Will ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal start new ‘separate but equal’?

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share via Email
• Copy Link

  Link Copied

“Being gay is like being left-handed. It’s not really that interesting anymore.” George Will, the conservative political commentator, recently made this profound point while debating the merits of the Congressional repeal of the U.S. military policy “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT). DADT has until now banned gay men and women from serving openly in our armed forces. Will put it best when he said, “The evolving standards of decency mark a maturing society.”

America is indeed evolving: she has elected her first African-American president and extends the rights and protections of citizenship to all its myriad constituency: black, white, brown, male, female, gay and straight. Seventeen years ago President Bill Clinton signed the DADT policy into law. He had campaigned on a promise to repeal the ban on gays in the military completely, but quickly confronted a military elite unwilling to do so for fear that military cohesion would suffer. At the time, DADT was lauded as the perfect compromise.

Prior to its implementation, gay men and women were not allowed to serve in the U.S. military. If discovered they faced court marshal, imprisonment and dishonorable discharge. Lives were ruined and patriots were cast aside as undesirable members of society. Today, we live in a world where conservatives and liberals alike accept gays as normal and equal. The overwhelming majority of the country is comfortable with the idea of having gay friends, gay family members and gay role models. This is perhaps the ideal time to consider our progress and the steps necessary to continue the journey forward.

The U.S., widely seen as the world’s military leader, has regrettably lagged behind its allies by closing its doors to openly gay patriots. That has been a mistake and one that both Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama promised to correct. The day has finally come. On May 27th 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a measure to repeal the policy and the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee followed suit. The full Senate will vote on the measure sometime this summer and it is expected to pass given the Democratic majority. But now the real work begins.

Like many liberals, I have been too long focused on the discriminatory nature of the law and have wanted it to be denounced and repealed. What I had not considered and is now being debated, are the wider implications. Will the military institute a new form of “separate but equal”? Will gay soldiers require separate living quarters? Will gay partners and families enjoy the same benefit of military subsidized housing as their heterosexual counterparts? How will the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) affect soldiers living in states that allow gay marriage and those who live in states which ban it? The military is an institution built upon uniformity, integrity, equality and singularity of mindset. How then will it handle new questions of diversity? In the effort to provide equal access and equal protections, are the Obama White House and Democratic Congress prepared for the legislative concerns that belie their own efforts?

General Colin Powell weighed in on some of these questions in an interview this past Sunday. It was his most definitive response on the topic thus far where he elaborated on his purport of the DADT policy in 1993 and his belief today that it should be repealed. Powell stated: “We should pass the law repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’…but don’t underestimate some of the issues we dealt with in 1993 and that we’re dealing with now.”

Apart of the evolution on the issue of gay rights in general make repealing DADT more complicated. The United States remains divided on the issue of same-sex marriage, with only five states acknowledging equal rights for gay couples and more than half of the states have constitutional or statutory bans on same-sex marriage. There are currently efforts to deal with the issue at the federal level, and human rights groups are intent on bringing a case before the Supreme Court to provide uniformity. While that remains pending, how do we contend to address our troops?

These are men and women who have fought, bled, and suffered great loss and limbs on behalf of this nation. To regulate their human desire for love, however they conceive it, would be to spit in the face of their service. President Obama realizes that and many of our democratic and republican congressmen do as well. But they are sharply divided on how best to handle the issues, especially with regard to families. This provides a compelling dialogue.

For two decades, the exclusion of openly gay men and women from the military has largely rested on an argument that it would undermine unit cohesion. This belief that sexuality would be flaunted or is inherently unwelcome is flawed of course, since gay soldiers are no more likely to “flaunt” their sexuality as any heterosexual would. Nonetheless, the final debate has become far too human to be ignored; this is where progress has been made.

U.S. military commanders are now debating how to handle gay couples, children of gay military officers, housing benefits and policies for leave. They are asking whether two military personnel who are partners should be deployed at the same time. They are asking questions which are normal and natural. This is the future: where gay men and women are treated equally and their humanity embraced.

I agree with Colin Powell and the Chairman of Joint Chiefs Michael Mullen — it will take time to implement the repeal effectively and I am not discouraged by their deliberate approach to the matter. Obama was at first accused of stalling on the issue. Liberal activists, including myself, called for him to sign an executive order and force the issue. I see now that would have been unwise and a rush to judgment.

Unlike civilians, the military lives by a code of honor which is often impenetrable. They cannot and will not allow for bias and inequality within their ranks, and therefore must approach this issue with the greatest integrity. Using this example, perhaps the federal government, courts and state legislatures can follow suit. Perhaps our men and women in uniform can teach us, by example, the greater lesson of what it means to be a true patriot and to be truly free.