E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAs opponents of the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy prepare a final push for repeal during Congress’s lame duck session, polling shows that they’ve got the wind of public opinion at their backs.
A new survey out Monday from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life shows that 58 percent of Americans favor allowing gay and lesbian members of the military to serve openly. Less than a third of respondents (27 percent) say that gays and lesbians should not be permitted to serve openly in the Armed Forces.
Democrats and independents favor letting gays serve openly in the military by wide margins, but Republicans remain divided on the question. About 40 percent say that gays should be permitted to serve openly, while 44 percent say they should not.
National approval for openly gay service members is mirrored in almost every religious and age group, according to the poll.
Over half of Catholics and non-evangelical Protestants say that gays should be allowed to serve openly. Only white evangelicals generally oppose that policy (34 percent favor open service; 48 percent oppose.)
Support for allowing gays to serve openly is still highest among young Americans, with almost 70 percent of those 18-29 favoring the proposal. But only 44 percent of Americans over 65 agree with their younger counterparts.
The Pew study’s findings are similar to those in a NBC/WSJ survey earlier this month, which found that support for letting gays serve openly has jumped from 40 percent in 2000 to 50 percent in 2010.
A Pentagon report about the potential effects of repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law will be released Tuesday, and the Senate Armed Services Committee is scheduled to hold hearings on the issue Thursday and Friday.
Most Republicans are withholding support for repeal until after reviewing the Pentagon findings. But some leading GOP members of the Armed Services panel, including ranking member John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, have said that the report is fundamentally flawed in its approach.
NBC’s Ken Strickland contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
The guy who took less than 48 hours to pick a vice presidential candidate wants further and further and further study about a policy that virtually everyone else agrees is outdated and unproductive. If only he had insisted on further and further and further study into who was going to be a heartbeat away from the presidency--but I guess he figured that decision didn't have serious ramifications and could be decided on a whim. McCain has no credibility anymore. I used to be a fan of his, but now it's clear he'll go whichever way the wind blows with his "base."
Way to funny when you think about the fact that Democrat and Independent politicians are the "liberals" and openly support gay and lesbian rights while they are alway's caught in affairs with grown women, Republican politicians on the other hand try to keep it "in the closet" right up until they are caught with their pants down in a bathroom with an underage boy.
.
It seems only one political party has an "issue" to hide.
AS a retired Army female officer, I know that I served with gay soldiers over the years. I don't care what people do in their private lives as long as they serve in their professional lives with honor, integrity, and all that stuff we need in the Army. Let me tell you, the only thing that needs to be changed if the ban was lifted is to take out one article of the UCMJ. Then let everyone have to live under the article that speaks to not harassing other soldiers sexually--there were a damn lot more males violating that article then I believe gay soldiers ever will. Everybody understands there are times when nobody gets to have sex!! And if they keep deploying you and your husband to different locations, that can be a long time. So get over it, and get on with it.
I don't think most people would agree with me, here. But, despite the fact that I too believe that DADT should be repealed, I don't like using polls and popular opinion to sway human rights matters. First of all, using that argument, we can also conclude that America should not have gay marriage based on the outcome of the votes in California, Maine, New York, and New Jersey. I obviously support gay marriage, too.
A right should be just that a RIGHT, and not up for debate or vote by the general public. What's next? A vote on whether or not to reinstitute slavery? Bar women from voting? Banning the practice of any religion other than Christianity? Deporting immigrants (legal or illegal)? Establishing a Nazi Party of the United States? What if these were up for DEBATE? And worse, what if they ALL pass a popular vote? See the problem with TOO MUCH democracy?
Again, I know my opinion will not be popular. But it is my opinion, never the less. Some things should just be common sense. I support gay rights. Denying gay right will not turn gay people straight. Allowing gay rights will not turn straight people gay? WHY CAN'T AMERICA GET THIS ISSUE RIGHT! We should have set the standard for the world on this matter.
