The Instigator
libertarian
Pro (for)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
soundman
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

The United States federal government should reverse the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.

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: 7/12/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,117 times Debate No: 4665
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (11)

 

libertarian

Pro

The Don't Ask, Don't Tell Act is economically and morally repugnant.

- We spend much of the taxpayer's dollars to train good soldiers and then these expensive soldiers are suddenly discharged for a discrminatory reason as sexual orientation.

- Hundreds of soldiers have been discharged even though we need these soldiers desperately.

- Arabic linguists are in high demand and low supply in the military, but these people are being let go of the military for the purpose of sexual orientation.

- Many nations allow homosexuals to express their sexual orientattion in the military and do a great job fighting.

- Most soldiers and Americans have expressed that they are comfortable with the military including homosexuals.

- Discrimination is wrong and should never be a policy of the United States of America as the Fourteenth Amendment states. "No state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
soundman

Con

I would be very interested to know where you get the stats that soldiers are discharged from the military due to their sexual orientation. That is, by definition, what "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" does, it protects gays and lesbians serving in our armed forces.

-Repealing that law would not solve anything, in fact, if anything, it poses the risk of opening up gays and lesbians to ridicule within ranks, not from superiors, but from fellow privates, sergeants, and the like.

-Other nations doing something should never be our sole reason for doing something. This is just common sense. Following other nations around will do nothing but cause what happens to one nation to happen to all nations, and then there is no one left to rescue anybody.

-Again, I would like to know where you get your stats on soldiers and citizens approval of open homosexuality in the military, and about the Arab linguists. Am I to believe, then, that the majority of Arab-American linguists and translators are, in fact, homosexual? Surely we do not want to create another stereotype for people to throw at our Middle Eastern brothers.

-As for your last point, which I addressed above, this law actually reduces the possibility of discrimination. You cannot force people to accept something. You can help them to get to know the person first, instead of immediately labeling them as "gay".
Debate Round No. 1
libertarian

Pro

Things To Remember_____________________________________________________________
(1) "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a discriminatory policy that treats gays differently for being gay. This is unconstitutional. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution states, "no state shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

(2) This plan is very costly and has taken over half a billion dollars since the beginning of this dscriminatory plan.

(3) We have very few Arabic linguists and they are in very high demand. Many Arabic linguists have been discharged for being gay.

(4) It is estimated that 65,000 soldiers are gay. We cannot afford to loose all these soldiers. 65,000 soldiers are at risk of being fired from the military for a silly reason that is driven by discrimination.

Rebuttals______________________________________________________________________

Opponent>>> " I would be very interested to know where you get the stats that soldiers are discharged from the military due to their sexual orientation. That is, by definition, what "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" does, it protects gays and lesbians serving in our armed forces."

- Soldiers are often discharged from the military because of their sexual orientation. The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law allows gays to join the military, but it says that if their sexual orientation is expressed, then they will be discharged.
*** http://www.nytimes.com...
*** http://en.wikipedia.org...'t_ask,_don't_tell#Criticism_from_
military_personnel

Opponent>>> "Repealing that law would not solve anything, in fact, if anything, it poses the risk of opening up gays and lesbians to ridicule within ranks, not from superiors, but from fellow privates, sergeants, and the like."

(1) The UK, Canada, Israel and over 40 nations that fight alongside us in Iraq are currently allowing gays to express their sexual orientation in the military. These plans work very well for their country.
*** http://www.cbc.ca...
*** http://query.nytimes.com...

(2) Many gays are already expressing their sexual orientation in the millitary because their fellow soldiers are accepting and they are only at risk of being discharged but not of extreme ridicule.

(3) The government should not protect gays from expressing their sexual orientation to protect them from extreme ridicule. Gays will decide whether to "come out" with their sexual orientation or not. The government should not decide when a gay person is ready to come out.

(4) A gay person "coming out" with their sexual orientation is necessary for their mental health and self esteem. To forbid someone from expressing their sexual orientation is immoral and unhealthy for the individual according to the American Psychological Association and most psychologists.
*** http://www.apa.org...

Opponent>>> "Other nations doing something should never be our sole reason for doing something. This is just common sense. Following other nations around will do nothing but cause what happens to one nation to happen to all nations, and then there is no one left to rescue anybody."

(1) "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a follish policy. It takes on average $40 million a year. That's on average $565 million in all since the beginning of the policy.

