Gates & Obama Urge Repeal of Military’s Gay Ban
- Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:07pm by
Scott Baker
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Robert Gates is encouraging Congress to act before year’s end to repeal the ban on gays serving openly in the military. It’s a position shared by his boss, the president.
But his new Marine commandant thinks otherwise and the Senate has not yet taken action, setting up yet another hurdle for gay activists who see their window quickly closing. After Tuesday‘s elections that saw Republicans chip away at Democrats’ majority in the Senate and wrest the House from their control, their hopes for ending the 17-year-old law have dimmed.
“I would like to see the repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,‘ but I’m not sure what the prospects for that are and we’ll just have to see,” Gates told reporters traveling with him to Australia this weekend.
Gates said he would prefer Congress act after the Pentagon releases its study of how repeal would be implemented, which is due Dec. 1.
That goal, though, lacks to backing of the Marine Corps commandant at a moment the country is fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“This is not a social thing. This is combat effectiveness,” Gen. James Amos said.
That hesitation could be enough to give senators permission not to act, activists fear.
The House has passed legislation repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell,” but it has not yet seen a vote in the full Senate, where Democrats don’t have the votes to overcome a Republican filibuster. Democratic leaders says they are trying to reach a deal across the aisle now that Election Day has passed.
“The Senate should call up the defense bill reported out of committee and pass it before it goes home for the year,” said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. “If the president, Majority Leader Reid, Secretary Gates and a handful of Republican senators are committed to passing the comprehensive defense bill, there is ample time to do so.”
Gay activists worry the repeal could be stripped from the bill that funds the Pentagon.
“Any talk about a watered down defense bill, whereby the ‘don’t ask’ revisions would be stripped out, is unacceptable and offensive to the gay and lesbian service members who risk their lives everyday,” said Sarvis, whose organization provides legal services for gays and lesbians who face discharge.
Obama on Wednesday also said he wanted a repeal before the new Congress arrives.
“This should not be a partisan issue,” he said. “You’ve got a sizable portion of the American people squarely behind the notion that folks who are willing to serve on our behalf should be treated fairly and equally.”
A Gallup poll in May found 70 percent of American favor allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly.
The legislative countdown comes as a parallel effort to end the ban continues in court.
Last month, the Pentagon was forced to lift its ban on openly serving gays for eight days after a federal judge in California ordered the military to do so. The Justice Department has appealed, and a federal appeals court granted a temporary stay of the injunction.
The Pentagon, meanwhile, is in the midst of a study of how it would implement a repeal should Congress act. Leaders of that effort have said a hasty pace and inadequate protections for gay and lesbian military members could be a disaster.
The White House had hoped lawmakers would delay action until the Pentagon had completed its study so fellow Democrats would not face criticism that they moved too quickly or too far ahead of public opinion in this election year. House Democrats would not wait. Administration officials joined the negotiations to make certain a repeal was not done too quickly.
Obama, Gates and Adm. Michael Mullen – the top uniformed military official in the country – have spoken in favor of repeal but have emphasized that it must be paced. The White House’s favored plan could give the Pentagon years to implement the repeal process and would require the approval of Obama, Gates and Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
In a speech last year at the Army War College, Gates noted that the 1948 executive order for racial integration took five years to implement.
“I‘m not saying that’s a model for this, but I’m saying that I believe this is something that needs to be done very, very carefully,” he told the audience.
“Don’t ask, don’t tell” was imposed by a 1993 law intended as a compromise between President Bill Clinton, who wanted to lift the ban on gays entirely, and a reluctant Congress and military that said doing so would threaten order.
Under the policy, the military can’t ask recruits their sexual orientation. In turn, service members can’t say they are gay or bisexual, engage in homosexual activity or marry a member of the same sex.
Between 1997 and 2008, the Defense Department discharged more than 10,500 service members for violating the policy.
___
AP National Security Writer Anne Gearan in Melbourne, Australia, and Associated Press writer Elliot Spagat in San Diego contributed to this report.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 691 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 488 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 375 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 338 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 326 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 311 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 326 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 224 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 311 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (121)
kamin
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:31pmAs long as there is private showers or the opportunity for guys to join the women‘s shower I don’t see an issue. I’ll defer to the military though. They know what they need.
