US Congress moves closer to ending military gay ban, page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

Topic started on 28-5-2010 @ 05:51 AM by henriquefd

US Congress moves closer to ending military gay ban

news.bbc.co.uk

The US Congress has moved a step closer to overturning the controversial "don't ask don't tell" ban on openly gay people serving in the military.

The House of Representatives voted 234-194 in favour of changing the law that currently allows gay people to serve in the military only if they hide their sexual orientation.

"Lawmakers today stood on the right side of history," said Joe Solmonese of the gay rights group Human Rights Campaign.

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 05:51 AM by henriquefd

You know, as a non-US citizen, I have only followed this issue in US through hollywood movies and such. I am not aware of how big an issue this is. I don't think I have learned of any other country that has issues with gay people joining the army. I know I never heard of anything about that here in Brazil.

Anyway, I guess the US military needs more soldiers, so not allowing gay people goes against that necessity, no? The more people wanting to defend and fight for your country, the better?

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 06:20 AM by Target Earth

Thats Fantastic, Thanks for asking... Another Big Deal, That Nobody cares about...
This Government is worthless.

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 06:23 AM by antonia

Originally posted by henriquefd

Anyway, I guess the US military needs more soldiers, so not allowing gay people goes against that necessity, no? The more people wanting to defend and fight for your country, the better?

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

There are already gay men and women in the army, they just don't advertise the fact. This will go a long way to ending that self-imposed ban on individuality Gays in the military have put on themselves. I'd also like to see benefits for their long-term partners.

And despite people's assertions, I assure you flaming queens don't join the Army.

[edit on 28-5-2010 by antonia]

[edit on 28-5-2010 by antonia]

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 06:56 AM by dontblink

Originally posted by antonia
I'd also like to see benefits for their long-term partners at all.
[edit on 28-5-2010 by antonia]

One thing at a time. But I wouldn't be surprised if there is some sabre rattling over this issue even with such a large majority vote. I think that it's long overdue, don't ask don't tell was such a stupid cop out.

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 07:24 AM by Tykonos

About time too.

An apology should be made to those who fought and trained in the services and since been thrown out due to their sexuality.

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 07:54 AM by thisguyrighthere

reply to post by antonia

Isnt there an overt ban on individuality for everyone in service?

I dont really get this push to end what is basically a call to ignore.

I have gay friends in the military. They've never expressed some discomfort with not being able to shout and dance "look at me I'm gay." Granted theyve never been the type to do so. I dont go around dancing and singing "hey look at me I'm not gay."

How is a rule that says "ignore orientation" really any different from any other aspect of life? With the exceptions of maybe P-Town and San Fransisco.

I'm all for less law and control but I dont see how the absence of this law changes anything. There were certainly gays in service before the law.

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 08:05 AM by dontblink

I'm all for less law and control but I dont see how the absence of this law changes anything. There were certainly gays in service before the law.

Yes but the point of don't ask don't tell was that if you were found to be homosexual you would be discharged from the service and barred from ever serving again. Now it will be more like don't ask don't tell 2.0 if you're outed as gay it's no big deal.

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 08:14 AM by thisguyrighthere

Reply to post by dontblink

Are there any stats for how many have been discharged for being "outed?"

Once "outed" how do they prove you are in fact a homosexual and not the target of a witch hunt or just trying to get discharged because you want out?

I mean, it never worked for Klinger.

How real is this whole thing? Seems like it's never been anything more than lip service.

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 08:23 AM by dontblink

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

Source

In the fiscal years since the policy was first introduced in 1993, the military has discharged over 13,000 troops from the military under DADT. The number of discharges per year under DADT dropped sharply after the September 11 attacks and has remained relatively low since. Discharges exceeded 600 every year until 2009. Statistics on the number of persons discharged per year.

And Klinger was trying to get a section 8 which is:

A category of discharge from the United States military for reason of being mentally unfit for service. It also came to mean any serviceperson given such a discharge or behaving as if deserving such a discharge

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 08:41 AM by thisguyrighthere

Reply to post by dontblink

Is there any way to know how many of those discharges were real? Not just targets of accusations or people wanting to bail out on the military life?

