Loading...

Greg Craven and DADT

347 views

Loading...

Loading...

Transcript

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading...

Loading...

Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Oct 3, 2010

Mr. Craven, I think you've got it wrong.

Mr. Craven's original video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty7bqd...

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_...

Psychology etc.:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow...
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow...
http://www.beyondhomophobia.com/blog/...

Opinions of miltary members:
"Gays in the Military". Military Times (Marine Corps Times): pp. 7. 22 March 2010.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/opi...

Foreign countries with openly gay members in their miltary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_o...
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,73...
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articl...
(in german) http://www.queer.de/detail.php?articl...

Financial Cost:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washingt...

Quotes:
From Gregory Herek: (in 1993) "My written testimony to the Committee summarizes the results of an extensive review of the relevant published research from the social and behavioral sciences. That review is lengthy. However, I can summarize its conclusions in a few words: The research data show that there is nothing about lesbians and gay men that makes them inherently unfit for military service, and there is nothing about heterosexuals that makes them inherently unable to work and live with gay people in close quarters."
""The assumption that heterosexuals cannot overcome their prejudices toward gay people is a mistaken one,"
(in 2008) "Today, as then (1993), the real question is not whether sexual minorities can be successfully integrated into the military. The social science data answered this question in the affirmative then, and do so even more clearly now. Rather, the issue is whether the United States is willing to repudiate its current practice of antigay discrimination and address the challenges associated with a new policy."

From the American Psychological Association:
"Empirical evidence fails to show that sexual orientation is germane to any aspect of military effectiveness including unit cohesion, morale, recruitment and retention (Belkin, 2003; Belkin & Bateman, 2003; Herek, Jobe, & Carney, 1996; MacCoun, 1996; National Defense Research Institute, 1993).

Comparative data from foreign militaries and domestic police and fire departments show that when lesbians, gay men and bisexuals are allowed to serve openly there is no evidence of disruption or loss of mission effectiveness (Belkin & McNichol, 2000--2001; Gade, Segal, & Johnson, 1996; Koegel, 1996).

When openly gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals have been allowed to serve in the U.S. Armed Forces (Cammermeyer v. Aspin, 1994; Watkins v. United States Army, 1989/1990), there has been no evidence of disruption or loss of mission effectiveness.

The U.S. military is capable of integrating members of groups historically excluded from its ranks, as demonstrated by its success in reducing both racial and gender discrimination (Binkin & Bach, 1977; Binkin, Eitelberg, Schexnider, & Smith, 1982; Kauth & Landis, 1996; Landis, Hope, & Day, 1984; Thomas & Thomas, 1996)."

***
This video is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
(Applies only to original content created by me.)

Loading...

When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next


to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...