Report Post »BRAVEHEART
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:18pmShoving filth down our throats is what this is all about, and has been the primary goal on the **** agenda for decades. To have national leaders solicit for this filth, and support perverse deviant behavior in the UNITED STATES MILITARY is dispicable. These lying pseudo American patriots are nothing more than back-stabbing criminals.
Report Post »TwilightZone
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:15pmOk…
Rambo…. or
Richard Simmons.
Who do you want on the battlefield defending us? :)
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:26pmAHHH why cant rambo wear a dress? best of both worlds? lol the fact of the matter is its not that gays can or cant serve, the laffy daffy libs dont want a military to begin with……you know that love and flower power stuff……..there are only happy good muslims looking to share the beauty of sharia law with all their fellow liberals and gays of the world. Islam is the religion of peace so how dare we not let them take over the world and share that peace /sarcasm
Report Post »tierrah
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:03pmLOL Twilight … I’m still wiping the tears from my eyes. Can just see Rambo dancing to sweat off the pounds!!!
Report Post »Axiom
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:57pmWell if gays can serve than others can too and if not well its off to COURT. If a person has mental disorders and can not get into the service all they need to do is find a liberal judge or the aclu and bingo where do we draw the line now Mr President ?
Report Post »Jim in Houston
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:56pmGates is a RINO! He disgraced himself by serving in Obumbler’s cabinet.
Report Post »ladyda
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:28pmLet it alone. Let’s keep our sexual preferences to ourselves and just do our jobs. Really, most Americans care less what consenting adults do in the privacy of their lives. Just please, do not try to shove everything down others throats. Keep it to yourselves, most country serving Patriot‘s would really rather not have gay’s parade their preferences….. the rest of us (me) could care less how you live… so cool it, OK?
Report Post »Venom
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:48pmAgree completely, they just keep pushing the envelope on whats acceptable….next thing you know we start having community bath houses and public orgys…..we are repeating Romes footsteps
Report Post »Smoovious
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:27pmI agree! Out with them! Get em out of the closets so they can be out in the open and get some sunshine like the rest of us! There is no reason they shouldn’t be out! Stand up for their rights!
Well, said, mikenleeds!
Report Post »HippoNips
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:08pmThere is NO military gay ban….Don‘t Ask Don’t Tell ALLOWS gays to be in the military
Report Post »Change your headline and clarify how “serving openly” differs with the current policy.
Smoovious
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:33pmWell, I suppose being able to communicate with your same-sex partner, without fear of having the letter snatched away by the obnoxious solder in your unit (and every group has one, in and out of the military), seeing it is a male partner, and reporting you so you end up dishonorably discharged, no matter how honorably you served?
I think that would differ with current policy…
– Smoov
Report Post »Venom
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:45pmIf i was in that soldiers unit and i was the commanding officer that was given the notice i would have him escorted out for his own safety. PTSD is already a problem, do you need someone you thought you could trust betraying that trust. Get over your self-righteous ideas *******
Report Post »Smoovious
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:43pmoh, right, _I’m_ the one being self-righteous… (and to answer your earlier post, no, I’m straight)
“escorted out for his own safety”… his own safety… so, you agree that the gay soldier isn’t the problem then? If he was, there would be no need to have him escorted, ‘for his own safety’, as he wouldn’t have any need to fear his safety…
and btw, I’m a Libertarian… not a lib-tard… which in many ways, makes me more conservative than you. (and in some ways, not)
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 6:05amSmoovious said: “Well, I suppose being able to communicate with your same-sex partner, without fear of having the letter snatched away by the obnoxious solder in your unit…reporting you so you end up dishonorably discharged…”
Well, if that is the case, the military needs to enforce the policy on both ends. DON’T ASK also applies. A goon who feels he has the right to abuse a fellow gay soldier who is minding his own business should also be dishonorably discharged. Kick out an idiot or two and everyone will get the message. Zero tolerance either way, period.
Report Post »New-American-Saviors
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:06pmJust have seperate Bathrooms,Showers,like Mens-Ladies..and Otherwise. Although in combat I know
Report Post »whet would probably happen.
PeterThePainter
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:00pmNVRFORGET.
Simple fact is a gay soldier is quite knowledgable over being reported/discharged. So DADT suppresses any action on their part. Once it is abolished you will have that percentage that WILL make a point to all, their orientation. Which will be detrimental to his/her own safety amongst a much greater proportion of straight personnel….in combat.
