Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Matter

[E5RANGER375]

No, they didn't win. They actually lost protections. It's going back to the way it was when I was on active duty. Being homosexual meant you couldn't serve in the military. They asked you if you were homosexual. Homosexuals were tried and discharged under the USMJ under other than honorable conditions.

oh, I thought thats what they were doing when they made me bend over and spread my cheeks.

 

[photoshooter]

Looking at the wiki page for the UCMJ Uniform Code of Military Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It appears that in the past POTUS Executive orders have amended the UCMJ.

Can the Prez just create the order?

 

[blue2golf]

Really? Who changes the UCMJ?

There are a couple in the UCMJ sections they'll have to change. Sodomy is still illegal.

The spirit of the bill was to remove, under specific condition, 10 USC § 654, or the DADT protections afforded to homosexuals. If the spirit of the bill was to allow homosexuals to openly serve in the military, why didn't Congress codify it as such? They could have replaced 654 with "Homosexuality is not a bar to enlistment or reenlistment in the Armed Forces of the United States." if that was the spirit and intent of the law.

I don't know if Congress is capable of passing a straightfoward law. Everything they do is Byzantine.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Looking at the wiki page for the UCMJ Uniform Code of Military Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It appears that in the past POTUS Executive orders have amended the UCMJ.

Can the Prez just create the order?

A president can't amend the UCMJ because it is federal law. They can however direct instances where it is to be enforced more or less vigorously, leading to a disparate application of the law.

As Commander in Chief, the president has Constitutional authority over the Armed Forces. (S)he can direct the Secretary of Defense to make homosexuality a disqualifying factor in serving in the Armed Forces as long as that direction does not conflict with federal law. The next president could pass just such a directive.

 

[Indy317]

Wonder when the first openly gay soldier gets assaulted because he just _has_ to shower at the exact same time as a group of straight soldiers. Don't try to say this doesn't happen, and won't happen, it will. Had a friend, who was female, and she said while at college this happened to her and her straight friends. They had another friend, also female, who wasn't out about being a lesbian. They found it odd that for some reason, whenever part of the group would go and shower, she would always perk up and want to go and bath as well....after they knew for a fact she had already taken a shower. I guess sometimes she would show up to shower when she knew they would be in there (prior to their class times, etc.). They all knew what was up, and stopped being friends with her (at least close friends). A few years later, she finally came out and hung out with other lesbians I guess.

If we can force straight and gay members of the same sex to shower together and see themselves naked, then lets save money and have just one shower and restroom facility for all sexes.

 

[grimor]

Congress must approve any changes to the UCMJ, which are then signed into law by executive order and included in the Manual for Courts-Martial

 

[machete]

Really? Who changes the UCMJ?

it was just effectively changed by the natural consequence of this law...

If our wormbag politicians had spent a fraction of their time figuring out how to win the war as they have on their social experiments we'd be done by now.

no,,,we wouldnt... we cant win these wars,,,because well never be able to force other people to live as we went them to... its foolish to try...

There are a couple in the UCMJ sections they'll have to change. Sodomy is still illegal.

maybe for heterosexuals,,,it was just made legal for homosexuals...

in a few months,,,anyone in the military who tries to attack someone with a sodomy charge will get themselves written up,,,and forced out of the service as intolerant,,,

when obama signs,,,the order will be given,,,the troops are expected to obey it and not look for a way around the law,,,

 

[mrjarrell]

its seriously about time. I knew a lot of great soldiers who were gay and always had to fear repercussions in the back of their minds. maybe now they can focus all their efforts on warfighting and not have to worry about being oppressed.

I just simply dont care what any people do on their own time.

Bingo.

 

[photoshooter]

United States Code: Title 10,925. Art. 125. Sodomy | LII / Legal Information Institute

Here's the pertinent section. Is this the only area that "Gayness" is anathema in the UCMJ?

(PS: my read is that even straight members of the military cannot enter "the forbidden zone" with their spouse or SOs)

Again, asking out of ignorance: Was DADT the only thing rule - other than recruiting rules - that kept Gays out of the military? Does this mean that a non-practicing gay would be allowed under the "letter of the law" if the recruiting rules were amended to ignore sexual preference - and instead focus only on the code I linked to above?

 

[machete]

This is entirely different than race. This is about sexual turmoil in the ranks.

However, it is now a moot point. Your side won. It is up to those who voted for this legislation to provide the funds for a logical sexual segregation of gays in the same manner that we seperate men from women.

the troops will be ordered to adapt and accept...any troop who cant get along with a gay troop will be unfit for service...and will be separated out other than honorable,,,maybe with a hate crime label that will hang over him the rest of his life...

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

United States Code: Title 10,925. Art. 125. Sodomy | LII / Legal Information Institute

Here's the pertinent section. Is this the only area that "Gayness" is anathema in the UCMJ?

(PS: my read is that even straight members of the military cannot enter "the forbidden zone" with their spouse or SOs)

Again, asking out of ignorance: Was DADT the only thing rule - other than recruiting rules - that kept Gays out of the military? Does this mean that a non-practicing gay would be allowed under the "letter of the law" if the recruiting rules were amended to ignore sexual preference - and instead focus only on the code I linked to above?

