The Instigator
Deziky
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Quickpaw
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Should "Don't Ask Don't Tell" be Repealed?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/8/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,653 times Debate No: 13559
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

Deziky

Pro

Hello! I'm new to this website, so I thought starting a debate would be a fine way for me to integrate with everyone. I hope that both the challenger and I learn something new from this debate.

Don't Ask Don't Tell is, by all means, a discriminatory measure taken in 1993 by Bill Clinton to attempt to compromise with Congress about the issue of all citizens serving in the military. This policy quite obviously backfired on Clinton.

There is ample evidence stacked against proponents of DADT, as well as subjective cases of ethics and tolerance within the military community.
1) Within the same year of the passing of DADT, Dr. Gregory M. Herek, research psychologist, concluded that, "...The research data show that there is nothing about lesbians and gay men that makes them inherently unfit for military service, and there is nothing about heterosexuals that makes them inherently unable to work and live with gay people in close quarters."
2) Analysis from the American Psychological Association concludes that it is a completely capable task to integrate LGBT individuals into the military as evident from studies including comparative data of foreign militaries as well as fire fighters and police officers, LGBT individuals that served in the Armed Forces and mission effectiveness, and success in past integration of different races and genders.
3) A majority of Americans now support gays being allowed in the military, with 57% of Americans in favor of a poll taken in February 2010 by Quinnipiac University. The poll also concluded that 66% of Americans believe that the policy is discriminatory.
4) The policy is unnecessarily costly, with an estimated total cost of $363 million by a Blue Ribbon Commission in University of California. This cost accounts for separation travel, training officers, training enlistees, and recruiting costs.

The typical reasons given upon asking a supporter of DADT why they support the policy is that the "social structure" will change within the military and that some troops may be uncomfortable on the battlefield with a homosexual in their presence. However, the "social structure" argument is highly exaggerated to induce paranoia, and the argument is poor in comparison to previously stated results of studies done on police and firefighters (who have similar operational systems to the military, including showering), which proves that homosexuality is minimally, if at all invasive.
The "distraction of the troops" argument is proven false by a previously-mentioned study on LGBT Armed Forces members that openly served.
In the issue of gays serving in the military, the evidence stacked for the gays is ample, with evidence against the cause severely lacking.

Thank you for reading, and I hope I did a good job with my first argument. :)

Sources:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu...
http://www.apa.org...
http://www.quinnipiac.edu...
http://www.usatoday.com...
Quickpaw

Con

Well, my opponent has just given an argument contradictory to their stance on the Resolution. The Resolution is that "Don't Ask Don't Tell" should be repealed. As pro, the affirmative side you should argue that it indeed SHOULD be repealed. The problem is, you just gave a whole argument of why it shouldn't. So, that means that you gave a contradictory statement to the resolution while being affirmative.

So, thus I begin my argument.

I agree with everything you said.
Debate Round No. 1
Deziky

Pro

Deziky forfeited this round.
Quickpaw

Con

Quickpaw forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Deziky

Pro

Deziky forfeited this round.
Quickpaw

Con

Quickpaw forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Quickpaw 6 years ago
Quickpaw
Oops. I didn't read fully. Could you end the debate? I wish to no longer compete. The resolution confused me.
Posted by sydnerella 6 years ago
sydnerella
Thanks for clearing that up. :)
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
DADT was repealed briefly by a Court decision. The Government appealed the decision and got a stay, so DADT is in effect at least until the case is resolved or Congress overturns the law.

Separately, the military is doing a study on what effect ending DADT would have. The question is whether sexual advances by gays would so upset straight soldiers as to impair military effectiveness. It is society-dependent, so foreign studies do not really provide the data. None of the foreign studies where done for countries with strong social prejudices, like the Muslim world, because those armies don't have openly gay people.

There is a rumor that the US study is showing that contemporary soldiers are not much bothered. If so, the report slated or December will be followed by Congressional action that ends DADT in the US. For political reasons, the Obama Administration would rather have Congress end the policy then let the Court decision stand.
Posted by sydnerella 6 years ago
sydnerella
WAIT a minute... wasn't DADT just repealed?
Posted by sydnerella 6 years ago
sydnerella
Haha same here, but I am pro too. :)

Oh well, good luck!
Posted by lawyer1995 6 years ago
lawyer1995
Very good argument. I wanted to debate, but you took my view! haha, good luck!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
DezikyQuickpawTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: FAIL... if someone takes the wrong side in the first round when they admit to being new, give them a break.