 |
||
 |
|
|
|
BARA Community Opinion GLBT Issues Page Note from the webmaster: A recent New Yorker op/ed (12-18-06, http://www.newyorker.com) written by Henderik Hertzberg, points out that after 5 years of Bush's war on terrorism there are only 6 fluent Arabic speakers attached to the American military in Bagdad. Fifty-five fluent speakers have been cashiered OUT of the military because they're gay. Zogby Poll: "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Not Working Survey Indicates Shift in Military Attitudes December 20, 2006 Nearly one in four U.S. troops (23%) say they know for sure that someone in their unit is gay or lesbian, and of those 59% said they learned about the person's sexual orientation directly from the individual, a Zogby International poll of troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan shows. More than half (55%) of the troops who know a gay peer said the presence of gays or lesbians in their unit is well known by others. According to the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, service members are not allowed to say that they are gay. These findings come amidst significant changes in the military and political landscape. This week, Robert M. Gates took over as the U.S. Secretary of Defense, and next month, Democrats will take control of the Congress. Some observers expect the new climate to prompt intense examination of all aspects of military policy including potential reinstitution of the draft, which is advocated by some in the new majority's leadership. According Congressman Marty Meehan (D-MA), "These new data prove that thousands of gay and lesbian service members are already deployed overseas and are integrated, important members of their units. It is long past time to strike down 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and create a new policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve openly." The Zogby Interactive poll of 545 troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan was designed in conjunction with the Michael D. Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and conducted by Zogby Oct. 24-26, 2006. It carries a margin of error of +/- 4.3 percentage points. Of those in combat units, 21% said they know for certain that someone in their unit is gay or lesbian, slightly less than for those in combat support units (25%) and combat service support units (22%). One in five troops (20%) in other units said they know for certain someone is gay or lesbian in their unit. Overall, nearly half (45%) say there are people in their unit they suspect are gay or lesbian, but they don't know for sure. Slightly more than half (52%) say they have received training on the prevention of anti-gay harassment in the past three years. But 40% say they have not received this type of training, which is mandated by Defense Department policy. The data also indicate that military attitudes about homosexuality have shifted. In the early 1990's, many senior officers argued that U.S. troops could not form bonds of trust with gays and lesbians, according to Dr. Aaron Belkin, Director of the Palm Center, who has written widely on the subject. According to the new Zogby data, however, nearly three in four troops (73%) say they are personally comfortable in the presence of gays and lesbians. Of the 20% who said they are uncomfortable around gays and lesbians, only 5% are "very" uncomfortable, while 15% are "somewhat" uncomfortable. Just two percent of troops said knowing that gays are not allowed to serve openly was an important reason in their decision to join the military. Some troops believe the integration of openly gay and lesbian service members in the military could undermine cohesion, but those who know at least one gay peer are less likely to believe it would negatively impact morale. Of those who know a gay or lesbian peer, 27% said it has a negative impact on the morale of their unit. By contrast, among those who do not know of a gay or lesbian person in their unit, or are unsure of their presence, 58% said it would have a negative impact on their unit. Prominent supporters of "don't ask, don't tell" have expressed concerns about privacy in the shower, Dr. Belkin said, but nearly three out of four troops said in the Zogby poll that they usually or almost always take showers privately – only 8% say they usually or almost always take showers in group stalls. For a detailed methodological statement, please visit: http://www.zogby.com/methodology/readmeth.dbm?ID=1158 For the complete Zogby report on the survey, please visit: http://www.zogby.com/CSSMM_Report-Final.pdf Please click the link below to view the full news release: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1222 Return to the BARA Opinion Page Cost of the War In Iraq While not strictly a GLBT issue, this item should be of interest to our visitors, who will end up paying the bill at some point.
On Legislating Morality Submitted 11 November, 2004 So now the hot topic in the editorial columns is how the press was blindsided by the strong tide of voters who chose Bush because of "Moral Values". A wave of dedicated born-again Christians and other fundamentalists was a significant part of Bush's win. The political analysts never saw it coming. Where did these people come from and why are they so dedicated? When questioned about just what they mean by "Moral Values" we learn they mean "the teachings of the Bible", especially the condemnation of homosexuality. They've always been here. They just don't make the headlines. They're not the intellectuals who write the esoteric editorials. They're not the authors and creators of political rationales. They're just the down-home folks who go to church and listen to their preacher tell them, over and over again, that homosexuality is a sin and the Bible is ag'in‚ it. Of course, amid the thumpings of quotes from Leviticus, the admonitions against eating shellfish and pork and the prohibitions against mixing threads of different materials in our clothing and all the other odd kosher laws of the Old Testament are conveniently ignored. Only the more colorful damning of homosexuals is carried forward as a sure way to please God. And in the New Testament, Paul and others followed the old ways and condemned homosexuals even while Jesus was praising the Centurion who had faith that Jesus could cure his homosexual lover. Somehow Jesus never saw it important to say anything at all against homosexuals. Now, after generations of Bible teachings by fundamentalists we have a cadre of queer-haters who, after finally learning the true nature of the dreaded gay agenda (They want to get married), are bound and determined to write discrimination into our Constitution by banning same-sex marriage - a clear case of legislation aimed to deny equality for a specific group of citizens. After several decades of two-steps-forward, one-step-back interpretations by our courts in favor of equal status for gays, just when true equality was in sight and marriage might be legalized, the pendulum seems to have swung the other way and it appears all that may be changed. But is there a pendulum in the hearts of the people? Yes, there is a swing in the rulings of courts and the laws passed by legislatures. The political makeup of these bodies does change with time and they change from liberal to conservative and back again. But what of the people? Do they swing back and forth in some long-term rhythm? No. At least not in an individual's lifetime. The little old lady who went to Bible School when she was 5 is the same person who goes to church every Sunday and listens to her preacher exhort his flock to follow the "teachings of the Bible" and reject equality for homosexuals, the inferior people of God's realm. Her mind hasn't changed in all these years. Her Bible tells her so. You can write laws prohibiting discrimination and you can interpret existing writings to favor equality but you can't legislate "morality." You can't change the hearts and minds of the people with legislation. Real change must come from within. I remember when I was a young man and GIs, returning from the Korean War, were thinking over their first exposures to blacks after Truman integrated the armed forces. One of my roommates told me that he was surprised to find out that, one-on-one, the blacks weren't so bad. Individually, each one he met turned out to be an OK sort of guy. It was just that, put them together with their own kind and you had a different sort of situation... On one hand he learned that the old phobias were false, that the color of a man's skin did not automatically make him good or bad, that he was just like you and me inside but on the other hand he was falling back on the old stereotypes in viewing group behavior and associating that with the reasons for discrimination. And hatred. You can go back a little further in time to the Nazi era in Germany and listen to people say that Jews weren't really so bad - why, they even did business with Jews and had Jews for friends -- but get them together in a restaurant or a park and they took over and had odd habits that were repulsive to good Germans. It's easy to hate a group -- a body without a face. But when you are up-close and personal, one-on-one with a real person, you can't rely on stereotypes and clichés - you have to look him in the eye and deal with him as a person. That's when thoughtless prejudice melts away and real equality begins. So where does this leave us? If we want to establish an equitable society and a loving camaraderie in our country, in our world, we have to get at the basic source of the problem. We have to deal with personal relationships instead of mob reactions. We have to apply the Golden Rule. Good luck. Jim Pursell Return to the BARA Opinion Page
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
