Ethics and discrimination in the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy

ETHICS and MORALITY -- DON'T ASK DON'T TELL

Introduction to the Ethical Issues

Homosexuality is a controversial topic in contemporary American society, despite efforts to normalize it in terms of social and cultural diversity. To a great degree, attitudes in that regard have improved tremendously in the last few decades, but significant issues still persist. Two of the most high-profile issues in connection with homosexuality in contemporary American society are same-sex marriage and the enlistment of homosexuals in the American Armed Forces. The issue of military policy toward enlistment has been challenged recently, largely on the basis of equal protection grounds in connection with the unequal treatment of individuals based on ethically impermissible distinctions. In many respects, discrimination against homosexuals is no different from discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, or gender. In fact, those who advocate changing the current policy toward homosexuals in the military suggest that future generations will look back at the current debate about Don't Ask; Don't Tell precisely the same way contemporary Americans look back at the pre-Civil Rights era of race relations when overt discrimination against blacks was common and when interracial marriage was illegal in many states.

Evolution of Don't Ask; Don't Tell Policy and Ethical Problems in Implementation

Throughout the modern history of the American Armed Forces, homosexuality was a specific grounds for disqualification from military service. In fact, during the Vietnam era, claims of homosexuality were commonly used as attempts to evade the draft. That attitude persisted until the Clinton administration when President Bill Clinton announced and implemented a new policy called "Don't Ask; Don't Tell." On one hand, that approach represented a significant improvement, because, at least, it provided a means for homosexuals to serve in the military. On the other hand, it never resolved the fundamental issues of discrimination because it did not change the military rules that always prohibited homosexuals from military service; it merely prohibited military recruiters and personnel from inquiring into the sexual preference of recruits and enlisted personnel. Still, homosexuality remained impermissible and according to widely reported news features on the topic, thousands of military personnel in good standing are dismissed against their will every year because they are "outted" against their will by others.

Some of the most notorious cases in that regard in recent years include the dismissal of 2003 West Point graduate Dan Choi who served in Iraq and has degrees in both environmental engineering and Arabic, the latter being one of the most crucial areas of expertise in the era of radical Islamic terrorism. In another high-profile case, battle decorated U.S. Air Force fighter pilot Lt. Colonel Victor Fehrenbach was also discharged after being outted by a third party. Thousands of other equally well qualified and combat-decorated military personnel must hide a fundamental aspect of their personal makeup from their comrades, most of whom could not care less about the sexual orientation of their fellow enlisted personnel.

Policy Issues

The fundamental problem with the DADT policy is that it forces military personnel to lie despite the fact that the honor code of the very institution in which they serve includes honesty and promotes it as a core value. From an operational perspective, the current DADT policy is harmful to the mission of the U.S. Military in that it results in the mandatory discharge of qualified personnel, exactly in the manner of Daniel Choi and Victor Fehrenbach. Choi is an expert in one of the most important operational areas and Fehrenbach represents more than $1 million in training in addition to having been a decorated squadron leader of an F-15 squadron with almost 20 years in the honorable service of his nation. Ultimately, the only way to resolve the obvious ethical issues raised by the DADT policy is to repeal it so that the military institutions of the nation that represents equality of opportunity and justice does not violate those very principles.