Please login to continue
Forgot your password?
Recover it here.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up Now!

You are now logged into your account.

Sign Up for Free
Choose Password
Confirm Password

Posted on Apr 18, 2010 Print this Article

New DoD Policy: “Don’t Report, Don’t Act”

            The Center for Military Readiness has produced the first comprehensive analysis of recently released Department of Defense regulations that redefine and weaken enforcement of the 1993 law, Section 654, Title 10, U.S.C., which states that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military.  

The concise four-page CMR Policy Analysis explains the consequences of regulatory changes that Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen announced on March 25:

New Defense Department Policy: “Don’t Report, Don’t Act” 

The CMR Policy Analysis states that under the new rules current law (usually mislabeled “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”) has been rendered virtually unenforceable.  The Gates/Mullen policy should be called “Don’t Report, Don’t Act” (DRDA) because it encourages local commanders to look the other way, pretend ignorance, or decline to act on credible information indicating that a servicemember is not eligible for military service.”  

The “Don’t Report, Don’t Act” policy does this by: 

  1. Requiring any inquiry into homosexual conduct by a servicemember to be initiated by a one-star general or admiral (O-7), without providing written instructions directing subordinate commanders to forward credible information up the chain of command.
  2. Imposing unusual loopholes and restrictions that will have the effect of excluding otherwise valid information by challenging the motives of “third party” sources, even in cases involving domestic violence.

            The CMR Policy Analysis provides examples of actual and hypothetical situations that demonstrate the insufficiency and folly of the Gates/Mullen DRDA regulations.  It also questions the Defense Department’s peculiar omission of “hand-holding and kissing” from examples of bodily contact that may be reasonably considered an indication of homosexual conduct.  

An editorial cartoon by Chuck Asay, forwarded to CMR by USNA-At-Large, satirizes a scenario that should give Congress pause.  It portrays the dismay of military bystanders when a pair of men engage in conduct that would be considered an indication of homosexual conduct:

The CMR Policy Analysis concludes that the DRDA regulations, taken as a whole, create an inefficient “Catch 22” by limiting investigations to one-star generals or admirals who are far removed and unlikely to receive credible information from subordinate commanders.   

By setting up gratuitous barriers to responsible enforcement, and treating ineligible homosexual personnel as if they are a special class, the new directives essentially redefine the purpose of the law as ‘fairness,’ rather than military necessity.  

This abrogates the first finding in current law, which recognizes that the U.S. Constitution assigns to Congress authority over military policies, and the second finding: ‘There is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces.’ ”  

All of this is being done for political reasons, just to please gay activists who consider the law to be “unfair.”  Military men and women are about to be used in an involuntary social experiment, paying a high and possibly irrevocable price for the president’s political promises to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered activists of the LGBT Left

Responsible congressmen and senators of both parties should step forward to clarify the situation and to reaffirm support for the 1993 law.


* * * * * * * 

Posted on Apr 18, 2010 Print this Article