But that still does not change the underlying law which now applies, the
UCMJ, and that is far more strict than DADT. You still have not
answered that one.
On 10/13/2010 01:10 PM, Tommy News wrote:
*False twisted pretzel pundit logic. *
**
*The point of DADT repeal is to allow gays to serve.*
*-The Other Annointed One
*
On 10/13/10, *THE ANNOINTED ONE* <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Without DADT you will revert to this Art. 117 clause,
Any person subject to this chapter who uses provoking or reproachful
words or gestures towards any other person subject to this chapter
shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
And the standard is that within the (each and every different)
command. A gentle hip roll or a floppy wrist is more than enough....
This section is as old as the military and has been upheld by the
Supremes...
With DADT Gays were protected because sexual proclivity was
inadmissible. They now LOSE the right to NOT answer that question.
Yes, Tommy, a real victory by the blind and the stupid.
On Oct 13, 9:51 am, Tommy News <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Judge acts while others debate Pentagon gay policy
>
> By PETE YOST (AP) – 8 hours ago
>
> WASHINGTON — A federal judge's ruling that the military must
stop its "don't
> ask, don't tell" policy comes amid conflicting concerns of gays
who think
> the government is moving too slowly to let them serve openly and
Pentagon
> officials who believe that moving too quickly might disrupt a
military
> engaged in war.
>
> Gay rights groups have said they are disappointed that
legislation to
> override the ban is likely to languish in Congress until next
year, when
> Democrats could have fewer seats and less power to override
Republican
> objections.
>
> Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff
Chairman Mike
> Mullen, the military's top uniformed officer, have supported
lifting the ban
> on gays serving openly. But Gates and Mullen also have warned
that they
> would prefer to move slowly.
>
> Meantime, despite a federal judge's ruling in San Diego on
Tuesday, the
> battle in the courts over gays in the military may be far from over.
>
> The Justice Department's first response may well be another trip
to the
> courtroom of U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips in San Diego
to seek a
> stay, or temporary freeze, of her ruling. If Phillips turns down the
> request, the Justice Department likely turn to the federal
appeals court in
> California.
>
> It was unclear whether Phillips' injunction against the
17-year-old policy
> on gays in the military would affect any ongoing cases.
>
> Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell, traveling with Gates in Hanoi,
Vietnam,
> said, "We have just learned of the ruling and are now studying
it. We will
> be in consultation with the Department of Justice about how best to
> proceed."
>
> If the government does not appeal, the injunction cannot be
reversed and
> would remain in effect. If it does appeal, that would put the
administration
> in the position of continuing to defend a law it opposes.
>
> With so much uncertainty, it also was unclear whether the ruling
would have
> any immediate effect on the midterm election campaigns that so
far have
> focused far more on economic than national security issues.
>
> Gay rights groups warned gay troops not to disclose their
identity for now.
> Aaron Tax, the legal director for the Servicemembers Legal
Defense Network,
> said he expects the Justice Department to appeal the case to the
U.S. 9th
> Circuit Court of Appeals.
>
> "Service members must proceed safely and should not come out at
this time,"
> Tax said in a statement.
>
> Gates, a Republican, and Mullen face disagreement among the most
senior
> general officers on whether lifting the ban would cause serious
disruption
> at a time when troops are fighting in Afghanistan and winding
down a long
> battle in Iraq.
>
> For example, the incoming Marine commandant, Gen. Joseph Amos,
and his
> predecessor, Gen. James Conway, both have told Congress that
they think most
> Marines would be uncomfortable with the change and that the
current policy
> works.
>
> In part to resolve the question of how the troops feel, Gates
has ordered a
> study due Dec. 1 that includes a survey of troops and their
families.
>
> Obama agreed to the Pentagon study. Obama also worked with
Democrats to
> write a bill that would have lifted the ban, pending completion
of the
> Defense Department review and certification from the military
that troop
> morale wouldn't suffer. That legislation passed the House but
was blocked in
> the Senate by Republicans.
>
> Democrats could revive the legislation in Congress' lame-duck
session after
> the Nov. 2 elections.
>
> Family Research Council President Tony Perkins accused Phillips
of "playing
> politics" with national defense.
>
> "Once again, an activist federal judge is using the military to
advance a
> liberal social agenda, disregarding the views of all four
military service
> chiefs and the constitutional role of Congress," he said.
>
> Perkins urged the Justice Department "to fulfill its obligation
to defend
> the law vigorously through the appeals process" and said
"Congress should
> make clear that it will not tolerate this judicial activism."
>
> Gates has said the purpose of his study isn't to determine
whether to change
> the "don't ask, don't tell" law, which is something he says is
probably
> inevitable but for Congress to decide. Instead, the study is
intended to
> determine how to end the policy without causing serious disruption.
>
> Coming just three weeks before voters go to the polls, Tuesday's
ruling
> seemed unlikely to force a final weeks' change of strategy or
message as
> candidates pounded home their plans to help put back to work the
15 million
> Americans lacking jobs.
>
> Polls suggest the economy is driving voters' choices, pushing
national
> security and social issues down on their list of concerns.
>
More:http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hxIyhWP4o0LCQi15rYE...
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy --
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
