Pro & Con: Should Congress repeal ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ in U.S. military?

The Pentagon’s senior civilian and military leaders, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen, have both testified in favor of repeal. In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama pledged its repeal this year.

Gates, a lifelong Republican first appointed by President George W. Bush, testified at a Senate hearing last month that he “fully supported” President Obama’s plan. Mullen, also a President Bush appointee with more than 40 years of military experience, went a step further. “My personal belief is that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is the right thing to do,” he said. Mullen continued, “I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we [force] young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens ... For me, it comes down to integrity — theirs as individuals and ours as an institution.”

Armed Services Committee member and Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), who never served in uniform, challenged the view of the Pentagon’s highest-ranking military officer. The senator oddly suggested that allowing gays to serve openly might somehow lead to “alcohol use, adultery, fraternization and body art.”

Notwithstanding the concerns of Chambliss, there is significant momentum in Congress for ending “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Repeal legislation, the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, has 187 co-sponsors in the U.S. House, including Georgia Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Hank Johnson (D-Ga.). Last week, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) vowed to introduce similar legislation in the Senate.

The American public, including conservatives, overwhelmingly support repeal. A 2009 Gallup poll showed 69 percent of Americans, including 58 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of weekly church-goers, favor repealing the law. Following last month’s Senate hearing, retired four-star Army Gen. Colin Powell also declared his support for repeal.

Although cloaked in language about protecting “unit cohesion,” at its core “don’t ask, don’t tell” is based on a bias against gay and lesbian Americans. There is no empirical evidence that open gay service would have any negative impact. Twenty-four of our nation’s allies — including Israel, England and Canada — allow gays to serve. Russia, China and Iran do not allow gays to serve.

There are some 66,000 gays and lesbians currently serving in enforced silence, according to the UCLA’s Williams Institute. The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network reports that since 1993 more than 13,000 gay and lesbian troops have been fired. Critical skill shortages such as Arabic linguists, fighter pilots and doctors have been discharged solely because they were gay at a time when we need them most while fighting two wars. Hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars have been squandered through the costs of gay investigations and discharges, and in then training their replacements, according to the Government Accountability Office.

I am a Georgia native who served almost 12 years in the Army. I served on foreign soil in South Korea and Germany, jumped out of airplanes, threw hand grenades and worked at the Pentagon. And, I am gay. I am but one of more than 33,000 gay and lesbian veterans who live in Georgia, according to a 2004 study by the Urban Institute. We know that military service has nothing to do with sexual orientation. We volunteered to serve because we love our country.

Congress should repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell.” To quote Adm. Mullen, it is the “right thing to do.”

Jeff Cleghorn is an Atlanta attorney and former Army major.

NO: Repeal will undermine morale and detract from combat training.

By Rick Goddard

For years, the gay rights movement has targeted the U.S. military as a vehicle to legitimize the gay lifestyle. Gay activists have demanded “their right” to serve, yet their agenda could not be more transparent. It is not military service they seek, it is an attempt to validate and gain recognition of a lifestyle, which is distasteful to most Americans, that truly drives this movement.

This issue has become a lightening rod as the Obama administration attempts to socially re-engineer our armed forces. Current senior military leaders have little choice when confronted with this issue — salute or retire. Yet more than 1,000 retired flag and general officers, whose numbers include members who have led American forces in every military engagement since World War II, have strongly stated their opposition to gays serving openly.

I have joined these officers in signing a letter delivered to Obama and members of Congress that clearly articulates our objection to the repeal of Section 654 of U.S. Code Title 10, which states that gays are not eligible for military service.

Section 654 recognizes that the military is a “specialized society” that is “fundamentally different from civilian life.” It requires a unique code of personal conduct and demands “extraordinary sacrifices, including the ultimate sacrifice, in order to provide for the common defense.” The law appreciates that military personnel have always been restricted from and punished for certain forms of self-expression that are permitted in civilian life. These restrictions include limitations on speech, relationships, personal appearance, as well as behavior.

The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy enacted during the Clinton administration clearly recognized the adverse impact of gays serving openly in our military. Congress voted for statutory language that affirmed, almost word for word, long-standing regulations stating that homosexuality is incompatible with military service. Both houses passed the law and federal courts have upheld it as constitutional several times.

The legislation introduced in Congress to repeal Section 654 will forever and dangerously alter the tectonic plates that underpin the strength of America’s military force. It will impose on commanders a radical policy that mandates “nondiscrimination” against “homosexuality, or bisexuality, whether the orientation is real or perceived.” It will mandate more training classes that significantly detract from essential combat training.

Too often neglected in assessing the impact of gays in the military is the essence of the gay lifestyle. Gay men in particular exhibit an appetite for anonymous sex with many partners. Traditional base gathering places — libraries, theaters, bowling alleys, gyms and athletic fields where both active-duty and military dependents frequent — become targets of opportunity. Military families living on base, where one or both parents must spend many months away from home, will be faced with one more concern regarding the well-being of their children.

Bottom line: The U.S. military is not a laboratory for social experimentation. It is not in any way similar to the military forces of Denmark, the Netherlands, Canada or others who have embraced homosexuals. The U.S. military is the most capable, dedicated and feared force on the planet. Over 1,000 flag and general officers have attested the issue is not one of individual desires or of the norms and mores of civilian society.

Rather, the question is one of national security and the discipline, morale, readiness and culture of the U.S. armed forces upon which that security depends. It is a question we cannot afford to answer in a way that undermines our military.

Maj. Gen. Rick Goddard (ret.) is on the board of directors of the Georgia Military Affairs Coordinating Committee. In 2008, he ran for Congress in Georgia’s 8th District.