Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 232

Thread: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

  1. #31
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by MCS117 View Post
    Well this is where rights and lefts branch off, because I believe that if the law is not clear, then you tell them either to make it clearer or do not have a ruling at that moment till a new law updates existing laws. It's the judges role of making sure the laws are following the Constitutional law, not to make their own biased rulings on them based on "the social norm." It's just not their job to do that.

    Wonder why justice wears a blindfold? It's to not see what is happening at the moment, but to hear the case and rule based on their "knowledge" of the Constitution....
    Such clarity is not possible. Never has been and never will be. Anyone who knows anything about language understands this, which is why such courts are designed in the first place. It is wrongly portaryed as a right and left thing, when it is really a logic thing. And once a law is written, it is no longer about what was intended as much as it is about what was actually written. So, when you say you can't discriminate, the law has reprecusions, maybe even unintended ones. And ruling on that is not activist, but law.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #32
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    OK, you are new, so I will take it easy on you and explain this politely. Being gay is not an action. Being gay does not require sodomy. A large portion of gay people never engage in sodomy. Sodomy laws, if uniformly applied between straits and gays would be a total nonissue for gays. Don't suck a dick on base, you are probably fine. Article 125 has jack and **** to do with DADT. It's a complete and total red herring. A tiny percent of those discharged for DADT are charged with a violation of article 125.

    Do you get the impression that article 125 is a bad argument? Good, because it is.
    who said anything about being gay being an action? not me, of course you can be gay without having sex. However, most sex acts between homosexuals would violate art 125. (hence my you can be gay but you can't have gay sex comment) I believe jerking off another person would not technically violate article 125.

    sodomy according to article 125:

    It is unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that personís mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal; or to place that personís sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal; or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person; or to have carnal copulation with an animal.

    Also, article 125 is not limited to actions "on base". if you are in the military the UCMJ applies to your life 24/7, 365 a year.

    so my statement is accurate.

    until article 125 is amended or removed, gays might be able to serve, but they wouldn't be able to have gay sex as long as they were serving, without violating UCMJ.


    is article 125 a stupid restriction? I think so. (except for the animal bit) In this case is art 125 a "bad arguement"? not at all because it accurately describes the current situation.


    Perhaps if you had read more than that one single post, you would have realized I actually support gays in the military.

    I was simply pointing out that even with DADT gone, gays could still be kicked out of the military based on violations of Article 125.

    would a gay man have a valid complaint if when charged with 125 he claimed that hetero guys put their sex organs into the mouths/anuses of females? yes

    would that change the fact that he violated art 125? no

    would it be hypocritical for the military to kick out a gay person for 125 when they don't for heteros? yes

    since when has life been fair? never
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  3. #33
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    facts are our friends.
    yes they are...you should try using them some time.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  4. #34
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,301
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by MCS117 View Post
    Judges are not supposed to rule..... They are to interpret the laws, not enforce them or make new laws out of them....
    No new law was made in this case, and only current law was "enforced". She made her ruling based exactly on the law. If you feel her ruling, feel free to show me what about it you disagree with. I read it, nad while I am no legal expert, it certainly seemed reasonable and within the framework of the law.

    You have read the ruling you are talking about, right?
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #35
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,301
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    The defense could appeal to the SCOTUS, but why would they because the judgement by the 9th Circuit has no grounds except as precedent for future cases. However it only relates to DADT and personally I don't believe the SCOTUS will ever touch DADT, generally they stay out of military affairs and let the Commander and Chief handle it.
    The 9th ruling can potentially have impact beyond being a framework for the next step of the appeals process. We will find out in a couple weeks when the courts decide what to do.

    SCOTUS will almost certainly rule on DADT if it is still law by the time the process reaches that point, assuming it does. If they do not, it will simply mean the lower court ruling is the one in effect.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #36
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,301
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by MCS117 View Post
    Still judges are supposed to interpret the consitutional laws into current laws that are to be passed, but instead activist judges use the social norm/status to current laws, which is unconstitutional. Unless the judge can prove that somewhere in the Constitution states the DADT or refers to the operation of the DADT is in conflict with a current Constitutional law, this is an activist judge's ruling that is biased.
    Please read the ruling. The case was all about constitutional law. You are showing a complete ignorance of what the ruling actual was, all the while declaring it flawed and activist. You have pretty much proved my point about activist judges being ones who rule in ways you don't like.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  7. #37
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by Councilman View Post
    i also think that once the Supreme Court rules on any subject it cn not be revisited in the future without a Constitutional Amendment.
    I disagree. While repeated rulings can lead to a principle's becoming settled law, such a constraint of requiring a constitutional amendment to overturn an initial Supreme Court decision is overly rigid. For example, under such a constraint, a landmark decision such as Brown v. Board of Education would not have been possible to reverse the Plessy v. Ferguson ("separate but equal") decision.
    Last edited by donsutherland1; 09-14-10 at 01:03 PM.

