Quantcast The State Hornet
College Media Network

Get macromedia Flash Player

ROTC gay policies put it at odds with anti-discrimination universities

Choquette Marrow

Issue date: 11/7/07 Section: Opinion
  • Print
  • Email
  • Page 1 of 1

Over the past decade there has been a strong movement to push Reserve Officer Training Corp programs off school campuses because of a discriminatory policy against homosexuals. The US military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy forces homosexuals wishing to serve to keep their sexual orientation under wraps. The military is not authorized to question or investigate whether a person is gay, but if it becomes apparent through the individual's words or actions, they will be forcibly separated from the military.

The policy against open homosexuality extends to ROTC programs on school campuses, putting the programs at odds with university anti-discrimination policies. Despite protests by students and faculty over the years at many of the California State University campuses, including two recently at the Northridge and East Bay CSU campuses, ROTC programs remain at 16 of the 23 CSUs.

The major incentive for university administrators to keep ROTC is the extra federal funding they receive for allowing the units to operate on campus. Not only would the extra funding disappear if ROTC programs were removed, but so would federal grants. The Solomon Amendment, passed in 1996, instituted funding penalties that would revoke schools grants if it removed ROTC. This amendment all but solidified the place of ROTC on CSU campuses.

Because the fate of a schools federal funding is attached to ROTC, it can be assumed that protesting the presence of ROTC is not going to change the minds of university administrators. Even with ROTC practicing discriminatory polices that are blatantly contrary to those of the university, kicking the program off campus is not viable option. For those who disagree with the policy, their time would be better spent focusing on the actual policy and the actual military rather than a training program, which is a fraction of the armed services and a beneficial component of many universities.

Removing ROTC from university campuses will not change the military's discriminatory policy. Instead, it would take away scholarship and job training opportunities for those interested in careers in the military. The removal of ROTC from campus does not benefit the school or surrounding community. It is not a club with autonomy over its own regulations and policies. The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is set by Congress, enforced by the Department of Defense and that is where the opposition to it should be focused.

The United Kingdom and France have allowed homosexuals to serve openly in the military without adverse affects on morale or mission focus. Furthermore, there have been various studies showing that gays who have served in the military were accepted and posed no more of a security risk than heterosexual males.

These arguments provide a better basis for objection to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" rule rather than opposition to an organization that does not set policy and does not have the ability to change Defense Department rules and regulations. ROTC will not be moving from the campus as long as federal funding threatens to go with it. And even if the training programs were successfully ousted from CSUS or any of the other state campuses, no achievement would be made. ROTC, along with its opportunities for students, should not be tossed off campus because of the Department of Defense's policy. The issue is the policy, not the program.

Choquette Marrow can be reached at opinion@statehornet.com
Page 1 of 1

Article Tools

Click here to view the State Hornet's comment guidelines.
Comments do not appear immediately.

Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1

daniel sebold

posted 11/20/07 @ 10:57 AM PST

My alma mater, Mankato State University, for over ten years after the establishment of its multi-cultural diversity program had no problem whatsoever with gays being bashed on its campus. (Continued…)

Post a Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Get macromedia Flash Player

Advertisement

Print Edition

Online Features Section

Handling a breakup
Online Dating
Interview with Andrew Sean Greer
Hollywood Buzz No. 5 - The Oscar results
Hollywood Buzz No. 4 - The 81st Oscars
Sac in Stereo No. 19 - What makes a great singer?
Hollywood Buzz No. 4 - Classic Christmas Movies
Sac in Stereo No. 18 - Haven't I heard this song before?
Sexcapades No. 7 - Dating your co-worker or your boss
Hollywood Buzz No. 3 - Romantic Comedies
Sac in Stereo No. 17 - Eclectic additions for any record collection
Sexcapades No. 6 - Why men and women date
Sac in Stereo No. 16 - Dillinger Four CD review, worldwide Thriller dance, Prince's secret message
Sac in Stereo No. 15 - Mixtapes and D.Willz live in the studio
Sac in Stereo No. 14 - Soundtracks for the Obama and McCain campaigns
Hollywood Buzz No. 2 - Indie and DVD gems
Sac in Stereo No. 13 - Don't call it a comeback! Should Metallica, AC/DC, Journey and LL Cool J stay or go?
Hollywood Buzz No. 1 - Summer Blockbusters
Sac in Stereo No. 12 - We (almost) interview Kanye, Justin and Amy Winehouse
Sexcapades No. 5 - Going for home base on the first date; avoiding psychos
Sac in Stereo No. 11 - Turntablism v. mashups; Coachella recap
Sac in Stereo No. 10 - Mariah Carey: bigger than the Beatles?
Sac in Stereo No. 9 - Hip-hop meets rock culture; interview and freestlye with rapper D.Willz
Sac in Stereo No. 8 - The state of the Sacramento scene (with KWOD's Andy Hawk)
Sac in Stereo No. 7 - The most overrated artists
Sexcapades No. 4 - The safe Spring-Break hookup
Sac in Stereo No. 5 - Guilty pleasures from the CD bin
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 3 - The ugliest, most drugged-up celebrities we love
Sac in Stereo No. 4 - The top artists to watch for in 2008
Sexcapades No. 3 - Sleeping together without staying together
Sac In Stereo No. 3 - The worst albums from our favorite artists
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 2 - Who was hottest at the Oscars?
Sac in Stereo No. 2 - Is music more accessible in this generation?
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 1 - Does Britney Spears smell; exploiting celebrities' children
Sac in Stereo No. 1 - Why form a side project? Can local musicians even make money?
Sexcapades No. 2 - Proper anal etiquette; watching porn as a couple
Reel Talk No. 7 - Oscarbation
Reel Talk: No. 6 - The dying drive-in
Sexcapades podcast: Hornet relationships and sex: No. 1
Reel Talk: Episode 5 - That annoying guy in the theater
Sex Ed(itors) - Episode 4: Mistakes women make in bed
Reel Talk: Episode 3 - Who's hot in film?
Sex Ed(itors): Episode 3 - Kinky relationships
Rapping with Kingspade's Johnny Richter
Sex Ed(itors): Episode 2 - Fetishes
Reel Talk: Episode 2 - Cult Classics
Reel Talk: Episode 1 - Summer movies
Sex Ed(itors) : Episode 1 - Oral Sex
Local reggae artists sound off
The Dimes to flip in for nooner
Jello to slide into Union Ballroom on Monday
Mayday Parade interview
Lovedrug interview
Red Jumpsuit Apparatus interview

Advertisement