The Removal Of The Dadt Policy

These political changes have recently manifested in the change in the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy of the US military, the military now accepts openly gay members willing to sacrifice for their country

This condemnation eventually led to the introduction of the separation of homosexuals from military service as seen with the neutral blue discharges which were often given to homosexual servicemen starting in 1916 . This neutral discharge was then labeled “general” and “undesirable”, resulting in a less honorable discharge. Discharges concerning men who were found to be guilty in engaging in homosexual acts were severely different than those who were neutrally discharged. If this were the case then you were then dishonorably discharged (“Don't Ask, Don't Tell” - Wikipedia). The current policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Harass, Don't Pursue1, derived from the original 1993 Department of Defense Directive 1332.14 coined Don't Ask, Don't Tell, ensures that any American citizen can participate in the Armed Forces. This policy is a step-up from the usual immediate discharge, however, this is only if the service member does not identify

The issue of gays in the military has been controversial in the United States for many decades. Over these decades there have been many different proposals as to what approach to take in order to handle the situation of homosexuals in the military. However, in 1992 when Bill Clinton was running for President of the United States, he made a promise to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military if he was elected (Washington Post). Bill Clinton followed through with his promise, and in December 1993 he instituted “a defense directive that military applicants should not to be asked about their sexual orientation” (Washington Post). This is now known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was the result

Karen O. Donovan 's article about military culture explores military tradition, and the impact social changes in society has on the military. These changes included the policy change regarding gays six years ago. At that time gays were acknowledged in the military when the military ended years old

Lately, there has been an outbreak of people of the LGBT community coming out in the military. Historically the United States has had a policy of discharging gays in the military. There has been an act called the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, it is basically saying that as long as somebody does not ask about your gender preferences, you do not have to tell. Even though the ban has been lifted, many militaries still say they cannot accept anyone from the LGBT inside. They do not care about how well you can perform or your strengths and that mindset is going to come back and hit them in the long run. Militaries that are judging these kids are taking them away from somewhere they feel safe and a place where they can finally belong. Members of the LGBT community find refuge in the military. It was one of the only places where they can prove their worth, where people aren’t focusing on their sexuality. They shouldn’t be judged based on their sexual preferences. Instead, they should be judged on their personality, performance, and their ability to get the job done precisely and correctly.

The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy should be repealed because it would strengthen the United States military dramatically.

As the removal of the DADT policy has made the LGBT community happy, has this decision made America’s military stronger? Studies suggest that the removal of the policy has not made the military stronger. A select number of generals believe that the openness of the recruitment will boost numbers in recruitment and the morale of all soldiers will improve, but the repeal of this act was acted upon during a time of war. Instead of finding ways to aid the troops in combat, Congress was discussing if they should keep or repeal an act involving homosexual rights. Many military leaders believe that the repeal was pointless during the time of war and that the results did not benefit the armed forces. After the repeal, the leaders of the armed forces didn’t know how the troops would react. Some soldiers were against serving with homosexuals because it was against their moral beliefs. Other soldiers didn’t see any problem with serving with homosexuals. Some soldiers didn’t really care about the sexuality of their fellow servicemen and women.

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 military leadership believed gay and lesbian service members were not fit for military service, were a security risk, threatened cohesion in the unit, and they violated the privacy of members of their units who were not gay. This outlook has however been refuted by policy makers, who according to Huffman et al., (2012) argued that sexual orientation was not a sufficient ground to reduce the performance of an individual during combat. General Powell alluded to this when putting a case for the group to a senate committee. According to Huffman et al., (2012) the rationale banning gays from military service also went against the just war theory since according to General Colin Powell the gays and lesbians were proud, brave and loyal citizens who deserved a chance to serve the nation. The ban on the gays also went against constitution on freedom of discrimination of all American citizens through race, color or creed. During my time in the service, I only had to chapter one Soldier out of the service due to the DADT, we didn’t know he was gay, until one night of drinking in the barracks, he made a pass at another Soldier and that Soldier reported him to his chain of

After reading chapter 2 the repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell also known as (DADT) has help shape family programs because it gives the LGB service members the opportunity to be able to serve their country without being judge due to their sexual orientation. Now, with the new law that past for the same sex marriage these individuals will feel a little more comfortable serving in the military with out fearing that people may know. When President Obama repealed the DADT and the DOMA it was found to be unconstitutional to the LGB. This helped them and their families because it made them feel like they were equal to the other service members (Blaisure, 2016).The military then changed how they gave benefits like the married couples, they made

When President Bill Clinton signed the memorandum to the Secretary of Defense in 1993 to stop homosexual prejudices regarding who can serve in the U.S. military, he did not initiate the creation of a policy denying them that right. The policies enacted were to enforce the free rights of everyone. Just because people have read policies the way they want to interpret them shows that the policies, themselves, need to be amended, not repealed. Nor can the meaning behind the creation of said policies be let go. The repeal was ineffective due to the neutral effect it has had on military life, whilst bringing to light more issues that need to be resolved before achieving the desired result.

This policy prohibited gays and lesbians from openly serving in the U.S. military. Obama repealed this policy in 2010, letting the different sexualities serve in the military, free of discrimination. Obama has had many fluctuations in his presidency, both good and bad. He has helped America in these few ways, but that does not change all of the problems he has created and will not fix.

In 1999, more than 1,000 men and women were discharged from military service due to their sexuality. That number has actually decreased compared to recent years. (Suro NP) Homosexuals were purged from federal employment in 1950, with Bill Clinton updating that policy in 1993 by adding the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue” policy. (Deicher 176) This policy doesn’t work and needs to either be updated again or the ban against homosexuals lifted. Gays should be allowed to fight for the military for employment reasons, the right to fight for one’s country, and because they are no different from anyone else. The fact of the matter is that not even experts can argue in favor of keeping the

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.

Also believed that having a homosexual in the ranks added risk to the Arm Forces’ high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion. In addition, most heterosexual men were so uncomfortable with homosexuality that would undermine unit cohesion and jeopardize the overall effectiveness. With all that undue pressure of being homosexual, it was mind-boggling how anyone could serve and perform at high levels of stress wanted to stay in the military. Between the law’s implementation in 1993 and the ban being lifted in 2010 as many as 14,000 servicemen had been discharged under the DADT policy. Also, the Don’t Ask Don’t tell policy would cost the military and taxpayers 230 million to a half a billion dollars over the next 17 years on legal fees. The ban promoted a hostile working environment, wasting crucial resources on unnecessary investigation and forced many qualified service members to leave the military, depriving the services of many needed talents. Furthermore, by condoning discrimination to the homosexual community went against military values and treating everyone with dignity and respect.