Don't ask, don't tell: what's your opinion?: Luke Ulrich

Soldier Blog Post

Don't ask, don't tell: what's your opinion?

December 13, 2010

Tags:

army-rotc active-duty-officer army-reserve-officer creighton-university dadt transportation-corps

Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) has been a subject of much debate in government and public policy circles. Signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993, it is the official policy that prohibits people who "demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts" from serving in the Armed Forces of the United States, because their presence "would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

President Obama and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mullen have expressed a desire to remove DADT. Such a move would mark a dramatic shift in the makeup of the United States military. As I'm taking final exams this week, I don't have time to express all my opinions, but I do ask yours.

To prompt discussion: "Exactly how many homosexuals are there in America: less than 1%? Between 1-3%? And if so miniscule a portion of our population, why is the elephant (all the 99% rest of non-homosexual America) dancing a political tightrope on this topic as the politics of "safe-speak" engages us all with such terrible fear of giving offense, all across the USA? Is is good to be afraid to speak out against a militant 1/2 of 1% of the American population when they are such a tiny fraction of We the People?"

What do you think about DADT? Is the military ready to accept open homosexuals? I invite your comments and debate, and plan to share my views later in the week.

Closing the semester: Army ROTC.
December 2, 2010

Transportation Basic Officer Leader Course—Advice Needed!
March 8, 2011

6 Comments

Add Favorite

You must be logged in to use this feature.

Comments

John Doe
Dec 13, 2010 5:28 PM

It depends on if soldier would still be able to trust each other and function together. I say ask them. If most don't care then repeal it and allow soldiers to be open and honest about themselves, it doesn't affect how good of a soldier they are, or if there are people who wouldn't be able to work with someone who was openly gay then I guess it won't work well at this point in time. It depends too much on the personal feelings of the soldier for anybody else to decide without knowing their opinions first.

Reply
Jamee Belsha
Dec 13, 2010 6:24 PM

Your argument goes in a circle. If the homosexual population is so small and insignificant, how their open presence in the military drastically shift its make-up? I also find it interesting that you assume that fear is motivating a silent majority from speaking against the repeal. The recent report on the study conducted by DOD indicates that the majority of military members support the repeal. Finally, don't you think "militant" is a bit of an exaggeration to describe this "tiny fraction" of the population? This seems like a mainstream movement with widespread mainstream support within the American population.

Reply
Luke Ulrich
Dec 13, 2010 7:03 PM

My words above are meant to prompt discussion, rather than to serve as my opinions.

Reply
Timmy
Dec 13, 2010 7:24 PM

Didn't republicans block the overturning already? As far as i know, the Senate couldn't acquire enough votes to overturn during the lame duck session, and the next senate will be even less likely to overturn DADT.

As opinions go, I prefer to take the stance of General Amos and General Casey. I am not necessarily opposed to repeal, although I think that now is not the right time. The repeal of DADT is more of a public show than a military necessity. The fact is that there are gays in the military right now, and many people know that they are gay. So why is it such an issue now? Because of this new generations social consciousness. The only difference the repeal would have is that people would now be allowed to "come out." But in the military, is that really important? Especially in a time of war, the focus should be on being the best warfighter you can be. Not whether your buddy next to you is a homosexual. I say wait until the war is over to hash this out. Right now it is just adding unneeded stress on our military command. And as to the DOD study, i believe that the majority of military members are ok with gays serving in the military, but not the repeal of DADT. The Marine Corps, as well as many older service members, lean towards keeping DADT in place.

Reply
Starlet
Dec 13, 2010 8:57 PM

I say that we keep it. Cohesion is the most important, not sexual preferences. Once the nation accepts it as a whole, then maybe it can be up for discussion again.. but not during a war time.

Reply
Brandon
May 16, 2011 5:36 AM

DADT was rightfully repealed for several reasons. The most important being that as the military being one of, if not the most, honored departments of our country, it should represent our values as a nation. Telling people to withhold who they are and pretend to be somebody else is not only destructive, it's un-American. To say that who you are is inferior to the majority, so pretend you aren't yourself so we won't fire you, is a terrible precedent to set within the military. Nobody should ever have to feel like that, and nobody should have to lie about who they are in order to serve their nation.