Report Post »drattastic
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:54pmWhen they finally get this openly gay thing done and believe me they will eventually . It’s going to create such mess that defending our country will become secondary. I personally don‘t really care what consenting adults do in private but can’t people just keep their sex lives to themselves.
Report Post »neverending
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:50pmNever could stand gates and never understood why President Bush chose him. He is as liberal as they come.
Report Post »shorthanded12
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:49pmGates should be given a sobriety test, the longer he stays there the more KOOLAID he drinks. He (GATES) should have left along time ago. POTUS is destroying everything he touches. Wander if George Soros has Gates on speed dial just like he has POTUS.
Report Post »DMD
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:46pmThe millitary has height, weight and conduct standerds and FLAMING GAY DUDE doesn’t meet the conduct of a millitary man.
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:58pmNo, but “regular gay dude who just does his job” meets the standards. Like thousands of gay people in the military do every day, at home and overseas.
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:17pm@ nvrforget……….thousands huh really? and the us population is 50% liberal too huh? the most recent study has shown that there is less than 1/2 of 1% of the U.S. population that is gay. how many do you think actually serve? i doubt there is that many, as compared to the numbers as a ratio it is quite low
Report Post »Smoovious
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:23pmYou do realize that the flamers are just a tiny majority of the gay community, right?
The vast majority are indistinguishable from you and me… except, maybe, they aren’t as open with you as the rest of your buddies are, setting him apart. Not suprising really. You guys with the fragile egos probably gave him damn good reason to keep to himself.
It is easy to talk about bravery and honor when you’re surrounded by people who you think are just like you, but to continue to defend, protect and back up the rest of your unit when you know your unit would just as soon turn on you if you let it slip?
Is that honor? Not in my book its not.
Way too many of you guys talk about honor and in the same message, show you don’t know the first thing about what being honorable means.
He puts his life on the line for his country, his freedom, and you, and if you even think he’s gay, you turn on him, and abandon him in return.
Honor my ass… chofaki…
– Smoov
Report Post »Venom
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:40pmIm going to assume you either are gay and still in the closet or your another liberal hippie tard that is all for drugs being legal and being all for people with issues to be left alone because you to have issues and want to be left alone. As i have family members in the military and i am a future soldier (after college) i don’t want gays openly serving, and don’t try with this its not fair crap, life isn’t fair. Grow up and start living in reality.
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 3:51amSmoovious: “He puts his life on the line for his country, his freedom, and you, and if you even think he’s gay, you turn on him, and abandon him in return.”
You lie stupidly. You remind me of Obama when he suggested doctors would rather amputate a diabetic’s foot than give him preventive care, just to get more money. Honor evades you, man.
Report Post »poverty.sucks
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:45pmDon‘t come out until it’s all worked out. Appeals can last an extremely longtime.
Report Post »NHABE64
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:37pmHow can these cockroaches do such a thing. I think someone should shake both Gates and Obama and wake them up. Bonehead politicains have screwed up so many things in this country I can’t believe they would simply push such an initiative. Does the Marine Corps Commandant disagreeing mean anything at all ? Does having a horrible impact on the military who are fighting overseas and for future recruitment mean anything ? Do they want to end up a military made up of all ******* ? This is a dfisgrace, I do realize Obama’s “special friend” Larry Sinclair would be jumping for joy but what about our mighty military. This is a terrible idea, I only hope somebody can stop such a move. Just another attempt to keep destroying America. Sad, really sad to see.
Speak without Fear
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:36pmI would consider it sexual harassament if I was forced to share……living quarters…..and showers, bathroom facilities with gays.
Obama needs to just stick with his bathhouses in Illinios….and stay the heck-out of the military.
Report Post »janddjohnson
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:22pmThat is what the gays will want next…their own quarters.
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 3:33amJanddJohnson,
You’d think, but these gay activists consider that “discrimination.” Guess it‘s the only place where you’ll hear them call for a free market.
Report Post »dontbotherme
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:34pmI agree with Obama (sarcastically). This should not be a partisan issue. It should be a Military issue. Let the Military decide without pressure from any judge who does not have the constitutional authority to overturn a congressional law. …and he wants it done before the end of the year. Curious….
