ON SEPT. 20, the controversial Don't Ask, Don't Tell military policy officially ended. The directive, issued by President Bill Clinton in 1993, prevented gay and lesbian people from openly professing their sexual orientation during military service. It has been estimated that more than 14,000 service members have been discharged from the military because of their sexual orientation. President Obama signed the bill repealing DADT in December 2010, and all branches of the armed forces now have taken the correct measures to end unjustified discrimination.
Proponents of DADT oppose its repeal because they believe allowing gay and lesbian soldiers to serve openly in the military will diminish the ability of other troops to serve effectively. John McCain, a notable DADT supporter, argued that having openly gay or lesbian military personnel would "harm the battle effectiveness vital to the survival of our young men and women in the military."
This argument that openly gay and lesbian service members will harm the success or cooperative nature of our troops is weak. It seems to suggest that either openly gay and lesbian service members make for inferior soldiers or that homophobia is the pervasive sentiment throughout the armed forces. The former cannot be true. Any openly gay or lesbian soldier doubtlessly will be of the same ability as when he was a closeted service member. If the latter is true, then the military has another barrier to clear. Gay and lesbian soldiers no longer have to hide their true identities, but intolerance still needs to be dealt with for gay military members to achieve equal footing with their heterosexual comrades.
Whether or not a soldier is gay should not affect the ability of our troops to continue keeping the United States safe. There are still standards of conduct by which any member of the military has to abide. If, for some reason, a service member's sexual orientation causes him to break a standard, then he will experience the appropriate consequences. This, though, is only if he does something against regulation. If he is as rule abiding as every other soldier, then his being openly gay should have no effect on troop preparedness.
Repealing DADT puts an end to unreasonable discharges that were not necessarily based on merit. By discharging soldiers based solely on their sexual orientation, the military was depriving itself of willing participants. Moreover, those who were discharged were not always honorably discharged. That some soldiers had their names slandered by a dishonorable discharge for their sexual orientation is deplorable. Being a competent gay or lesbian soldier is no less commendable than being a capable heterosexual soldier.
Hopefully, the repeal of DADT reinforces the message that sexual orientation is not something that makes a person fundamentally different. It should be viewed the same as race and ethnicity. The importance of racial equality has been well established - why should the same attitude not be taken toward sexuality?
In addition, there are plenty of divergent political, theological and ethical beliefs among service members. These differences of opinion, however, do not result in laws that ban people from serving in the military. Similarly, sexual orientation alone does not warrant a policy that keeps its expression banned. With many other rights still withheld from gay and lesbian people, affirming their equal place in the armed forces is definitely a step in the right direction. The ability to join the military and to make the sacrifices necessary to defend one's country should not be denied to anyone.
As one Army Reserve member said, ending DADT will "finally end a policy which has burdened our armed services for far too long, depriving our nation of the talent, training and hard won battle experience of thousands of patriotic Americans." He is exactly right. Ideally, the time soon will come when sexual orientation ceases to be such a contentious issue and when a shared sense of patriotism transcends any negative backlash caused by the repeal of DADT.
Alex Yahanda's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at a.yahanda@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PARTING SHOT: On the art of walking and chewing gum
By Nathan Onibudo | 11 hours agoStudent journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | YesterdayWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
PARTING SHOT: Asked and answered
By Honor Wood | YesterdayLooking back, the answer has been abundantly clear all along. I did it for the people.
