization policy. Second, the rule doesn’t prevent gays from having relationships with each other, it just prevents them from being open about it. And third, just because they’re gay doesn’t mean they’ll automatically have relationships with other soldiers. I was married to a civilian the entire time I served. Oh yeah, keeping women out of combat arms is a stupid rule, too. Especially in Iraq, where the distinction between combat arms and support is pretty blurry. ---
**Author:** ![InterestedObserver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@InterestedObserver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/InterestedObserver)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/29 "2008-11-08T19:27:48Z")
> [@astro](#): > > [I’ve always seen it](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell)as a somewhat absurd Kabuki dance but the world largest military has to abide by it’s structures. As laws go is this a relatively good law or a bad/stupid law? The only way it would be a good law is if it applied equally to ALL individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. If it prohibited ANY display or verbal “telling” related to sexual orientation among personel, sure. Sex has no place in the military anyway, and is terribly distracting, right? So it ALL needs to go. No more revealing that you are heterosexual OR homosexual. ---
**Author:** ![Jman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jman/32/4416_2.png) [@Jman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jman)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/30 "2008-11-08T19:30:57Z")
Army veteran here, and I think DADT is a ridiculous policy. It is bigoted, and I see absolutely no reason to not allow openly gay people to serve. All the arguments against it are the same arguments that were originally made when the armed forces were desegregated. “I can’t serve with them.” “There will be assaults.” etc, etc. The only way to get over it is to allow it, crack down on anyone who attacks or discriminates against them, and let everyone get over themselves. ---
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/31 "2008-11-08T19:31:37Z")
> [@Camus](#): > > Bringing an end to “don’t ask, don’t tell” would not require soldiers, sailors, and marines to be open about their sexual orientation. It would merely make it unacceptable to discharge them from service should that orientation become known. Individual service members would have the freedom and the discretion to let everyone or no one in their platoon, squad, team, ship, or assignment know whatever they wanted them to know. The very same arguments were made back in the late 1940s when Truman ordered the military to be desegregated. While it’s very likely that there were ugly and even violent incidents between service members following desegregation because of race, people got over it. > > The job of the military is to follow orders. They would not and shall not fail in this instance just as they have not in the past. There is no prejudice too great - be it against gender, race, religion or even sexual orientation - that it cannot be overcome through a combination of orders and bullets flying at you. > > There are already regulations governing and in many cases prohibiting romantic/sexual relationships between service members, particularly when one outranks another. Women in the military have certainly complicated these kinds of matters, but they have not broken down unit cohesion and instead have shown naysayers that they have every bit the discipline and courage that male soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines have. Having known gay men and women nearly my entire life, I can tell you that just because they are gay does not mean they are attracted and fall in love with any person of the same sex they are in close proximity to. This is a ridiculous argument (that was also made against female service members). Camus…is that in reference to Albert Camus? i like your point about desegregation, and hopefully one day we can break more molds. i never thought of it that way, as simple as it may seem. so thanks for the knowledge. 🙂 now…fraternization is a totally different point. and i never said gay people fall for anyone near them, or women ruin unit cohesion…so you can’t say my argument is ridiculous, because i never said that. what i said was romantic/emotional attachments on the battle field break down unit cohesion…which is one reason why females can’t serve in battle. ---
**Author:** ![geniios](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9d8465/32.png) [@geniios](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/geniios)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/32 "2008-11-08T19:34:47Z")
You are making my point here. Rednecks get **fired up** when bullets fly. > [@usmc8408](#): > > i don’t think anyone wants to die once they realize it’s not a game anymore. in the marines, when iraq happened in 2003, i found myself quickly absent of any macho, kill 'em all motivation. Canada was looking pretty good to me. 🙂 > > i love the marines and would never change my experience, but there is that side of me that never liked how they reeled you in, young and naive, and filled you with false ideals and dillusions of grandeur. because once that reality kicks in that you may have to catch a bullet…things aren’t so red, white, and blue anymore. ---
**Author:** ![geniios](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9d8465/32.png) [@geniios](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/geniios)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/33 "2008-11-08T19:41:13Z")
The only way to apply it equitably, would be to enforce the same treatment to gay men as is given to women. After all the reason to keep women out of combat is to preclude diversion and sex during combat, correct? and of course also\> No more revealing that you are heterosexual OR homosexual. > [@InterestedObserver](#): > > The only way it would be a good law is if it applied equally to ALL individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. > > If it prohibited ANY display or verbal “telling” related to sexual orientation among personel, sure. Sex has no place in the military anyway, and is terribly distracting, right? So it ALL needs to go. No more revealing that you are heterosexual OR homosexual. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/34 "2008-11-08T19:42:50Z")