Report Post »PeterThePainter
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:30pmI have nothing aginst gay people in the world, but in the military where close long term situations are in place with housing will probably undetermied moving forward. I think you could look at the “basic attraction” factor. If a man is sexually attracted to a woman…then why not have men and woman bunk together in the military. In this world of same gender attractions of sexual orientation I believe that there will be unforseen consequeces directed towards gays from straights especially in the heat of battle and or the “back me up” senario in the field will be compromised in many situations, thus bringing on unwanted deaths and a reduction of general moral.
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:36pmIrrelevant. DADT does NOT prevent gays from serving. Gay people are serving in the military at this moment. People who act inappropriately are removed from service. Gay people who act appropriately are not. Gay people are currently bunking and showering with other men and apparently, it doesn’t change the effectiveness of our military.
Report Post »Smoovious
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:15pmThis fact, unfortunately, only shows that gays aren’t the problem.
We’re in a new century now, and it is time for people to grow up a little bit more.
A gay solder, being able to say he’s gay, or talk about his partner, or any other communication the hetero soldiers take for granted… hell, the way so many of you talk, you’d think the sky is falling down.
Going to destroy the military? Are you kidding me? Is our military really that fragile?
No way.
Just stop regurgitating the same tired excuses that were used when it came to women and blacks serving, and just deal with it.
You’re not children anymore.
Do your job, let him do his job, and get on with it.
Keep your personal issues to yourself. It isn‘t the gay soldier’s fault you got hangups you can’t deal with. See a counselor if it gets to be too much for you.
– Smoov
Report Post »Venom
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:33pmNo its not irrelevant, he makes a great point, Gays being open in the field is a problem. Being gay is not normal thus a distraction and also, when your in the military, you don’t have rights so get over your hippie fair crap, it doesn’t belong there. That is all.
Report Post »tierrah
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:47pm@ smoov: They do talk about their lives and loves with each other as do heterosexuals. However, I don’t want them to some to my table as the mess hall and start discussing this issue with me when he/she/it knows that I have an “alternate” opinion. The issue to me is a “stuff it” one and I’m tired of having everything I dislike or disagree with crammed down my throat (if you’ll pardon the pun).
Report Post »teahugger
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:26pmI wonder if anyone has done a study on how many gays are currently in the military, and how a change in the laws would affect the number of gays going in to the military. I don’t think its exactly the same issue as having blacks or women in the service, because you can pretty much see for yourself if someone is black or female. But since homosexuals are currently serving, would it really change anything if people knew who they were…except for the possibility of harrassment. As long as a person of any orientation doesn‘t act innapropriately I don’t know what the difference in knowing is. I just don’t know. Glad its not up to me!
Report Post »clh1217
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:30pmIn 1990, I slept in a berthing of 125 women. Over forty lesbians were openly serving and sleeping in the same berthing. The gay women called us straight women “breeders”. Gays openly serve. It is a DADT policy. They serve, they exist, they work, live, eat, sleep, shower, drink, live and die in the military. The DADT is to keep from having discrimination in the work place. NOT to create it. It is to protect ALL MEMBERS. We are men, women. WE are soldiers, marines, airmen, sailors and corpsmen. We do not need “qualifyers” before our ‘label’. To remove the DADT will make a spectacle of gays that the military does not need. Why try to fix something that simply is not broken.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 9:38amBlacks and women– Gen.Colin Powell wrote in 1992 that skin color is a benign nonbehavioral characteristic.Sexual Orientation is perhaps one of the most profound of human behavioral characteristics Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument.” I agree with him in that.
Report Post »while blacks and women can contract HIV/AIDS through transfer of bodily fluids the lifestyles of blacks
and women is not indelibly associated with their behavior as blacks or women. Not so with those whose identity is tied to their sexual behavior.Add to the cost of what they do one might add the
increase in depressive illness and suicide -gays in th emilitary will prove very costly indeed..
Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:26pmthe dont ask dont tell policy was enacted to allow gays to serve. this law is for all service members gay or not …..it stipulates that private life/bedroom is to be kept to yourself…….if a straight man was to talk about his private life he can also be removed from service. the alternative to this law is ASK AND TELL which would result in gays not serving. it is a voluntary service, constitutional “rights” do not exist in the service. if you want to serve, the rules apply to everyone. DONT LIKE IT?………DONT VOLUNTEER
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:33pmBut the rules DON’T apply to everyone. A heterosexual soldier is free to talk about his family and his girlfriend/wife. A gay person is not.
