Is DATD a good rule

Before I begin, allow me to clarify a few things: 'good' - proper; fit. Knowing this definition now, allow me to clarify my burden today; the resolution specifically uses the term 'is'; this denotes present tense, meaning that we are discussing current matters; not the way things ought to be, and not how things were. So, to win the debate today, I will have to show you that, for the present time, the policy "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", or, DADT, is proper and fitting. One final clarification; in a nutshell, DADT consists of three elements: • Superiors are not allowed to ask about or investigate the sexual preference of another soldier. • Soldiers are not allowed to disclose or openly discuss or display their sexual preference. • Any soldier found in violation of one or both of the previous stipulations will be discharged from military service. Now then, let's get on to the meat of the argument. First, the military is not democratic, and so this rule is necessary to maintain discipline and order. As a disclaimer, I am not saying that homosexuals are incapable of learning military discipline; what I am saying is that, due to the military's extremely rigid, socialistic structure, there is not a lot of room for change or diversity. We can definitely look to a historically set precedent: blacks. For centuries, blacks were forced into slavery, brutalized, segregated, disenfranchised; and it took centuries for blacks to gain equal footing in every day society; another historical precedent is women; they were treated as servants for years, and at one point even lived under the terror of the 'rule of thumb', which meant that a man could not beat his wife with a stick larger in girth than his thumb; yes, beating a woman was acceptable back then; even today, women are often seen as nothing more than mere sex objects; my point here is that, equality is not a quick process; it's a slow progression, and that's exactly what we have to remember when dealing with the homosexual community; look back to what I've said before on chronology; the resolution deals with the present, and at this very moment, our society is not yet unanimously ready to accept gays as equals, especially not the rigid structure of the Armed Forces; at some future point, it's possible that our society will be ready for equality and tolerance; but like I've said, progress is not instant; patience is necessary, and DADT acts as merely another stepping stone on our path to tolerance and understanding. Second, DADT is fitting because it helps to maintain safety; another precedent I would have you examine would be abortion clinics; many doctors, like Dr. George Tiller (. http://www.reuters.com...), are terrorized, and sometimes brutalized by right-wing extremists; in the same way that these clinics, their doctors, and even patients are victimized, choosing right now to liberalize, and even erase policies like DADT would put the safety of the homosexual community at risk; as many parades and demonstrations as you see for "We're here, we're queer, get used to it! ", you'll very likely see more in (possibly violent) protest of gay rights, especially in the Deep South states, for example, if we tactlessly erase DADT and alike policies. So, don't get me wrong; I'm not trying to argue against equality, don't pin me as holding that position; but ultimately, know that for the time being, DADT is proper; it is fitting; it cools tensions, and prevents gross culture shock from occuring; one day, perhaps, we'll be able to allow gays into military service without fear; but, until that day comes, we'll have to accept the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy as a tight fit.