Study: Military gays don't undermine unit cohesion

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Congress should repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law because the presence of gays in the military is unlikely to undermine the ability to fight and win, according to a new study released by a California-based research center.

The study was conducted by four retired military officers, including the three-star Air Force lieutenant general who in early 1993 was tasked with implementing President Clinton's policy that the military stop questioning recruits on their sexual orientation.

"Evidence shows that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline or cohesion," the officers states.

To support its contention, the panel points to the British and Israeli militaries, where it says gay people serve openly without hurting the effectiveness of combat operations.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080708/ap_on_...e/military_gays

[pedroh 21]

really??

I would really think, in a very objective way, that being gay diminishes your capability on the battlefield, or they won't like to wear the uniforms because they don't like to look 'fat'... mhhhh.. and of course, they couldn't live in the barracks with the other soldiers, because gay people are horny uncontrolable people and would like to bang everybody there while they're in the shower...

--

really? did someone in their right mind thinks that sexual preference affects military performance? omg

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

...gay people are horny uncontrolable people and would like to bang everybody there while they're in the shower...

:rofl:

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

So much for gay minded heterosexuals that are still in the closet!

Comon out dude! YOU CAN DO IT!

[pedroh 21]

So much for gay minded heterosexuals that are still in the closet!

Comon out dude! YOU CAN DO IT!

you gonna teach us how get out of the closet?

awesome

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Is ANNE FLAHERTY a veteran?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Is ANNE FLAHERTY a veteran?

Anne Flaherty didn't write the study. She only reported on it for the AP.

From the original article:

The study was conducted by four retired military officers.

...

The study was sponsored by the Michael D. Palm Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara, which said it picked the panel members to portray a bipartisan representation of the different service branches.

...

Two of the officers on the panel have endorsed Democratic candidates since leaving the military — Army Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, who supports Barack Obama, and Marine Corps Gen. Hugh Aitken, who backed Clinton in 1996.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Robert Minter Alexander, a Republican, was assigned in 1993 to a high-level panel established by the Defense Department to examine the issue of gays in the military. At one point, he signed an order that prohibited the military from asking a recruit's sexual orientation.

Alexander ... now believes the law should be repealed because it assumes the existence of gays in the military is disruptive to units even though cultural attitudes are changing.

...

Navy Vice Adm. Jack Shanahan said he had no opinion on the issue when he joined the panel, having never confronted it in his 35-year military career. A self-described Republican who opposes the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq war, Shanahan said he was struck by the loss of personal integrity required by individuals to carry out "don't ask, don't tell."

"Everyone was living a big lie — the homosexuals were trying to hide their sexual orientation and the commanders were looking the other way because they didn't want to disrupt operations by trying to enforce the law," he said.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The study in full, for those interested:

http://www.palmcenter.org/files/active/0/F...0408spreads.pdf

An excerpt:

The Study Group has made ten findings , including :

Finding one: The law locks the military's position into stasis and does not accord any trust to the Pentagon to adapt

policy to changing circumstances

Finding two: Existing military laws and regulations provide commanders with sufficient means to discipline

inappropriate conduct

Finding three: "Don't ask, don't tell" has forced some commanders to choose between breaking the law and undermining

the cohesion of their units

Finding four: "Don't ask, don't tell" has prevented some gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members from obtaining

psychological and medical care as well as religious counseling

Finding five: "Don't ask, don't tell" has caused the military to lose some talented service members

Finding six: "Don't ask, don't tell" has compelled some gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members to lie about their

identity

Finding seven: Many gays, lesbians, and bisexuals are serving openly

Finding eight:"Don't ask, don't tell" has made it harder for some gays, lesbians, and bisexuals to perform their

duties

Finding nine: Military attitudes towards gays and lesbians are changing

Finding ten: Evidence shows that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is unlikely to pose any significant risk to

morale, good order, discipline, or cohesion

Edited July 11, 2008 by A.J.

[eric&gen 0]

We got powder puffs in the military passing the guns in there shorts.

[jundp 191]

It would be nice for the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy to be repealed.

[Teacher Mark 53]

Yeah, I'd want this guy in a foxhole with me.

[jundp 191]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Doubt that he'd be joining up anytime soon....

[Teacher Mark 53]

I had a very good friend in Basics that I am sure was a lesbian (I never asked). I would have placed my life in her hands anytime, anywhere.

[jundp 191]

My quite happily gay brother was in the Navy for 8 years. He's still to this day close friends with heterosexual people he served with. They knew he was gay, and they didn't care.

I suppose it's about the person, eh?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

My quite happily gay brother was in the Navy for 8 years. He's still to this day close friends with heterosexual people he served with. They knew he was gay, and they didn't care.

I suppose it's about the person, eh?