Americans Have Moved Past ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ Pols Haven’t

February 3, 2010 RSS Feed Print

By Mary Kate Cary Thomas Jefferson Street blog 

Think about what's happened in American pop culture over the last 17 years, when "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" first was voted into law by Congress --from Ellen DeGeneres coming out of the closet, to the success of the series Queer Eye for the Straight Guy; to the films Milk and Brokeback Mountain each winning multiple Oscars. I know in my own life, I've seen a sea change in the way friends, neighbors, and coworkers who are gay are treated by society. Everyone I know in my suburban, carpooling existence has at least one friend or a loved one who is gay--something that wasn't necessarily true 20 years ago. 

In his State of the Union address, the President announced that he would work with Congress to repeal the ban on openly gay Americans serving in the military, as the Canadians, British, French, South Africans and Israelis have done. At yesterday's hearing on the matter, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that the question is not whether the U.S. military will enact the change, but rather how it will. (His proposal: a high-level working group to make recommendations and move to implement a new policy within the next year, pending Congressional approval.) 

As good as Gates was, it was the Bush-appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Adm. Mike Mullen, who stunned the crowd: "Speaking for myself and myself only, it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do ... No matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens. For me personally, it comes down to integrity--theirs as individuals and ours as an institution."

Gates is right that this is a done deal, and that it needs to be done right--meaning, done the military way. Many gay-rights advocates are impatient that the president should fix this with the stroke of a pen, but the military needs to handle this in the way they've done it before ... by commissioning a working group first, getting Congressional approval, then implementing the change throughout its world-wide bureaucracy. And Mullen is right that this is about integrity. It's the right thing to do no matter how you look at it. Today General Colin Powell agreed with Mullen and Gates

Why more Republicans can't seem to see that is beyond me. Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard takes a slap at banning Don't Ask "because it is in some abstract way 'the right thing.'" He continues: "It isn't a change an appreciable number of Americans are clamoring for. And even if one understood this change to be rectifying an injustice, the fact is it's an injustice that affects perhaps a few thousand people in a nation of 300 million." So, since minorities are just that--minorities--it's okay to discriminate against them? 

Sen. John McCain said that he'd change his stance and support repealing the ban if the top brass supported it. Well, here was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs--not exactly the bottom brass--endorsing it because of what it says about the integrity of our entire military. Did McCain change his mind, as he said he would? No, according to Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, who was covering the hearing: "McCain and four Republican colleagues left before the hearing ended, and the other six GOP members of the panel didn't show up at all." As a Republican, that made me cringe. 

One family friend of ours who is gay and who has been with his partner longer than my husband and I have been married, shrugged when I asked him about the resistance to gays in the military. "It's a generational thing," he said, "Once the older generation is no longer fighting this, things will change." John McCain is part of that older generation, which may partly explain his reticence on this. Mullen is, too, but the difference is that the men and women he represents--our troops--are mostly from a younger generation. He gets it. 

Another friend of mine who is a former Marine told me recently of what happened to him as a young soldier: he ended up unemployed and living in a trailer park after being forced out of the Marines on suspicion of being gay. (He's made a new life for himself since then.) He didn't get caught doing anything; they just suspected he was gay. And here he was, volunteering to give his life for our country. As an American, that made me cringe. 

That kind of discrimination is what former U.S. Solicitor General and conservative legal scholar Ted Olson addressed in his opening arguments of the Prop 8 trial in California, which seeks to determine the constitutionality of banning same-sex marriages. Granted, he's not talking about Don't Ask Don't Tell, but to me, he might as well be:  

There is no rational justification for this unique pattern of discrimination. Proposition 8 ... advances no legitimate state interest. All it does is label gay and lesbian persons as different, inferior, unequal, and disfavored. And it brands their relationships as not the same, and less-approved than those enjoyed by opposite sex couples. It stigmatizes gays and lesbians, classifies them as outcasts, and causes needless pain, isolation and humiliation.

It is unconstitutional.

To the most respected minds in the military and the law, this is a civil rights issue, one that goes to each person's basic dignity, and to our integrity as human beings. To the rest of us, this seems like a no-brainer, a non-issue that seems so ... last century. I'd like to think most Americans moved past this a long time ago. Apparently our politicians haven't. 

Members of the Party of Lincoln need to remember their history of fighting discrimination against minorities. Have they forgotten that one of the fundamental principles of being a conservative is a belief in the individual, in equality for all Americans under the law? The sooner Republicans like Bill Kristol and John McCain can see that, the better. For us all. 

Tags:
national security terrorism and the military,
military,
gay rights

Reader Comments Read all comments (32)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I am an american and I have not moved past the don't ask, don't tell. Actually, alot of us have not and that makes the title of this article a lie.

My opinion: unless you have served in the services or currently serving, I don't think your opinion should matter, because you have no idea what it is like to be in certain situations. If the gay ban was lifted before I went into the service, I wouldn't have joined the military. In the service, you are put into situations where you would be very much uncomfortable, if you knew there was a gay person present.