On the other side of the coin, I appreciate the public agreeing that DADT should be repealed. I totally agree.
Razor, the study was of military personnel. The news article was a general poll of the public at large. The study itself showed that 59% of military personnel have no problem with repeal either.
The study wasn't any sort of 'vote' for the military however, but rather a simple gauge of problem areas if/when they did repeal it, so they could better handle any rough spots and avoid morale issues. According to the study, they don't have much to worry about.
I completely agree with you that civil rights should never be a matter put up to a majority vote.
However, when the majority do happen to agree with what is the correct action in favor of civil rights, it should put that much more push behind our legislators being able to legislate a resolution. This wasn't a vote, it was a poll; the results aren't meant to be binding, but I do hope they provide the impetus for action, finally.
Where was the poll taken? San Francisco?
If gays & lesbians helped to save American lives and freedoms, the Republicans and the religious "wrong" would still hate them and call them names will they sit back and have their happy hour and type ridiculous stuff on this website. Bigots....can't be thankful for anything! That way, they can always say...."we are better than you", which is their ONLY reason to exist.
Go figure, upity white people (aka busy bodies) are in the majority the ones that are against this.
I think these white evangelicals spend too much of their time worrying about what two grown adults do in their free time.
Here is a fantastic idea, why don't these Christians do something helpful, like feed the poor, or help the sick?
PS: Lindsy Grahm and John McCain need to pack it in. Thanks for your service gentlemen. The party is over, it is time to go home. Bravo and great work. Thanks for Coming. Buh bye...buh bye.
Someday we'll look back at DADT with the same embarrassment as when we had separate bathrooms and drinking fountains for blacks.
These men and women openly risk their lives for our country and our freedoms. Why humiliate them?
Stop, Stop, Stop!!!! Ask the people who serve with these folks, and if they have a problem, listen to them and stop asking the civilians who shouldn't count..... enough!
They have been asked; they generally don't care.
Your argument is irrelevant anyway. If we are denying people rights, you don't ask the oppressor how they feel about it. You fix it. During WWII, they didn't ask the service members how they felt about blacks; they just integrated the services, tough @!$%# if you don't like it.
@ acidrain
Y o u r argument is irrelevant because it will N-E-V-E-R happen. Thats just the way it is! No openly gays now and Your opinion on how you HOPE it will be is irrelevant, those are just the FACTS....there!! LIKE it or NOT, i r r e l e v a n t. Thats you !! :) sorry. Now to you...tough beans if you dont like it!! Facts are Facts, all your little typing wont change it either.....Toooo bad!
That's what Jim Crow thought.
His child-2382068:
You are wrong. The youth support repeal; it's the older population that doesn't. It's only a matter of time. To say otherwise is to ignore reality. The president has made it policy, and many of the generals are on board. The others? Well, if they shoot their mouths off, they will be finding another job.
My little typing? WTF does that mean? What drugs are you on?
@ acidbrain
hmmmm,
name calling and innuendos...a g a i n....Im not surprised but a bit disappointed. Everyone reading this looks at you and laughs, you are calling something that is black, white. Anyone who can read a newspaper knows its NOT policy. Boldface LIE, its not military policy to let gays openly serve, what drugs are you on? Give em an inch they take a mile, just like the Muslims. You want us to believe another LIE toooo, like, most of the generals are on board....show me the "credible" article with names of the generals supporting your gay hope...You cant, because you are deceiving. How does if feel to live a life of misleading people? Just like saying that its military policy to let gays openly serve, didnt your mommy teach you not to lie and not to stick your baby maker in another mans poop shoot??
Again, your little typing exercise here wont change the facts on the ground and it wont change anything. Just cuz you believe your fantasy doesnt mean its true.....nothing to back what you say....its just lie, lie, lie, shame on you. :)
What name calling? You're the one calling me acidbrain. It's A_C_I_D_R_A_I_N
I don't see anyone laughing at me. Are you hallucinating? Do you see people laughing at me? They are welcome to come argue their point.
