'Don't ask, don't tell' policy ruled unconstitutional

Reba said:
Since DADT has been deemed unconstitutional, does that mean the military will go back to the policies that were in place before DADT?
Click to expand...

No, it means troops are able to be openly gay to serve in military without getting penalty.
 
that is interesting surprised! I am puzzled it! I am interesting good reading!
 
Foxrac said:
Senate passed to repeal DADT by 65-31 votes.
Senate votes to repeal ban on gays openly serving in military - CNN.com
Click to expand...
Yes, I know that.

However, it's still unclear how the changes will be implemented, and when.

...Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, in a statement, that he'll "approach this process deliberately, (making changes) only after careful consultation with the military service chiefs and our combatant commanders."

Clifford Stanley, a retired Marine and the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, will "immediately proceed" to execute the Pentagon's plan, Gates said.

The entire process, Collins estimates, will take "months, not years" to complete. Until then, Gates said that "the current law and policy will remain in effect."

Still, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York, said Saturday afternoon that she believed no man or woman would be outed or kicked out of the military in the meantime....
Click to expand...
 
Reba said:
Yes, I know that.

However, it's still unclear how the changes will be implemented, and when.
Click to expand...

It isn't new, it is pretty same with some NATO countries were under progress to allow gay troops to be openly to serve in military and it got finalized.
 
I just have some confusion over this whole thing. I know that Bill Clinton created the whole DADT policy, however, he never lifted the ban on homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces. When the DADT policy was repealed, does this mean that if a homosexual makes their sexual orientation known, they can be discharged under the current ban on homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces?

Did this recent repeal of Clinton's DADT policy also lift the ban on homosexuals serving in the military (or just the policy)?
 
Steinhauer said:
I just have some confusion over this whole thing. I know that Bill Clinton created the whole DADT policy, however, he never lifted the ban on homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces. When the DADT policy was repealed, does this mean that if a homosexual makes their sexual orientation known, they can be discharged under the current ban on homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces?

Did this recent repeal lift the ban?
Click to expand...

Under DADT policy, gay troops must keep their sex orientation as confidential and leaders can't ask them about their sex orientation. Yes, DADT replaced the full homosexual ban in military.

Yes, when DADT is reprealed, gay troops can be openly to serve in military without any of penalties, except for some circumstance that restriction may apply so wait and see about what's up with Pentagon.
 
Steinhauer said:
I just have some confusion over this whole thing. I know that Bill Clinton created the whole DADT policy, however, he never lifted the ban on homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces. When the DADT policy was repealed, does this mean that if a homosexual makes their sexual orientation known, they can be discharged under the current ban on homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces?

Did this recent repeal of Clinton's DADT policy also lift the ban on homosexuals serving in the military (or just the policy)?
Click to expand...
That's what I questioned, too. If only the DADT is repealed, the original regulations would still be in place unless other regulations were put into place to remove them. The DADT was a way for homosexuals to enlist and serve without being questioned about their sexual preference. Homosexuality was already banned from the services before DADT.

Did the most recent vote actually do away with the original ban against homosexuality and sodomy in the service? Or did it just do away with the DADT procedures?

:dunno:
 
This was the policy before Clinton's DADT:

According to DOD officials, U.S. forces have had policies prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the military since the beginning or World War II. DOD's current policy on homosexuality was formalized in 1982 and specifically state that:

Homosexuality is incompatible with military service. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements demonstrate a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct, seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission. The presence of such members adversely affects the ability of the Military Services to maintain discipline, good order, and morale; to foster mutual trust and confidence among servicemembers; to ensure the integrity of the system of rank an command; to facilitate assignment and worldwide deployment of servicemembers who frequently must live and work under close conditions affording minimal privacy; to recruit and retain members of the Military Services; to maintain public acceptability of military service; and to prevent breaches of security.

According to DOD, a homosexual is "a person, regardless of sex, who engages in, desires to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual acts." DOD define a homosexual act as "bodily contact, actively undertaken or passively permitted, between members of the same sex for the purpose of satisfying sexual desires."
Click to expand...
 
Reba said:
This was the policy before Clinton's DADT:
Click to expand...

I am just wondering if that policy had soldiers like Bradley Manning in mind.


According to DOD officials, U.S. forces have had policies prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the military since the beginning or World War II. DOD's current policy on homosexuality was formalized in 1982 and specifically state that:

Homosexuality is incompatible with military service. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements demonstrate a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct, seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission. The presence of such members adversely affects the ability of the Military Services to maintain discipline, good order, and morale; to foster mutual trust and confidence among servicemembers; to ensure the integrity of the system of rank an command; to facilitate assignment and worldwide deployment of servicemembers who frequently must live and work under close conditions affording minimal privacy; to recruit and retain members of the Military Services; to maintain public acceptability of military service; and to prevent breaches of security.

