Breaking News: Supreme Court Refuses to Stop Enforcement of 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'

[Luissa]

This is excellent news. The Military is alot stronger without queers, It is very demoralizing for the troops to have gays openly serve. Sarah Palin is one who understand's this and knows that our military needs to be as strong as it can be to deter any threats. Obama on the other hand doesn't since he had a affair with Larry Sinclair, a openly homosexual.

God you are a dipshit.

Obviously illiterate too.

The SCOTUS hasn't weighed in on this issue definitively, they are just allowing the DOD to maintain the status quo while the government put's it's appeal together.

I agree with the decision.

The time has come to do away with DADT, but it needs to be at the hands of more than a single federal judge's ruling.

Agreed, this was the right decision by the SCOTUS. I'm not sure I agree about ending DADT though.

Why? Every country that has ended these sort of policies have had little problems.

 

[USArmyRetired]

Sad

No, it's cotton pickin good that we don't have gays to serve. They are demoralizing to the welfare of the military and nation.

No, anyone who serves has a pair. It's just your insecurity about someone being "different" that demoralizes ME, as a MAN, that my fellow MEN, are such insecure fucking pussies.

What's a gay guy who's willing to die for you, going to do? Bite you? Booh! Jesus fucking christ you're lame.

Lets face it. Gays are not good for the military. The Marine corps agrees. The Supreme Court agrees. It is dangerous. They are failures. Our president who had a affair with Larry Sinclair is proof of failure.

 

[G.T.]

No, it's cotton pickin good that we don't have gays to serve. They are demoralizing to the welfare of the military and nation.

No, anyone who serves has a pair. It's just your insecurity about someone being "different" that demoralizes ME, as a MAN, that my fellow MEN, are such insecure fucking pussies.

What's a gay guy who's willing to die for you, going to do? Bite you? Booh! Jesus fucking christ you're lame.

Lets face it. Gays are not good for the military. The Marine corps agrees. The Supreme Court agrees. It is dangerous. They are failures. Our president who had a affair with Larry Sinclair is proof of failure.

You're a grown assed man who uses this sort of logic? Your Education is what's a failure. Grow up.

 

[jillian]

No, anyone who serves has a pair. It's just your insecurity about someone being "different" that demoralizes ME, as a MAN, that my fellow MEN, are such insecure fucking pussies.

What's a gay guy who's willing to die for you, going to do? Bite you? Booh! Jesus fucking christ you're lame.

Lets face it. Gays are not good for the military. The Marine corps agrees. The Supreme Court agrees. It is dangerous. They are failures. Our president who had a affair with Larry Sinclair is proof of failure.

You're a grown assed man who uses this sort of logic? Your Education is what's a failure. Grow up.

you think he's had an education?

 

[ConHog]

God you are a dipshit.

Obviously illiterate too.

The SCOTUS hasn't weighed in on this issue definitively, they are just allowing the DOD to maintain the status quo while the government put's it's appeal together.

I agree with the decision.

The time has come to do away with DADT, but it needs to be at the hands of more than a single federal judge's ruling.

Agreed, this was the right decision by the SCOTUS. I'm not sure I agree about ending DADT though.

Why? Every country that has ended these sort of policies have had little problems.

Let me differentiate here between what I believe, and what I believe should happen.

First, I believe it should be repealed, but second I recognize that many don't and that this is an issue that we as a voting pubic will NEVER agree on, so when you can't agree the best course is to compromise. A compromise is to keep DADT in effect (yes that makes no one completely happy, but neither does it give either side what they want.) Keep it in place and relax the standard, as I said no one should get booted for having dinner with their partner or whatever. It should have to meet the standard of giving the military a black eye.

As to your comment about what other countries have done, I honestly don't care. We are not other countries, we are the USA and we shouldn't be taking our cues from anyone else. We need to decide what is right for OUR country.

 

[Luissa]

Lets face it. Gays are not good for the military. The Marine corps agrees. The Supreme Court agrees. It is dangerous. They are failures. Our president who had a affair with Larry Sinclair is proof of failure.

You're a grown assed man who uses this sort of logic? Your Education is what's a failure. Grow up.

you think he's had an education?

Don't be knockin The Aryan Hand book. LOL

 

[G.T.]