Prediction: Since being gay is an abomination to God and if it does get allowed, we will start losing more people in combate. As a nation we will do worse than we already are, because of our sins.

In bible history, God's people had lost battles due to the sin of one person and we have several people sinning against God, even now. If He destroyed several cities or caused His people to be taken captive then and God does not change, He will do the same even today.

However, a majority of the american people will not agree with this and continue in their sin, but eventually, we all will stand before the judgement seat of Christ.

We are a nation that has lost it's value and we will pay the price, sooner or later, regardless if you believe in God or not.

al of OK 6:08PM February 15, 2010

You are only casting pearls befor swine with Tony of CA. The old addage is true: "A man compelled against his will is of the same opinion still."

Tony and his type, know quite well that Adam and Steve, being gay, cannot procreate and thus have no posterity. No posterity means an end to their poor genetic blue print.

I'm sure it's disappointing for gays. It all comes down to literally nothing! No wonder they are bitter! I mean, think about it, since the begining of time both parents of everyone's ancestors have had to survive disease, war, famine, plague, pestillence, hardship, natural disasters, accidents, etc and they all made untold sacrifice to ensure the success of their progenity. What are the odds the we are here simply because our ancestors managed to survive? A million to one? Two million to one?

Then, if that isn't enough, every person on earth had to win the lottery. There was only one in several millions of spermatazoa with your precise and exact genetic code that finished the race, won, and became life! What an astounding achievement. So, in that sense, we are all essentially lottery winners before we took our first breath!

And yet, sadly for some, the ultimate purpose and design of all this lineage, all this sacrifice, all the fortuitous events and sheer blind luck resulted in a posterity that decided Steve was better looking than Eve. And thus, the entire expended effort since time began was all for naught and abruptly ends. Truely sad. Truely tragic.

David of ID 7:23PM February 10, 2010

As your comments obviously include me, I'm happy to respond.

Where did I say anything about "hating" or "fearing" homosexuals? As I said, I have a few friends that are gay. I neither hate them nor fear them.

Your recollection of history concerning Black people is correct and those were terrible times and I certainly do not condone the hatred that was perpetrated on them. But being "black" is not a sexual lifestyle. Being homosexual is. Homosexuals are not a "race" of people. There are homosexuals in every people group on the planet. Does that make their lifestyle right or acceptable? No.

I'm not perfect and I certainly do not claim to be a "god." I'm just telling you, and anyone else reading these comments, that God, the Creator of heaven and earth, hates the sin of homosexuality, just as He hates the sins of lying, cheating, stealing, adultery, murder, backbiting, gossip, gambling, pride, lust, gluttony, idolatry, greed, sloth, pornography, alcoholism, drug addiction, and many others. I'm guilty of many of these sins myself in the past, but I have been saved by the Blood of the Lamb, the Perfect Sacrifice, Jesus Christ, the only name under heaven by which we must be saved. I'm just trying to convince readers that we are ALL sinners, and as such we MUST have a savior to keep us from receiving the just punishment for our sins, which is eternity in hell. People can be forgiven for their sin of homosexuality, but only if they are willing to give up that sin. Jesus said, "Repent and be baptised for the remission of sins." As I stated in my earlier comment, "repent" means to "turn away from." If you, or anyone else, choose to continue in a sin because you refuse to give it up, you accept the eternal consequences of that sin.

You obviously believe it is okay to allow people to continue in their homosexual perversions in this temporal world without understanding that they will reap what they are sowing in the eternal world to come. In other words, you are okay with them burning in hell for eternity for a short time of unnatural pleasure on earth. And you complain that I have no love for them??

Jesus commanded His believers to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength," and "to love your neighbor as yourself." If I'm letting my "neighbor" wallow in his or her sin without telling them about God's love and His commandments, I'm guilty of sin because I could have said something to that person that may have changed their mind for God. I'm guilty of this many times over.

Will there be homosexuals in heaven? NO! There will be people who USED to be homosexuals in heaven. Just as there will be people who USED to be murderers, thieves, and prostitutes, and USED to be every sin you can imagine, but they came to a saving faith in God (old covenant) or in Jesus Christ (new covenant) before they died, and stand in the presence of Almighty God.

I want to be in heaven, just as I want all to be.

J.F. of NV 2:43AM February 09, 2010

Mary Kate Cary

Mary Kate Cary

Mary Kate Cary is a former White House speechwriter for President George H.W. Bush. She currently writes speeches for political and business leaders.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Obama's Mixed-Bag Week

The Obama camp can celebrate Dick Lugar defeat, but should worry about the Scott Walker recall.

Mary Kate Cary

Obama Attacks as Economic Cliff Looms

The president can't afford to talk about the economy, but with a 2013 fiscal time bomb approaching, the rest of us can't afford not to.

Latest Video

advertisement