(2) It is a discriminatory policy, which is unconstitutional. The Constitution has the sediment that "All men are created equal." It also clearly says in the 14th Amendment, "no state shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Opponent>>> "Again, I would like to know where you get your stats on soldiers and citizens approval of open homosexuality in the military, and about the Arab linguists. Am I to believe, then, that the majority of Arab-American linguists and translators are, in fact, homosexual? Surely we do not want to create another stereotype for people to throw at our Middle Eastern brothers."

(1) Citizens approve of allowing gays in the military.
*** http://people-press.org...
*** http://en.wikipedia.org...'t_ask,_don't_tell#cite_note-5

(2) The majority of Arabic linguists are not gay, but a significant portion are. Arabic linguists are in high demand. But even one Arabic linguist discharged for being gay is too many. And many are being discharged.
*** http://www.diversityinc.com...
*** http://www.equalitygiving.org...

Opponent>>> "As for your last point, which I addressed above, this law actually reduces the possibility of discrimination. You cannot force people to accept something. You can help them to get to know the person first, instead of immediately labeling them as "gay."

(1) The government has no right to tell a person when they can come out to their coworkers. If an indivudal wishes to face critism so they can be honest with others and themselves, they should be allowed to and the government should not step in the way.

(2) A gay person "coming out" with their sexual orientation is necessary for their mental health and self esteem. To forbid someone from expressing their sexual orientation is immoral and unhealthy for the individual according to the American Psychological Association and most psychologists.
*** http://www.apa.org...

Please vote for PRO for fiscal responsibility, national security, equality, and constitutionality.
soundman

Con

I suppose the heart of this argument is one's view on the matter of homosexuality. I know of many military leaders and soldiers who are oppposed to GLBT's serving in the military. Living with an openly gay member of the same sex is very awkward and distracting in barracks situations. While I believe that it is not a good idea to repeal the law, and while there are as many military leaders for the law as there are against it, I agree that discrimination cannot be condoned under our constitution. It has to be upheld. I propose that either I will withdraw my contention against said topic, or we redirect the discussion in the remaining rounds to address the heart issue of homosexuality.
Debate Round No. 2
libertarian

Pro

I don't want to debate you on general homosexuality, because we are so far in the debate and because that is a debate based solely on feelings that I cannot win. I accept your concession. I really appreciate your open-mindedness. It is rare.
soundman

Con

soundman forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Killer542 9 years ago
Killer542
libertarian, for someone who is so quick to condemn so called "dumb, prejudice, conservatives" you are probably the most biased, stupid, liberal jacka**(by that I mean the real meaning, therefore not a curse) on this sight! Every debate you participate in, you are on the liberal side.

P.S. you forgot a comma
Posted by Xera 9 years ago
Xera
I think mmaderom, that this is a poor reason to prevent someone from entering the military. I do believe it is excellent justification for the removal of communal showers though.

I'm voting pro because Con Conceded and Pro had convincing evidence.
Posted by libertarian 9 years ago
libertarian
How does he have 3 votes after he forfeited the debate in Round 2 verbally and forfeited Round 3? God! I hate dumb, prejudice conservatives. And I hate this site's judging system.
Posted by brian_eggleston 9 years ago
brian_eggleston
The armed forces should not be subject to the same anti-discrimination laws that apply to civilian life. The next thing we shall hear is that tanks, fighter planes and submarines must have wheelchair access.

Nevertheless, I voted Pro in this debate because I considered he made a better argument.
Posted by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
Don't ask, Don't tell was a STUPID policy to begin with. It was nothing more than an appeasement to the gay community. Considering the close quarters our military men and women have to live in, showering with other soldiers, etc. banning homosexuals from the military is absolutely fair and not discriminatory at all. Hear me out.

Would you allow male and female soldiers to shower together? Of course not. Why? How is this any different from the straight soldiers not liking showering with Gay soldiers? If you openly allow homosexuals don't you ALSO have to mandate co-ed showers? When you know another soldier does or might covet you sexually, why on earth would you want to shower with them? It's uncomfortable, at best. Potentially violent, at worst. Men are macho as a rule, men who have been in the military have been trained to be even MORE macho. And openly gay man, whether it's stereotypical or not, doesn't fit that lifestyle.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by NukeTheJuice 8 years ago
NukeTheJuice
libertariansoundmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Killer542 9 years ago
Killer542
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by I_am_Einstein 9 years ago
I_am_Einstein
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Xera 9 years ago
Xera
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by libertarian 9 years ago
libertarian
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by brian_eggleston 9 years ago
brian_eggleston
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by surfride 9 years ago
surfride
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by oboeman 9 years ago
oboeman
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by bluebeans 9 years ago
bluebeans
libertariansoundmanTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03