Report Post »komponist-ZAH
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:43pmHow dare we ask that they keep their private lives private. It’s so obviously “homophobic”. (Sarcasm.)
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:44pmTHEY DO APPLY TO EVERYONE it is just not enforced fully. if a gay man is serving most in his unit know, and if he keeps it to himself it is generally not an issue. when he or she makes an issue of it, then it is enforced. straight men do not make an issue out of it, and just act normally. sorry but if you think being gay is normal your wrong. get over it dont be a blatant idiot and serve with honor, and there wont be an issue. but for activists it has to be an issue. EVERYTHING HAS TO BE AN ISSUE FOR AN ACTIVIST. I have a friend who is serving and is gay, but he is pissed off at the ACTIVISTS drawing attention to his private life. he is only interested in serving his country and getting an education and doesnt want any part in social activism which this amounts to. what do you think will happen if these ACTIVISTS GET WHAT THEY WANT? do you think they will be happy and move on? hell no……THEY WILL FIND SOMETHING ELSE TO WHINE ABOUT, ITS WHAT THEY DO. they want it to seem normal, so they can push harder on more moral issues, destroying more and more with each “victory” they get
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:55pm@ Komponist-Zah, do you or do you not think it’s unfair that, if someone is asked about his family at home by a fellow soldier, that person would have to lie if he is gay and wants to follow the rules?
@ Psychosis
So no hetero males ever talk about their private lives in the military?
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:09pm@nvrforget………………..you ask if its fair that a someone cant talk about his/her family if hes gay…………..i doubt his parents are gay, and i doubt that there is an issue with children in most cases……….men still cant have kids………………and blah blah blah……………….I DONT CARE IF ITS FAIR……LIFE ISNT FAIR GET THE FREAK OVER “FAIR” LIFE IS WHAT YOU MAKE OF IT, AND THE CHOICES YOU MAKE. YOUR CHOICES COME WITH RESULTS. how does fair have anything to do with it. if i decide to stick my finger in my butt, is it fair that your finger doesnt stink too?
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:58pmso you chose to be a moron? i guess i would have chosen the higher IQ…
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:20pm@MINTY………..YOU SHOULD GET BACK IN LINE THEN cause your showing you absolute ignorance of the topic. AND STOP USING RACE TO PUSH YOUR BLATHERING I AS A BLACK MAN AM DISINTERESTED IN YOUR ATTEMPTS TO USE IT HERE
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 3:13amTo those who want to do away with DADT, define “openly gay,” please. Does that mean the RIGHT to openly lust after a fellow soldier, or openly fall in love with him or openly hit on him? Aren’t those the kinds of activities gay men NORMALLY engage in? So where do you draw the line to be FAIR? The gay lifestyle does not fit in the barracks, where the majority of men are straight and live in confined quarters with gays only because both (with the exception of some pervs) want to serve this country.
Has it ever occurred to those who favor repealing DADT that you are trying to IMPOSE gays alleged “equal rights” at the expense of straight soldiers? As always, those against repealing it are accused of racial discrimination, and, as always, it is a stupid and false analogy. This is a GENDER/SEX issue, so the closest analogy available would be forcing men and women to bath, sleep, undress, and live in the same barracks. Of course there could be private bunks for all soldiers, but gays won’t settle for that. They want to have it both ways, regardless of how their open presence in the barracks makes straight men feel. Apparently, sexual assault by gays in the military has increased post-Obama, but that fact is not being reported. More than likely, how repealing DADT affects unit cohesion will not be reported either.
The real agenda here is to gradually change the political makeup of our military from conservative to liberal — just as was done in academia and is currently happening in our churches. Scr*w the lowlife liberal scum. The military is all that we have left besides God.
Report Post »sean_m.
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:24pmI love how ‘activists’ or people who’ve never served have a say in what happens to our military. Like the Commandant said, it’s not about social causes, it’s about defending our country. We don’t need to use the military to prove points, especially not for bleeding hearts on the left. Serve and then get back to me and see for yourself why repealing this is a bad idea.
