Latest News

Army Times: Army�s Treatment of Homosexuals an Attack on Values

Army’s treatment of homosexuals an attack on values

By 2nd Lt. Shawn Debarge Goodwin

The intent of this piece is not to take a side on the don’t ask, don’t tell policy. Both sides have submitted their arguments — from scripture to polls to opinions of former general officers.

I submit the seven Army values, the Soldier’s Creed and its warrior ethos, and the expectation that all soldiers adhere to a professional code of conduct.

Neither side seems to dwell much on Army ethics. Loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and personal courage — which of these does a homosexual soldier inherently fail to exhibit as a result of his or her sexuality?

The Army does not discourage open discrimination against homosexuals. The culture seems to encourage the denigration of homosexuals. In the ranks, vulgar terms for homosexuals fit neatly in between “hoo-ah” and “roger” as choice words in everyday Army vernacular. Never mind that each individual has sworn to protect and defend the Constitution and, therefore, the people of the United States — all American citizens. Which of the Army values do soldiers fail to exhibit when they make disparaging comments against homosexuals, some of whom serve in the same uniform?

The rationale for the policy is that morale and unit cohesion are compromised by the presence of known homosexuals within the ranks. I agree. I agree that when any soldier uses hatred to disparage a group of citizens, especially other soldiers, morale and unit cohesion suffer.

Discrimination undermines efforts to build mission-capable teams, period. The target of discrimination is effectively isolated, his or her ability to contribute to the team sacrificed.

In Army culture, masculinity trumps maturity at a time when many of America’s sons and daughters are in harm’s way. Any behavior deemed to reek of femininity is subject to ridicule, especially as it relates to combat. These attitudes are indicative of the thinking that women are inadequate in the profession of arms. Discrimination of one kind allows soldiers to rationalize discrimination of another. If only soldiers, male and female, homosexual or heterosexual, were judged by how each one is able to contribute to the fight.

This piece is not an attack on “don’t ask, don’t tell.” It is understood that the policy is the result of legislation, and we are subject to it. Rather, this is an examination of ourselves, and whether we are truly living the Army values in word and deed, void of hypocrisy.

The integrity of our Army values remains compromised so long as we tolerate open discrimination against homosexuals. Our failure to choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong suggests the Army values are talking points we hope soldiers achieve with time rather than the foundation of character taught in those initial formative months of training.

Let’s right this wrong.

———

The writer graduated from the U.S. Military Academy in 2008. He has deployed to Iraq as a Sapper platoon leader and is now with 571st Sapper Company, 14th Engineer Battalion, 555th Engineer Brigade, Fort Lewis, Wash.

http://www.armytimes.com/community/opinion/army_editorial_attack_111609/

Click here to read the original article.