Has the time come to revise the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy?

Professor Notes: Escellent essay that brings in relevant outside material and is fairly and completely argued. Good job!

Btw, here is the article I'm referencing:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/08/04/080804fa_fact_mcgrath

The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy of the U.S. military has been a controversial issue since its inception and implementation into law under former President Bill Clinton in 1993. The policy, which was intended to place guidelines and principles for dealing with homosexuality and more specifically, homosexual service members, has been less than favorable, among GLBT activists and military personnel alike. However, the reasons behind the DADT legislation have little to do with individual ability and merit, and are designed more as a safeguard for morale and “unit cohesion.” In my opinion, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is outdated and rooted in homophobia, and it is an unnecessary qualification for individuals wishing to join the United States military
The longstanding controversy regarding homosexuality in the military was well illustrated in our reading “A Soldier’s Legacy.” Major Alan Rogers, who was killed in Iraq in January by an IED, has posthumously become a symbol of the GLBT struggle for rights within the military. Despite Major Rogers’ exemplary service record with the Army, his sexuality became the main subject of interest after his death. With conflicting accounts of how Rogers would like to have been remembered and his multi-faceted life keeping many of his “closest” friends separate from each other, I can understand how the larger narrative could become clouded and lost in the tumult. However, I believe that the most socially relevant aspect of Rogers’ life was the fact that he showed through his twenty years of service that homosexuality is not a determining factor in individual ability. Sexuality does not define success, not even in the Armed Forces. However, success and even admission into the services can be bureaucratically prevented by open declaration of homosexuality.
The “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was the result of a compromise between Clinton (who vowed to end the ban) and the “four-star community,” who was a source of opposition and pressure against ending the ban on gays in the military. It seems to me that the DADT policy is still in place as a consequence of high-ranking homophobia and traditionalist practices within the U.S. Armed Forces. This was evident in the Wikipedia edit-war that ensued following Major Rogers’ death. Enlistees such as Rogers, who was raised for much of his life in a town of less than 500, may often view the military as an opportunity for a better life; however, for gay soldiers like Rogers, this opportunity comes with an additional sacrifice to personal life. As McGrath states in his article, “Of course, being a proud gay officer is tantamount, under the current military policy, to being a retired gay officer with no pension.”
While Rogers compliance with the DADT policy may be seen as evidence of its success, it must be noted that Rogers was an intensely private soldier (“Rogers rarely talked about himself”) and that his ability to thrive in the military despite the institutionalized barriers against him was more of an individual quality than a triumph of the DADT legislation. Indeed, it seems that Rogers’ was personally opposed to the policy, but kept his opinions to himself, especially in military settings. Friend Marty McNeil said “Alan really cared deeply about what people felt about him--people’s respect for him. He went to a lot of effort to maintain that respect.”
I find it difficult to fully understand the arguments against allowing gays to serve openly in the military. It seems that most claim it would produce a negative effect on troop morale. However, the statistics that I’ve seen provide evidence to the contrary. McGrath cites the Washington Post in saying that “seventy-five per cent of Americans now favor repealing ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell,’” and half of all polled veterans agreed. In fact, McGrath also quotes a Zogby poll saying that “among those who felt certain that they had served alongside a gay colleague, about two-thirds did not think troop morale had been affected.” Even high-ranking military personnel have spoken against the policy, especially for turning away otherwise qualified applicants from today’s short-handed military. Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili wrote in an opinion-editorial in a January 2007 New York Times saying “I now believe that if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces. Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job.”
The policy of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” is obsolete, unnecessary and a hindrance to much needed recruitment for the military. Arguments in favor of the guidelines are sparse and difficult to find, but mostly seem to come from those who have some type of preexisting involvement with the military, although this is not always the case. The time has definitely come to revise the existing policy, if not remove it entirely.

Shalikashvili, John M. “Second Thoughts on Gays in the Military.” New York Times. Jan. 2,
2007.