Page 23 of 24 FirstFirst ... 1321222324 LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 235

Thread: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

  1. #221
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    An injuction is a court order. Thanks for the insult.

    Of course, if it was the order you believe it is, then the President would not disobey it would he?
    He didn't disobey it, he went to a higher court and asked them to stay it.

    Dude, I'm done trying to educate you on the basics of the judicial system. You clearly do not have the capacity to understand this situation. I'll repeat it one more time for you, but that is it.

    1. A federal court found DADT unconstitutional.
    2. A federal court then decided to issue a world wide injunction to cease the enforcement of DADT.
    3. The Pentagon, in order to comply with the federal court's injunction, ceases enforcement of DADT for 8 days.
    4. Obama went to the Appeals court, a higher court than the federal court and asked them to put a stay on the injunction.
    5. The Appeals Court put a stay on the federal court's injunction.
    6. The Pentagon was then able to go back to enforcing DADT.
    7. The Log Cabin Republicans who brought the original suit to the federal court sought to have the Supreme Court undo the Appeal Court's stay on the federal Court's injunction.
    8. Obama asked the Supreme Court to keep the stay.
    9. The Supreme Court decided to keep the stay.

    And here we are now. If you can't figure it out with it layed out like that for you as plain as day, then it is completely hopeless.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 11-13-10 at 05:46 PM.

  2. #222
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,037

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Explain to me how the Pentagon could have ignored a court injunction? Obama also did not reverse it, he asked the Appeals court to put a stay on the federal court's injunciton.
    The same way it has been largely ignoring DADT since 9-11. We don't work for the courts. We work for the Commander-in-Chief and the Senate. The Pentagon was complying to the judge's ruling because DADT is a dead policy. Obama reversed it.

    You can place all the technical terms on it as you wish so you can argue and argue and argue, but in the end, we are stating the same damn thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    No they aren't. You refuse to acknowledge what an injunction is and that Obama did not issue some direct order to reverse things.
    You mean the same injuction that Obama dismissed for the time being? You don't seem to understand how set apart from your legal system the military and the Pentagon is.

    Obama reversed the Pentagon, which ordered the military to suspend DADT, which was complying with the judgement.


    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    No it didn't. The judge had to order a world wide injunction to get the Pentagon to cease enforcing the policy.
    In which the Pentagon went ahead and complied until......what? Obama decided to ignore the "injunction" thyereby reversing the Pentagon's orders to the military?

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    No it wasn't. Even though it was Obama who pushed for it, it was the Appeals Court that put a stay on the injunction.
    You are talking in circles and arguing symantics and insignificant details. This is near and dear to you isn't it? You enlisting?

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  3. #223
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,037

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    [QUOTE=Critic
    Last edited by MSgt; 11-13-10 at 05:52 PM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  4. #224
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    The Pentagon could care less about a court order. You don't seem to get how things work with the military. Unless policy is changed by the military or Washington, policy doesn't change. This judge gave the Pentagon an excuse to free itself from DADT and it took the leap. The same leap the Air Force took before the Pentagon issued the order. But let's just drop the bitching. We'll just say you "won" and call it a day.
    I'm not sure I've heard of any case where the Pentagon has not complied with a court order but a win is a win.

  5. #225
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,037

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I'm not sure I've heard of any case where the Pentagon has not complied with a court order but a win is a win.
    I guess so. Good for you.
    Last edited by MSgt; 11-13-10 at 05:58 PM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  6. #226
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Discrimination is always going to happen. Completely getting rid of DADT is the only way to effectively decrease discrimination against gays. Without DADT, gays will be able to report cases of discrimination without fear that they will be discharged, or under what you propose, punished because of their sexuality.
    You just don't know how wrong you are. But, hey! Rock on!!

    When it turns into a complete Charlie Foxtrot, don't say that you weren't warned.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #227
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Because those "heightened privacy rules" would not apply or not apply in the same way to heterosexual personnel. That is discrimination.




    The DADT policy since its implementation has been the transition, although not an official one.

    Under DADT, especially within the last decade, only a person's CO could initiate an investigation into a person's sexuality. And unless there was some official record that actually proved a person was homosexual, a CO could choose to not investigate a person who even stated multiple times and the COC even believed was gay. Which means that every person joining the military should understand that they will be serving with homosexuals, even some who can say that they are homosexual. It would completely depend on the chain of command as to whether the person is discharged or even investigated for simple statements of homosexuality or even public displays out of uniform.

    This is a transition from the old policy, which was essentially, if you were suspected of being homosexual, anyone could call you out on it. And if the CO knew about it, not only would he violate the policy of no homosexuals, but also, the person made a false official statement since they used to officially ask about a person's sexuality.
    Actually, those new rules would apply to everyone. But, I don't expect you to comprehend that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #228
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Actually, those new rules would apply to everyone. But, I don't expect you to comprehend that.
    They couldn't possibly apply to heterosexuals, for two reasons.

    First, the military gives benefits to spouses of military members. Since the military only recognizes opposite sex couples, only opposite sex couples could admit to being married. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what someone's sexuality most likely is from who they are married to.

    Also, the military has military balls and dances, not to mention many bases have "clubs". It is considered completely okay for a man to dance with a woman at such events or places, even if on base and/or in uniform. Would it be okay for a man to dance with a man or a woman to dance with a woman at these events or places, on base and/or in uniform?

    Along with this, it is completely impossible to separate every military member's private life from their military life. The military is not just a job. Deployments ensure that people you work with will find out about more private details of your life unless you are forced to completely hide who you are attracted to and/or dating. Forcing everyone to completely hide such attractions and relationships would most likely result in very low morale.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #229
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    They couldn't possibly apply to heterosexuals, for two reasons.

    First, the military gives benefits to spouses of military members. Since the military only recognizes opposite sex couples, only opposite sex couples could admit to being married. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what someone's sexuality most likely is from who they are married to.

    Also, the military has military balls and dances, not to mention many bases have "clubs". It is considered completely okay for a man to dance with a woman at such events or places, even if on base and/or in uniform. Would it be okay for a man to dance with a man or a woman to dance with a woman at these events or places, on base and/or in uniform?

    Along with this, it is completely impossible to separate every military member's private life from their military life. The military is not just a job. Deployments ensure that people you work with will find out about more private details of your life unless you are forced to completely hide who you are attracted to and/or dating. Forcing everyone to completely hide such attractions and relationships would most likely result in very low morale.
    How about we just take it one step at a time? Get gays, in the system and work out the issues that arise from their simply being there. Then, you can phase is the rest of that stuff as time goes along.

    I believe--in other words, in my opinion--if you try to force things to happen, there will be negative consequences.

    You want this to work, right? Why not take it easy, rather than trying to stuff a hundred pounds of ****, in a ten pound bag.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #230
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    How about we just take it one step at a time? Get gays, in the system and work out the issues that arise from their simply being there. Then, you can phase is the rest of that stuff as time goes along.

    I believe--in other words, in my opinion--if you try to force things to happen, there will be negative consequences.

    You want this to work, right? Why not take it easy, rather than trying to stuff a hundred pounds of ****, in a ten pound bag.
    They have been phased-in. I served with gays that I knew were gay since 2000, and when I expressed surprise at finding out one of the guys I knew was gay, the rest of those who were in our class were just as surprised at my own ignorance. Very few guys nowdays should ever use the excuse that they never served with gays before so it would be new to them. They have served, whether they knew it or not. They need to get over it, and do their jobs.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Page 23 of 24 FirstFirst ... 1321222324 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
  •