Allowing Gays in the Military Would Be Unfair and Hurt Troop Morale

If you won't say it to his/her face...

Would you tell it to the face of a would-be African immigrant who has AIDS to "forget about coming to America because 'we don't want their aids"?

Would you tell it to the face of a woman that she shouldn't have the right to vote because "women aren't as smart as men"?

Would you tell it to the face of an African-American that they shouldn't dream big because they are "inferior"?

No sensible person would say anything of the sort to their faces. So what makes it o.k. to tell a gay/lesbian person that he/she should not be allowed to serve their country because "their sexual orientation undermines unit cohesion and military discipline"?

None of the above reasons barring civil rights makes any sense and is not grounded in fact. This is not just a matter of civil rights but of respect. It should be considered cowardly for a legislator to draft discriminatory laws, but not have the words to say when confronted on the issue by a gay or lesbian person.

New rule-If you can't say it to his/her face, err on the side of respect and civil liberties.

It's 2009

I can't believe that there is a law like that, how long did it take our political leaders to pass that worthless bill. If we could send another 100,000 troops over seas to help the already tired and home sick troops back to there families do you really think they are going to care if they are Gay. Move on Donnelly check out the calender it's 2009. Oh by the way I'm married with two kids.

If you need a translator

and the only one is gay - would you say to keep him/her out? That's just plain dumb.

The world is full of gay and straight people. We all live and work every day with a variety of people, and thye do not threaten our well-being. Just as women should be allowed in the military if they can meet the same guidelines as the men, gays should be allowed in if thye have proven their loyalty to this nation and they can meet the same guidelines.

Why are we always protecting "phobic" men?

I say get rid of the ban. Let's get rid of people who are unable to do the job, are disloyal, are disruptive. There are just as many straight folks as gays who are disgusting and incompetent.

Civilized people all over the world do not ask if people are gay or straight when they meet. They ask if they are law-abiding, caring, hard-working, moral people.

This country really is so backwards about homsexuality. And I'm a straight person...

Donnelly's obsolete, bigoted and bankrupt argument is easily discredited

I find it pathetic and laughable that Elaine Donnelly continues her crusade against against gay people serving openly in the military. DADT, far from "enjoying widespread support" has in recent years eroded in public popularity to the point that over 70% of Americans support its repeal.

The "privacy" and "modesty" argument is equally vacuous. Young men and women, gay and straight, share locker rooms in middle and high school and nobody cares; Donnelly simply projects her own painfully evident prudery and homophobia onto an entire class of people she doesn't even know. If you're tough enough to be a soldier I doubt you're going to be squeamish around your fellows fighters!

Moreover, it's been demonstrated that "Military Times" subscribers are largely old-timer career officers, not younger, junior officers or enlisted soldiers. This is a group that by age and service culture is much more likely to share Donnelly's views. A poll of the overall general service population would likely show a more balanced and tolerant perspective.

Finally, fears of sexual harassment are purely speculative with no basis whatsoever in fact--"exposure to others sexually attracted to them." Men and women are serving together already, and women are daily reporting sexual harassment, which Donnelly doesn't address--is it somehow worse if _men_ report sexual harassment? I suspect that most men can handle such a matter if women can do it. All soldiers know the rules of engagement and are subject to the same discipline by their superior officers if they are harassers, whether they are male or female and harassing the same or the opposite sex. This argument is, therefore, completely without merit.

Donnelly should drop the prudish, bigoted and bankrupt campaign against gay people serving in the U.S. military. Gay people have demonstrated repeatedly that they are patriotic, dedicated soldiers and sailors. Allow them to serve openly.

Donnelly's obsolete, bigoted and bankrupt argument is easily discredited

I find it pathetic and laughable that Elaine Donnelly continues her crusade against against gay people serving openly in the military. DADT, far from "enjoying widespread support" has in recent years eroded in public popularity to the point that over 70% of Americans support its repeal.

The "privacy" and "modesty" argument is equally vacuous. Young men and women, gay and straight, share locker rooms in middle and high school and nobody cares; Donnelly simply projects her own painfully evident prudery and homophobia onto an entire class of people she doesn't even know. If you're tough enough to be a soldier I doubt you're going to be squeamish around your fellows fighters!

Moreover, it's been demonstrated that "Military Times" subscribers are largely old-timer career officers, not younger, junior officers or enlisted soldiers. This is a group that by age and service culture is much more likely to share Donnelly's views. A poll of the overall general service population would likely show a more balanced and tolerant perspective.

Finally, fears of sexual harassment are purely speculative with no basis whatsoever in fact--"exposure to others sexually attracted to them." Men and women are serving together already, and women are daily reporting sexual harassment, which Donnelly doesn't address--is it somehow worse if _men_ report sexual harassment? I suspect that most men can handle such a matter if women can do it. All soldiers know the rules of engagement and are subject to the same discipline by their superior officers if they are harassers, whether they are male or female and harassing the same or the opposite sex. This argument is, therefore, completely without merit.

Donnelly should drop the prudish, bigoted and bankrupt campaign against gay people serving in the U.S. military. Gay people have demonstrated repeatedly that they are patriotic, dedicated soldiers and sailors. Allow them to serve openly.