Although soldiers (as well as citizens) are concerned about unit cohesion or inter-military relations with those who are openly homosexual, here is my thought on that: if Soldier A can't handle who Soldier B is is enough that it affects their performance or if that causes them to hesitate to save Soldier B's life solely because Soldier B is gay, then Soldier A is the one with the problem. Soldier A is the one holding a prejudice against his fellow soldier for something Soldier B cannot change about himself/herself and did not choose to be that way.

This was a great first step in moving towards an accepting nation, I once again honor and respect the military even more for being role models in this area as they are in so many others.

Reply

Add Comment

Profile

Luke Ulrich

Affiliation:	Army Reserve
Rank:	Second Lieutenant
Branch:	Transportation
MOS/AOC:	88D
Location:	Omaha, NE
Hometown:	Colorado Springs

About Me: I am 2LT Luke Gerard Ulrich I am a native of Colorado Springs, Colorado. I am a platoon leader in the 443rd Transportation Company here in Omaha, Nebraska. I graduated May 2011 from Creighton University with a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration with a concentration in management. Outside of my reserve duties I am a personal banker with First National Bank of Omaha.

Posts by Date

May 2012

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Archives

John Doe

Dec 13, 2010 5:28 PM

It depends on if soldier would still be able to trust each other and function together. I say ask them. If most don't care then repeal it and allow soldiers to be open and honest about themselves, it doesn't affect how good of a soldier they are, or if there are people who wouldn't be able to work with someone who was openly gay then I guess it won't work well at this point in time. It depends too much on the personal feelings of the soldier for anybody else to decide without knowing their opinions first.

Jamee Belsha

Dec 13, 2010 6:24 PM

Your argument goes in a circle. If the homosexual population is so small and insignificant, how their open presence in the military drastically shift its make-up? I also find it interesting that you assume that fear is motivating a silent majority from speaking against the repeal. The recent report on the study conducted by DOD indicates that the majority of military members support the repeal. Finally, don't you think "militant" is a bit of an exaggeration to describe this "tiny fraction" of the population? This seems like a mainstream movement with widespread mainstream support within the American population.

Dec 13, 2010 7:03 PM

My words above are meant to prompt discussion, rather than to serve as my opinions.

Timmy

Dec 13, 2010 7:24 PM

Didn't republicans block the overturning already? As far as i know, the Senate couldn't acquire enough votes to overturn during the lame duck session, and the next senate will be even less likely to overturn DADT.

As opinions go, I prefer to take the stance of General Amos and General Casey. I am not necessarily opposed to repeal, although I think that now is not the right time. The repeal of DADT is more of a public show than a military necessity. The fact is that there are gays in the military right now, and many people know that they are gay. So why is it such an issue now? Because of this new generations social consciousness. The only difference the repeal would have is that people would now be allowed to "come out." But in the military, is that really important? Especially in a time of war, the focus should be on being the best warfighter you can be. Not whether your buddy next to you is a homosexual. I say wait until the war is over to hash this out. Right now it is just adding unneeded stress on our military command. And as to the DOD study, i believe that the majority of military members are ok with gays serving in the military, but not the repeal of DADT. The Marine Corps, as well as many older service members, lean towards keeping DADT in place.

Starlet

Dec 13, 2010 8:57 PM

I say that we keep it. Cohesion is the most important, not sexual preferences. Once the nation accepts it as a whole, then maybe it can be up for discussion again.. but not during a war time.

Brandon

May 16, 2011 5:36 AM

DADT was rightfully repealed for several reasons. The most important being that as the military being one of, if not the most, honored departments of our country, it should represent our values as a nation. Telling people to withhold who they are and pretend to be somebody else is not only destructive, it's un-American. To say that who you are is inferior to the majority, so pretend you aren't yourself so we won't fire you, is a terrible precedent to set within the military. Nobody should ever have to feel like that, and nobody should have to lie about who they are in order to serve their nation.

Although soldiers (as well as citizens) are concerned about unit cohesion or inter-military relations with those who are openly homosexual, here is my thought on that: if Soldier A can't handle who Soldier B is is enough that it affects their performance or if that causes them to hesitate to save Soldier B's life solely because Soldier B is gay, then Soldier A is the one with the problem. Soldier A is the one holding a prejudice against his fellow soldier for something Soldier B cannot change about himself/herself and did not choose to be that way.

This was a great first step in moving towards an accepting nation, I once again honor and respect the military even more for being role models in this area as they are in so many others.

Army Strong Stories

Soldier Blog Post