CNO Records Podcast on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy

Story Number: NNS100602-19Release Date: 6/2/2010 8:10:00 PM
A  A  A   Email this story to a friend   Print this story
By Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class (SW) Kyle P. Malloy, Chief of Naval Operations Public Affairs

WASHINGTON (NNS) -- Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Gary Roughead recorded a podcast June 2.

In the podcast, CNO talked about the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy and expressed his encouragement to each Sailor to participate in the Department of Defense review.

"Every Sailor needs to speak for themselves, and military family members need to be heard too," said Roughead.

CNO stated the importance of each individual Sailor's input.

"Be honest and speak your own personal beliefs and opinions," said Roughead. "The review is only valuable with full participation."

Roughead also encouraged any Sailor who has not yet participated in the review, to voice their opinion anonymously via a CAC-enabled website at

To listen to the podcast, visit

For more news from Chief of Naval Operations, visit

6/28/2010 7:41:00 PM
Sexual preference should be no more of a determining factor of eligibility to serve than religious preference. Gays/lesbians should not get special treatment but they should get equal treatment. If your only crime is that your sexual preference, which is consummated in secret and between two consenting adults,is considered deviant and taboo then that is discrimination. Sexual assault and assault are already punishable and do not correlate to sexual preferences.

6/9/2010 10:30:00 AM
Lying, deceiving, and misleading are actions that are shunned by the US Armed Forces; however, the military policy DADT calls for our gay/lesbian service members to engage in these discreditable actions on a daily basis. DADT can basically be described as a law to isolate and ultimately eliminate a group of people (a sexual minority) who serve their country. These brave men and women lay their lives on the line and yet are at risk of being called dishonorable for being who they are. DADT (Congress) segregates gays from all other groups of minorities, citing they are a threat to “Unit Cohesion” and that their sexuality is incompatible with the military way of life. Moreover, unit cohesion by its very definition is inclusion, inclusion of all members as a single unit. DADT IS a detriment to unit cohesion in that it is calling for members to LIE about who they are. Social boundaries and definitions are shattered day one of boot camp. The time has come for DADT to be repealed!

6/8/2010 7:11:00 PM
I hope this issue does not become a popular vote like the uniform change. I have served in the navy for almost 17 years now and sexual contact on ships/ at work is not authorized. Gays have been serving in the Navy since the beginning. Sexual activity should not be a part of work/mission weather hetero or homosexual. Leave sex at home, come to work, to work, period. Remember when blacks were allowed to serve, many hated that idea too. It is 2010 for God sake, don’t be ignorant. ENCS.

6/8/2010 7:41:00 AM
With the national debt at an all time high, shouldn't we deal with this matter at a later date. Currently, the "team" that is reviewing this law and gathering opinions from base to base, is costing the taxpayer a fortune in per diem, travel and other allowances. I refuse to believe that are tax dollars are not being prioritized by this administration but then again, I know better!

6/7/2010 11:51:00 PM
I have deployed, worked with, and slept-in berthings with lesbians. I wish that they could be open with their sexual preference. Hiding who they are would not be a psychological burden. Allow them to embrace who they are! Their sexual preference is known anyhow. No one is stupid. Why force them to hide it? It just creates bitterness when they can not embrace who they are. Besides, it does not matter if you are strait, lesbian or gay people have relationships while deployed together.

6/7/2010 4:10:00 PM
I think we should keep the policy the way it is. “Don't ask, don't tell” is about as far as I think we should go with allowing homosexuality in the military. I am not opposed to homosexuals serving our country. I just don't think it should be openly discussed for many reasons; it protects them as well as those that are completely opposed to it. I agree that openly allowing homosexuality would be going down a slippery slope. Heterosexual liberal female.

6/7/2010 4:01:00 PM
There are many people serving in the military who are gay or are in the closet. I’ve known a few during my career and their sexuality did not affect their ability to do their job or follow orders. The way I see things you might be working for one right now and would never know because they keep that part of their life private as it should be rather you are straight or homosexual. My “personal problem” is I hate men that act like a woman but I don’t feel their out to turn me into one of them.

6/7/2010 12:51:00 PM
As a member in the navy I took an oath that includes the statement, "To obey the orders of those appointed over me". An order from a senior that is homosexual is no diffent than an order from a heterosexual. Same thing with junior personnel, an order is an order. Ones preferences will not affect the performance of their duty, and if a homosexual individual issues an order, I will gladly obey, as I have gladly accepted my oath.

6/7/2010 5:16:00 AM
why is this country so worried about the the life of a homosexual.we have far better things in life to worry about.I feel everyone deserves the chance to defend the nation against all enemies.if you think about they already play a big role in this country so get over it and let them do the job some of you cant or wont do.