According to DOD, a homosexual is "a person, regardless of sex, who engages in, desires to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual acts." DOD define a homosexual act as "bodily contact, actively undertaken or passively permitted, between members of the same sex for the purpose of satisfying sexual desires."
Click to expand...
 
Reba said:
That's what I questioned, too. If only the DADT is repealed, the original regulations would still be in place unless other regulations were put into place to remove them. The DADT was a way for homosexuals to enlist and serve without being questioned about their sexual preference. Homosexuality was already banned from the services before DADT.

Did the most recent vote actually do away with the original ban against homosexuality and sodomy in the service? Or did it just do away with the DADT procedures?

:dunno:
Click to expand...

Reba said:
This was the policy before Clinton's DADT:
Click to expand...

Now, my best guess, without DADT policy, it means DoD and Pentagon can make decision to what do with gay soldiers, whatever is allowed or not allowed to be openly to serve in military.
 
Steinhauer said:
I am just wondering if that policy had soldiers like Bradley Manning in mind.
Click to expand...
The reasoning at that time was that a homosexual soldier might be blackmailed by foreign agents who threatened to out him. It was feared that the homosexual soldier might turn over classified information to the agents in order to keep them quiet.
 
Reba said:
The reasoning at that time was that a homosexual soldier might be blackmailed by foreign agents who threatened to out him. It was feared that the homosexual soldier might turn over classified information to the agents in order to keep them quiet.
Click to expand...

Yes, that what I was thought and I feel bad for him but he is not supposed to release the classified information and commit treason against our government.

It is best way for him to quit military if he is too uncomfortable with action that take advantage of him.
 
Supposedly, he cannot stands his team or whatever. Can he tells them that he is gay so that he could have the opportunity to leave the army? Otherwise, the red code pops up like "A Good Few Men."
 
Foxrac said:
It won't make any difference because DADT is only for military.
Click to expand...

True, but it will pave the way for reforms to be made in other areas. If people realize that there are now homosexuals openly serving in the military to protect their right to openly bash homosexuals, then they will eventually see the day when the ban on same-sex marriages are banned.

Even after slavery blacks were limited through the Jim Crow laws.

Now homosexuals are being faced with bans on same-sex marriages, gay adoptions, and barred from serving openly in the military. These are the modern Jim Crow laws aimed at homosexuals to treat them as sub human. Many will agree that this DADT is discrimination and that it's not right.
 
Dixie said:
True, but it will pave the way for reforms to be made in other areas. If people realize that there are now homosexuals openly serving in the military to protect their right to openly bash homosexuals, then they will eventually see the day when the ban on same-sex marriages are banned.

Even after slavery blacks were limited through the Jim Crow laws.

Now homosexuals are being faced with bans on same-sex marriages, gay adoptions, and barred from serving openly in the military. These are the modern Jim Crow laws aimed at homosexuals to treat them as sub human. Many will agree that this DADT is discrimination and that it's not right.
Click to expand...

Yup but gay adoption are allowed in many states, even Alabama, however watch out for ballot may allow voters to vote on gay adoption ban.

If they favor gay adoption ban so what's ill informed and idiot voters are... :roll:

I want court to declare voter approved gay marriage ban as unconstitutional, IMO.
 
Foxrac said:
Yup but gay adoption are allowed in many states, even Alabama, however watch out for ballot may allow voters to vote on gay adoption ban.

If they favor gay adoption ban so what's ill informed and idiot voters are... :roll:

I want court to declare voter approved gay marriage ban as unconstitutional, IMO.
Click to expand...

Arkansas has a ban on gay adoption. While it isn't worded that way per se, it is geared towards preventing that from happening thanks to the Arkansas Baptist Convention and their cronies at Focus on the Family. The leader of this movement spoke at my church and I had the 'pleasure' of being front and center to his sermon. Midway through I was ready to throw my bible at him, literally. I should have just got up and walked out to show my disapproval.

Little did he know his 'enemy' was right before him.
 
Reba said:
The reasoning at that time was that a homosexual soldier might be blackmailed by foreign agents who threatened to out him. It was feared that the homosexual soldier might turn over classified information to the agents in order to keep them quiet.
Click to expand...

Being able to be honest about their sexual orientation would prevent them being blackmailed about it.
 
Back
Top