Should soldiers’ attitudes drive Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell decision? Based on Harry Truman’s example, the answer’s no
The Pentagon has commissioned a survey of more than 400,000 service members, available here, to test morale and other issues,including their reaction to a potential abolition of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy toward gay service members.
“If the law changes and we are told to implement it — and we will, if the law changes — then how do we do this in a way that makes sense?” Gates told soldiers in Korea this week. “How do we identify beforehand the problems, the issues and the challenges that we’re going to face? The kind of training requirements we’re going to need, the kinds of changes in regulations, the impact on benefits — all of these things need to be addressed in advance.”
The proposed policy change has been compared by gay-rights advocates to the historic decision by President Harry Truman in 1948 to desegregate the military. However, defenders of DADT reject that comparison and argue that Congress and the president should be guided on such matters by the sentiments of those who actually wear the uniform.
As it turns out, however, the military also surveyed its members prior to Truman’s decision, and the sentiment among troops at the time was overwhelmingly opposed to desegregation. (H/t Think Progress).
For example, one poll surveyed 2,360 white enlisted personnel in three Army divisions stationed in the South, with results broken down by the soldiers’ region of origin (North, South or Border States). It found that opposition to desegregation was strong and crossed all regional boundaries.
“White enlisted men from the North show a strong prejudice against sharing recreation, theatre or post exchange facilities with Negroes,” it found. “As would be expected, the white enlisted men from the Border States show a stronger dislike for sharing facilities with Negroes than do the Northerners, and the white enlisted men from the South show the strongest dislike at all.” (An example of the questions and reports is printed below).
Truman nonetheless decided to end segregation, a step that earned him a place of honor in civil rights history. His decision may have been influenced by other Army surveys, conducted with white officers and non-commissioned officers who had commanded black combat troops in the European Theater during WWII (a sample is also reprinted below).
Sixty-four percent of the white soldiers said they had initially opposed serving in a company that included “colored platoons,” but 77 percent said that attitude had changed for the better after actual service. In fact, fewer than 1 percent of the white soldiers reported that the colored platoons had performed poorly in combat, with more than 80 percent reporting they had done very well. Almost nine out of 10 reported that black troops had performed as well as if not better than white soldiers.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
427 comments Add your comment
Scout
July 22nd, 2010
11:37 pm
josef:
Lost me again.
josef nix
July 22nd, 2010
11:40 pm
Scout
Lost you where?
Scout
July 22nd, 2010
11:43 pm
I figured it out. What’s his MOS ?
Del
July 22nd, 2010
11:49 pm
Scout,
I carry a Springfield XD 45. A little bit more difficult to conceal, although in a cross draw carry it’s doable. Love the Glock but the XD, to me provides a a more comfortable handle. I also have an XD 40. S&W compact, which is really my wife’s but sometimes I’ll carry it. Semper Fi
G in Virginia Highland
July 22nd, 2010
11:51 pm
Stop the Christian Taliban NOW!
josef nix
July 22nd, 2010
11:51 pm
okay, outta here for real…g’night
Scout
July 22nd, 2010
11:52 pm
Del:
Good ones. I also recently got a Taurus “Judge” for the house ……… .45 Colt and .410 Shotgun …………….
Scout
July 22nd, 2010
11:53 pm
G in Virginia Highland :
O.K. Done. Thanks for reminding me.
Del
July 23rd, 2010
12:00 am
Scout good choices,
I have a Remington 870 12, tactical for home protection, can’t beat Buckshot. For social work at 200 meters I have an SR 556 with Lake City M55 and M855 ammo. Also for detail work a Rem. 742 with 3×7 Tasco scope. Yes I can group them at 100, Hey good enough!
Scout
July 23rd, 2010
12:06 am
Del:
We are much alike ……… have an 870 also. The only thing I lack is an M-79 !
Del
July 23rd, 2010
12:09 am
Oh well I think I may have unintentionally scared some folks off. Should have maybe talked about Fut Ball. Gnight y’all
Del
July 23rd, 2010
12:12 am
M-79 oh yes M-79 grenade launcher, how wonderful in the midst of the ill conceived M-16. Taps
Scout
July 23rd, 2010
12:17 am
Del:
I’ll take the first watch ……………..
RW-(the original)
July 23rd, 2010
12:17 am
7 and 2/3 was a nice run…..
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 23rd, 2010
4:45 am
We’ve seen the power of people such as Andrew Breitbart, who released a harshly distorted video depicting Sherrod as a racist. He almost destroyed her career and her life in the process, yet he still refuses to apologize or take responsibility. -kookman, Urinal
What is the Atlanta Urinal but “harshly distorted?”
The mudslingers and smear job artists got beat at their own game, and they whine and moan.
boo hoo hoo, bookman.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 23rd, 2010
5:00 am
And in the longer term, with concern mounting about the government’s $13 trillion debt, a bipartisan deficit-reduction commission is warning that cuts in military spending could be needed to help the nation dig out of its financial hole.
