Column:
Don't ask, don't discriminate
Published Feb. 9, 2010
I am sure you can guess my stance on the military's “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” policy. I have been writing our legislators about both this policy and the Defense of Marriage Act for more than a year.
It seems “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” has a cyclical nature, popping up in the news and political blogs every once in a while. The problem with this cycle is that nothing ever changes.
Back in the '20s and '30s, gay servicemen were given neutral or "blue" discharges from service if they were found to be gay or engaged in gay actions. After World War II, the policy changed to giving "desirable" or "undesirable" discharges.
If people were just gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, but were not caught in any implicating act, they were given a desirable discharge. But if they were caught in such an act, they were given an undesirable discharge.
When Ronald Reagan was president, this became a hot-button issue, probably because of the genesis of the gay rights movement during that time.
When Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush were running for president in 1992 (anyone born in that year will be able to enlist in the military sometime this year), it was a big part of the campaign rhetoric. Bill Clinton wanted the LGBTQ community to serve openly in the military, but Congress, public opinion and the military itself quashed that quickly.
So the next brilliant step in this demented thought process was the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.
I'm sure Bill Clinton assuaged his guilt over signing this policy into federal law by telling himself if gay people were shoved back into the closet during their time in the armed services, they would be protected from verbal, emotional and unfortunate physical abuse from their fellow men in arms.
This is the same ridiculous logic that allowed leaders of the Islamic Revolution to demand women cover their bodies from head to toe in Iran in the '80s. It's a little sick this policy clearly exists to protect those who might commit horrific acts upon a fellow American and soldier and not the brave people who serve and happen to defy archaic social mores.
I have nothing but the highest respect for people who protect this country through their service in the Army, Navy, Marines, National Guard, Coast Guard and Air Force. These men and women are supposed to be men and women of honor.
We ask only the smartest, strongest, bravest and most committed people to protect us, but we tolerate a ridiculous prejudice on a state-mandated level? Our soldiers are expected to participate in missions that might conflict with their political or ethical views, and they do it admirably.
Why is it unfathomable to ask a soldier to serve alongside a gay or lesbian soldier honorably, even if he or she doesn't approve of how that person behaves behind closed doors?
I hope sincerely this wave of relevancy for this issue doesn't subside until the proper action is taken. We should be proud of our LGBTQ soldiers, and we should respect them enough to let them serve openly.
Jordan Stein is a senior political science major and a campaign volunteer for Columbia mayoral candidate Sid Sullivan. She can be reached at jesf25@mail.mizzou.edu.