home page
civil liberties page

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Doesn't Work

Why the Current Military Policy on Homosexuals is Counterproductive and Actually Dangerous

by Tom Lowe

December 20, 1999

Virtually everyone is admitting that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" -- the compromise between the president and Congress in 1993 on gays and lesbians in the military -- hasn't worked. It's about time; anyone with a modicum of common sense and some experiential knowledge of how the military works could have easily predicted the outcome.

The debate has up until now concentrated on the effects of openly practicing gays and lesbians upon combat morale. The arguments seem to me to be implicitly based upon the assumption that homophobia is rampant among combat troops; otherwise the presence of homosexual troops within combat units would have no effect. Historically, there is no evidence to suggest that tolerance of homosexuality has an effect upon military effectiveness. The ancient Greek armies tolerated homosexuality without ill effect upon morale or fighting ability, the only difference being that it was accepted within that society.

I leave this argument to others more knowledgeable; there is an even bigger problem with outlawing homosexuality in the military: security.

Shortly after every recruit starts basic training, he or she receives a briefing on the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I was no exception to this, and in April of 1968 at the Air Force Officers Training School in San Antonio, I heard a Major Tipton deliver a humorous but very serious lecture on the UCMJ. When he came to the matter of homosexuality, his advice was that if you were indeed a homosexual, let the Air Force know immediately and you could be back at your old job right away and no one would know a thing. "On the other hand," said the major, "if you don't tell us about it and we later find out about it, you will be court-martialed and drummed out, because homosexuality is a crime in the military. Furthermore, everybody -- your family, your neighbors, your friends -- will know about it"

Why did the military exclude homosexuals? "Because they're security risks" said the major. "They're subject to being blackmailed." The fact that they were subject to being blackmailed precisely because of the ban wasn't discussed. Perhaps we were all too stressed out by the first few days of OTS to ask such a question.

But then, in the course of the four years I spent on active duty in the Air Force and the seven or eight years in the Air National Guard, I would occasionally encounter men or women that I was virtually certain were homosexual. And they were all excellent officers or enlisted personnel. At the time I knew them, I don't believe that any of them were actually practicing homosexuals; it would have been too difficult to keep up the straight facade.

But erotic passion being the driving force behind so much of the human psyche, it is highly probable that, sooner or later, most latent homosexuals eventually pierce through the wall of denial and seize upon their true sexual identity.

Finding yourself homosexual, you suddenly find yourself militarily illegal. If you have dedicated your life honorably to the military, you may have only five years left until retirement, not to mention the accompanying perquisites and generous remuneration that senior NCOs and officers receive, all of which you would stand to lose if discharged.

Add to this the hypothetical fact that you are stationed in Washington, D.C. at the Pentagon and entrusted with some of the nation's highest secrets, for which you have been given a security clearance above top secret. Yielding to these new, compelling, erotic cravings, you visit a cinema catering to homosexuals, and when you emerge, attempting to remain incognito, a Russian operative, sitting in a van on the other side of the street for just that purpose, snaps your picture along with the other people coming and going from the cinema. Your picture is matched with your name, rank and position and shortly thereafter you receive an unpleasant invitation to a meeting with a Russian agent who suggests that it would be in your best interest to pass along some military documents in return for your secret not being revealed, with all the embarrassment, suffering and privation that would inevitably result. If you do your sworn duty--turning in this despicable spy--you might get a commendation medal on the way to pick up your discharge orders.

I would like to think that most military men in that situation would not cave in; that they would take their oath seriously and suffer the consequences. But I know to an absolute certainty that a minority would betray their country from fear of exposure. And as long as homosexuality is a crime in the U.S. military, this problem is inevitable and nothing whatever can be done about it. The law itself creates the very security risks that it was designed to extinguish.