Study: Military Gays Don't Undermine Unit Cohesion

WASHINGTON — 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.

Undermining unit cohesion was a determining factor when Congress passed the 1993 law, intended to keep the military from asking recruits their sexual orientation. In turn, service members can't say they are gay or bisexual, engage in homosexual activity or marry a member of the same sex.

Supporters of the ban contend there is still no empirical evidence that allowing gays to serve openly won't hurt combat effectiveness.

"The issue is trust and confidence" among members of a unit, said Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis, who retired in 1993 after working on the issue for the Army. When some people with a different sexual orientation are "in a close combat environment, it results in a lack of trust," he said.

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. According to its Web site, the Palm Center "is committed to keeping researchers, journalists and the general public informed of the latest developments in the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy debate." Palm himself was "a staunch supporter of civil rights in the gay community," the site says.

Story continues below

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 said at the time he was simply trying to carry out the president's orders and not take a position. But he 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.

Further, the Defense Department and not Congress should be in charge of regulating sexual misconduct within the military, he said.

"Who else can better judge whether it's a threat to good order and discipline?" Alexander asked.

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.

___

On the Net:

Palm Center: http://www.palmcenter.org

Comments

[Irons]

Wow, that's relevatory. LMAO

[SanityClaus]

My uncle Manny met Joe, his partner of 50+ years, in the Navy.

Both died before the first legal same-sex marriages were conducted in Massachusetts.

They loved America more than America loved them.

[dennyd]

You would think that the Armed Services would be happy to accept ANYONE given that there aren't enough troops to bomb all the places this government would like to. Instead of beating to death (literally) the current troops with four/five/six tours of duty, they shouldn't have such an insane law as 'don't ask don't tell'.

[andvoodoo2]

Manny and Joe may have died before they could legally marry, but they had something most people, straight or gay, never know in their lifetimes - a love that lasted more than half a century. Thanks to them for their service toward my country and thanks to you for sharing.

[helonias]

So aren't adulterers worse and can never be trusted.

Being gay is not a 10 suggestion no no while adultery is.

[MissingAmerica]

When did we sleep through the part where we became such an ignorant, intolerant nation?

[Redrover666]

Have you served in the military?

[MajorKong]

I have, 21 years worth. We had a few people in my National Guard unit who were, while not openly gay, commonly known to be gay. Never really mattered much as long as they did their job.

[GrainOSand]

Some day we will need a law to go to the bathroom or to breathe air. It matters not to me what one does in their bedroom. Such has no place in an evaluation on his or her worthiness for the same respect and courtesy I extend to anyone else. I do not want to see Alfred and Lawanda “do” it anymore than I want to see Katiana and Susannah “do” it. This is why though I understand the need for civil rights legislation I still protest the need for it. The law only serves to legitimize the idea that because the government says it is so it is. I am all for law and order and rules where it and they make sense. Law and Order and Rules and Regulations do not penetrate the surface of that which defines me. I realize many identify with their job, their family, their friends, their country -- They find identity through relationship. This is true for most if not all. However, the ultimate mirror of relationship is the relationship of self to self. Let not the reflection be a distortion brought about by the definitions of mere people legislating and making rules. For it is known that such can kill self-esteem and leave wombs of life barren for generations. I am not the “right” to go to the bathroom with another person, oh no, I am far more than mere laws may allow for.

Of no concern, that is the policy.

[zigzag1]

Actually Katiana and Suzannah sounds pretty hot.

[GrainOSand]

Artistically speaking and perhaps through the lens of my youthful discretion, the two names together do or would suggest a certain eroticism. My point was that no matter the persuasion, that remains something for two consenting adults to agree upon and not a regulating military. On the rights for gays question I come down on the side of what discriminates is wrong. I personally am not gay, nor am I a female, Irish, disabled or a Mormon. I would not want any of the members of these human delineations/classifications to be marginalized in law. The moral question is again a personal one, and does not enter into ones’ mind unless they are casting stones, passing judgment, or leveling criticisms, all of which are counterproductive to promoting the well-being of all human beings. Being gay is how one is born it is not a choice, so say those who consider themselves gay. Therefore let society not discriminate against what is a natural tendency, like being female, Irish, disabled (birth or through earthly source), or Mormon. To the extent any of the people who fall under these classifications are American citizens let that be the extent to which one set of laws apply that are inclusive not exclusive of certain citizens based on historical disdain for admitting what has been the case for ages. Billie Holiday told us, ain’t nobody’s business if I do. We would do well to adhere to that sound advice concerning the sexual orientation of others.