You are amazingly ignorant. Not that it matters, but I am straight. My mom wasn't an ignorant bigot redneck like yourself; she taught me to respect people for who they are. Which is why you don't get any respect.
You are being ignorant again. Stop it. I said Obama has made it policy. If he didn't, we wouldn't be discussing repeal.
http://www.defense.gov//News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=61659
Adm Mullen supports repeal.
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=61892&461892=20101130
Ham seems to support it; or at least he couldn't come up with a reason to reject it.
Your move. I have provided evidence. You have provided heresay and bad punctuation. You are so outgunned on an intellectual level right now, it's like you brought a toothpick to a tank fight.
Now let's just get this straight. Just whom will these gays be openly serving and just exactly how? Or did you mean servicing and was it not GOP that liked to be serviced best of all?
Has anyone ever asked WHERE they get the poll results? Who exactly validates the uniformity of these polls to ensure proper representation of all parts of the country? If the polls are taken in liberal CA, is conservative VT represented? Why should we believe "THE POLLS?"
Phoenix2c......what on earth have you got against Poles. They make some very nice cuisine indeed.
"Poll: Most favor gays serving openly"
Guess what? I don't and I don't need to explain why to any body.
What an intelligent and thought provoking post.
Tammy,
No declaration of war has been voted on by congress since WWII. In 2003, the congress voted to give the administration permission to commit troops to a mission in Iraq, if the administration deemed it necessary. That is is the reason that, while I will think of the whole mess over there as Bush's war (or, maybe more correctly, Cheney's war), it's really not a war at all. That doesn't in any way diminish the service that our service-men and -women are performing for us over there. As a veteran, I can say that I grieve the loss of every one of those who have lost or limb in a conflict which might have been ended at Tora Bora.
Tammy,
No declaration of war has been voted on by congress since WWII. In 2003, the congress voted to give the administration permission to commit to a mission in Iraq, if the administration deemed it necessary. That is the reason that, while I will think of the whole mess over there as Bush's war (or, maybe more correctly, Cheney's war), it's really not a war at all. That doesn't in any way diminish the service that our service-men and -women are performing for us over there. As a veteran, I can say that I grieve the loss of every one of those who have lost or limb in a conflict which might have been ended at Tora Bora.
So the Pew Forum interviewed 100% of all Americans and determined that "most" (58%) do not object to gays in the military? Or did they interview a handful of people at a homosexual love fest in Key West and found that "most" do not object? Why don't they go into the real world and interview real people from a broad spectrum across the country and people in professional careers as well as blue collar workers and the military? I have asked everyone I know (most are health professionals,) and NOBODY wants gays to be anywhere - not in America nor the military, not in our faces, not in our communities, not in our conscious. Mainly, everyone I polled just wanted to never hear another word about homosexuals ever again in their lives. Anybody can do a poll, anyone can come up with whatever statistics they are trying to skew in one favor or another. This entire thread is pointless.
In the approximate words of Mark Twain - "There's three kind of lies. Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics"
I'm glad it makes you angry, gator. You're going to KEEP hearing about it until they get equal rights and treatment, and stop being treated as second class citizens. Have a nice life!
I'm glad it makes you angry too, its fun watching dumb people make fools of themselves.
@ acidbrain
seeeee, you are in this to make people angry....get off this forum. you are not a nice person, we dont respect what you say. We should never be happy if someone is angry...are you high? Or just a gay trouble maker like the 2 we had on my boat in the navy. Or like the two others that got caught on my second boat ( an aircraft carrier) who were supposed to be on watch but instead they were caught red handed doing the dirty down in the bowls of the ship.... ON WATCH ! cum on!!
No, I'm in this for the discussion, but if I run across a bigot, then yes, I'm here to make bigots angry. Is it working? You can try to get rid of me, but I don't think you'll have much luck.
