• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Sorry Gay People, This Country Failed You Again

dust1n

Zindīq
US ban on openly gay troops to stay - Americas - Al Jazeera English

Moderator cut: image removed The 'don't ask, don't tell' law will stay in place as it is debated in a forthcoming legal battle [AFP]

The US military's ban on openly gay troops will remain in place while the Obama administration challenges a court ruling overturning the policy, a US appeals court has ruled.


Monday's decision means that the controversial "don't ask, don't tell" law will remain in place for the duration of a landmark legal battle that saw the policy briefly dropped before being re-instated.


In September, a district judge ruled that the law infringed on constitutional rights of gay men and women serving the military, prompting the Obama administration to appeal.


Barack Obama insists that he supports ending the "don't ask, don't tell" rule, but argues that congress rather than the courts should make the decision once the US military completes plans for an orderly transition to a new policy towards gay recruits.
The Pentagon has warned that a sudden change to a new law will hamper military readiness and cohesion.


The three judges sitting on the appeals court ruled 2-1 in favour of suspending the earlier decision, concluding that "the public interest in ensuring orderly change of this magnitude in the military - if that is what is to happen - strongly militates in favor of a stay."


Confusion

It could be months before the appeals court issues a ruling on whether or not the law, which requires gay service personnel to keep their sexuality secret, should be abandoned in line with the earlier ruling.



The initial decision to lift the ban sparked confusion at recruitment offices, where a number of openly gay former servicemen sought to re-enlist, despite warnings they could face dismissal if the law is re-instated.


The legal debate comes at an awkward moment for Obama and the Democrats, who are facing a potential rout from Republicans in Tuesday's mid-term elections.
Many Republicans are fiercely opposed to gays serving in the military and are likely to gain from any controversy over social issues that could galavanise their conservative base at the polls.


The "don't ask, don't tell" law was introduced by former president Bill Clinton as a compromise between previous rules that excluded gays from serving in the military, and allowing them to serve as openly homosexual.


An estimated 13,000 men and women have been discharged from the military for being gay since the law came into effect, angering gay-rights campaigners.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Requia

Active Member
It would be extremely bizarre if this stay was not granted. Both sides have a lot to lose if this decision flops around in the appeals process.
 

Smoke

Done here.
Not the least bit surprising. Don't expect any action during the lame duck session, either. If there is any action, it will only be on DADT, although ENDA, UAFA, and the repeal of DOMA are all far more important and would affect far more people.

I am, frankly, losing my enthusiasm for the repeal of DADT anyway.

I have long doubted whether serving in the U.S. military is an honorable occupation. This is particularly true with regard to lesbian and gay servicemembers who, in view of the way they're treated by their own government, ought to know better than the serve the cause of oppressing foreigners -- even if the corporations that own and direct our government are themselves sometimes superficially LGBT-friendly.

Queer folks should boycott the armed forces.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Queer folks should boycott the armed forces.

I'm not sure if that could work.

I mean, I bet that there are at least a few GLBT folks who discover their homosexuality while serving in the Armed Forces.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I'm disappointed, but maybe it is only a slow-down (perhaps even a needed one) instead of a true obstruction.
 

no-body

Well-Known Member
I have long doubted whether serving in the U.S. military is an honorable occupation. This is particularly true with regard to lesbian and gay servicemembers who, in view of the way they're treated by their own government, ought to know better than the serve the cause of oppressing foreigners -- even if the corporations that own and direct our government are themselves sometimes superficially LGBT-friendly.

Queer folks should boycott the armed forces.

I agree, to paraphrase Bill Hicks a bunch of hired killers shouldn't be judging others, anyone dumb enough to want to be in the military should be allowed.
 

142857

Member
Why is it so important for gays to inform the world of their gayness.

it would seem to me that anyone could be a great soldier for their whole lives without their sexual preferance ever coming into play.
 

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
Why is it so important for gays to inform the world of their gayness.

it would seem to me that anyone could be a great soldier for their whole lives without their sexual preferance ever coming into play.

So you think just because someone is Gay they have no desire to show their friends pictures of their loved ones. Talk about their home life. They must live a lie and keep their whole life a secret from all others. It sounds very sad to me.
 

dust1n

Zindīq
Why is it so important for gays to inform the world of their gayness.

it would seem to me that anyone could be a great soldier for their whole lives without their sexual preferance ever coming into play.

Why let married men into the military then? Why should they be allowed to talk about it?
 

Requia

Active Member
Why is it so important for gays to inform the world of their gayness.

it would seem to me that anyone could be a great soldier for their whole lives without their sexual preferance ever coming into play.


You do realize that actually having a relationship gets gays kicked out? It's not just a keep quiet rule.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Barack Obama insists that he supports ending the "don't ask, don't tell" rule, but argues that congress rather than the courts should make the decision once the US military completes plans for an orderly transition to a new policy towards gay recruits.
The Pentagon has warned that a sudden change to a new law will hamper military readiness and cohesion.
I don't see why the two efforts shouldn't be autonomous (and the media doesn't see fit to tell us).
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Why is it so important for gays to inform the world of their gayness.

it would seem to me that anyone could be a great soldier for their whole lives without their sexual preferance ever coming into play.
It's called "honesty."
 

