From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 27 Jul 93 02:49:13 GMT From: world!srctran@uunet.uu.net (Gregory Aharonian) Subject: DoD, Ada, Homosexuality and Hypocrisy Message-ID: List-Id: The current dilemmas the DoD is trying to deal with in regards to finding a policy for homosexuality reminds me of the dilemmas the DoD is facing in trying to deal with Ada. In particular, there are many parallels between the 'de jure' "don't ask, don't tell" homosexuality policy, and the 'de facto' "don't ask, don't tell" Ada Mandate policy, given the rampant violations of the Mandate within the DoD itself. Independent of the validity or utility of either of these policies, is the issue of hypocrisy. A recent article in Time magazine (July 26,41) has some observations on this issue of hypocrisy that I would like to repeat here: "Don't ask, don't tell" is corrosive at several levels. "By engaging in this hypocrisy", says the philosopher Sissela Bok, "by saying something matters and then ignoring it, by mandating duplicity, the government will further reduce the public's trust in the honest of its officials". "It is ironic that the military should participate in sanctioning a catergory of falsehood by silence", says New York University law professor Stephen Gillers. "More than any institution in society, probably including the family, the military insists that its effectiveness demands loyalty to the organization above loyalty to self. If there's something amiss, you're supposed to speak up. If homosexuality or its practice is considered wrong, you're supposed to acknowledge it and others are supposed to expose you. This so-called compromise is dishonorable on its face". I claim, and have posted more data than anyone else, that the Mandate is being violated in the main by the DoD, and yet no one has ever shown any interest in the data - the DoD just does not want to know about its people violating a federal law in ignoring the Mandate. It is hypocrisy pure and simple - hypocrisy that does not get lost in the minds of the general public considering the adoption of Ada. Why should anyone believe the claims made by the Ada Mandated world when the Ada Mandated world apparently does not believe them themselves? Read the Mandate legislation. It applies to everything the DoD does with software. And given Reifer's data showing the cost-effectiveness of Ada in general, any use of non-Ada in DoD projects (and I have endless lists) is a violation of a federal law, which the last time I checked, is a felony. Anyways, a bit of philosophy for those interested in ethics. -- ************************************************************************** Greg Aharonian Source Translation & Optimization P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178