And it's YOUR failure to accuse me of being gay. You assume I am gay because I don't share your opinion? You are very short sighted.
I think what anyone does in their own bed is none of my business or any one elses either. I have news for them, gays are ALREADY in the military and no harm is done so why not acknowledge them for their service? Why not let them serve with honor and let their partners have the support they need when their partner is deployed or killed in action. It doesn't hurt anyone. I don't agree with the officers sleeping with the enlisted or females getting raped by soldiers while on tour overseas but it happens. Just because they have a penis or are hetrosexual doesn't mean they are moral beings either but we give them their due. Give gays the same respect?
NO thank you :) no respect.... read my above post....NO due to them....NO! Not moral...NO, that is not the fact...you are a liar, not moral I say...I know, I served with em....NO !! No harm you say....you KNOW nothing about serving with gays....read my previous post...there are a few so check carefully. I give many eye witness examples about exactly how they are proven trouble makers.. :)
thank you for listening :)
Of course you want them open so you know who to put on the front line. It also enables the Pat Tillman maneuver.
We need a 100% gay military. Being gay should be a qualification for enlisting. That's the only way we can be safe as a nation.
We're all entitled to our opinions on this matter. But I feel strongly that the only opinions that matter are those of the folks within the enlisted ranks.
Since when do enlisted men make decisions about human resource policy?
Isn't it amazing that people have more tolerance for gays serving openly in the military, but we can't get married? Let's see...why would I want to defend a country that denies me what should be construed as a basic freedom?
Totally agree!!!! Gays who want to serve and want to known as gay should be allowed to wear an insignia next to their stripes to show that they are openly gay...like G with a pink love sign or something similar.....Famous warriors such as Alex the Great was gay...
dont suprise me.... CANADA.....pfft!!
Bull Malarky!! What poll? No one asked me or my two sons who serve in the military and think it is a HORRIBLE idea for them to serve openly. Look at the way the service men and women live during Basic Training and such. There is no way that serving openly is in the Gay person's best interest. This is ASKING for trouble. I am not saying they are incapable of doing a job, I am saying that as it stands, and until there is another alternative, Don't ask. Don't tell. Is the best policy for gays and lesbians who wish to serve their country.
It is in their best interest if it means they can't be kicked out on a whim. Repealing DADT doesn't mean gays are free to harass other service members (and it's ridiculous for you to believe that's what is going to happen. Gay people are not sloven animals who can't control themselves around your straight sons. Get over yourself). Harassment is always against the rules; whether DADT stands or not.
It's bad policy, and it WILL be removed. The younger generation is much more against it than the older generation. It may take another 15 years, but it will be gone.
its not policy now.....Ha Ha
They DO harass others....all the time. But what do you care, you will never serve chicken MR. Typing boy....
Where is the gay harrassment? How many gay men are hitting on you? You're a liar.
I personally will not serve, but I have several family members who have given their years in the service. 2 more who just finished basic training. But they aren't bigots like yourself. The young generation WILL change this policy, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Poles in this mater are a waste.
Military housing is hard enough with just keeping males and females seperated. Are they going to have to seperate male, female, homosexual, lesbian, bi's for both genders?
I'm ex military also. I have nothing against people that have a different orientation. My best friend in my last command flip-flopped. I didn't care... he was a funny guy and a good friend.
With that said, everyone should just keep thier personnel lives just that, personnel. If you are gay and your CO asks "are you gay" you say "You can't ask me that" and go on your own happy little way. Also, straight peeps should keep thier lives personnel also, DADT should be military wide and for any sexual orientation.
When I was in the Air Force women were a) lesbians, if they didn't put out, b) whores, if they did. I was married, so I fell into category c) she's married, so she'll put her husband first and not the service.
It wasn't gays I was worried about, trust me. But somehow, straight white guys are considered more trustworthy than women, the suntanned contingent, or gays. Go figure.
The headline should be that the men and women in our military are adults.
A few have spent the summer telling us something very different.