6/6/2010 2:51:00 AM
In the constitution, which service members vow to defend and uphold, citizens are afforded the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, so long as these rights do not infringe upon the rights of another. How are gays in the military, or gay marraiges for that matter, in violation of this fundamental principle? A bigot is a bigot, no matter how well wrapped in their own self-rightousness and ignorance he may be. I am a gay veteran and was always evaluated as best

6/5/2010 8:15:00 PM
SCPO B, Hawaii, "Racism, discrimination, and hate crimes" will not grow unless we as leaders allow it. I believe that it is important to have written policy, but what is most impotant is that everyone understands it, and that leaders must also obey and enforce it. We will always be faced with ethical dilemas. If we see something wrong we must correct it. Things do not have to get out of control; when they do is when leaders fail. Petty Officer First Class, Naples, Italy

6/5/2010 6:39:00 PM
I wouldn't consider a retiree's opinion here-they are no longer serving on the deckplates nor are they in the trenches. Let active duty folks decide whether we should discriminate against volunteering patriots. Regarding the red herring about "good order and discipline," Tailhook was hardly about good order and discpline; hazing was hardly about good order and discipline; frat is not a homosexual problem, and neither is acting a fool in port. Hard work, know-how, and motivation-period!!

6/5/2010 8:38:00 AM

6/5/2010 3:20:00 AM
Now is the time that we realize that diversity does not diminish our humanity; that respecting diversity does not make us less human; that understanding and accepting our differences do not make us cruel. And in fact, history has shown us that denying and rejecting human variability is the one that has lead us to inflict indignity upon indignity towards each other.

6/4/2010 10:05:00 PM
Open relationships within a command are not allowed whether homo or not but they happen anyways. For a great many years the Navy has had, still has and will continue to have it's good share of gays/lesbians throughout, and yes, we've all seen it, whether at your own command or another. Are we really that naive to think this will stop if rules/regs are imposed. The homo population is greater than most care to think; racism, discrimination, hate crimes will grow, that is one fact this will bring.

6/4/2010 9:21:00 PM
The slippery slope argument has been used before. Admitting that there are, indeed, homosexuals in the military will not be the first step towards bringing spouses on deployment, nor will it encourage a breakdown in morals. Whatever the decision our national and service leadership makes, it will be incumbent upon the deckplate leadership to fairly and justly implement the policy.

6/4/2010 1:42:00 PM
Ltjg, MC Comments are sarcasm. Good order and discipline are necessary to maitain combat readiness. Allowing open relationships are NOT condusive to good oreder and Discipline. The ships is sinking, who are you going to save your "Partner" or the guy that can potentially save the ship. Bloodbanks; Having open relationships endorses Homosexual activity, therefore increses the risk of AIDS in the event of a disaster. BAH? Spouse? Whats next?

6/4/2010 6:52:00 AM
The function of the military is to protect and defend the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. The military is not and should not be used as a platform for social engineering or experimentation. There are rules in place regarding personal conduct of military members. Why not enforce those rules and leave the social engineering to civilians.

6/4/2010 12:21:00 AM
Is this really that different or more challenging than when we integrated African Americans or Women into the service? I know it is emotional to some and seen as impossible for others, but a profession Naval force with evaluate every Sailor on sustained superior performance and not on race, religion, gender, age, etc. We will be able to adapt, overcome, and complete the mission, and for those that can't, remember this is a voluntary force.

6/3/2010 12:03:00 PM
Master Chief, Do you really think that allowing homosexuals to serve on ships really means that heterosexuals should be allowed to bring their spouses aboard? Nobody is supposed be in a relationship with anyone else at the same command anyways, hetero or homosexual. Maybe we should only enlist people who are celibate. That would solve all our issues, right? The best thing that we can do is to stop it when we see that there is a relationship occurring no matter what sexual preference it is.

6/3/2010 12:03:00 PM
Master Chief, Do you really think that allowing homosexuals to serve on ships really means that heterosexuals should be allowed to bring their spouses aboard? Nobody is supposed be in a relationship with anyone else at the same command anyways, hetero or homosexual. Maybe we should only enlist people who are celibate. That would solve all our issues, right? The best thing that we can do is to stop it when we see that there is a relationship occurring no matter what sexual preference it is.

6/3/2010 9:31:00 AM
Where does drawing the line end? It seems to me that changing the policy opens the door to discrimination. If the USN says it is fine to go to sea with your shipmate that you share sex preferences with then as a married sailor it would seem fair that heterosexuals should be able to bring along their wives. I think that the USN should leave the present policy stand as otherwise Pandoras Box may be more than a myth in the future.

Comment submission for this story is now closed.
Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Gary Roughead answers questions from Sailors and their families at Naval Support Activity Mid-South in Millington, Tenn.
Official U.S. Navy file photo.
May 4, 2010
Navy Social Media
Sign up for email updates To sign up for updates or to access your subscriber preferences, please click on the envelope icon in the page header above or click here.