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:22pmyeah, and i hate how those people in the north who never even owned slaves argued against it! i mean, really, who says that defending the equality of our fellow human beings should be everyone’s job.
Report Post »Gita
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:20pmOK So why is such a thing as getting rid of don’t ask, don’t tell sooo important to the commies? Well how about if the commies get their way they then have a special influence in the military, and a portion of the military will be beholding to the commies in power. Now why would they need that? For the coming insurrection? Just trying to think outside the box, think like a commie not a constitutionalist.
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:20pmyeah, equal rights is so unconstitutional. oh, wait…
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:44pm@mintyfresh. equal rights has no standing in the service. your constitutional rights hold little ground after you volunteer for service. you are told what to do when to do it how to do it when to eat when to sleep and how to fart. you want equal rights………………….stay out of the service.
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:56pm“equal rights has no standing in the service.”
oh, i just thought morality may be a ubiquitous desire. i underestimated your despicability, i guess. here’s to fighting for discrimination!
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:17pm@mintyfresh……………….you know what i am talking about …………so dont be a smart ass and go take your pc crap elsewhere equal rights as to your point is not an issue here, but whether the service can or cant tell you what to do, what you can say or not say, and since they do have that right as it is necessary to run a military it has nothing to do with civil rights. if the military had civil rights as described in the constitution, a leader could not tell a soldier to do something the soldier didnt feel like doing, and the chain of command would fall apart. AS A BLACK MAN I FIND YOUR ARGUMENT DISGUSTING. QUIT USING ME TO PUSH YOUR UTOPIA GOALS
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:26pmhuh, the argument that all people should be treated equally in all arenas is disgusting to you? weird.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 9:21amTheold principle of Divide and conquer comes to mind.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 9:27amI would like minty fresh to show me where Equal rights is a consideration for military service. There is NO
Report Post »Constitutional right–nor any founding principle declared in the Declaration of Independence that grants
everybody a right to serve in the military. In fact the same Congress that adopted the Declaration of
Independence drafted the Articles of War that allowed those convicted of homosexual behavior-i.e. attempted sodomy with a soldier and perjury ,swearing to false accounts worthy of immediate discharge
with INFAMY -never to return. Of course we were a Moral and Religious people then.
Kisha
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:20pmSo what? Obama is trying to destroy our military now? Great. What else do we have left he hasn’t destroyed?
I despise Obama, and all that he stands for. Evil man! Evil intent! Who alienates the majority of this country’s will.
Report Post »Kisha
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:38pmWhat else as a society do we have to accept? Men marrying farm animals? I’m sure something as ridiculous will be in the works.
Report Post »neverending
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:48pmNothing – he has indeed destroyed everything.
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {mix art}
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:56pm@Kisha,
I believe there has recently been a lawsuit where a man wanted to marry his dog in recent months. I have seen references on Google about this going to courts in several European and Indonesian areas of the world. As for in America a google search turned up no references in the last couple of months yet I still recall there may have been one on the news channels.
Report Post »Kisha
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:02pmIt’s truly sad… Now he picks on our honored men and women. It’s such a shame!
Report Post »Kisha
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:05pm@SNOW
lol… it wouldn’t surprise me at all… this is defiantly showing how ridiculous all of this has become.
/sigh
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:19pmpeople getting married to each other out of love is just like marrying a farm animal? what the wrong with you? here’s a tip – get some exposure to the world. there is a lot more than you see in your tiny, tiny worldview.
also, not that i agree with the use of argumentum ad populum, but if you are going to use it, i will point out your flaw. the majority are for the repeal of DADT. so even your logical fallacy is wrong.
Report Post »Kisha
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:29pmOk well when people (gays) die because they were open about their sexuality. Don’t come knocking on my door whining! I won’t give it another thought!
Accept they will expect special treatment. As they always do. So in the end equal will not be equal. Gays will be given rights, normal people won’t have. It will be a never ending vicious cycle. Allowing it, won’t cause this discussion to somehow disappear. But who am I to say, I only see my small/tiny world view. /shrug.
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:53pmi wasn’t convinced you gave it a thought in the first place… certainly none of your comments have exhibited any higher cognitive function.
