Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabby
DADT is good policy because it retains a requirement of discretion of behavior and maintains (even if it's only a perception) a right to privacy.
That right to privacy is shredded if straights are required to co-mingle, bunk, shower, etc, al with gays.
Example of a violation of a right to privacy is a straight having to shower with a known gay. Of COURSE gays would not have a problem with that, r u kidding?! I said it once and will say it again, the military will have to create barracks and showers for straight men, women and one for gays, but even THAT won't work, because if you offer gays their own barracks or showers it is disparity of treatment, because army regs don't allow guys to shack up with their girlfriends (or vica verca) in the barracks. Eliminating DADT will require the military to be even more politically correct than it was with the Ft Hood shooter. DADT is the best policy we could come up with given the nature of the military environment.
At least with the DADT policy gays can serve, albeit discretely.
|
Sabby,
I need to point out one thing. You, along with others, are lumping gay men and gay women into one group. Bad assumption. So your conclusion really should be: "the military will have to create barracks and showers for straight men, women and gay men and women". In other words not three seperate units but four.