catch 22

Admiral Mike Mullen, the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, might just be my new hero. While testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, he had this to say:

“No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens.”

Of course on the other side we've got dear John McCain, "deeply disappointed" in Admiral Mullen & Secretary Gates for their support of repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell despite claiming a few years back that if military leaders said it was time to reassess the policy, he would certainly listen to them.

And I know this is a hugely obvious observation, but how do people justify or rationalize or otherwise claim that DADT is just, or even functional? At its core, it is a paradox. Gay men and lesbians can serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation a secret. But if anyone finds out, they're booted. So gay men and lesbians cannot serve in the military.

This illogic dismays me, and in this day and age to fall back on this as a rationalization for preventing able-bodied men and women from serving in a military already stretched thin seems not only disgustingly homophobic but also detrimental to national security.

Of further reading interest:
Bill Kristol's cold-blooded take on DADT (best, by which I mean most callous, line ever: "As an intellectual matter, gays in the military is a not uninteresting question.")

The Economist's lovely take-down of Bill Kristol

Paul Waldman's piece at the American Prospect