142857

Member
Ok.....Honestly, as bad as it may sound.....Straight soldiers don't want gay guys watching their backs....

Honestly, The Strongest Fighting Force in the world would be slightly de moralized if it were to become the worlds first openly gay brigade.

I have a feeling there aren't a bunch of buff baddass super soldiers who are also gay trying to get a chance to fight....I think rather there are simply gay's trying to show the world it's ok to be gay and using the millitary as a vehicle for their agenda.

Honestly, there are still a great deal of people who just aren't down with it.
 

Duck

Well-Known Member
Well... with DADT, they've got an automatic "out" (pun only slightly intended).

Down side of course being that any significant amount of time in the military is effectively wasted when processed out under DADT. Spent 10 years in and then got outed, or came out, or had some jerk call your command because they saw a copy of DNA in your backseat when they pulled you over for speeding, and guess what? you are out on your *** with no severance pay, possibly (depending on how your command works the discharge) with reduced benefits and perhaps even a characterization on your discharge that makes employers hesitant to employ you. And all it takes to invoke DADT is an anonymous phone call (or at least that was the case up until last month. technically now the anonymous phone call isn't supposed to be enough, but I have no doubt that it still works).
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Why is it so important for gays to inform the world of their gayness.

it would seem to me that anyone could be a great soldier for their whole lives without their sexual preferance ever coming into play.
I wear a wedding ring. I keep a photo of my wife on my desk. At the odd time when I've attended family-oriented company events, I've brought my wife. I think all of these things are eminently reasonable for anyone to do in any workplace, whether the person is gay or straight.

There are a bunch of support programs for spouses and partners of servicemen and women. With DADT, all of them are effectively off-limits to same-sex partners.

The military has found that "great soldiers" can be even better when they know that while they're in the field, their families have support at home. Soldiers in same-sex relationships don't get this.

Ok.....Honestly, as bad as it may sound.....Straight soldiers don't want gay guys watching their backs....
This sounds a lot like the arguments that were used against integration of the armed forces. If they didn't work then, why do they work now?

Honestly, The Strongest Fighting Force in the world would be slightly de moralized if it were to become the worlds first openly gay brigade.
More demoralized than knowing that their military cares more about some idiotic version of someone's moral standard than it cares about collecting the intelligence that will help to keep them safe in the field? Doubtful.

I have a feeling there aren't a bunch of buff baddass super soldiers who are also gay trying to get a chance to fight....I think rather there are simply gay's trying to show the world it's ok to be gay and using the millitary as a vehicle for their agenda.
No... for the most part, the issue is that there are capable people who really do want to serve their country, and they're frustrated by the fact that the government that they're trying to serve is getting in their way of doing it for no good reason.

Honestly, there are still a great deal of people who just aren't down with it.
There are a great deal of people who just aren't down with 3 AM patrols of Baghdad or being separated from their families for months at a time. But they're expected to deal with it even if they don't like it.

They're soldiers, for crying out loud. If you can take being shot at, you can take the possibility that one of the guys in your platoon just might find you attractive.

You said that being called "the world's first openly gay brigade" would be demoralizing. Do you think it would be more or less demoralizing to be called "the brigade so wussy it's afraid of a few queers"?
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Ok.....Honestly, as bad as it may sound.....Straight soldiers don't want gay guys watching their backs....

Honestly, The Strongest Fighting Force in the world would be slightly de moralized if it were to become the worlds first openly gay brigade.

I have a feeling there aren't a bunch of buff baddass super soldiers who are also gay trying to get a chance to fight....I think rather there are simply gay's trying to show the world it's ok to be gay and using the millitary as a vehicle for their agenda.

Honestly, there are still a great deal of people who just aren't down with it.

Homosexuals are just as capable as anyone else, and their sexuality doesn't impact anything other than the insecurity of simpleminded bigots.
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
Ok.....Honestly, as bad as it may sound.....Straight soldiers don't want gay guys watching their backs....

Some straight soldiers don't want gay people watching their backs. If that's the case, good for them. They can go into another line of work, or they can suck it up and do their duty.

Honestly, The Strongest Fighting Force in the world would be slightly de moralized if it were to become the worlds first openly gay brigade.

It wouldn't be the world's first openly gay brigade, and it wouldn't be demoralized.

I have a feeling there aren't a bunch of buff baddass super soldiers who are also gay trying to get a chance to fight....I think rather there are simply gay's trying to show the world it's ok to be gay and using the millitary as a vehicle for their agenda.

That's probably because you're misguided. Thinking that gay men and women would join the military and go to war just to further the "gay agenda" is ridiculous and stupid. I'm not sure why they have to be "buff ****** super soldiers". Does a straight soldier have to be that? Or is that just a double standard for gay soldiers?

Honestly, there are still a great deal of people who just aren't down with it.

That's true. There are still a great deal of people who just aren't down with black people going to the same schools as white people. We should get rid of that, right?

Look, if people aren't down with it, then they can leave. That's all there is to it.
 
Top