The True Cost of DADT a/k/a the Cost Of Religious Based Discrimination

As our do nothing faux "fierce advocate" in the White House and the leadership of the Congressional Democrats apparently contemplate their navels rather that do anything substantive and meaningful in terms of repealing DADT - or enacting LGBT friendly legislation such as ENDA - the Palm Center has released an new report on the real cost of the failed DADT policy and the extent to which DADT IMPEDES military readiness. The report makes it clear that no one gains from DADT except the professional Christian set that uses DADT as one of its issues to dupe the ignorant and bigoted into handing over their hard earned money to the likes of Elaine Donnelly, James Dobson, Tony Perkins, et al, who are little more than opportunistic parasites (here in Virginia, the same holds true for Victoria Cobb and the leeches at The Family Foundation who use homophobia to line their own pockets). The full report can be found here. The following are some highlights from the report:
*
This report details a litany of costs incurred by the military, the troops—both gay and non-gay alike, and the nation as a result of DADT. Indeed research and experience now show that the policy is a costly failure that has had the opposite of its intended effect. DADT was supposed to preserve indispensable talent in the armed forces; protect privacy, morale, and unit cohesion; and let gays who did not voluntarily reveal their sexual orientation serve their country discreetly without undue hardship. It was, in short, supposed to make sexuality into a non-
issue in the U.S. military.
*
Yet the actual impact of the policy has been quite different. Far from protecting military readiness, the policy has harmed it, sacrificing badly needed personnel that is replaced with less qualified talent; undermining cohesion, integrity, and trust through forced dishonesty; hurting the morale of gay troops by limiting their access to support services; wasting hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars; invading the privacy of all service members—gay and non-gay alike—by casting a cloud of suspicion and uncertainty over the intimate lives of everyone in the armed forces; and damaging the military’s reputation which makes it harder to recruit the best and brightest America has to offer.
*
The overall results of DADT have been to:
*
1. Waste the talents of thousands of essential personnel with “critical skills” who were fired for their sexual orientation, including Arabic language specialists, medical professionals, combat aviators, counter-intelligence agents,
military police and more.
*
2. Strike at the heart of unit cohesion by breaking apart cohesive fighting teams, and undermining trust, integrity, and honesty among soldiers.
*
3. Hamper recruitment and retention by shrinking the pool of potential enlistees and discouraging many of America’s best and brightest young people from joining, or remaining in, the military.
*
4. Lower the quality of military personnel by discharging capable gay troops leaving slots to be filled through “moral waivers” that admit felons, substance abusers, and other high-risk recruits.
*
9. Increase reports of harassment that are more difficult to investigate and harder to prevent because of the policy’s strictures on gathering honest information and because of service members’ inability to safely report abuse.
*
10. Embarrass the military through consistently bad press reports on an institution increasingly seen as intolerant, widening the “civil-military gap” and further hampering recruitment efforts by alienating Americans who view the military as out of touch.
*
11. Cost the American taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars paid toward lost troop replacements, administrative enforcement, and defending the policy in court.
*
Rather than hiring or retaining competent gay troops, the military began to hire less competent recruits, including those who scored poorly on military aptitude test and enlistees who were granted “moral waivers”— invitations to enlist despite a prior record of criminal activity or substance abuse that would normally prohibit entry, including murder, kidnapping, and “making terrorist threats.” In 2005 the army increased by nearly 50 percent the number of new recruits it granted moral waivers. Between 2003 and 2006, 4,230 convicted felons, 43,977 individuals convicted of serious misdemeanors, including assault, and 58,561 illegal drug abusers were
allowed to enlist. According to GAO, soldiers who are granted moral waivers are more likely to be discharged for misconduct than those who are not.
*
The report in short is scathing. Especially since DADT in truth ONLY exists so that Christianist can feel morally superior about themselves and savor the punishment of those who do not live in accordance with Christianist religious beliefs. DADT's continued existence is an outrage and makes a farce of the alleged, but unrealized religious freedom promised by the U.S. Constitution.

