Should Gays and Lesbians Be Drafted?

[guidod]

Yes or No, should gays and lesbians be drafted? With the Don't Ask Don't Tell Policy we have could you please explain your answer, thanks.

[DODI]

1. Equal is equal.

[ThomCat]

8. Only if DA/DT is repealed

and the military makes an effort to end discrimination and violence in the military. Until then equal is not equal.

[LostinVA]

13. Agreed n/t

[nickinSTL]

15. only if they are able to serve voluntarily as well

It's hypocritical in the extreme to tell gays that they are a threat to morale during peacetime, so they'll be kicked out if they want to serve, but to draft them during wartime - only to be dishonorably discharged when the fighting ends.

[William769]

24. How is this equal?

Can't wait to hear your answer.

[IndianaGreen]

41. Only if we are allowed to marry one another

Doesn't make sense to tell a gay or lesbian inductee that they cannot claim their gay companion as a dependent spouse.

[DURHAM D]

2. No - not until they have all normal rights i.e. marriage.

On the other hand - they should be able to serve if they desire.

Also, women should not be drafted until the ERA is passed because the possibility of women being drafted was how the rightwing alarmists defeated the amendment.

[Sapphocrat]

19. Spot on.

We shouldn't be forced to pay taxes until we're given our place at the table, either. Same thing.

[marmar]

3. The short answer is that there shouldn't be "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

But if the question is should gays and lesbians be drafted with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in place, I guess my answer would be no. Why should they be forced to serve in a military that doesn't want them otherwise? It's the high cost of bigotry.

[ThomCat]

12. Agreed. That would create a double standard.

We could be drafted into combat positions, but kicked out of more prestigious or competitive positions. That would create an underclass of GLBT soldiers.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

4. If there is a draft, then yes. DADT is a deadly & costly policy.

It needs to be repealed NOW.

[TechBear_Seattle]

5. False dilemma

NO ONE should be drafted. :hi:

If, however, we did have a draft, then yes, gay people and women should be equally available as draftees as straight men.

[Der Blaue Engel]

7. I don't get why people are answering yes

You can't draft people who aren't legally allowed to serve. This makes no sense.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

9. I answered yes because I believe that gay people should be allowed to serve. nt

[Der Blaue Engel]

17. But that wasn't the question

My brain is exploding. The question just doesn't make any sense. If the draft were all male, it would include gay men (because they're not yet wearing government-mandated pink triangles). If the draft included women, it would include lesbians for the same reason. (It would then be up to them whether to tell or not.)

Here's something that just occurred to me about this absurd rule: are bisexuals allowed to serve? How about transgendered people? Many of them are straight. And what about the intersexed?

What a stupid policy.

:banghead:

[Dulcinea]

73. Agreed.

We already have gays in the military, don't we, albeit closeted ones?

And yes, I agree, no one should have to be closeted to serve their country.

[Der Blaue Engel]

6. Why would the military draft someone it won't allow to serve?

Gays and lesbians can't be drafted. It's against military policy. This seems like a no-brainer to me.

[TechBear_Seattle]

18. Because if gay people were not exempt from a draft, they would have to serve

Assuming that there was a draft, should gay be allowed (required) to serve or should homosexuality continue to be the automatic exemption that it was in the past? That seems to have been the OP's question, and that is how I answered.

[Behind the Aegis]

10. No.

The don't want us in times of peace, why should we serve in times of conflict? The bigger point is that once the conflict was over, would they (the gays and lesbians) then get dishonorably discharged, as in the past? Until we are treated as equals, I really fail to see how they can expect us to serve in a group that, under normal circumstances, wouldn't have us!

[Behind the Aegis]

11. self-delete

Double post...damn twitchy fingers!

[DinahMoeHum]

14. Used to be, feigning homosexuality was a time-honored way

to beat the draft.

:evilfrown:

[DURHAM D]

32. Prior to 1973 very few men would openly admit to being homosexual.

It was better to take a chance on dying in Vietnam than to admit to being gay.

Perhaps you just meant to be humorous but was not sure.

[LiberalVoice]

16. Why should someone be forced to fight for a country that doesnt represent them? nt

[queenbdem87]

20. Only when we are treated as FULL citizens of this country should we have to fight for it!

[LeftCoast]

21. Do you mean eligible for a hypothetical draft, or drafted *now*?

:shrug:

[guidod]

31. Hypothetical draft.

[Arkansas Granny]

22. Not until they are able to openly enjoy all rights accorded to all

other Americans.

[William769]

23. FUCK NO!

If we can't serve in peace time they can't have us during war time!

[ThomCat]

29. Best short answer yet.

:applause:

But you know it rarely works that way. If we have a war-time draft a whole lot of people will get sucked in no matter how loudly they proclaim their gayness.

