Policy is the point of emphasis for this discussion, and if you are looking for a debate in regards to L.G.B.T rights, this is not the place for it as the goal is to delve into the meat of the matter regarding this policy which compares and contrasts transparency and confidentiality on a grand scale.
From what I am told, the quality of all human relationships is based on trust and this policy appears to undermine the integrity of relationships by virtue of it’s premise of keeping and asking to be kept in the dark.
Don’t ask, don’t tell
Don’t ask, don’t tell (DADT) is the common term for the policy restricting the United States military from efforts to discover or reveal closeted gay, lesbian, and bisexual servicemembers or applicants, while barring those who are openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual from military service. The restrictions are mandated by federal law Pub.L. 103-160 (10 U.S.C. Â§Â 654). Unless one of the exceptions from 10 U.S.C. Â§Â 654(b) applies, the policy prohibits anyone who “demonstrate(s) a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts” from serving in the armed forces of the United States, because “it would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.”
This is one of those occasions where I will get Socrates with the Pimpin and pose a two fold moral question which appears to be presenting itself to modern society as a whole.
Is it better to be loved or to be feared, and more importantly, is it better to be accepted or to be trusted?
With the widespread privacy debate regarding modern culture and its use of the Internet, we are seeing a growing number of cases involving suicide or other self destructive behaviors as a result of individuals living in fear of group rejection stemming from unpopular or socially unacceptable lifestyles and ideologies or just being less socially skilled, which interestingly enough usually seems to revolve around the old fashioned touchy subjects of human sexuality,Â sexual attractiveness, and approval.
Put in another context, it brings into question as to whether or not a
straight liar is more upright than a homosexual honest person?
If need be told, my personal stance as a heterosexual male is not in agreement with homosexual behavior for my own personal preferences and reasons, yet interestingly enough, the homosexual individuals who I have met over the years have agreed to disagree with me and find common ground in regards to matters in which we agree about for the common good.
Perhaps a book is in order for this whole area of discussion and this entry can act as a thought provoking mechanism to set things in motion. In closing, it again points to a society that is shifting its individual self estimate to being judged by others, many of which have a low individualÂ self estimate of themselves in the first place, and when asked why they hold a stance or belief, it is due to what society says, and we all know that society does not write its own rules, but is dependent on authors and policy makers to write the rules in regards to how it is going to be.
It is because “eye say so”.
A different perspective to consider.