President Barack Obama’s recent vow to get rid of the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ military policy has many people talking.
The policy, created by former President Bill Clinton in 1993, authorizes the military to fire American soldiers for admitting to be homosexual.
Obama told the Human Rights Campaign on Oct. 10 that he plans to end the policy, according to the Associated Press. The country cannot afford to cut from the military’s ranks people with needed skills for fighting, he said.
First Lt. Tierney A. Williams, Central Michigan University department of military science instructor, believes the policy is working quite well as it is.
“The policy provides security for each person, and it puts people that are uncomfortable with their personal choices at ease,” she said.
Williams hopes everyone will still be able to do their jobs if the policy is removed.
“The policy being removed could bring more people in, but that just depends on how comfortable each person is with themselves,” Williams said. “Every situation brings good and bad.”
To serve openly?
Director of Gay and Lesbian Programs Shannon Jolliff said she thinks the policy was originally put into place to protect lesbian, gay and bisexuals who were already in the military.
“I think that our administration at the time, however, realized that the policy was going to have the reverse effect, asking people to stay ‘in the closet’ as opposed to serve our country while being free and who they are,” Jolliff said.
She said the policy should be removed so anyone can serve the country while enjoying the freedoms they are fighting for.
“An advantage of the policy being removed would be that individuals serving in the military can serve openly without the fear of being discharged,” Jolliff said.
The only disadvantage, she said, would be that the policy would not be able to protect individuals from being harassed if the were gay or lesbian.
Jolliff said the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prevent employers with more than 15 employees from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and disability will be approved first, followed by the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
“If the (don’t ask, don’t tell) policy is overturned, it will have a positive affect on the lesbian, gay, bisexual and even transgender community of our nation,” she said.
Ishpeming sophomore Rob Waters said the current policy is immoral.
The elimination of the policy would bring advantages, he said.
“Removing the policy will open up enrollment for more people as well as create an environment based on equality,” Waters said. “I don’t see how the policy has made the military any better. It’s discriminatory and outdated.”
E-mail the author:
Staff Reports












(Powered by 
DOMA is descriminatory and outdated – but that still stands…how nice that anti descriminatory idealism in the US only appears to apply to heterosexuals…so much for Obama leading the “change” brigade…empty promises on equality as usual…
With gay marriage now legal in several states now, DADT must be dropped. Otherwise, being in a gay marriage means that you can’t join the military or that if you’re in the military and gay then you can’t get married!
“An advantage of the policy being removed would be that individuals serving in the military can serve openly without the fear of being discharged,” Jolliff said.”
While this may be a personal advantage for homosexuals serving in the military, the real question must be asked; “Will this benefit the country?” I can partly see a positive effect in the form of higher recruitment numbers for armed forces across the globe. However, DADT is not only designed to respect GLBT people, but heterosexuals as well. To put it bluntly, not everyone within the military wishes to work, live and fight beside someone who demands Federal entitlement and absolute social respect in the realm of sexuality. Tolerance runs both ways; respecting people you don’t agree with, and giving respect to those who don’t agree with you.
Gregory, basically you are suggesting that bigotry and homophobia are things that should be tolerated and respected. That is absolutely disgusting.
Jonathan,
I am not arguing in favor of bigotry; I am arguing against social entitlement. If a person is homosexual, fine; I am against the government forcing people who do not agree with that world view to accept it and positively promote it as if they personally agreed with it.
What is disgusting is living in country that preaches equality, yet cannot handle when opposition arises.