[DRaymond]

If they are so worried about gays affecting 'combat readiness' why not just start out by letting them serve in noncombat roles? After all the most ridiculous examples of the military losing valuable people to this policy were translators and flight nurses! Under what absurd notion does the sexual orientation of a translator or a flight nurse have to do with their job effectiveness?

[RedDogBear]

This was never about "combat readiness". It was always about prejudice. What has happened now is that the military is so desperate for people to maintain the empire that those who know what is going on realize they have to put aside their prejudice in order to retain and recruit as many people as possible.

[Majus]

So far as being gay and in the military goes, a soldier who isn't a flaming queen will get on just fine with other soldiers, all other personality traits being considered, of course.

It happened during my time and still happens today; most soldiers got along just fine.

[klmebane]

i have yet to meet a flaming queen that wanted to be in the military, anyway!

[andvoodoo2]

It's the limitation on the wardrobe that gets them every time. All those drab colors...

[thatone]

The whole article is based on a study that proves how gays don't affect the military's ability to fight and win.

Who cares about the study? It's about common sense.

[Marlyn]

More than that, it sets the tone on homosexuality for the nation.

The fair thing to do would be to rewrite the Military Code of Justice to remove explicit use of the word "homosexual" and replace it with the word "sexual".

[klmebane]

the fair thing to do would be to rewrite the UCMJ (uniform code of military justice) to remove any regulations on sexual conduct whatsoever, short of sexual harassment. sure, sleeping with someone else's spouse is wrong, but the "rules" against it don't stop it from happening, it just means that if there is some kind of problem (i.e. the marine who killed his pregnant girlfriend) the parties with the problem will be reluctant to seek some kind of mediation for fear of punishment.

did you know that in the military you can be prosecuted for having anal sex (gay or straight, married or not) or for having sex with someone you aren't married to?? someone else's sexual proclivities mean nothing to me as long as they go on between consenting adults. it is not the job of any governing body to tell consenting adults (who can be killed or maimed in their service) what they can do in their own bedrooms or if they can have an effing drink.

[Hare]

batguano101...."The reason the majority of America is offended is the Bible says it is a sin, one of the few sins that actually makes God angry, like treason-which God hates. Look it up."

Actually most people do not care who is or isn't gay or what people do behind their own closed doors. God and sin from a man-written book is just foolish non-sense and a lot of brainwashing, just what God is that angry? Doesn't this same God tells you to Love thy neighbour as yourself? What is your truth?

I just think there should not be any military force at all. The world would be such a much better place

[Redrover666]

However, you aren't discussing closed doors. At your college, do they encourage the football team to shower together with the girls tennis team? Do they assign the boys and girls to the same rooms.

[RnR]

What a waste of taxpayer money. The premise of the study is totally insulting as well. *Why* would a gay person undermine the ability to fight and win? They've been in the military since the dawn of time.

[TrevorAlan]

Now even commanders want an army without closets. What's the excuse now?

[Doofus]

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was always meant to be
temporary & transitional. If the Pentagon brass
want it to be over, & Obama is President, it can
be over. Can't be one or the other. Got to be both.

Gonna be a lot of unhappy Repos, either way.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[EquinsuOcha]

"When some people with a different sexual orientation are "in a close combat environment, it results in a lack of trust,"

No, what undermines trust is the fact that someone has to live a lie in order to do their job. Anyone who has been in the military under combat conditions knows that.

[JackNasty]

Translation: "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

[JackNasty]

As Emily Litella used to say, "Never mind!"

I obviously replied to the wrong post.

[MizLiz]

Well, finally. Of all the NATO allies, only the U.S. and Turkey discriminate against gays. The military commanders have finally realized they need these talented people, which include many, many Arabic/Farsi speakers.

[useyourbrain]

From what I've heard, historically, both the Marines and the Air Force is mostly closeted, bi, bi-curious, or "I was soooo drunk...."", so what's the problem.

Ironically, the whole structure of the military is based on, and executed in the most homo-erotic manner possible. Even more than football. But don't get me started.

[Liberal2]

Ya know....every time I see a "RAW" commercial (or the other wacko group) I keep wondering what kind of person wants to be seen tightly wrapped around some sweaty guy? I suspect a lot of those weird pins are actually intended to delay while penises deflate.

[midknightryder13]

That's nothing -- watch ANY mixed marshal arts competition.