Don T Tell Persuasive Speech

In September 2011, the United States lifted the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy (DADT), which restricted gay, lesbian, and bisexuals from openly serving in the military. This was the first time in American history in which people of every sexual orientation could serve openly (“11 Facts About,” n.d.). This was a momentous occasion for some and not so much for others. For those military members that had served in secret and those members that were firmly against gays and lesbians, this repeal had different meaning. Both groups contained members that have served in the military for years and were products of the Former President Bill Clinton’s 1993 “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. For many soldiers of this era, communication issues arose due

Defenders of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy argue that the military must do what it needs to maintain the strongest possible fighting force. In order to carry out that obligation, they say, military leaders must have the authority and discretion to set rules as they see fit to keep up morale and maintain order. On the issue of gay people's service, they say, if military commanders maintain that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be detrimental to morale and discipline, then courts and public should respect that decision.

January 20, 1950 – Army Regulation 600-443 is published, identifying three categories of homosexuals. Those deemed to be aggressive are placed in Class I and are subjected to general court-martial. Homosexuals considered active but non-aggressive are placed in Class II and can avoid a court-martial by accepting a dishonorable discharge – or resigning, if they are officers. Personnel professing or exhibiting homosexual tendencies without committing a violation of the sodomy statute are designated "Class III," and can be removed from service under general or honorable discharge.

The Clinton administration and military leaders defend the current policy and the way it has been enforced. They argue that allowing gay people to serve openly would harm military readiness by destroying troops' morale and disrupting order and discipline. Policy defenders argue that the military is a special institution that holds itself to stricter rules than those observed by the rest of society. Because the armed forces must fulfill the crucial mission of defending the U.S. and its allies, they say, its leaders' views on how to achieve optimal readiness should be respected. Pentagon officials say that while they believe the current policy is working well, they will investigate cases of alleged abuse.

Building family readiness groups, singles opportunities, diversity courses, training on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and involving the Chaplain Corps has, and continues, to build a stronger military. This allows for a better transition into a civilian position upon leaving the military. Additionally, it allows for a well-rounded leader to the betterment of the organization.

During my persuasive speech, I used an attention getter with a story to put a face on the problem of the 5-day work week because it is something for the audience to get attached to. In my attention getter, Jeff Campbell suffers from a stroke from working long hours as an accountant. I believe it was effective in showing pathos to the problem of the 5-day work week. In my thesis, I clearly stated the topic and related it to my audience by telling them that it will affect all full-time employees in America. To conclude my introduction, I gave a preview of the what I was going to talk about during my speech, which included the problems, causes, and solutions.

The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy is a major policy of the armed forces of the United States, and allows a number of people to serve their country. This policy restricts the United States armed forces from discovering gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy has, in a way, limited homosexuals from completely fulfilling their military duties by forcing them to serve in the military silent about their personal lives. The policy is a violation of equal rights, forces homosexuals to violate the military code of honor, and causes disputes among fellow soldiers and should be repealed.

I had been openly gay for four years, before enlisting in the army in September 2009, which was still operating under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. This policy was implemented in the US by the Clinton Administration and came into effect on October 1, 1993. Under this policy, homosexuals serving in the military were not allowed to talk about their sexual orientation or engage in sexual activity and commanding officers were not allowed to question members about their sexual orientation.

Today’s military is a unique force in my opinion. What makes the US Military so unique is that we have an all volunteer force. With that volunteer force there are rules and regulations that need to be followed because serving our country is a privilege. The 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy is claiming that even though it may be considered an infringement on human rights and freedom of expression, it protects the rights of the rest of the military and opens a loophole for gay men and women to serve in the armed forces. Other countries have successfully integrated gay men and women into their militaries and compared the treatment of other "minority" groups in the military. Is the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy really effective or even