Seems like an easy way out for the soldier trying to bail.

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 08:52 AM by dontblink

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

I've got no data pertaining to that, unable to run any down. Anyone else able to corroborate this?

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 09:09 AM by thisguyrighthere

reply to post by dontblink

I havent found anything either. Even various anti-dadt places fail to cite fraud as a reason to repeal the law. The fact that dadt discharges drop like crazy during conflict means the military itself doesnt care to waste resources for no reason or that when there is no conflict they are more relaxed about just letting anyone out of service.

I know several individuals who claimed and faked all sorts of ailments from hernia to mental disorders to get out of the military and according to them they met very little resistance to discharge.

All Ive found out so far is that it isnt a "dishonorable" discharge.

From testimonies of those discharged under dadt found at SLDN:

The Board of Inquiry disregarded the recommendations of Kopfstein's Captains. Concluding that Kopfstein's statement that she is a lesbian constituted grounds for discharge under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the board voted in February 2002 to discharge Kopfstein from the Navy.

Obviously for her this was a bad thing since she wanted to remain in service. But if a simple statement of "I am gay" is all that is needed for the Board of Inquiry to discharge you then apparently anyone can do it.

[edit on 28-5-2010 by thisguyrighthere]

Gates went on to "raise the standards" for what could be used as reason to investigate or discharge. His reasons are evidence that an amount of fraud does take place:

To discourage the use of overheard statements or hearsay, from now on any evidence given in third-party outings must be given under oath, Gates said. Cases of third-party outings also have included instances in which male troops have turned in women who rejected their romantic advances or jilted partners in relationship have turned in a former lover.

New DADT Standards

Seems like ending DADT is as much about keeping more meat on the field as it is about "gay rights" if not more so. Cant have those 600-1000 annual discharges fraudulent or warranted if you're expecting the war(s) to keep going on or expand to other nations.

[edit on 28-5-2010 by thisguyrighthere]

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 09:29 AM by JohnPhoenix

There Is NO Gay Ban - Title is False Seems like Propaganda !

Gays are Allowed into The Military Already !!

This Only stops them from being Open about their sexual preference.

You know, I can be liberal on certain issues, but Not This Liberal -

If I'm fighting a war, I don't need or want to know the guy in the trenches next to me is openly gay. In fact, I'd prefer Not to know it because I feel an openly Gay man won't have the Guts it takes to carry his weight in combat.

Most straight ladies I know are tougher than most gay men I know.. I'd rather have sally watching my back.

This is such a bad move.. if we allowed gay Men to be open about it they would flaunt it and cause dissension in the ranks. Manly fighting men don't need that kinda BS around when they are concentrating on the job at hand.

The Military is NOT the place for a Gay Movement.

This is all just a bunch a liberal P*ssy propaganda and you all have bought into it like the saps you are.

This can only lead to worse corruption, hate crimes, and a weakening of our military.

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 09:44 AM by Benevolent Heretic

reply to post by henriquefd

This is good news. I hope it is successful.

Yes, people can be gay and in the military, but they cannot have pictures of their loved ones, talk about their families, let anyone know they are gay, etc. In other words, they have to hide who they are and pretend to be someone they aren't. And there's the constant threat that someone is going to charge them with being gay and there will be a big investigation ending with them being discharged, even if they've done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING wrong. Just for who they are.

DADT is a stupid law and should be overturned immediately.

reply posted on 28-5-2010 @ 10:42 AM by autowrench

reply to post by henriquefd

Last night I watched an interview of some soldiers and a commander in Iraq. They stated that they all supported an open gay policy, because for one things, they already serve with British, French, and Australian troops who are openly gay with not one problem. Also, the commander said that being a closeted gay lease it open for blackmail, if you do not perform X,Y, or Z, I will out you to your parents, other troops, etc.

You know of course the only ones fighting this are Christians, who consider all gays pawns of Satan, and lessor than human. I fully support this measure.

Pages: ^^TOP^^