Fear of the unknown, keeps a young man un-grown.

 

[Dr.House]

Correct decision...

There are proper procedures to be followed, not just one judges opinion...

 

[Saikron]

Sad

No, it's cotton pickin good that we don't have gays to serve. They are demoralizing to the welfare of the military and nation.

There are gays in the military.

P.S. You can come out of the closet now, it's 2010.

 

[Big Black Dog]

That's probably the only thing the Supreme Court has done right in over five years.

 

[geauxtohell]

This is excellent news. The Military is alot stronger without queers, It is very demoralizing for the troops to have gays openly serve. Sarah Palin is one who understand's this and knows that our military needs to be as strong as it can be to deter any threats. Obama on the other hand doesn't since he had a affair with Larry Sinclair, a openly homosexual.

God you are a dipshit.

Obviously illiterate too.

The SCOTUS hasn't weighed in on this issue definitively, they are just allowing the DOD to maintain the status quo while the government put's it's appeal together.

I agree with the decision.

The time has come to do away with DADT, but it needs to be at the hands of more than a single federal judge's ruling.

Agreed, this was the right decision by the SCOTUS. I'm not sure I agree about ending DADT though.

I do. It's time has come. I find it ironic that the same people who are adamantly defending DADT now (national pundits in this case) were flipping out when Clinton wanted to take away the full ban and put DADT in place.

This isn't about preserving an awesome policy (b/c DADT is absurd), it's about people's disdain for homosexuals.

That is not sufficient to bar them from serving their nation.

I am not going to pretend that this will be a popular decision in the ranks. I know better. However, that has also never been a good argument for military policy.

This is why we have a civilian chain of command.

 

[Vel]

I wonder who will call them activist judges?

Hmm.. Maybe those judges are just trying to protect the gay soldier by making him put away his gayness just like the school administration is trying to protect the little boy by making him put away his flag. Just a thought


( and no I don't think there is any problem with gays serving openly. Just trying to make a point about freedom and the ability to be who you are in the USA. )

 

[G.T.]

Agreed, this was the right decision by the SCOTUS. I'm not sure I agree about ending DADT though.

Why? Every country that has ended these sort of policies have had little problems.

Let me differentiate here between what I believe, and what I believe should happen.

First, I believe it should be repealed, but second I recognize that many don't and that this is an issue that we as a voting pubic will NEVER agree on, so when you can't agree the best course is to compromise. A compromise is to keep DADT in effect (yes that makes no one completely happy, but neither does it give either side what they want.) Keep it in place and relax the standard, as I said no one should get booted for having dinner with their partner or whatever. It should have to meet the standard of giving the military a black eye.

As to your comment about what other countries have done, I honestly don't care. We are not other countries, we are the USA and we shouldn't be taking our cues from anyone else. We need to decide what is right for OUR country.

Anti Bigotry doesn't need a consensus. It's 2010, if we can't move forward as a Human Civilization, that's a loss.

 

[Luissa]

I wonder who will call them activist judges?

Hmm.. Maybe those judges are just trying to protect the gay soldier by making him put away his gayness just like the school administration is trying to protect the little boy by making him put away his flag. Just a thought


( and no I don't think there is any problem with gays serving openly. Just trying to make a point about freedom and the ability to be who you are in the USA. )

A gay soldier is not a minor.

 

[geauxtohell]

Correct decision...

There are proper procedures to be followed, not just one judges opinion...

Ugh. I can't believe we agree on this.

 

[judyd]

No, it's cotton pickin good that we don't have gays to serve. They are demoralizing to the welfare of the military and nation.

No, anyone who serves has a pair. It's just your insecurity about someone being "different" that demoralizes ME, as a MAN, that my fellow MEN, are such insecure fucking pussies.

What's a gay guy who's willing to die for you, going to do? Bite you? Booh! Jesus fucking christ you're lame.

Lets face it. Gays are not good for the military. The Marine corps agrees. The Supreme Court agrees. It is dangerous. They are failures. Our president who had a affair with Larry Sinclair is proof of failure.

I don't usually get into these "gay" discussions, but I do have to ask you how are they failures? If a person is doing his job, going through the military ranks without any disciplinary actions against him, I don't see how he/she can be labeled a failure simply because of his/her sexuality. Many have also gone and returned safely from combat assignments before they were outed. They're failures?

