Gates: Veto of military gay ban bill possible, page 1

Gates: Veto of military gay ban bill possible, page

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

Topic started on 20-6-2010 @ 09:47 PM by airspoon

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Sunday that President Obama could end up vetoing legislation that would lift the ban on gays serving openly in the military.

Mr. Obama supports repealing the law, and the White House has pushed for quicker congressional action than the Pentagon has favored. Mr. Gates also supports repeal.

But Mr. Gates told "Fox News Sunday" that Mr. Obama still probably would veto an upcoming spending bill that includes the repeal if the bill also contains money for defense projects he says are wasteful.

Mr. Gates wants to get rid of an aircraft engine and additional transport aircraft that some lawmakers want to keep. They generally represent areas with defense contractors that would stand to lose business from the cuts.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Source: www.washingtontimes.com...

First, I would like to say that I 100% supports gays openly serving in the military. What gets me in this article, is that the military industrial complex slips all of this spending into a bill that should otherwise have nothing to do with the matter at hand.

You see, they take a bill that is likely to pass and then slip all of this nonsense to benefit corporate America into the bill. That way, the President and both houses of Congress are more likely to pass the bill due to popular opinion on that one particular subject. This is exactly what's wrong with the current system, among many other things of course. What I'm surprised about, is that the Washington Times, FOX News and NEWSMAX are actually reporting on this corporate robbery of the American people. Are they now that confident that the American people can do absolutely nothing about the out of control and corrupt government, influenced by the military industrial complex?

--airspoon

Edited to add: Either way, the American people will lose. Whether the bill gets passed and tax-dollars are wasted on equipment we don't need, or the bill doesn't get passed and gays are not allowed to serve their country who serves corporate interests.

[edit on 20-6-2010 by airspoon]

reply posted on 20-6-2010 @ 09:51 PM by draevin

I have to agree with you on your commentary. It should be two separate bills, just goes to show that they will never waste an opportunity.

It never has made sense to even have the ban in the first place, but I suppose I'm just "too young to understand." As I've been told before. Or maybe I'm biased.

reply posted on 20-6-2010 @ 09:52 PM by sdcigarpig

There is one slight problem that not many people are actually discussing or talking about. Being gay in the military is not against the law or the UCMJ. What is in the UCMJ that is not discussed or talked about, is the actual sex acts. Every one talks about letting gay people serve in the military, however, until the military laws are changed, then it just opens it up for them to get rid of that many more people.

reply posted on 20-6-2010 @ 09:54 PM by Steve8511

Sexual fetishes have no business changing the military. What next multiple wives…..animals, kid fetishes?

reply posted on 20-6-2010 @ 10:01 PM by airspoon

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
There is one slight problem that not many people are actually discussing or talking about. Being gay in the military is not against the law or the UCMJ. What is in the UCMJ that is not discussed or talked about, is the actual sex acts. Every one talks about letting gay people serve in the military, however, until the military laws are changed, then it just opens it up for them to get rid of that many more people.

That's not entirely true. While you may be gay in the military, you are not allowed to be openly gay. Meaning, that you aren't allowed to tell anyone. This is the whole "don't ask, don't tell" thing. What this bill would do, is allow people to be openly gay in the military. Not only could you not tell people in the military, but if the military found out about your sexual preference, you could be discharged. Such things as Facebook or MySpace could get you discharged. It has happened to many people.

It's not really about flaunting your sex preference in front of your fellow soldier/sailors. Rather, it's about be able to be yourself. During formal events, they would be allowed to actually bring a date or their significant other. They would no longer need to lie about who they are.

--airspoon

reply posted on 20-6-2010 @ 10:05 PM by draevin

reply to post by Steve8511

If you're comparing two consenting adults that are doing nothing against the law, to people who commit actual crimes then you fail to see the point.

Pages: ^^TOP^^