The article "The Ban on Gays in the Military" takes a look at how this ban on a subset of individuals is unfair and cruel.

military but was unsuccessful.   Instead there was a policy set into place in 1993 called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”.   While this policy would prove to be a compromise, it brought about its own set of problems.               In the past five or six years there has been a shift in the mindset of how gays are viewed in the military.   Military leaders and the public are more willing to accept the idea of gays in the military.   Therefore, administrators and leaders need to take a more active role in trying to remove the ban.   HCTSR (Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric -see p.10 in your text) On a scale from 1 to 4 on the Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric, I gave the article a 2.   The reason that I gave the article a 2 was because it failed to identity counter arguments, ignored alternative points of view and justified few results.             First, the article fails to identify counter arguments.   The article argues that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is not effective.   It gives valid points of arguments such as “thousands of military service members have been discharged at a time when they are needed the most” (The Ban on Gays in the Military).   It also argues that “The loss of highly skilled interpreters and intelligence analysts has been especially damaging.”   While these points are valid, the article does not give counter-arguments that show how the policy has been effective as a progression towards the ban being removed.            Secondly, the article ignores alternative viewpoints.   The article is very one-sided in its opinion that the ban and the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy are unwarranted.     It also gives a very one-sided opinion on what the government should do and how they are handling the situation.   The article does not give any other opinions that show other viewpoints on how these issues are perceived by other people.            Lastly, the article justifies few results.   It points out that “thousands of military service members have been discharged”, but it fails to give numerical data that shows exactly how many have been discharged due to their sexual orientation.   Also, the article points out that military leaders and the public are more willing to accept gays in the military.   However, the article cannot justifiably prove this.VIDEO: OPINION“An op-ed, abbreviated from opposite the editorial page (though often mistaken for opinion-editorial), is a newspaper article that expresses the opinions of a named writer who is usually unaffiliated with the newspaper's editorial board” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op-ed).   In this instance it is an op-ed video.   The video was added along with the article to visually show people how the ban affects the lives of the individuals that are gay in the military.   The video is supposed to evoke an emotional response which will further connect readers and sway their thinking to align with the author’s main points of arguments.   The video shows the hurt and the pain that is often not talked attributed to the issue.CONCLUSIONThe topic of being gay has been a taboo subject in American culture.   For many people, the term “gay” has negative connotations.   For some, it brings up feelings of fear, shame, and much more.   Therefore, it is no wonder why there is a ban on gays in the military.   In my opinion this ban is not right and it borderlines on unethical and illegal practices.   There is nowhere else in America where this type of alienation and segregation would be tolerated.   Gays should have the opportunity to be open without fear of retribution and the government should take a more substantial role in stopping this unfair treatment.   In a time of war such as this, America needs all of its available soldiers.   The government is supposed to be an example of true unbiased leadership.   So why do we tolerate this type of treatment in one of the most highly respected parts of our government?   America used to be one of the most forward-thinking and innovative countries in the world.   However, with practices such as these it seems that we are stuck in a time warp.