Don't Ask Don't Tell: A Pragmatic View

There are many issue's in the contemporary political landscape that are riddled with complexities.

What's the best way to fix an economy that has crashed from the top down without ignoring the middle class? How can we make meaningful and much needed healthcare reform without sacrificing some of the benefits of privatization and without aggravating record high deficits? How can we best reform our educational system to better empower students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds to succeed?

These are tough questions. When you try to start thinking about some of these issues, you may find yourself in a mental dialogue that runs in circles and ends up at a dead end. That's not to say these questions don't have great solutions, it's just that the solutions to these questions aren't obvious.

But not all questions are like these questions. Some are quite simple.

Should openly gay citizens be permitted to serve in the military?

A New York Times editorial titled "Don’t Enforce ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" gives an emphatic yes and argues that repealing this legislation no difficult leap in logic on the sheer basis of observable evidence.

The article draws wisdom from the judicial opinion issued by Viginia Phillips, which provides a pragmatic case against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" by examining the effects this legislation has had on the armed forces. The author pleads to everyday Americans to take an objective view of the damage that this legislation has caused, citing that "13,000 men and women have been discharged in the 16 years since the law was enacted," many of which posess "critical skills" like "fluency in Arabic, medicine and counterterrorism." The fiscal cost of replacing these troops is also stated to be high. In addition, the article mentions that the judge's opinion found "no convincing evidence" that openly gay men and women have had a negative effect on unit cohesion.

In a time where America is juggling multiple wars, the practical reality of a troop shortage may be a more persuasive argument to the average American than the ideological civil rights arguments (although those are just as valid in my opinion). This legislation is very clearly weakening our nations defense by refusing to tap the valuable resource of gay citizens who are willing and able to serve.

The article's call for action is right in the title: "Don’t Enforce ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell." The article ends by suggesting that Judge Phillips should not wait for Congress to get its act together and "should issue a strong injunction to enforce her decision."

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that she will hear this message.