Report Post »tierrah
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 3:26pm@minty: you know equal rights is not a blanket benefit … you can have equal rights as long as you don’t infringe upon the equal rights of another. Duh, when I’m being forced by another to accept his/hers/its ideas of what is right and wrong, then he/she/it is invading MY equal rights area. I’m not trying to force my opinion down your throat, minty, and would never presume to think that my opinion is interwoven within the basic concept of equal rights, so it’s truly difficult for me to see your point of view regarding this issue. You, obviously have a different opinion than I have so let’s agree to disagree. I read all the comments here and try to see each one’s point of view. Have a nice day, minty :-)
Report Post »Kisha
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:16pmDon’t let them serve! Or the alternative is, Don’t ask, don’t tell. Otherwise you risk lives! End of Story!
cubanbob
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:38pm@kisha, how will it cost lives? I‘m a proud conservative but I don’t see the problem with gays serving in our military, just don’t see it.
Kisha
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:43pmBecause there are men who don’t like their sexuality being threatened by another man. Gay’s have died, been beaten up and caused caos inside the military ranks. It is dangerous to have people apart of a team who don’t trust one another. It could cost a whole platoon their lives if they are not all on the same page. And it DOES affect men in a way that can be seriously be dangerous for all who is involved! On the field and off it!
Report Post »WORKS FROM HOME
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:45pmAs a vet I know that in the military you give up your rights in order to serve. This should be dealt with by the military not civilians.
We need to watch our reps every move and make sure everyone knows what they are doing. Blog about it and get paid. http://whamhost.info/
Domandred
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:49pmMen in combat want others looking out for their ass, not looking at their ass.
snowleopard3200 {mix art}
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:49pmThis comes down to a fairly simple point, how far are we willing to take this politically correct junk before we all become fed up with it. The military is a distinct service, with its own needs and abilities, that do not need to be held hostage over this matter. All Mr Obama and the Progressives want to use this for is political ends in 2012, and to the gutting of our military to the point of total ineffectivness.
These people of the services are the only defense between our freedoms, and the madmen who wish to destroy us, not to mention being the final defense for our freedoms within the lands if military forces should ever cross into our territories.
Report Post »tierrah
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 7:53pmMy Goodness!! I can’t believe so much money, time, effort and attention has been put into this … it’s totally STUPID. Okay now, what percentage of our military is gay, lesbian, trans whatever? hummmm very very minor, slight, small, piddling, etc., right? At most 5%. So why in the heck is our government wasting time over this issue and why are we allotting our time to keep their wishes as headline news? What is important here? Is our National Defense more important than whether some MINOR aberrant is given permission to shout to the world that he/she/it is different than the rest of us? Or is it the other way around? Just sayin’, whatever happened to PRIORITIES?
Report Post »cubanbob
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:12pmthe U.S. is only one of the few that do not allow gays to serve openly, Israel who has one of the best armed forces allows it, so should we. again, I’m a proud conservative, but if gays want to serve our country and our able to pass boot camp, who are we to say no.
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:15pm@tierrah – yeah i don’t see why “all men are created equal” is a priority. it’s not like the founding fathers felt it was important enough to put in the beginning of, say, the declaration of independence. screw equality. i want spend more time bitching about a health care bill i don’t really understand – not making sure we all have equal rights!
all you other folks sound like those opposed to letting african americans serve. wanna defend that position now? you are on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of morality.
Report Post »Anarcho Capitalist
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 8:19pm@WORKS FROM HOME
agreed. I never have and never will be in the military. I don‘t know why the don’t ask thing is so bad. sexual preference has nothing to do with the military (I think). People don’t join up in order to talk about sexuality do they? As far as i can tell it is outside of what the military should be concerned with. But that being said I feel rules such as this one should be up to the military. Just as congress can pass a declaration of war it is not up to congress to set strategy.
I don’t know what the big deal is about all this anyway. I‘m not gay but if i was i don’t think i would have a problem with this. Not up on the gay culture but i would guess the loud and flashy once are a small minority that give the rest a bad name.
Report Post »tierrah
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:38pm@minty: just stating another point of view … they do have the right to serve in the military already, don’t they? All I’m saying is they still are not satisfied, they want to be able to shout to the world their sexual preference. Somehow that’s a bit distasteful to my palate; but you are free to taste anything you like. Thanks for your comments, thought I think you read me wrong.