Wow, the dummycrats spend every penny that we and our children have and now they want to raise taxes and cut defense spending, go figure.
This isn’t your Daddy’s dummycrat party, oh wait, yes it is.
Next up, surrender monkey Afghanistan….
barking frog
July 23rd, 2010
5:44 am
they-e-shaveit @9:10; also at wakkanai 66-67.
stands for decibels
July 23rd, 2010
5:49 am
I’ve barely skimmed the comments (long day, too tired last night) but…
Lost in all this I suspect, is appreciation for a few individuals:
Kerry Eleveld, at the Advocate; who in turn heard from DOD spokeswoman Cynthia Smith, about the original c. 1948 military polling; and then Think Progress’ Igor Volsky, who actually dug up these documents from the National Archives.
Big question is, why the hell hadn’t this been brought to light ages ago? As Casey Stengel might say: “Can’t anyone play this game?”
stands for decibels
July 23rd, 2010
5:53 am
In other news, I see that the apparent non-aggression pact between NL East rivals continues to manifest itself with yet another Braves win and another m#$%^%#@*ing Mets loss…
Desperado
July 23rd, 2010
8:30 am
Why do you keep comparing a race to a choice? The progressive liberals surely need all the votes they can muster. I guess keeping the vile disgusting groups in their voting league depicts how desperate the liberals are to maintain their presence in congress.
Fred
July 23rd, 2010
9:12 am
Thanks for the history lesson Scout (Fort Oglethorpe). they had a small detachment of Horse Cav at Ft. Hood, probably still do, but it was just a ceremonial thing, not a real horse Cav unit. I always wondered where the last true Horse Cav was, but never looked it up lol.
potstirrer
July 23rd, 2010
9:26 am
One’s color is TOTALLY different than your sexual perversions or desires. I don’t want to be in a bunker or shower thinking the dude next to me is wanting my “junk”. Yes times are different and I know when I served our great country in a uniform, that there were gays around me. I just don’t want special priveledges to a group for because of what their “sexual desires” are… Keep it the way its is DADT works for now…
MTM
July 23rd, 2010
9:34 am
“The mudslingers and smear job artists got beat at their own game, and they whine and moan.”
You are one bloated idiot. The AJC does research… follows up… reports and not opines… We may not always like what they report, but at least they are honest JOURNALISTS.
But obviously you love to be lied to by the likes of FOX, Hannity, Brietbart, etc. You like to be deceived by manipulated videos and sound bytes designed to reinforce your right wing your opinion. Why? My only guess is that you are top stupid to handle the truth so it easier for you to let others think for you and define your thoughts based on their lies.
You are one weak-minded, useless American.
Dtown
July 23rd, 2010
9:40 am
Obviously POTSTIRRER, you are dealing with your own innate homosexual tendencies and you cannot handle them. I have known plenty of “straight” guys just like you. You bash and you bash and you denigrate (look it up) homosexuals because you are conditioned by the church and society that your biology is wrong. And since you are so mentally incapable of accepting your own biology, you attack others because it is all you are capable of doing.
Good luck and PLEASE seek out some professional help before you do something stupid like physically attack a gay person.
WW
July 23rd, 2010
9:43 am
Since when did equality become special “priveledges”? Besides Einstein, you spelled “privileges” wrong. So why should we all listen to a moron like you?
middler and so tired of all the rhetoric :
July 23rd, 2010
10:03 am
Whites didn’t want black soldiers; male officers and their wives didn’t want female law enforcement personnel; now we are going to ask people about another heretofore barred group and expect welcoming and acceptance? It appears that gay service people are just like the rest of us when they are in the military, at least that was my experience in the 1960s and 1970s. I am unaware of any verified reports of gays attacking straight people they were attracted to though we have hear about attacks on gays by straights and that is supposed to be one of the concerns about total integration? There are already laws on the books and if these laws should be migrated into the UCMJ so be it. But if our troops and sailors and marines cannot obey U.S. and state law and rules of their organization they shouldn’t be allowed to serve.
Eric
July 23rd, 2010
4:42 pm
Jay Bookman’s comparison of desegregation of the armed forces and allowing homosexuals to serve openly is extremely flawed if not downright inflammatory. Desegregation worked for one fundamental reason; there is no inherent behavioral difference between races. Indeed, the degree of command attention needed to make racial integration work is steadily declining. A far better analogy is the very broad inclusion of women in the armed forces. Integration of the men and women has worked because even as we recognize a fundamental equal value we also account for different behavior. Measures varying from separate billeting for men and women to strictly enforced rules that control sexual exploitation of subordinates or false accusations against superiors makes it work. As women have deployed more and been allowed into a much wider range of specialties, the attention paid to enforcing these rules has steadily increased. When advocates of repealing DADT decide to stop playing the race card and instead talk about how to integration homosexuals while respecting the other 98%+ of service members, I’ll be truly ready to listen. Until then, I’ve seen too many incidents during my 25 years in the service of homosexuals repeatedly propositioning roommates, exposing themselves, shower “naked talkers”, etc to pretend this isn’t a bad idea.