Bill Clinton thought he was going to be in charge and just open up the military with an executive order. He was quickly told not to attempt it, that the military is more independent than it appears in the constitution.
But he did make the first step.
Will the next winner have the nerve and/or support of the brass?
What do you think the chances are?
The Don’t ask don’t tell issue was made a much bigger issue that it probably should have been. After 12 years of Republican control, the press thought that Clinton was going to unleash a liberal revolution.
Clinton’s book mentions that it took so little of his time and yet it got all the media play. Don’t ask, don’t tell was a quick compromise to get it off the front page.
No, no, and very small. America is getting more bigoted towards gays, not less; note all the anti-gay marriage laws passed recently. Gays in the military and out of it are going to be lucky to hold on to what they have, much less get anything else. I wouldn’t be surprised if I see it outlawed to be gay again in my lifetime; I certainly don’t ever expect them to be allowed to openly join the military; not for generations.
So, so depressing. You think even the rightest wing would break a little after reading this.
The problem is, “don’t ask, don’t tell” is a product of federal law, which means that, even if a president wanted to change the policy, he couldn’t. It would take a law to get through Congress and signed by the president to change the policy now.
Complete and utter bullshit. The data shows that the US, like most countries, is becoming more accepting of gays, not less. And it will not be “outlawed to be gay” in any of our lifetimes. he anti-SSM laws were passed because it wasn’t even an issue until recently. And more and more states are adopting civil unions or domestic partnerships. CA, with about 12% of the entire population has such a law concerning domestic partnerships.
As for the OP, I think the don’t ask don’t tell policy will be be around for some time. The military may have led the nation in the civil rights area concerning race, but it’s masculine, conservative nature is going to make it lag in that area for sexual orientation.
Yes, but note recent counter-examples in New Jersey and Arizona. I think you’re wrong, although the path to the day when all Americans are treated fairly and decently irrespective of sexual orientation is admittedly going to be a long one.
I second this. Younger people are more tolerant of gays and lesbians than their parents, who freak out, draw up and pass these laws.
The laws passed because America is a nation devoted to bigotry, and always has been. As for the “data”, the fact that those laws passed shows that the data is either wrong, or irrelevant.
And people are notorious for getting more conservative as they age. They may or may not be more tolerant now, but by they attain any kind of influence they’ll be just another crop of bigots. Just as happened to their parents.
And they’d still be less bigoted than their parents. I don’t think the religious right will ever go away, but I’ve been saying for a few years now it’s past the apex of its power.
It must be very difficult to be you.
Yeah, because it doesn’t conform to your cartoonish caricature of this country? :rolleyes:
No, it shows that the bigoted attitude towards gays is in its last days. In the past, there was no need to pass these laws because the idea of gays getting married was so ridiculous it would never happen. Now, however, there is a sizable segment of the population that says gays should be allowed to marry. This would have never happened twenty years ago. In reaction to this, people want to codify their ideas about gay marriage.
Yeah, just like all those kids from the 60’s grew up, renounced the civil rights movement, and began passing laws mandating segregation and outlawing inter-racial marriages. :rolleyes:
While I don’t think anti-gay bigotry will ever go away, but would say that it is definitely declining. That is not to say that there isn’t a long ways to go, hence the anti-gay marriage laws/amendments, but I just don’t see when homosexuality was any more acceptable in the past.
I think it is worth pointing out that former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili, an original proponent of “don’t ask, don’t tell”, recently came out (no pun intended) against the policy.
Well, people do tend to get more conservative as they get older. What Der Trihs has done, as he often does, is conflate “conservative” with “bigot”.
I read this article when it appeared on the Real Clear Politics site a few weeks ago. It originally appeared in the New York Times, which now has it archived so I can’t get at it without paying. He defends don’t ask don’t tell as a necessary compromise in its day, and advocates a planned and deliberate change beginning now. I believe that gays will be able to serve in the military openly within a few years.
**Der Trihs ** - How old are you, dude? Do you honestly believe that the US is moving away from acceptance of gay people? I mean , really?
His profile says he’s 38.
I think that there is a good chance that if a Democratic President is elected, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will be abolished, probably through some combination of executive order and Congressional action.
When Clinton implemented the policy in 1993, we were at peace and the military brass were pretty universally opposed to gays serving. In the ensuing decade and a half, gays have become much more visible and homosexuality has become much more socially acceptable. In 1997, when Ellen DeGeneres came out of the closet, there was a serious question as to whether she had killed her then-sitcom and her showbiz career. This year, in addition to having a popular talk show, she’s hosting the Oscars.
More significantly, we are currently in two wars and the military is having to stretch to meet recruiting goals. There have been well-publicized cases where critically needed Arabic translators were kicked out of the military because of the policy and several ranking officers have come out in opposition to the policy. And national polls show that a strong majority favors allowing gays to serve.
If a Democratic President is elected, and Congress retains its Democratic majority in both houses, I’d say it is very likely that the ban on gays in the military will be eliminated.
I’m all for that happening, however I’m far from thinking it will be sunshine and roses for everyone if it does.
Fact is, the fears some people in the military have of gay sexual relations creating a breakdown in discipline is a genuine one, and it has a basis in reality.
Sexual relations pursued without regard to command structure, rank, personal hygiene, birth control, personal privacy, or consent is a major problem for the military. And I don’t think the brass mentioned above want to invite more problems in the name of making things more equal.
Right now, the majority of problems caused are heterosexual in nature, which will always be the case, obviously. Even so, IMHO, this change cannot be made without cracking down on sexual misconduct broadly across the military
Only if we define “conservative” as “resistant to change” as opposed to denominating a specific range of the ideological spectrum. (In Russia, the oldest folks are the likeliest to pine for Communism, from what I’ve read.)