Don’t ask, don’t say is an abbreviated version of the phrase “don’t ask, don’t tell.” In the United States, DADT is a military policy aimed at homosexuals, gays, and bisexuals. During President Bill Clinton’s presidency, the program went into effect in 1994. (Belkin 107-108). Service officers were not allowed to discriminate against any member of the military depending on sexual identity under the statute. For the same time, open homosexuals and lesbians were barred from serving in the military. The stern stance was intended to foster strong military values and morale, which were based on cohesion, order, and strict discipline. Recently, more than 10 000 military personnel have been fired after the implementation of the controversial law. Others preferred to voluntarily leave the service because operating under such strict regulation was a burden. On the controversial issue, citizens and professionals have taken different stands on the best stand to guide the military conduct on recruitment and retaining committed personnel in the force.
DADT law has come under criticism because of preventing the armed forces from recruiting and retaining troops on the basis of talent. Besides, the laws has been faulted for denting the integrity of the nation. A survey done by the Associated Press on top military academics revealed that they were open and supportive to the repeal of the law because the ban does not comply with the dynamic nature of the society. The report was not surprising because the law is said to have laid an emphasis on a non-issue. Just like the position held by other security professionals, these academics are reported to have argued that recruitment and service should be based on character and competence instead of sexual orientation. The soldier’s creed is clear on the right form of conduct that puts the mission first, never accepting defeat and helping the fallen comrades (Coreales 1-2). There is no mentioning of the sexual orientation issue, which makes it wrong to have it as a major determiner of the suitability in service.
The attorney in the Department of Justice has boldly criticized the decision to bar the transgenders from serving in the military. The view is further supported by the human rights groups, who argue that the reintroduction of the new law will infringe on the rights of minority groups hence the derailment from the doctrine of equality for all. The president’s decision to sign the bill into law is therefore discriminatory to the largest portion of transgenders who offer valuable services aimed at protecting territorial integrity and sovereignty. All these positions are aimed at proving the heroes in the military ought to be celebrated on the basis of talent displayed rather than relying on minor issues that have been raised by influential people like the president through his tweets (Vitulli 84).
The implementation of DADT has also been hailed by the significant portion of the American citizens who are conservative on the ideal that should guide the conduct of members and professionals in the society. Through the promotion of the values of transgenders in the military, the pillars of discipline, dedication, and observance of high standards is compromised. The argument that discriminating the gays is a sign of inequality is found wanting because the overall negative effects of eroding the morale call for the re-visitation of the issue. From a clinical perspective, the transgenders are mentally ill because of being detached from the reality of their true gender. Instead, the people believe they belong to a different gender, an aspect that acts negatively on their morale at work. Having the transgenders leading the military force has also been faulted as a result of their reduced confidence during battles. Leaders ought to have a high morale and have great confidence in who they are and what they want in as far as vanquishing the adversaries is concerned.
Supporters of the DADT policy have also faulted the presence of transgenders in the service because their presence does not promote the pillars of professionalism. Having the group in the military make the professional body to be vulnerable to forms of social experimentation. For this reason, the transgenders are considered to be better of the military because they are mentally ill and require immediate medical treatment for their condition. It, therefore, turns out that the DADT law is doing more good than harm in as far as the cost-benefit analysis is concerned. The position will, however, continue to be debated for years to come in order to match the requirements of the dynamic society.
Mixed reactions have also been elicited in the religious groups and chaplains. Other members have opted to take a neutral point as they consider the pros and the cons having an equal weight. A significant section believes that the law should be repealed in order to make the military a more inclusive profession. The Southern Baptist Convention has, for example, supported the exclusion of the homosexuals arguing that it contradicts the religious beliefs of the chaplains (Appleton 707-708). The Roman Catholic has also reconsidered withdrawing its priests from the military if the transgenders are allowed to serve because the same-sex marriages and affairs are regarded as immoral hence conflicting the churchmen service. Other religious organizations have considered the controversy surrounding the debate as a non-issue for the chaplains arguing that the military should continue getting the right support regardless of the conflicting actions and beliefs.
Conclusively, the reintroduction of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will continue to elicit mixed reactions among the security personnel and other stakeholders. If the constitution is to be followed to the letter, then values of equality and justice should be upheld. The position implies the equality for the minority groups that should not be discriminated in the military force on the basis of their sexual orientation. Besides, the pros of having the DADT law implemented seems to hold more weight and geared towards promoting the best values for maximum service in the military despite being contradictory to the laws of the land (Proffitt 393-394). Military service should always be guided by the need to promote discipline openness and dedication. In informing the policies on the issue, Pentagon should also borrow lessons from other developed nations around the world and how they objectively approach the controversial issue as a guide for action. Besides, it is worth noting that other nation’s models should be generalized cautiously and whenever possible, their ruled should be tailored to meet the requirements of the American System.
Appleton, Michael. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Journal of palliative medicine 16.6 (2013): 707-708.
Belkin, Aaron. “Don’t ask, don’t tell: Is the gay ban based on military necessity?.” Parameters 33.2 (2003): 107-108.
Coreales, Robert I. “Unfinished Business: A Discussion of Remedies for Victims of Involuntary Dismissal Under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and Its Predecessor, Toward A True Reconciliation.” S. Cal. Rev. L. & Soc. Just. 22 (2012): 1-2.
Proffitt, James S. “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” The Midwest Quarterly 54.4 (2013): 393-394.
Vitulli, Elias. “A defining moment in civil rights history? The employment non-discrimination act, trans-inclusion, and homonormativity.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 7.3 (2010): 155-167.