  8. #38
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,301
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    who said anything about being gay being an action? not me, of course you can be gay without having sex. However, most sex acts between homosexuals would violate art 125. (hence my you can be gay but you can't have gay sex comment) I believe jerking off another person would not technically violate article 125.
    There is a whole myriad of sexual acts that gays can and do engage in that would not be sodomy. It's also irrelevant, since to convict some one of sodomy, you have to, you know, catch them. It would also require a uniformity of application, which means that if gays can get discharged for getting a blowjob, so can straits. The reality is that article 125 enforcement in a post DADT world would be just like it is now for straits...basically unenforced.

    sodomy according to article 125:

    It is unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that personís mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal; or to place that personís sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal; or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person; or to have carnal copulation with an animal.

    Also, article 125 is not limited to actions "on base". if you are in the military the UCMJ applies to your life 24/7, 365 a year.

    so my statement is accurate.
    I know article 125, and you did not make an accurate statement. No one is discharged for getting a blowjob from their wife at home. This is the point you are missing.

    until article 125 is amended or removed, gays might be able to serve, but they wouldn't be able to have gay sex as long as they were serving, without violating UCMJ.
    Actually, "gay sex" is not sodomy. "Gay sex" is any sex between partners of the same sex, which may or may not include sodomy. Please get that right. Further, as pointed out above, article 125 is not enforced for straits outside of onbase or duty areas, and even there sporadically. Gays could live with it being enforced for them exactly as it is for straits.


    is article 125 a stupid restriction? I think so. (except for the animal bit) In this case is art 125 a "bad arguement"? not at all because it accurately describes the current situation.
    It is a bad argument because you do not understand how article 125 is used, and therefore make false assumptions. I care about this issue, and have spent a great deal of time researching it. Trust me on my knowledge of the issue.

    Perhaps if you had read more than that one single post, you would have realized I actually support gays in the military.
    I correct innacuracies. Your statement was inaccurate. It does not matter your view of DADT, your statement was still inaccurate.

    I was simply pointing out that even with DADT gone, gays could still be kicked out of the military based on violations of Article 125.
    And this is for the most part inaccurate. Are straits who give or receive oral or anal sex discharged much? So why would gays be?

    would a gay man have a valid complaint if when charged with 125 he claimed that hetero guys put their sex organs into the mouths/anuses of females? yes

    would that change the fact that he violated art 125? no

    would it be hypocritical for the military to kick out a gay person for 125 when they don't for heteros? yes

    since when has life been fair? never
    Again, if DADT is repealed, article 125 would have to be, by law, uniformly applied.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #39
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    There is a whole myriad of sexual acts that gays can and do engage in that would not be sodomy. It's also irrelevant, since to convict some one of sodomy, you have to, you know, catch them. It would also require a uniformity of application, which means that if gays can get discharged for getting a blowjob, so can straits. The reality is that article 125 enforcement in a post DADT world would be just like it is now for straits...basically unenforced.



    I know article 125, and you did not make an accurate statement. No one is discharged for getting a blowjob from their wife at home. This is the point you are missing.



    Actually, "gay sex" is not sodomy. "Gay sex" is any sex between partners of the same sex, which may or may not include sodomy. Please get that right. Further, as pointed out above, article 125 is not enforced for straits outside of onbase or duty areas, and even there sporadically. Gays could live with it being enforced for them exactly as it is for straits.




    It is a bad argument because you do not understand how article 125 is used, and therefore make false assumptions. I care about this issue, and have spent a great deal of time researching it. Trust me on my knowledge of the issue.



    I correct innacuracies. Your statement was inaccurate. It does not matter your view of DADT, your statement was still inaccurate.



    And this is for the most part inaccurate. Are straits who give or receive oral or anal sex discharged much? So why would gays be?



    Again, if DADT is repealed, article 125 would have to be, by law, uniformly applied.

    yeah, in a perfect world. but we don't live in that world. Do you honestly believe that there is not "selective enforcement" of certain laws?

    two cars driving at the exact same speed down the interstate. one has in state plates, the other out of state. which one do you think the trooper is going to pull over for the ticket?

    I don't believe for a minute that there are not people who would prosecute gays under article 125 while turning a blind eye to hetero violators.

    doesn't make me inaccurate...just a bit more cynical than you.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  10. #40
    User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    United States of America
    Last Seen
    04-04-17 @ 01:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    121

    Re: Pentagon: No Plans to Change 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy After Court Ruling

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Please read the ruling. The case was all about constitutional law. You are showing a complete ignorance of what the ruling actual was, all the while declaring it flawed and activist. You have pretty much proved my point about activist judges being ones who rule in ways you don't like.
    No, it doesn't work like that... This is a California court ruling, not the SCOTUS... What are we even debating this about... The DADT is on a federal level, not on a state level.... I don't even see why this is able to go through the state when this is very much a federal issue...

    And violating the 1st amendment is a just semantics... It does not prohibit a person of speaking their mind, but there are disciplinary actions following it. It's the same case as getting a job, you can bad mouth the company all you want, but there are consequences to your actions.
    And 5th amendment pertains to the courts, not any setting.... And it's not forcing a person to come out and say he's gay. So I don't really see how the 1st and 5th amendments are being violated....
    We the People of the United States,... provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare....
    Where did it ever say, promote for the common defence, and provide the general Welfare..... Please don't mix up the two....

Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •