• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Judge orders halt to Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Better late than never I guess.

I still don't think it's a good idea for couples regardless of sexual orientation to serve in the same combat unit during a time of war.
 
Everytime I see that the feelings of american LGBT people are trampled on, a small flicker of something that's actually good happens.

I just wished they would happen a damn sight more regular than they actually do.
 
That's great news. A win for common sense and rationality. I can already see the conservatives objecting because an "activist judge bypassed congress!". If it takes "activist judges" to make reasonable decisions that congress wont then so be it. :cool:
 
I do want to note that there are conservatives in this thread and so far the support for ending DADT is unanimous. Good to see, and good for you, those on the right.
 
Awright, now onto allowing the disabled and the obese and the elderly sign up so that no-one gets their widdle feewins hurt.

I guess I'll head downtown tomorrow to observe the great rush of the fabulous to the recruiting office. This is what the fags were waiting for,right? Now there's no obstacle to them signing up. Well except for the myriad STD's the average homo carries around inside them.
 
bynmdsue said:
Awright, now onto allowing the disabled and the obese and the elderly sign up so that no-one gets their widdle feewins hurt.

I guess I'll head downtown tomorrow to observe the great rush of the fabulous to the recruiting office. This is what the fags were waiting for,right? Now there's no obstacle to them signing up. Well except for the myriad STD's the average homo carries around inside them.
Click to expand...
Did you ever serve?
 
As predicted, the Obama administration is appealing the ruling. Pathetic.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69B63U20101012
Click to expand...
That is a different story. The current story is about the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell. Not the Defense Of Mariage Act. The story you linked to is about the federal judges repeal of DOMA a few months ago. Regardless it's rediculous of them to appeal it. Especially considering Obama supposedly supports it!
 
Well, I'm glad to hear DADT was ordered to a halt by a judge, but I have a feeling it's going to either be: Appealed right to the Supreme Court; Obama will issue an executive order instituting the exact same policy again; or a new bill that will re-institute DADT again.

You'd think a declaration of a law being declared unconstitutional would be enough to render null and void any new bill that is created after the ruling (unless it's an amendment), but under George W. Bush's second administration, this happened all the time.
 
bynmdsue said:
Awright, now onto allowing the disabled and the obese and the elderly sign up so that no-one gets their widdle feewins hurt.

I guess I'll head downtown tomorrow to observe the great rush of the fabulous to the recruiting office. This is what the fags were waiting for,right? Now there's no obstacle to them signing up. Well except for the myriad STD's the average homo carries around inside them.
Click to expand...

Are you a troll or just an ******* giving his honest opinion?
 
bynmdsue said:
Awright, now onto allowing the disabled and the obese and the elderly sign up so that no-one gets their widdle feewins hurt.

I guess I'll head downtown tomorrow to observe the great rush of the fabulous to the recruiting office. This is what the fags were waiting for,right? Now there's no obstacle to them signing up. Well except for the myriad STD's the average homo carries around inside them.
Click to expand...

Sounds like Ken Mehlman just before he came out of the closet.
 
The Uniform Code of Military Justice, Section 125, requires that any soldier committing sodomy be "punished as directed by a Court Martial" and separated from the service.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Harass, Don't Pursue, was a policy created to give soldiers and commanders alike a system of plausible deniability, whereby UCMJ S.125 would not need to be invoked.

I assume that with the abolition of DADT-DHDP, the military will go back to the original policy, whereby commanders are required to investigate and report possible UCMJ violations.

Or have I misunderstood, and this Judge has actually issued an injunction against UCMJ S.125, a statute passed by Congress, and signed by the President?

I mean, the whole point of DADTetc. was that it gives soldiers an excuse to leave the issue alone. As long as UCMJ S.125 is still in effect, being openly gay in the military is a guaranteed ticket to separation, and/or punishment. Getting rid of DADTetc. just removes any shred of plausible deniability for soldiers and commanders.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
The Uniform Code of Military Justice, Section 125, requires that any soldier committing sodomy be "punished as directed by a Court Martial" and separated from the service.
Click to expand...

And most legal definitions of sodomy include oral sex between consenting adults regardless of gender (i.e. including heterosexuals).

ETA: You could read the injunction itself and find out that your assumption that the injunction means a return to pre-DADT law is wrong. http://www.politico.com/static/PPM153_dadt.html

ETA: I would add that your description of the origin of DADT is accurate.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
The Uniform Code of Military Justice, Section 125, requires that any soldier committing sodomy be "punished as directed by a Court Martial" and separated from the service.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Harass, Don't Pursue, was a policy created to give soldiers and commanders alike a system of plausible deniability, whereby UCMJ S.125 would not need to be invoked.

I assume that with the abolition of DADT-DHDP, the military will go back to the original policy, whereby commanders are required to investigate and report possible UCMJ violations.

Or have I misunderstood, and this Judge has actually issued an injunction against UCMJ S.125, a statute passed by Congress, and signed by the President?

I mean, the whole point of DADTetc. was that it gives soldiers an excuse to leave the issue alone. As long as UCMJ S.125 is still in effect, being openly gay in the military is a guaranteed ticket to separation, and/or punishment. Getting rid of DADTetc. just removes any shred of plausible deniability for soldiers and commanders.
Click to expand...

The latter.

Plaintiff Log Cabin Republicans attacks the constitutionality of the statute known as the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Act ("the Act" or "the Policy"), found at 10 U.S.C. § 654, and its implementing regulations.1 ... Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought in its First Amended
Complaint: a judicial declaration to that effect and a permanent injunction
barring further enforcement of the Act.
Click to expand...
The key phrase there is "implementing regulations," as the judge defines the act in the footnote as:

1 The Act, described in greater detail below, provides that any member
of the U.S. Armed Forces who engages in homosexual conduct is subject to
discharge unless the servicemember is able to demonstrate that he or she
has no propensity to engage in "homosexual conduct." Under the Act,
homosexual conduct includes sexual acts with persons of the same sex,
admissions that one is homosexual or bisexual, and attempts to marry a
person of the same sex.
Click to expand...
The judge is striking down all regulations that implement the policy that members of the US armed forces who engage in homosexual conduct are subject to discharge.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/37183082/Decision-finding-DADT-is-unconstitutional
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom