1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Don't ask, don't tell"

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by WaylonJennings, Feb 2, 2010.

  1. Say what you will about this administration not getting enough accomplished, this is a landmark civil rights advancement, and just a step on the way to a much bigger fish, I believe.


    As I've discussed with a friend, Congressmen like McCain and Boehner are going to look very, very bad when historians examine this issue and sift through their statements.
  2. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Kudos to Obama for getting it done, if it happens. It's about time. But I think when you measure this against other civil rights advances it will be remembered as something relatively minor. Even Truman desegregating the army in the 40s (which had little or no impact on segregation societally) was a bigger deal, because the segregated armed forces were overt and something anyone with a set of eyes could see. "Don't ask, don't tell" has been a "bury your head in the sand" kind of policy, not one that makes the discrimination overt in a way that people can easily see -- because it doesn't really affect the way the armed forces look to even a casual observer.

    When we look back, if there are future things that give gays rights they haven't had or some pioneer gives us an iconic gay role model, such as a Federal marriage amendment giving gay couples rights equally to heterosexual couples, or something high profile, like a superstar athlete coming out of the closet, I think it will be a more major event. Ending "don't ask, don't tell" is a nice symbolic measure and a step in the right direction that can lead to bigger advances, but practically it doesn't affect that many people and I'm not sure it is going to open the floodgates for more rights for gays.

    All of that said, good for Obama for pushing it.
  3. Ragu, the thing is that there is no more "masculine" institution existing than the military. If the barriers fall down there, then it's tough to keep them up at all, anywhere. It's an enormous step. Symbolically, yes. But also as an indication that "social mores" and public opinion are moving this way, to, say, the nine justices of the Supreme Court, who are going to have less and less reasons to uphold state bans on gay marriage when the issue gets to them. There is no legitimate state interest being protected, and the fall of DADT is an enormous piece of evidence that this is the case.
  4. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    The funny thing is that when they finally get rid of Don't Ask Don't Tell they will find that it's no big deal at all and that all the fears and worries folks had over the years are stupid and unfounded.
  5. TrooperBari

    TrooperBari Active Member

    Shhhh ... you're gonna ruin the surprise!
  6. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Good for Obama. History will prove that this may be the single worst policy of the Bush Presidency.
  7. Ha, ha. I saw what you did there. ::)
  8. Crash

    Crash Active Member


    I agree with one of your original points:

    In 15-20 years, when I have kids in school, they're going to look back at all this gay-hating shit and think we were so stupid for wasting so much time on it. It might not directly parallel to the Civil Rights Movement, but it's going to be looked upon that way. A generation of two from now, they'll look back and wonder what the big deal is. And the people who stood up for the status quo will regret it. At least I hope they will.

    We've expended far more energy on DADT, gay marriage and the inclusion of homosexuals in hate crimes legislation than we should have had to.
  9. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    I agree with most of what you have here, but I would like to point out that serving in the military is not a "right" in any way, shape or form.

    That being said, I have problem with gays serving in the military. I think they should be allowed. But it isn't a right.
  10. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    It's semantics. It's an opportunity that they are being denied. Just like being denied the chance to buy a house, rent an apartment, get a specific job, etc.
  11. It may not be a "right," but eventually it'll be considered against the constitution to discriminate specifically on that basis, like marriage.
  12. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    I see Obama has now taken a page from Clinton's failed playbook -- delve into a fringe issue to appease a fringe group while the economy sucks, we're still in an idiotic war and we're still looking for jobs and stability in our markets and in our health care system.....

    Of course, as Clinton found out, most voters don't take to kindly to this kind of idiocy in a first term when the economic world around us is falling down and that led to the rise of Newt and company.

    These kinds of fringe issues are the kinds of things a president should take on late in his second term when he has helped put an end to the problems he was sent to Washington to fix.......
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page