Report Post »Smoovious
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 9:58pmthey don’t want to shout to the world. they just don’t want to be forced to lie anymore.
Report Post »mintyfresh
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:08pm@Smoovious – exactly!
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:19pmThey need to abide by what the top military leaders deem acceptable, they are the ones on the front lines and will deal with the fallout. My husband was an officer in the army until he was injured in Viet Nam, there is not a prejudice bone in his body, but he is firmly against repealing don’t ask, don’t tell. I have no point of reference, but I would abide by his opinion since he is the one who served our great country. Obama is clueless.
Report Post »jzs
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:21pmMintyfresh, you’re awesome. Teirrah, not so much. It’s often said that those who forget history and doomed to repeat it. Every argument I hear in favor of DADT is the same arguments made by those against integrating the army. Now that is a non-issue, and I believe the army is probably disproportionately black.
As someone said, the Israelis don’t care if someone is openly gay and I challenge anyone to say that they have a wimpy armed force. If you think they’re ineffective, that would be another case forgetting history.
Report Post »jds7171
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:21pmIf they repeal the DADT policy, a lot of guys might not reenlist or not enlist at all. Then will come the mandatory service.
Report Post »keaton
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:44pmHow about “Don’t ask, shut the hell up”. Does the military not know that when homosexuality is accepted, and heterosexuality is discouraged, homosexual activity will increase. The example of prisons, where heterosexual men engage in homosexual experiences to pleasure themselves is proof of that concept. Do we really want our military men engaging in this behavior.
Report Post »longhorn mama
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 10:49pmYou have the same rules for sexuality and sexual actions on the job as you do for heterosexuals. Are the men and women always “getting it on”?
Report Post »I think the new Republicans should immediately pass legislation abolishing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Most people, regardless of their views on homosexuality, think that if you want to serve in the military, well then God love you, and who cares what you do in your own bedroom on your own time.
It would immediately establish that the Republicans could get something done when the Dems couldn’t and it would be done the right way rather than by judicial fiat.
And this is coming from someone who believes homosexuality is an illness and homosexual acts are a sin. The Left are the ones who are actually intolerant.
Kaen
Posted on November 7, 2010 at 11:32pmIf gays are allowed to openly serve in the military, they open them selves up to discrimination, being ostricized, and possibly violence. Why then, would they even want to serve openly? The only solution to openly serving gays in the military would be completely segregated military regiments, living quarters, dining facilities…essentially…a completely separate gay military which, would then allow for the regular military to be condemed for being discriminatory, cost outrageous amounts of money to manage, ineffective and nothing more than a failure. Anyone that supports the ban of DADT is a fool to think otherwise. As it stands, gays can and do serve in the military. Many, if not all, serve our country well but, this is and issue better left in the closet.
http://thefreeamerica.blogspot.com/
Report Post »chasbronson
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 7:18amBob ,it will cost lives in many ways.The cost of sin always does.From a secular stand point the afghans ,or any muslim group for that matter will not ally with a homosexual army any more than they would an army of prostitutes ,or adulterers.All cooperation gained from the muslim community will be lost.You think they are deserting and killing US soldiers now?JUst wait [might as well burn the koran in front of them too].Ever heard of AIDS?Coming headline will be“ AIDS epidemic hits military”.The emotional,economical,and legal costs will demoralize and put even more pressures on an already stressed military.There are many other quite obvious consequences if people would think about it.
Report Post »CAPTAIN
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 8:19am@mintyfresh. To equate military life with civilian life is to be clueless, as you are. We’ve had enough of the degenerate gay agenda in this country. Why don‘t you go waste your time over at the Huffington Post and gargle while you’re at it.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on November 8, 2010 at 9:15amKisha Cuban bob has failed to think before he speaks. Ignore him. You are right. I pray Congress will
Report Post »do the right thing and NOT give Gates and his CIC what they want. The decision to repeal DADT and
allow open homosexuality within the ranks was made -like everything else the Poser in the White House
he decide Everybody else in American history is wrong -if they oppose his desire for Communist change.
The problem with gays in the military is it divorces America from the Law made when we were a Moral and Religious people. The problem with gays in the military is it affirms the reprobate and denies the Law.The problem with gays in the military is akin to the problem with Obama in the White House they are not eligible under the Constitution that even our reprobate Log Cabin Congress takes Oath to defend.