No Gays, Please, We're Americans

No Gays, Please, We're Americans - That's the title of Aubrey Sarvis' latest post over at Huffingtion Post that looks at the ridiculous lengths and amounts of money expended by the U. S. military to achieve recruiting goals rather than open the ranks of the military to gays. The reality is that millions of dollars are being squandered and questionable enlistees accepted rather than - heavens, the vapors - recruit qualified openly gay men and women. Yes, I have talked about this very topic before, but Sarvis' column demonstrates the idiocy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell in even more startling terms. Of course, supporters of the ban on gays - think Elaine Donnelly, Tony Perkins, James Dobson, et al - disseminate bullshit propaganda like the poster above left. What's amazing is that the anti-gay Christianists in the military are even willing to grant foreigners (typically, not one of their favored groups) citizenship rather than allow gays to serve. Here are some highlights from the column:

*

[I]n the fiscal year that ended last October the Army exceeded by 517 its goal of 80,000 recruits. That's the good news. The bad news is that it failed yet again to meet its goal of 90 percent high school graduates. That's what waivers are for. You have a weight problem? No problem. The Army has been granting waivers for that -- and for serious felony convictions, for failure to meet physical and mental standards, for age (it's now 42 for new recruits) -- thousands of waivers every year -- as well as offering such enticements as whopping sign-up bonuses, as much as $40,000 for a few. Don't let me forget the free video games to simulate the "army experience."

*

Now they've come up with another idea. . . . recruit legal residents here on temporary visas with skills "vital to the national interest." . . . The bait that's being dangled is a fast track to full citizenship -- six months for some. There are certain requirements -- language skills (interestingly, Spanish is not one of them) or medical training, for example. Julia Preston writes in the Times: "Recruiters expect that the temporary immigrants will have more education, foreign language skills and professional expertise than many Americans who enlist, helping the military to fill shortages in medical care, language interpretation and field intelligence analysis.

*

Sadly I can't say that I'm incredulous but I can say that I marvel at the contortions our government goes through to avoid welcoming gays and lesbians openly into the armed services, whether they be skilled, highly skilled, or not skilled at all. Are we more dangerous than a Pashto-speaking kid who arrived a couple of years ago from Afghanistan?

*

It is interesting that the State Department doesn't care about sexual orientation. Even more interesting, the civilian side of the Defense Department doesn't care. Private contractors don't care. In fact, they all want them and in many cases are aggressively recruiting the talented men and women who got the axe because of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and made the military weaker as a result. . . . Of course they are going back for two or three times what they were paid when in uniform.

*

It is time for Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mike Mullen to draw the final curtain on this theater of the absurd and go up to the Hill and tell Congress exactly what's what: that nobody cares about the sexual orientation of the soldier next to them in the line of fire.

First "Moral" Waivers, Now Obesity Waivers, But Still No Gays

The U.S. military continues to struggle to achieve recruiting goals and having already increased the use of moral waivers to allow convicted felons to join the military, now the standards are being relaxed to allow those who are over the weight/obesity standards to enlist. Of course, LGBT Americans are still off limits regardless of who law abiding and physically fit they are so that Christianists and nut cases like Elaine Donnelly can feel superior. The excuse for the newest round off waivers is that Americans are getting more over weight rather than admit that fewer good recruits want to enlist due to the Iraq War debacle. It's pretty pathetic actually. Yet we continue to hear that there will be no immediate action to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell by the Obama administration even though DADT daily forces out qualified service members. Here are highlights from the Christian Science Monitor:

*

The waistlines of America's youth are expanding, shrinking the pool of those eligible to join the US military. But an Army program is giving overweight enlistees a second chance – and helping the military with its own expansion. The recently-introduced waiver program allows enlistees who don't qualify for the military because of their weight a chance to shape up after joining. So far, the program has helped the Army make its recruiting goals in what remains a tight recruiting market.

*

"We support any service who comes up with a scientifically defensible way of expanding the market [of recruits]," says Curtis Gilroy, director of accessions policy for the Pentagon. Such waivers had been studied for years but the program wasn't implemented until fiscal 2007, when it admitted about 1,500 individuals through the program (just a small slice of about 80,000 recruits).

*

The Army has struggled the most with recruiting. Although it has met its active-duty goals in recent years, it has had to issue other waivers and let in more high school dropouts in order to do so. At the same time, the military is expanding through next year. The Marine Corps, which is not using the weight waiver, is growing to 202,000 and the Army will reach its "end-strength" goal of 547,000 this year. Many experts would like to see the military grow even larger to meet demands.