OT: Police overstepping their jurisdiction?

[TeaSea]

I've been doing a bit of reading around the issue as I was unaware what the USAF's policies were on the subject of gay relationships. Isn't this whole "don't ask, don't tell" policy rather archaic and liable to cause more problems than it solves?

A persons sexuality has no more bearing on their ability to do a job than their skin colour.

Apologies for the thread creep, but I was genuinely shocked when I found out that the USAF have such an apparently ludicrous policy in place.

Not really that ludicrous...the military is unique in that it can and does discriminate on a daily basis on almost everything: Height, weight, intellect, strength, endurance, vision, moral turpitude, political disposition, eye-hand coordination, memory....the list goes on and on....the military is one organization where all those things you've been told don't matter -- Matter.

(Now, onto my "barracks lawyer" mode...)

In any case, "don't ask don't tell" was imposed by the Clinton Administration, not the services (People seem to have short memories). The previous policy was that homosexuality was simply not allowed. To engage in homosexual activity was a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Note, I said "engage"...you could actually be a confessed homosexual, but you could not "engage" in homosexual behavior. As a result homosexuality was only addressed to a minor degree and commanders were given a lot of options on how to deal with it. Oddly enough, there were fewer cases of homosexuals being put out of the service back in those "dark ages" than under the current policy.

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" codified specific actions that commanders are now obliged to take regarding homosexual activity. Options previously available are now gone....the irony of course is that a change to that previous policy is exactly what various homosexual rights organizations pushed for. Sometimes you need to be careful what you ask for, because you'll get it.

Still, my own personal experience after 24 years of active service is that when a commander takes action to chapter (discharge) or discipline someone for homosexual activity, there is always something else involved. Gay rights activists like to point to "witch hunts". I never saw any.

You will note that in this example, as in every example I've run across....there's always a back story that somehow doesn't get told.

 

[tigisfat]

I've been doing a bit of reading around the issue as I was unaware what the USAF's policies were on the subject of gay relationships. Isn't this whole "don't ask, don't tell" policy rather archaic and liable to cause more problems than it solves?

People get the wrong idea about the military's homosexual policies. Heterosexual cases make up almost all of the misconduct cases in the military. In a military environment, especially in war, we don't have time to worry about relationships an sexual behavior, and the rank system must be indebatable and absolute. It's not just Officers and Enlisted engaging in innapropriate relationships, either. It's men and women who've compromised the chain of command and rank structure within even the smallest of units. The military has a HUGE problem with SNCOs haveing crushes on our young 18 year old women, and the consequences are astronomical. Many positively outstanding young women with potential to command or be SNCOs have left the military after one term because they became tired of the negative repercussions from preferential or undue ill treatment.

We have a responsibility to uphold the military rank structure, and it has nothing to do with gay rights. The integration of women (while necessary) into many traditionally male jobs has opened an entire can of worms to deal with. The opponents of openly gay service (don't forget to say openly) aren't anti-gay, they foresee an absolute nightmare for innapropriate relationships.




side note: Gays aren't drummed out as much as you'd think they are. "Don't ask don't tell" is not a ban on gay service, it's a sort of 'keep it in your pants' order. I've known quite a few people who I flat out assumed were gay (and some verified) who did just fine in the USAF. Noone had a problem with them. It's the type of wacko that marches in parades naked and flaunts their sexuality in your face that will rip a unit apart, and OBVIOUSLY that is discouraged. And yes, the hyper-sexual wacko heterosexuals are booted out too.

 

[tigisfat]

(Now, onto my "barracks lawyer" mode...)

Ah yes, I used to retain several of your type. At one point I probably practiced. Often, the only payment desired is a six-pack, and the counsel is highly valued. You only get into trouble when you rely on barracks lawyers to tell you when you're supposed to be somewhere, or get unit updates.

 

[Ken Stallings]

I will say one thing on this issue and leave it at that ...

If you take someone at their word who says he/she is gay, then by definition to require me to shower with the male homosexual or use a public restroom with same, is precisely the same as to require me as a married man to do the same with a woman not my wife.

Now, beyond all the jokes people can add, I want you to think very seriously on what I just said.

In private life, the requirement to share public shower and bathroom facilities simply does not exist. As a civilian you have total control over your private life. In the military this is absolutely not the case, especially when you are deployed.

This is why the military accepted (not that it had much choice) the "don't ask, don"t tell" policy. Because if it was kept confidential, it could not lead to any of the obvious rancor that my scenario listed above could cause.

Before people leap to a condemnation of a policy, they must first strive to fully understand the background.

Despite the Hollywood story treatment like that played out in Starship Troopers, men and women playing slap and tickle in a shower isn't promoting proper military discipline. And again, despite the obvious "insert joke here" reply, the situation isn't funny for the people who have to actually command units, and who's phones already ring more often than not late at night with another call from another unit subordinate who did something he/she should not have done. Add in the all-too-predictable fistfights and worse that would happen if a gay man/woman interacted with a straight man'woman, and it's a whole other layer of problems commanders don't currently have to deal with. Last I checked, the list of people who seek impossible jobs is pretty thin!

Commanders have more than enough headaches. Fighting a war is damn sure a hell of a headache and I would suggest anyone who doubts that try the hat on for size and see how he likes it!

Like most military people, what a person does in his or hers private life isn't of concern for me. If, that is, it doesn't affect the ability of my unit to perform its mission! If it does put hurdles in my ability as a commander to get the job done, then I want none of it thank you!

The military isn't a social laboratory! It's an institution of national defense and right now, business is booming!

It was hard enough logistically to rig up male/female shower and bathroom facilities at deployed locations. But, the military invested billions of dollars to make it happen. Now, when you can figure a way to parse gay men, gay women, straight men, and straight women into separate facilities, then we can talk about the social benefit of removing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. About the only answer I have is 100% private shower/bathroom facilities. Now, you calculate the cost of doing that at every deployed location and we can talk about the value of this latest "social experiment" so many now are agitating for!

Howerver, no one articulating or demanding such a change has the foggiest notion of how to do it. They just claim other militaries already do it and leave it at that. It's not that simple.

Ken