Don't Ask, Don't Tell fails Senate

Status
Not open for further replies.
raimius said:
That would be a LOT more than 85%, considering not everyone in the military is gay...
Click to expand...
You are correct. Assuming an even distribution of gays, the 85% of them who will keep their sexuality private will will account for the aforementioned 85%. But since 2/3s of the straights don't care, only with 1/3 of the remaining 15% will there become an issue. So really it is 95% where there will not be an issue.
 
I sure hope the congress, president, DOD, JCS, and military can work this out. If they leave it to the "Civilian" judicial system to force an immediate remission of the DADT policy, it's going to be a total "Charlie-Foxtrot". Allow the military to abolish the DADT policy in 3 phases: 1) All CURRENT gay military members are now totally free from persecution and prosecution for sexual preference. 2) Arrange all necessary logistics. Dorms, Housing, Dependents, benefits, etc... 3) Allow NEW enlistees/commissions to be "Sexual Preference Neutral". With a court decision, all of this would be expected to be in place over night. It can't be. It won't be. It WILL cause problems. Hopefully the congress and president will take "SOME INITIATIVE" and take care of this issue.
 
Something I just thought about...do you think this would affect "Diversity Recruiting" efforts if DADT was repealed? For instance, at the Academies they strive for a certain number of represented minority groups...just food for thought.
 
Already started that discussion Sam: http://www.serviceacademyforums.com/showthread.php?t=15566&page=4
Still a great question.

CC- I agree 100% Sadly, all GOP senators signed a letter saying they will not sign ANY legislation until the tax situation is resolved.
As you may have heard, Mitch McConnell sent a letter to Harry Reid today insisting that all GOP Senators will block all Dem initiatives until the standoffs over the Bush tax cuts and funding the government are resolved. The letter, which is signed by all 42 GOP Senators, is being widely interpreted to mean that he's maintained lockstep GOP unity against repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell before the GOP gets its way on the tax cuts.
Click to expand...

Some are calling a bluff that the moderate GOP senators will still vote. But, if this holds, I see little chance of Congressional repeal if the tax situation does not reach a quick resolution.
 
SamAca10 said:
Something I just thought about...do you think this would affect "Diversity Recruiting" efforts if DADT was repealed? For instance, at the Academies they strive for a certain number of represented minority groups...just food for thought.
Click to expand...
Be serious. If one were to enter under your perceived diversity program, would they have to demonstrate/confirm eligibility annually?
 
Mongo said:
Be serious. If one were to enter under your perceived diversity program, would they have to demonstrate/confirm eligibility annually?
Click to expand...

Bahaha, that made me bust out laughing. While I know you're serious, still cracks me up. :yllol:
 
Even if the 42 republican senators stand together to block any/all democratic initiatives, until the tax issue is taken care of, the president/house/senate are still controlled by the democrats. (Until January). If they can pass a Health-Care bill through, which no republicans voted for, and most Americans were against; I'm sure the democrats could rescind the DADT policy. Especially considering most Americans, military members, and even many republicans want. (It was a democratic congress and president who started this policy in the first place). If the president or democrat leadership "CLAIM" that they can't progress on this issue because of the republicans, then they are totally "F.O.S." and are lying to you.

On a secondary note: Assuming they do rescind this shortly, there are 3 IMMEDIATE logistics that will need to be addressed. "The rest can be worked out later".
1. Do the "FINALLY" get rid of Article 125 of the UCMJ? It's already an article that isn't followed, but leaving it in place makes any sexual activities among gay individuals, an automatic infraction of the UCMJ.
2. Do they also recognize and respect the rights of military members who aren't comfortable with "Room-mate living conditions"? In other words, will they allow quarters on land and see to be locally altered or will they FORCE individuals to have room mates they don't want based on sexual preference.
3. MOST IMPORTANT: Does the military SEPARATE Sexual preference/activities from Marriage and treat them as 2 separate issues. Point is: The federal government can not "LICENSE" individuals to get married. That is done at the state/local level. If only a couple state recognize gay marriage, then unless 2 gay individuals got married in one of those states, the military can't recognize them as married. Therefor, family member benefits and such can not be authorized. Chances are, they keep the sexual preference/activity side separate from the benefits/marriage side of it. (Just like they do with single heterosexuals).

