"Don't ask, don't tell" should continue to be enforced.

So there are several reasons why DADT should not be in place, and why the Military Readiness enhancement Act (MREA, which allows gay, les, bi, and transexuals, to serve openly) should. DADT has kicked out 10,000 soldiers so far.... many of them "MISSION CRITICAL" The following is from Steve Ralls. According to the Pentagon, it has discharged more than 10,000 service members for being gay, including nearly 800 with skills deemed "mission critical" by the Department of Defense. Those who have been discharged include linguists, combat engineers, pilots, medical professionals and others. According to statistician Gary Gates, the armed forces could attract as many as 41,000 new recruits by repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," in addition to the 65,000 lesbian and gay Americans already on duty in the active duty, reserve and national guard forces. The policy creates an anti gay stigma, which is really bad for cohesion and morale.... obviously, the following is from nathaniel frank. Those cases in which service members reacted hostilely to discussion about gay troops are instructive. During New York City's "Fleet Week" in May, 2004, several sailors were asked whether they had an opinion on the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Only one respondent was willing to discuss it, saying he thought it was a fair compromise. Another respondent said, "I don't think we're supposed to talk about that," which is not, in fact, a regulation mandated by the policy, but which suggests the confusion surrounding the policy. The others refused to discuss it entirely, and one yelled, "f--k the f*gs." Melissa Sheridan Embser-Herbert, a professor of sociology at Hamline University, and a retired U. S. Army Captain, has found that the gay ban casts such an air of suspicion and uncertainty over everyone's sexuality that it encourages the performance of "hypermasculinity" as a way of proving one is not gay. By mandating that all soldiers appear as straight, the policy requires both gays and straights to "go out of their way to be read as heterosexual," which often entails making or engaging in homophobic or sexist comments and behaviors. Other countries prove that nothing will be hurt if we allow MREA to happen. This is from Nathaniel Frank again. But other experts cautioned that this poll does not indicate that Americans would be less likely to enlist. Before Canada lifted its gay ban in 1992, a survey of 6,500 male soldiers found that 62% said they would refuse to share showers or living quarters with a gay soldier. But when the ban was actually lifted, follow-up studies found no increased difficulty with recruiting, discipline or performance, and few if any resignations were attributed to the change in policy. A similar scenario unfolded in Britain, where twothirds of service members indicated that they would not serve with gays if the British ban were eliminated. Following the lifting of the ban, studies found no increased difficulty with recruitment. The military could get as many as 41,000 new recruits. From frank again. Some advocates of ending the ban have further argued that doing so would enhance recruiting both by broadening the pool of permissible enlistees and by removing the stigma of intolerance that may turn off younger or more progressive Americans. For instance, a recent data analysis of 2000 census figures from the Williams Project, UCLA School of Law, suggests that lifting the gay ban could increase the number of active duty personnel by more than 41,000 troops. With these reasons why DADT is bad, and why the MREA is a good thing, there is no reason why DADT should still exist, and why the MREA shouldn't. You probably picked a bad thing to argue with me, as a policy debater last year, this was my aff case that I qualified for nats with. :D Good luck.