FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1568880839> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1568880839 endingPage "448" @default.
• W1568880839 startingPage "419" @default.
• W1568880839 abstract "On February 28, 2007, former Rep. Martin Meehan (D-MA) and a bipartisan group of co-sponsors reintroduced the Military Readiness Enhancement Act in the House of Representatives to amend title 10 United States Code [section] 654 (Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces) to enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces by replacing the current ask, don't tell policy with a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In the recent DUKE JOURNAL OF GENDER LAW AND POLICY article, Constructing the Co-Ed Military, Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, asserts that has changed that would justify the turmoil that would in and outside of Congress if Meehan's legislation were seriously considered or passed. (2) But on what evidence is she basing her claims that turmoil would ensue if 10 U.S.C [section] 654, the ban on openly gay service members, were repealed? The outcomes of repeal are exactly the points that an informed public conversation about the ask, don't tell policy should be engaging, but in a serious, evidence-based debate. And the focus of that debate should be not on fears of what would occur in and outside of Congress, but on the impact of any legislation on military readiness. Signed into law in November of 1993 by President Clinton, the Defense Department issued the first set of comprehensive regulations in February of 1994. The ask, don't tell policy, once considered an interim measure by policy makers, has remained in force, relatively unchanged, for over fourteen years. (3) Contrary to Donnelly's assertion, however, much has changed in the military, political, and cultural landscape since 1993. Military opinion and public opinion have experienced dramatic shifts, which have been well documented by scholarly research and in the media. The most recent evidence of these shifts, and perhaps the most telling, was a statement released by a group of twenty-eight retired U.S. generals and admirals urging Congress to repeal the current ban on openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual troops. (4) The support of such a large number of senior military officers for an end to the so-called gay ban reflects nothing less than a sea change in military opinion on the issue. In 1993, when the current policy was formulated, some surveys found that 97 percent of generals and admirals opposed lifting the ban. (5) When General John Shalikashvili, who served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1993 through 1997, published an op-ed in The New York Times on January 2, 2007 calling for the end of ask, don't tell, he cited polls showing that a large number of younger enlisted personnel also favor letting openly gay soldiers serve. (6) That poll of 545 troops who served in Afghanistan and Iraq by Zogby International, found that 72 percent of service members are personally comfortable interacting with gays and lesbians. (7) Public opinion polls show similarly strong indicators of change. Furthermore, data indicate that the policy is now harming the military's reputation because it is out of step with public opinion. (8) Donnelly contests all of this evidence. She says that the research supporting the claim that discrimination undermines the military, and that integration would enhance military effectiveness, is not compelling. And she suggests that, A closer look at materials produced by the activist groups usually reveals questionable methodology and unsupported conclusions. (9) The Palm Center, a research institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara, stands at the core of her offensive against full integration of openly gay and lesbian service members. She repeatedly attempts to dismiss the credibility of the Palm Center's research by labeling our data the product of social engineers and activists. (10) In the following pages, we respond to the substance of Donnelly's critique, addressing the factual errors in her analysis, addressing her unsupported assertions about the quality and integrity of research in this area, in particular by the Palm Center, and commenting on the stakes raised by the rhetoric Donnelly chooses to deploy in presenting her position in lieu of evidence to support that position. …" @default.
• W1568880839 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1568880839 creator A5059711299 @default.
• W1568880839 creator A5084514910 @default.
• W1568880839 creator A5085318734 @default.
• W1568880839 creator A5063924119 @default.
• W1568880839 date "2008-08-01" @default.
• W1568880839 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W1568880839 title "THE IMPORTANCE OF OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS ON GAYS IN THE MILITARY: A RESPONSE TO ELAINE DONNELLY'S CONSTRUCTING THE CO-ED MILITARY" @default.
• W1568880839 cites W1982811588 @default.
• W1568880839 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W1568880839 type Work @default.
• W1568880839 sameAs 1568880839 @default.
• W1568880839 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W1568880839 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1568880839 hasAuthorship W1568880839A5059711299 @default.
• W1568880839 hasAuthorship W1568880839A5063924119 @default.
• W1568880839 hasAuthorship W1568880839A5084514910 @default.
• W1568880839 hasAuthorship W1568880839A5085318734 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConcept C2776957806 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConcept C2777351106 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConcept C2780808987 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConcept C3116431 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConceptScore W1568880839C144024400 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConceptScore W1568880839C17744445 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConceptScore W1568880839C199539241 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConceptScore W1568880839C2776957806 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConceptScore W1568880839C2777351106 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConceptScore W1568880839C2780808987 @default.
• W1568880839 hasConceptScore W1568880839C3116431 @default.
• W1568880839 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W1568880839 hasLocation W15688808391 @default.
• W1568880839 hasOpenAccess W1568880839 @default.
• W1568880839 hasPrimaryLocation W15688808391 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W113133743 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W117968955 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W1992434951 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W2005399492 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W2009529192 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W2014447254 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W2094035087 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W217094310 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W235563312 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W2481734246 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W2595586651 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W291066239 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W310885834 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W313533634 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W328271632 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W334306845 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W404840943 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W68815849 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W71198583 @default.
• W1568880839 hasRelatedWork W2596533171 @default.
• W1568880839 hasVolume "15" @default.
• W1568880839 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1568880839 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1568880839 magId "1568880839" @default.
• W1568880839 workType "article" @default.