These 3 logistical issues can be handled almost immediately. The military can then move on to accommodating future enlisted and commissioned basics and such.
 
Christcorp said:
Even if the 42 republican senators stand together to block any/all democratic initiatives, until the tax issue is taken care of, the president/house/senate are still controlled by the democrats. (Until January). If they can pass a Health-Care bill through, which no republicans voted for, and most Americans were against; I'm sure the democrats could rescind the DADT policy. Especially considering most Americans, military members, and even many republicans want. (It was a democratic congress and president who started this policy in the first place). If the president or democrat leadership "CLAIM" that they can't progress on this issue because of the republicans, then they are totally "F.O.S." and are lying to you.

On a secondary note: Assuming they do rescind this shortly, there are 3 IMMEDIATE logistics that will need to be addressed. "The rest can be worked out later".
1. Do the "FINALLY" get rid of Article 125 of the UCMJ? It's already an article that isn't followed, but leaving it in place makes any sexual activities among gay individuals, an automatic infraction of the UCMJ.
2. Do they also recognize and respect the rights of military members who aren't comfortable with "Room-mate living conditions"? In other words, will they allow quarters on land and see to be locally altered or will they FORCE individuals to have room mates they don't want based on sexual preference.
3. MOST IMPORTANT: Does the military SEPARATE Sexual preference/activities from Marriage and treat them as 2 separate issues. Point is: The federal government can not "LICENSE" individuals to get married. That is done at the state/local level. If only a couple state recognize gay marriage, then unless 2 gay individuals got married in one of those states, the military can't recognize them as married. Therefor, family member benefits and such can not be authorized. Chances are, they keep the sexual preference/activity side separate from the benefits/marriage side of it. (Just like they do with single heterosexuals).

These 3 logistical issues can be handled almost immediately. The military can then move on to accommodating future enlisted and commissioned basics and such.
Click to expand...

My take on the whole thing is that they just want to serve without the stigma of being subject to involuntary discharge. DADT being repealed will do that. 85% will be happy. The other 15% might take a while. But it will work. I am confident that the military has a plan in action to accomidate all of this.
 
Even if the 42 republican senators stand together to block any/all democratic initiatives, until the tax issue is taken care of, the president/house/senate are still controlled by the democrats. (Until January). If they can pass a Health-Care bill through, which no republicans voted for, and most Americans were against; I'm sure the democrats could rescind the DADT policy. Especially considering most Americans, military members, and even many republicans want. (It was a democratic congress and president who started this policy in the first place). If the president or democrat leadership "CLAIM" that they can't progress on this issue because of the republicans, then they are totally "F.O.S." and are lying to you
Click to expand...
CC - at least make an effort to read up on this subject including Senate rules.
I don't know if you just made this up off the top of your head or you really beleive it.
It is false.
 
No JAM, I'm not making this stuff up; and you are most likely, reading into it. The democratic party was able to pass a health care issue through without any support from the other party. If this is possible, then it is most definitely possible for them to get this issue addressed. I understand the rules, and how issues can be blocked from coming up for a vote or even brought to committee. And I'm sure my comment was over-simplified, and you read it to mean that it was simple. But this is politics, and both sides will use this topic, as they do with most issues, to the best political gain they can. Point was/in/will always be; if they can take an issue as hotly contested as the health-care bill, and push it through; then they have the political savvy to have the DADT policy addressed. If the Dems try and say that they can't address it because the republicans are blocking it, then they are indeed B.S.ing the citizens. The truth most likely is: They can't find a political benefit from either this issue or another that they could use as "Bartering" material. In other words, they don't want to play the game of "Compromise". This is how the legislative branch works. "Compromise". Not in the negative sense, but the sense on how different representatives and senators are able to get issues they believe are important addressed. It would be great if our legislative branch could work within a "One Bill - One Law" environment. But they can't and won't. It's not efficient and it's not productive for all sides.

So yes, if the dems are saying that they might not be able to address the DADT issue because the other side of the isle is blocking it's progress, then they are FOS. That simply means they aren't looking for a way to compromise, because they don't see any political gain for themselves.
 
OMG. Do your homework. Don't try and backpedal now.
Some keywords to look up include 'fillibuster', your buddy, flip floppy, wishy washy "John McCain" , "Senate Armed Services Committee".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top