A study by the Palm Center, a research branch from the University of California Los Angeles Law School, conducted a study a year after the repeal of DADT. The research group wanted to discover what impacts the repeal has done to the military and according to their findings they concluded: (1) The repeal of DADT has had no overall negative impact on military readiness or its component dimensions, including cohesion, recruitment, retention, assaults, harassment or morale. (2) A comparison of 2011 pre-repeal and 2012 post-repeal survey data shows that service members reported the same level of military readiness after DADT repeal as before it. (3) Even in those units that included openly LGB service members, and that consequently should have been the most likely to experience a drop in cohesion as a result of repeal, cohesion did not decline after the new policy of open service was put into place. In fact, greater openness and honesty resulting from repeal seem to have promoted increased understanding, respect and acceptance. (4) Recruitment was unaffected by the repeal of DADT. In an era when enlistment standards are tightening, service-wide recruitment has remained robust. (5) Retention was unaffected by the repeal of DADT. There was no mass exodus of military members as a result of repeal, and there were only two verifiable resignations linked to the policy change, both military chaplains. Service members were as likely to say that they plan to re-enlist after DADT repeal as

The history of the gay rights movement goes as far back as the late 19th century. More accurately, the quest by gays to search out others like themselves and foster a feeling of identity has been around since then. It is an innovative movement that seeks to change existing norms and gain acceptance within our culture. By 1915, one gay person said that the gay world was a "community, distinctly organized" (Milestones 1991), but kept mostly out of view because of social hostility. According to the Milestones article, after World War II, around 1940, many cities saw their first gay bars open as many homosexuals began to start a networking system. However, their newfound visibility only backfired on them, as

The first reason why LGBT people should be allowed in the military is because they are willing to fight. Don Kusler says, “Military service is honorable and voluntary.” In addition, Kristin Beck says, “People, all people, are what make our country and our military great--not the weapons and equipment that prop up the military industrial complex” (Discrimination is no way to make America great ). The evidence shows that it should not matter at all because they are willing to risk their lives for us. Even though people think that LGBT people reduce the overall effectiveness but why do they believe that it reduces effectiveness even though there would be more humans than to help fight. Not only are LGBT people willing to fight but they deserve the job.

Almost anyone can point out a man who is in the service, whether or not he is in uniform. Although it may not be easy to tell that I was a soldier in one point in time. The main reason is, is because I am a woman. There are not many physical attributes for a female that gives any tell tale signs like a person would see with a male member with his high and thigh hair cut and freshly shaven face. The only sure way to know that I was a soldier is if I had said so, or if I was seen wearing one of my uniforms with my hair tied neatly in a low bun; however when I am in my civys (military term for civilian clothes), it’s almost impossible to tell unless one is very observant in human behaviors. Another way to tell how a woman may be a military member is how we talk; we usually use military jargon such as “female/male”, using the NATO alphabet, “FUBAR (F*** Up Beyond All Recognition)”, and many others we may find reasons to use in our civilian lives but can only find a military term to express how we feel about it.

I am sure that everyone of you have heard about aliens and UFOs. Indeed, we all have heard about the famous case of aliens and UFOs in Roswell, New Mexico. Most people might be interested in the topic of aliens, but I know that the majority of you just think of it as rumours and the existence of them are impossible. Therefore, I am standing here in front all of you to make you change your perspective. I am strongly confident that I have found the evidence of their real existence to convince all of you.

For example, using a leftover coffee can for loose nails or screws, or even washing and reusing a plastic zip-loc bag instead of throwing it in the garbage. Thrift shopping is a way of reusing someone else’s unwanted goods. As I spoke about in an earlier speech about thrifting, I included many locations and ways to thrift, also the benefits to the shopper and the donator. One place in particular was shopping at the local boys and girls club. I personally shop there, keeping my eyes open for a good deal. For example, the pair of jeans that I am wearing today was purchased from this store just a few months ago. I paid only $8.00 for this pair of Lucky Jeans and according to buckle.com, a retailer for lucky jeans the retail price is $99.00 that is a savings to me of $91.00.I am not the type to worry about name brands, but quality usually does cost more. If I can get a quality pair of jeans at a fraction on the price, I am glad to shop at the thrift store. I am thankful to the person that made the donation of the lucky jeans and they can benefit from that donation. According to the IRS webpage, IRS. Gov it explains that an individual can donate items like clothing, household furniture and furnishings, a car or boat, even taxidermy. The donations are appraised, by the donator, and recorded. At the time of filing taxes if the donation equals at least $500 for the year, the donator may take advantage of the