 

[Vel]

I wonder who will call them activist judges?

Hmm.. Maybe those judges are just trying to protect the gay soldier by making him put away his gayness just like the school administration is trying to protect the little boy by making him put away his flag. Just a thought


( and no I don't think there is any problem with gays serving openly. Just trying to make a point about freedom and the ability to be who you are in the USA. )

A gay soldier is not a minor.

True.. but the US government is responsible for his safety while he's serving. It's not so different than being in a school in that regard. IMO the soldier should be able to be proud of who he is and be openly gay and an American of ANY age should be able to display their American pride in any AMERICAN public building or property. After all. what is that soldier fighting for?

 

[ConHog]

God you are a dipshit.

Obviously illiterate too.

The SCOTUS hasn't weighed in on this issue definitively, they are just allowing the DOD to maintain the status quo while the government put's it's appeal together.

I agree with the decision.

The time has come to do away with DADT, but it needs to be at the hands of more than a single federal judge's ruling.

Agreed, this was the right decision by the SCOTUS. I'm not sure I agree about ending DADT though.

I do. It's time has come. I find it ironic that the same people who are adamantly defending DADT now (national pundits in this case) were flipping out when Clinton wanted to take away the full ban and put DADT in place.

This isn't about preserving an awesome policy (b/c DADT is absurd), it's about people's disdain for homosexuals.

That is not sufficient to bar them from serving their nation.

I am not going to pretend that this will be a popular decision in the ranks. I know better. However, that has also never been a good argument for military policy.

This is why we have a civilian chain of command.

I don't think DADT is absurd, what I DO find absurd is that someone can be kicked out over being "outed" in a relatively minor way, but I also find it absurd that some gays used their gayness to get out of going to the sandbox, so it cuts both ways.

I just don't understand why gays can't be quiet about being gay. Okay you're gay, keep it to yourself. And by keep it to yourself, I mean use a modicum of respect for the fact that most people in this country don't approve and act appropriately. If that were done, we both know that most soldiers are not going to rat out their buddies who are known to be gay. Sure some assholes are, but we both realize that the military is a pretty good breeding ground for assholes, and changing this policy isn't going to change that.

Wouldn't a better policy be, "don't embarrass the military?" meaning who cares if you're gay but don't pose in gay magazines, don't attend gay pride parades, in other words don't flaunt your gayness, BUT no one is getting kicked out for bringing their partner to the Brigade Christmas party.

We do agree that the military can't be making decisions based off what is popular within the ranks though. If that were the case, we'd never go to war, for starters.

 

[Danaelle]

Agreed, this was the right decision by the SCOTUS. I'm not sure I agree about ending DADT though.

Why? Every country that has ended these sort of policies have had little problems.

Let me differentiate here between what I believe, and what I believe should happen.

First, I believe it should be repealed, but second I recognize that many don't and that this is an issue that we as a voting pubic will NEVER agree on, so when you can't agree the best course is to compromise. A compromise is to keep DADT in effect (yes that makes no one completely happy, but neither does it give either side what they want.) Keep it in place and relax the standard, as I said no one should get booted for having dinner with their partner or whatever. It should have to meet the standard of giving the military a black eye.

As to your comment about what other countries have done, I honestly don't care. We are not other countries, we are the USA and we shouldn't be taking our cues from anyone else. We need to decide what is right for OUR country.

Just as the government should stay out of marriage vows, we working class citizens shouldnt get any kind of vote at all on this thing. If a vote is to be had, it should be voted on by all those serving in the military. I personally think it should be repealed...but Im not sure if that would help matters for them in the slightest.

Its kinda like discrimination in the workplace....if your boss doesnt like you, or suspects whatever...they can still get rid of you. They dont necessarily have to say it was because you are gay. If its done the right way, it can still happen.

 

[Sunni Man]

Sad

No, it's cotton pickin good that we don't have gays to serve. They are demoralizing to the welfare of the military and nation.

It isn't a problem for the 25 other countries, some that are our allies in both wars.
I guess we can fight with gay englishman, but not gay americans.

None of those 25 countries has fought a major war, (WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam) since allowing homos to serve.

So openly faggot soldiers have Not been tested in real combat situations.