The Tempest

Not Exactly Shooting For \”Miss Congeniality\”

John McCain…DADT…& Research

Posted by Daniel on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 McCain again said no to gay marriage and no to the repeal of DADT (Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell).

McCain called the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy toward gays “very effective.” He said he opposed gay marriage, but as to civil unions, “people ought to be able to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people who have relationship can enter into.”

Nevermind the fact that McCain knows full well a majority of states will, in all likelyhood, not legally recognize many forms of these contracts. Powers of attorney only go so far in many states, but don’t include any of the federally-allowed tax, social security or insurance provisions afforded to male/female unions.

While he can, for now, continue to ride the current wave of anti-gay marriage
that still has a strangle hold over this country, his fight to keep the status quo with regards to DADT may prove more uphill as November 2008 draws closer.

With same-sex marriage, he, and panderers like him, have the religious right and lobbyists.

The only thing holding DADT and the narrow-minded military higher-up’s from buckling is the fact that it is still taught under the table (so to speak) that sissy’s can’t fight and they will rape you while you sleep. I take issue with that mentality, as do millions of other Americans.

And we’re not alone. I’ve done some research and discovered a few details for our war-hero McCain.

Currently, 24 nations allow gays and lesbians to serve in their armed forces, and only a few NATO members continue to fire homosexual soldiers. Despite the growing number of countries that have decided to allow gays and lesbians to serve in uniform, however, there has been little in-depth analysis of whether the lifting of a gay ban influences military performance. Even the best and most recent case studies of foreign countries are based on little evidence. Most were written in the immediate aftermath of a decision to lift a gay ban without waiting for evidence on the effects of the new policy to accumulate.

The lack of in-depth analysis of foreign experiences in lifting bans on homosexual personnel prompted the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (CSSMM) to examine four cases in detail: Australia, Canada, Israel, and Britain. CSSMM researchers focused on these countries because all four lifted their gay bans despite opposition from the military services; because the United States, Australia, Canada, and Britain share important cultural traditions; because the Israel Defense Forces are among the most combat-tested militaries in the world; and because prior to lifting its ban, Britain’s policy was often cited as support for those opposed to allowing homosexual personnel to serve openly in the United States. To prepare the case studies, every identifiable pro-gay and anti-gay expert on the policy change in each country was interviewed, including officers and enlisted personnel, ministry representatives, academics, veterans, politicians, and nongovernmental observers. During each interview, experts were asked to recommend additional contacts, all of whom were contacted.

By the end of their research, 104 experts were interviewed and 622 documents and articles were examined. Although it is possible that additional data exists (I haven’t found it yet), CSSMM believes that the findings reflect a comprehensive appraisal of all relevant evidence.

And furthermore, Senator McCain…

Each of the four countries studied reversed its gay ban for different reasons.

  • In Canada, federal courts forced the armed forces to lift the ban in October 1992, ruling that military policy violated Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
  • In Australia, the liberal government of Prime Minister Paul Keating voted to lift the ban in November 1992 as the country was integrating a number of international human rights conventions into its domestic laws and codes.
  • In Israel, the military lifted its ban in June 1993 after dramatic Knesset hearings prompted a public outcry against the armed forces’ exclusion of gay and lesbian soldiers.
  • And in Britain, in September 1999, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Britain’s gay ban violated the right to privacy guaranteed in the European Convention on Human Rights, and London reacted by lifting the ban in January 2000.

Despite the different routes that led to the policy change in each country, the lessons drawn from each case were the same.


The image “” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.Are you now, Mr. McCain, calling four of our biggest allies on the war on terror immoral? Does this raise doubts in your mind as to whether or not you’ll look upon these four countries (should you win the Presidency in 2008) with shame, incredulity and disgust?

I believe his outlook on the issue of DADT as “very effective” is a little skewed with his nonchalant view of following and – dare I say? – embracing Bush’s tired old soundbites.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: