Despite Lady Gaga’s dramatic entrance at this year’s VMA’s, the U.S. Senate failed to repeal the current “don’t ask, don’t tell” military policy.
2008 presidential candidate John McCain successfully filibustered on the Defense Authorization Act leaving some disappointed, to say the least.
What if sexuality was one of those profoundly obvious human features like race or gender? Say for instance, there was not a need to ask or tell what your personal sexual preference was or was not. Imagine if everyone could visually categorize heterosexual and homosexual. Would “don’t ask, don’t tell” be a necessary policy?
I think not. Seriously, what difference does it make? Are Caucasians better qualified as soldiers than Asians or African-Americans? Women better suited for combat than men? The answer is no. A soldier’s sexual preference should not qualify or disqualify that individual for the position of protecting the country they love.
A soldier’s sexuality does not directly correlate to that individual’s competence in the realm of combat.
Last year, former Lieutenant Dan Choi was discharged for being homosexual. Choi announced his sexuality in a military publication and on national television in protest of the military’s policy.
“I’m an American soldier that happens to be gay. That’s the way I was born. It’s unfortunate I had to hide that,” Choi said.
According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, over 400 soldiers were discharged in 2009 due to a violation of the DADT policy. In my opinion, after losing soldiers in combat, there is no need to relieve anyone of their duties because they don’t happen to be attracted to the opposite sex.
It is primitive and unfair. The United States of America is one of the most highly advanced nations in the world, but this is where we drop the ball. Out of the 26 countries that participate militarily in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 22 permit homosexual people to serve. Of the five members of the United Nations Security Council, only two countries forbid homosexuals to be in the military: the U.S. and China.
If we are really a country that stands for freedom and individual rights, then why do we continue to support a policy that blatantly stifles them? What is upholding the current DADT policy protecting but a culture of shame and intolerance? DADT does nothing but promote the same shame and intolerance we openly claim to defend the rest of the world from.
Hypocritical, much? But not suprising. Our country’s history is laced in discrimination and sexism that took centuries to revolutionize, and this issue is no different. As a people, we are revolutionary and a movement is underway.
The outcome will probably result in stories that we will tell our grandchildren, about the “good ole days” when Auto-Tune ruled and gays couldn’t be soldiers. And they’ll stare in awe and disbelief that a country would do something so heinous and unimaginable.
As a culture, discrimination and oppression has to stop in all forms. Racial and gender discrimination have been outlawed for years now, and so should discrimination because of sexual orientation. It accomplishes nothing.
In the face of danger, I am sure that a soldier’s thoughts do not revolve around whether the individual fighting next to them is gay or straight or a lesbian or bisexual. I would like to hope that all that matters at that time is protecting what they are fighting for: freedom.
Melody Andrews is a junior majoring in communication. She can be contacted at
[email protected].