There were several sections under the UCMJ that were used to try homosexuals prior to DADT. None of them have changed.

The first was that you had to certify on enlistment and reenlistment you were not homosexual nor had you engaged in homosexual acts. Lying could be prosecuted. Sodomy was another. Then there was the section governing conduct unbecoming an officer, and then the general behavior section.

 

[grimor]

United States Code: Title 10,925. Art. 125. Sodomy | LII / Legal Information Institute

Here's the pertinent section. Is this the only area that "Gayness" is anathema in the UCMJ?

(PS: my read is that even straight members of the military cannot enter "the forbidden zone" with their spouse or SOs)

Again, asking out of ignorance: Was DADT the only thing rule - other than recruiting rules - that kept Gays out of the military? Does this mean that a non-practicing gay would be allowed under the "letter of the law" if the recruiting rules were amended to ignore sexual preference - and instead focus only on the code I linked to above?

Nothing kept gays out of the military, they just can't tell anyone. Hence DADT

 

[printcraft]

Are you saying guys can conceive children?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Nothing kept gays out of the military, they just can't tell anyone. Hence DADT

Except that prior to DADT the military could ask, and if you lied you'd be subject to punishment. DADT was passed to protect homosexuals that wanted to serve. Those protections, but not the penalties, will be removed if 654 is removed.

 

[WWIIIDefender]

I do have several problems with this. The government has no buisness in this. Don't ask don't tell worked atleast. Now recruiters will ask and you will be forced to tell. Don't ask don't tell atleast made it no bodies buisness. Was it so bad when we were a christian nation that did not torture and your sexuallity was no ones buisness.

 

[E5RANGER375]

I do have several problems with this. The government has no buisness in this. Don't ask don't tell worked atleast. Now recruiters will ask and you will be forced to tell. Don't ask don't tell atleast made it no bodies buisness. Was it so bad when we were a christian nation that did not torture and your sexuallity was no ones buisness.

REALLY? You think so? I dont think so myself. every recruiter I know will tell you not to sayt s*** about anything. anything that gets you in is acceptable as long as its not traced back to them.
I think the recruiters will be all over this.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

REALLY? You think so? I dont think so myself. every recruiter I know will tell you not to sayt s*** about anything. anything that gets you in is acceptable as long as its not traced back to them.
I think the recruiters will be all over this.

In some services maybe. My GF's son enlisted in the Marine Corps and ships to MCRD in 15 & a wake up. His recruiter has a monthly mission of one. They aren't talking to anyone already out of high school. Minimum ASVAB score of 50 (the other services were 30). No prior service, not even prior service Marines. It took him five months to get an enlistment date. The Corps is picking and choosing who they want.

Qualifications for all services are rising. I think that recruiters will be the front line to prevent homosexuals from enlisting. All the guys at the RS here are combat vets, the very troops that said homosexuals will hurt unit morale.

 

[E5RANGER375]

In some services maybe. My GF's son enlisted in the Marine Corps and ships to MCRD in 15 & a wake up. His recruiter has a monthly mission of one. They aren't talking to anyone already out of high school. Minimum ASVAB score of 50 (the other services were 30). No prior service, not even prior service Marines. It took him five months to get an enlistment date. The Corps is picking and choosing who they want.

Qualifications for all services are rising. I think that recruiters will be the front line to prevent homosexuals from enlisting. All the guys at the RS here are combat vets, the very troops that said homosexuals will hurt unit morale.

I know some great Marines, but the Marines make you think they are selective because they only take the best and thats it. well the other part of the story that they dont tell you is that they are smaller than some of the other branches so they dont need as many Marines. So they can afford to be selective.

People just need to wise up and go into the Army anyways, since its the best branch (im maybe a little biased)

 

[grimor]

In some services maybe. My GF's son enlisted in the Marine Corps and ships to MCRD in 15 & a wake up. His recruiter has a monthly mission of one. They aren't talking to anyone already out of high school. Minimum ASVAB score of 50 (the other services were 30). No prior service, not even prior service Marines. It took him five months to get an enlistment date. The Corps is picking and choosing who they want.

Qualifications for all services are rising. I think that recruiters will be the front line to prevent homosexuals from enlisting. All the guys at the RS here are combat vets, the very troops that said homosexuals will hurt unit morale.

The Air Force quota for many areas is 0, gonna be hard to meet those numbers.

 

[MrSmitty]

Equal rights, that's why.

If some straight guy can blab about his girlfriend or wife all day over the pond then so can the gay guy.

The problem is that it's not about equal rights it's always about special rights.... you HAVE to accept me!!!.....uh.. no I don't, I don't agree with the lifestyle... but I do try to abide by " Hate the sin, love the sinner" I also hate when gay people compare themselves to the equal rights movement...Black people were discriminated solely based on skin color, not actions, gay people are frowned on because of their lifestyles and behavior, something which may offend some people.