During WWII a lot of people were forced to serve, and the army didn't kick them out during the war. They simply took note of who they were so that those were the careers that could be ended first immediately after the war.

[bowens43]

25. Of course not. No one should be drafted. The draft is slavery.

[guidod]

33. I agree with you 100%....

[USA_1]

49. Agree

[KennedyGuy]

26. Voted No..

No one should be drafted..but Gays and Lesbians should be allowed to serve..or should be allowed to serve un-harrassed, since they already serve.

[sarge43]

27. No.

As long as DA/DT is in place, they'd be subject to harassment and discharge. What the service needs is an UCMJ Article against sexual predation.

[cboy4]

28. This poll makes no sense. Are people voting no because they don't

want gays in the military, or because they are opposed to the draft for EVERYONE, including gays?

We're not just voting on a hypothetical, we've voting on a double hypothetical.

:shrug:

[terrya]

30. No...not until "Don't Ask Don't Tell" is repealed.

If we are "unsuitable" to serve openly in the armed forces...if "unit cohesion" will suffer if we are open and honest about ourselves...then please help understand how that suddenly is "inoperative" when we're drafted.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

34. only if we can say we are gay/lesbian and also get married

equal is after all equal

[Fovea]

35. Not don't ask-don't tell

but 'don't care.'

[LWolf]

36. No. NOBODY should be drafted. n/t

[sampsonblk]

37. Yep, draft and honorable discharge

Fine to draft, but not to keep for obvious reasons.

If a gay person shows up, declares himself and then is discharged, I respect that 100%.

[guidod]

38. Please help me on this,

what would those obvious reasons be? :wow:

[sampsonblk]

45. Obvious reasons

Current policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. If a gay person willing offers that he is gay on the way in, to keep him in uniform is to effectively end the policy - which is working.

[guidod]

46. How is the current DADT policy working?

[sampsonblk]

51. Simple

Because Don Rumsfeld hasn't been lurking under anyone's sheets for the past 6 years. Get rid of DA/DT, and that's what you'll end up with.

Aside from that, NOT drafting gays is very unfair. So I still say draft, then honorable discharge as long as they show up, and as long as they willingly admit they are gay.

[guidod]

56. Not letting openly gay men and women

join the military is extremely unfair. Do you understand my question in the OP?

[sampsonblk]

69. I believe so

You asked if they should be drafted, even with the DA/DT policy in place. That was my impression.

My answer is yes. But they should not be allowed to serve or the policy will effectively be removed.

Draft, yes. Serve, no.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

39. I did 10 years in the Navy and I saw how gays were treated

If you were even suspected of "homo tendencies" your life was in danger, literally. From what I hear not much has changed since then.

[smtpgirl]

40. If gays aren't equal to everyone else,

then why should they be drafted?

Can't have it both ways.

[Telly Savalas]

42. No and neither should straight people.

[guidod]

43. It looks like the people that voted yes

are to coward to stick around and give their reasons why.

[Cameron27]

44. I noticed that too.

I can't understand why anyone would vote yes unless they've misunderstood the question....or worse.

[lumberjack_jeff]

47. No. God. Damn. Draft

Not straights
Not gays
Not men
Not women
Not minorities
Not whites
Not poor
Not rich

[guidod]

48. I agree......

...this is a hypohetical question. If they did happen to re-insate the draft should gays and lesbians be drafted along with everyone else?

[lumberjack_jeff]

50. The OP question was not hypothetical.

Do I prefer enslavement of everyone or just a select few? I honestly don't know how to answer except to say "no".

[Kelly Rupert]

53. No, this is about as hypothetical as a question gets,

since there is no draft, and nobody in power is debating the merits of drafting homosexuals.

[lumberjack_jeff]

55. "Should gays and lesbians be drafted?". New definition of "hypothetical" I guess.

[Kelly Rupert]

59. Not sure what definition of "hypothetical" you're using.

But this fits any standard definition to a T.

We have the purely conjectural situation we are assuming to be true, being the implied state "there is a draft." We have a question asked that draws upon information taking place only in the hypothetical world in which the United States is conscripting people. That's a hypothetical question. This is practically a dictionary example of a hypothetical question.

How do you get more hypothetical than "if there were a draft, should gays and lesbians be included?"

[lumberjack_jeff]

63. Looking again... nope, still no "IF". You might want to look again too.

I don't read what other people mean. I read what they say. To do otherwise is presumptuous.

[Kelly Rupert]

65. Now you're just being ridiculous.

There is no draft at the moment. Therefore any discussion of the nature of the draft is hypothetical. Surely you do not believe that the OP was suggesting that we draft homosexuals without there being a draft--that would be nonsense. In order to draft people, drafting must occur. The "if" is not an optional assumption I presume to make, it is an unavoidable entailment of the initial proposition.

