Don't Ask Don't Tell to soon be on the trash heap of history

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/07/21/military.dadt/

So in 60 days this abomination of evil and hatred will be GONE.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

An abomination?  Come on... Clinton went as far as he could with that.  There needed to be a stepping stool between where we were before DADT and now.  While looking at it now, DADT may seem bad, it was still necessary.

[dead0man]

I agree with Inks.  Good that it's gone, but it was a needed and necessary step.

[MaxQue]

An abomination?  Come on... Clinton went as far as he could with that.  There needed to be a stepping stool between where we were before DADT and now.  While looking at it now, DADT may seem bad, it was still necessary.

Most armies autorized gay people to serve in the 90's, without passing by DADT or things like that.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

An abomination?  Come on... Clinton went as far as he could with that.  There needed to be a stepping stool between where we were before DADT and now.  While looking at it now, DADT may seem bad, it was still necessary.

Most armies autorized gay people to serve in the 90's, without passing by DADT or things like that.

Look at the opposition to just DADT when it was passed.  You're honestly telling me you think legislation allowing homosexuals to be in the military would've passed at the time DADT was?

[Marokai Backbeat]

Political considerations hardly change the fact that it was a terrible policy and a goddamn shame that it was "necessary" to begin with.

[dead0man]

An abomination?  Come on... Clinton went as far as he could with that.  There needed to be a stepping stool between where we were before DADT and now.  While looking at it now, DADT may seem bad, it was still necessary.

Most armies autorized gay people to serve in the 90's, without passing by DADT or things like that.

Why is the US so conservative?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Political considerations hardly change the fact that it was a terrible policy and a goddamn shame that it was "necessary" to begin with.

But it wasn't a terrible policy, because it got us to where we are now.  In context, it was a good policy.  And the people who bash Clinton for passing it are just ridiculous.

[MaxQue]

An abomination?  Come on... Clinton went as far as he could with that.  There needed to be a stepping stool between where we were before DADT and now.  While looking at it now, DADT may seem bad, it was still necessary.

Most armies autorized gay people to serve in the 90's, without passing by DADT or things like that.

Look at the opposition to just DADT when it was passed.  You're honestly telling me you think legislation allowing homosexuals to be in the military would've passed at the time DADT was?

Well, I don't see why people had to pay because faith is taking an exaggerate place in the political debate. Religion and politics don't go together, it is an explosive mix.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Political considerations hardly change the fact that it was a terrible policy and a goddamn shame that it was "necessary" to begin with.

But it wasn't a terrible policy, because it got us to where we are now.  In context, it was a good policy.  And the people who bash Clinton for passing it are just ridiculous.

Oh please, in context it was still dumb. I'm not here bashing anyone for passing it, I'm just saying it was a silly half-assed measure that didn't really solve anything and in reality life for gay soldiers wasn't really that different before or after DADT. (The idea that people still weren't persecuted by the higher ups even under the "Don't Ask" portion of DADT is crazy-naive.)

If it helped old people get over their horrible fears of gay soldiers by passing some dumb semantic difference, then great. But we're talking about the 90s, here. Not 1965. People should've known better. I don't actually take political considerations into account when I'm forming my own personal opinions on things.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I stand by my statement that without DADT we wouldn't be where we are now.  You can criticize people all you want, but it did make things better for gay soldiers.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I stand by my statement that without DADT we wouldn't be where we are now.

That's impossible to determine either way, but it was clear by the very fact that we implemented DADT in the first place that attitudes about homosexuality were changing. DADT or no DADT, we would've gotten to this point sooner or later. Frankly, you could just as easily argue that because we had some silly moderate hero half-assed measure technically allowing gay individuals to serve that it took longer to fully integrate gays into the military than it would've if we were fighting against an out-and-out ban. But this is guesswork either way.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I criticize the fact that it was necessary to begin with, and I criticize the fact that it was a stupid policy due to the fact that it never really changed anything. It was a change in wording, basically. DADT didn't actually do much except essentially say "we won't try to persecute you for it and try to find out when we get suspicions that you're gay", except they still totally did.

[specific_name]

Pragmatically, it may have been a reasonable solution. But it's still a shame and I'm glad it's gone. It's true that 1990's America would not have accepted, with ease, openly gay people in the military. Though it's truly sad that people have fought and died to defend a country that wouldn't accept them for who they are.

[Gustaf]

I stand by my statement that without DADT we wouldn't be where we are now.

That's impossible to determine either way, but it was clear by the very fact that we implemented DADT in the first place that attitudes about homosexuality were changing. DADT or no DADT, we would've gotten to this point sooner or later. Frankly, you could just as easily argue that because we had some silly moderate hero half-assed measure technically allowing gay individuals to serve that it took longer to fully integrate gays into the military than it would've if we were fighting against an out-and-out ban. But this is guesswork either way.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I criticize the fact that it was necessary to begin with, and I criticize the fact that it was a stupid policy due to the fact that it never really changed anything. It was a change in wording, basically. DADT didn't actually do much except essentially say "we won't try to persecute you for it and try to find out when we get suspicions that you're gay", except they still totally did.

Are you saying that you prefer political posturing over actually improving things for people in the real world? Didn't you just make a big deal about how ideology shouldn't trump pragmatism and that only stupid crazy Republicans do that?

[Verily]

Political considerations hardly change the fact that it was a terrible policy and a goddamn shame that it was "necessary" to begin with.

But it wasn't a terrible policy, because it got us to where we are now.  In context, it was a good policy.  And the people who bash Clinton for passing it are just ridiculous.

No. If it hadn't been enacted, allowing gay people to openly serve would have happened sooner, maybe almost immediately (certainly before 2000). Calling it a "good policy", even in context, is incredibly absurd.

All it achieved was to remove/reduce the pressure for a needed reform that was even at the time supported by a majority of the population. It was the quintessential political cop-out.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

What Verily said.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

An abomination?  Come on... Clinton went as far as he could with that.  There needed to be a stepping stool between where we were before DADT and now.  While looking at it now, DADT may seem bad, it was still necessary.

Most armies autorized gay people to serve in the 90's, without passing by DADT or things like that.

By the 90's most European armies weren't expected to do macho things like fight anymore, so they didn't have to face the introspection that would be caused once homophobes realized queers can fight.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Like many things, DADT is back asswards today, but very proggressive back in the 90's.