Begakis’ article, “Military Culture Overrules Rights of Individual Soldiers”(Daily Nexus, Oct. 20, 2009), is outright spin and filled with glittering generalities to distract readers from the truth: “Don’t ask, don’t tell” is discriminatory. Being openly gay is completely unrelated to an army’s performance on the field. Conservatives defend it without valid reason because of moral bias, and military personnel have used the law to persecute and harass servicemen who have volunteered to defend the country.
Abuse of the policy is rampant. If you are harassed in the army and complain, you are at risk of being kicked out. The don’t ask, don’t policy tell puts gay servicemen at the mercy of anyone in the chain of command who may think being gay is immoral and use the policy to get them discharged, even if they’re the victim. So-called “evidence” such as an online profile that says you’re into men, has led to McCarthy-esque investigations into your sexuality. You don’t have to be flamboyant to be perceived as gay; being silent when asked about a girlfriend or having another individual out you to your commanding officer are things that have led to hazing, harassment and then discharge from the military. The don’t ask, don’t tell policy has also been used by male officers to coerce lesbian women into performing sexual favors.
The truth is there’s no evidence or study showing that openly gay servicemen have a negative effect on the military. Most western nations, like Britain, Canada and Israel, have been allowing gays to serve openly for years without a negative impact on recruitment or morale. Any claim that it would affect the atmosphere in a negative manner is unsubstantiated and the policy itself is another product of conservative bullshit attacks on civil rights.
Posted by
Friday, October 23, 2009 at 01:21 PM
What a classic case of moralizing against people who claim a position of morality. You say "Conservatives defend [Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] without valid reason because of moral bias…" as if to imply that the Right’s argument, not the Left’s, is burdened by a moral sense, yet you ignore you’re own moral standard, in which you assert, "”Don’t ask, don’t tell” is discriminatory," then claim that to support the policy is to attack "civil rights."
Let’s get to some reality:
Christians on the Right believe that homosexuality is a sin. The Right makes a lot of utilitarian arguments against open homosexuality in the military (some of which are shown in Begakis’ last article), arguments that are a-moral, but any remnant of morality in their argument is rooted in that fundamental Christian premise.
Liberals on the left believe that the denial of any rights (and not just natural rights - they can be whatever "legal rights" they conjure up, ie "right to healthcare" or "right to marry") to homosexuals is a sin. Yet rather than use the word "sin," leftists throw around loaded words with moral connotations, such as being "discriminatory" or "against civil rights." Translation: If you don’t agree with me, you’re a bad person! This is JUST as much a moral argument as a Christian asserting that to promote homosexuality in any part of society is to promote a sinful lifestyle.
This article is using moral, emotional arguments to attack an article that was a-moral and utilitarian in nature. You created a straw man (Conservative with a "moral bias…") and then knocked it down from your apparently "unbiased" position, then proceeded to moralize against anyone on the Right.
Good job at being intellectually dishonest.