Let me try again: There is not a draft. We are talking about the conditions of a draft. If you are asking about the conditions of something all parties agree is possible but not real, then that is a hypothetical question.

And "I don't read what other people mean" is nonsense. Unless you read only the orthography in front of you, taking no information from the text but a string of alphanumeric characters, you are inferring information, though you have very good reason to do so--after all, you must presume that the characters in front of you are in English and correspond to English words. You must also presume that the person you are speaking to is using the same syntactical and morphological rules you are using. You must also presume that the person with whom you are speaking has similar semantic meanings for each word that they type. Finally, you must assume that the two of you are providing each other with germane, complete, correct information, to the extent that is practical in conversation. Conversation is full of assumptions that must necessarily be made, or else we would never be able to say a word to each other. And assuming that when the OP asked if homosexuals should be drafted that he was implying that there would be a draft is not exactly a leap of faith.

[guidod]

57. The question in the OP has

to be a hypothetical, there is no draft.

[Kelly Rupert]

52. Are we assuming that straights are drafted too?

If so, yeah. Straight, gay, men, women. I'm in favor of full equality in all regards. But this question is just too vague.

Are we talking about there being a draft?
Are we saying that gays will be drafted despite being openly gay?
Can gays enlist?
Is DA/DT still policy?
Are we assuming that gays have all rights?

[guidod]

58. No, we're only going to have a draft for gays.

What do you think? :banghead:

[Kelly Rupert]

60. There were more questions than that.

[guidod]

61. It doesn't mention

my next door neighbor either.

[Infinite Hope]

54. When they have equal rights...

Remember those who fought in Vietnam demanded their rights (to vote) and by right they should have had that right *before* they were sent into a war they were not allowed to vote to prevent.

Before they're forced to go overseas, they should have full rights as a citizen, otherwise they should not be forced to fight as citizens.

[ComerPerro]

62. as a straight man, I say an emphatic HELL NO

they can't legally marry or even have their committed relationships recognized, they are denied the same basic human rights and legal protections automatically given to striaght Americans.

And most of all, they can't serve their country because apparently our military doesn't regard them as people.

So, if they are indeed expected to enter the draft, they should be the first to tell the US to fuck off. And they will be completely in the right to do so.

[guidod]

64. Nicely said.

[election_2004]

66. No...because it's wrong no matter who's being drafted

No one should be drafted. Ever. Under any circumstances. The world has simply changed too much since WWII.

But these gay witch hunts in the current military need to end!

[DocSavage]

67. Everyone is eligible

no college deferments, ONLY medical conditions now that are exclusive. There have always been gay members of the military. There are swingers in the military, people that like S&M. SO WHAT! you come to work, do your job, no one says anything. Flaunt what you do, you get in trouble. Simple as that. I was on AD when DA/DT took affect. It ended the which hunts that some commanders conducted. There were 2 gay women in the command I was in, widly known, one was the OIC. There were no problems. Even us neanderthal white christian males did not have an issue with it. Do your job, carry your weight, everyone was happy.

[jonnyblitz]

68. DADT did NOT end the witchhunts. what a CROCK of shit!

THe organization, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which deals with the affects of this bullshit law, has tons of reports pretty much proving that witch hunts have stayed the same or escalated at some points during the history of DADT.

http://www.sldn.org/templates/index.html

I am gay and was in the navy for 10 years and lived under DADT for 2 of those years and things DID NOT change for us!

[DocSavage]

72. So you joined

before DA/DT and therefore you lied at MEPS. You went into the military most likly knowing that being gay was not the best way to make friends on board ship. But you did it anyway. Lasted 10 years, 10 more and you would be getting a check like me the 1st of each month. If you can do it, other gay and lesbian people can.

Truth check, who were conducting the witch hunts, the a*(holes, thats who. The same ones that cause problems today in the workplace. I am going with the Libetarian viewpoint. What happens behind closed doors is none of my damn business.
I was the LPO of a clinic. If you made it to work on time, wore a good uniform, worked hard, happy days. That is all that I cared about.

And about the link. Lots of reports, how about data about how many G/L servicemenbers are not forced out?

[EdwardM]

70. No Draft Period.

[Atman]

71. It's a way to get ONLY republicans in the military!

Hey, suddenly this "no gays in the military" makes sense! Dems will have no problem saying they're gay. Hell, half of us already are anyway! But republicans, they can't even say the word "gay" without getting dry heaves. I'll make out with any guy in the room if it'd keep me from becoming cannon fodder for the Bush/Halliburton embassy project, but can you see the homophobes in the GOP doing that? They'd sooner kiss a yak!

.

[malachibk]

74. Only if we can marry & adopt in all 50 states

Until there's equality, gays and lesbians should not be forced to defend a country that considers them 2nd class citizens.
Not that we'll ever reinstate the draft.