THE NEW YORK TIMES: The Supreme Court’s refusal this week to hear a challenge to the ban on homosexuals serving openly in the military is not much of a legal setback. The court did not address the merits of the case, and another lawsuit still moving through the courts may be a better vehicle for challenging the benighted policy.
Even so, relying on a conservative court to make things right would be a gamble. Unfortunately, neither President Obama nor Congress shows much appetite for moving to end a ban that is not only unfair to gay men and lesbians but damaging to the military as well.
The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was hatched in 1993 as a compromise after President Bill Clinton failed in an attempt to overturn an existing ban on gay service members. The awkward compromise limited the military’s ability to ask service members about their sexual orientation (don’t ask) and allowed homosexuals to serve provided they kept quiet about their sexual orientation (don’t tell) and refrained from homosexual acts.
The ostensible rationale was that the known presence of gay men and lesbians would undermine morale and unit cohesion, but as it turned out, the policy caused its own kind of damage to military readiness. Thousands of service members have been discharged from duty at a time when the military is stretched by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The loss of highly skilled interpreters and intelligence analysts has been especially damaging. >>> | Tuesday, June 09, 2009
THE NEW YORK TIMES: President Obama has said he will abolish the 16-year-old “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military only if they do not disclose their sexual orientation. Nationwide, polls show that a majority of Americans support lifting the ban on openly gay members of the military. But support in the military’s ranks and among retired officers is mixed. While several prominent retired generals and admirals have urged a repeal, others have said that allowing openly gay people to join the service would hurt recruiting and retention.
How would lifting the ban affect the military ranks? And, as the first step, if the president acts to change the policy, should it be by executive order or should it be by act of Congress? >>> The Editors | Sunday, May 03, 2010