> [@dangermom](#): > > I think it was intended as a stepping stone, but it should have been gone years ago. It’s way past time to get rid of it. I remember when it was enacted and I never heard that it was supposed to be a “stepping stone” but a compromise. IIRC, Clinton campaigned on the issue of eliminating the prohibition of homosexuals in the military. When he took office there was a huge backlash against the idea, so he, in typical Clinton fashion, came up with this “compromise”. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/35 "2008-11-08T19:43:14Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > and pregnant females don’t threaten any sort of readiness That’s just silly. Of course they do. Who does the female’s work while she is giving birth and after? On top of the fact that they require work to ferry out of the field, administrative work to replace, and decreased job performance because the person replacing her has to get up to speed. ---
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/36 "2008-11-08T19:51:20Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > I don’t know about the Marines, but when I was in the Army it was professional enough that people of all kinds lived and worked together, overcoming individual prejudice to accomplish the mission. It was probably my favorite part of the Army and one of the few things I miss about it. > > I worked with plenty of homophobic, ignorant racist soldiers, but however they might have talked in private, they kept it out of the workplace. There is no Mexican unit in the military, no Black Battalion or Asian Brigade. If the rednecks can get over working with minorities, homophobes can get over working with gays. I know because not only have I known both homophobes and gay people work together in civilian jobs, but there were known gay guys in my Army unit and the homophobes got over it. > > And Don’t Ask Don’t Tell has nothing to do with preventing romantic relationships in the Army. First of all, straight soldiers aren’t prevented from having romantic relationships with each other, outside of the fraternization policy. Second, the rule doesn’t prevent gays from having relationships with each other, it just prevents them from being open about it. And third, just because they’re gay doesn’t mean they’ll automatically have relationships with other soldiers. I was married to a civilian the entire time I served. > Oh yeah, keeping women out of combat arms is a stupid rule, too. Especially in Iraq, where the distinction between combat arms and support is pretty blurry. oh how my words are being twisted. please quote me where i said DADT is to prevent romance in the military. and please quote me where i said gay troops automatically want to date other troops. what i did say was romance/emotional attachments compromise safety on the BATTLEFIELD. that’s one reason why females can’t serve in combat, and why gay relationships pose the same problem. i never said it was a guarantee, only a policy the military has to prevent it. and honestly, i never encountered racism or homophobes. because i was an MP, i saw the result of “gay bashing” on a professional level, but racism specifically was totally not tolerated in any way. homosexuals in the Marine Corps really isn’t that big of an issue, as i assume they served in other branches, or kept it well hidden. not to bash the Army, but our standards in the Marines would not allow any sort of prejudice or hate…i can’t speak for the grunts though ---
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/37 "2008-11-08T19:55:03Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > I’m former Army and gay and I’ve got it all figured out. Whether a soldier is gay or not doesn’t mean diddly squat in garrison, or on the battlefield. It only means something to ignorant bigots, who usually don’t serve more than one term anyway. Careerists are professional enough to deal with it. i’m not saying it means diddly squat either…i’m just referring to military policy and what it’s about. i’m not arguing the moral issues of it ---
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/38 "2008-11-08T19:56:43Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > That’s just silly. Of course they do. Who does the female’s work while she is giving birth and after? On top of the fact that they require work to ferry out of the field, administrative work to replace, and decreased job performance because the person replacing her has to get up to speed. i guess i should have been more specific…i meant combat readiness ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/39 "2008-11-08T19:59:18Z")
> [@usmc8408](#): > > homosexuals in the Marine Corps really isn’t that big of an issue, as i assume they served in other branches, or kept it well hidden. They kept it hidden. You’ll just have to take my word for it. I’ve known many gay Marines. There use to be, and may still be a gay bar practically right outside the Marine base in San Diego. As an MP, I’m surprised you weren’t briefed on the local gay bars, but maybe they’ve cut down on that form of harassment. ---
**Author:** ![usmc8408](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/usmc8408/32/12878_2.png) [@usmc8408](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usmc8408)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791/40 "2008-11-08T20:02:46Z")
> [@LilShieste](#): > > Then why doesn’t it apply equally to heterosexual soldiers? > > Consequences as in a reprimand, or consequences as in a discharge from the service? > > In the context of this discussion, though, this is a distinction without a difference. it does apply to heterosexuals too…that’s one reason why females can serve in battle. and consequences that would probably make you wish you were discharged. the marine corps is not some barbaric sort of thing. respect for a marine has no gender, race, or anything like that [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-dont-ask-dont-tell-a-reasonable-law-or-not/471791.md?page=3)