Judge Orders Lesbian Reinstated To Air Force

[USArmyRetired]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company of 80 to 200 causes problems and demoralization.

 

[rightwinger]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company causes problems and demoralization.

World has passed you by hasn't it?

 

[Luissa]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company of 80 to 200 causes problems and demoralization.

So it is alright for our military men to serve along side openly gay soldiers from England, France etc, but not from the US?

 

[Cal]

They have been covering this a lot here, she is from Spokane.
I think it is great.

I was watching a show last night where they were discussing DADT. I think it is funny we will serve with other countries that all allow gays in the military, but complain it will affect our troops if we allow it.[/QUOTE]

Great point! And I agree.. Great to see this happening!

 

[FireGod]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company of 80 to 200 causes problems and demoralization.

So it is alright for our military men to serve along side openly gay soldiers from England, France etc, but not from the US?

Now you are getting it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company of 80 to 200 causes problems and demoralization.

Yeah right. You old juicer lifers were the problem, you just don't have the brains to know it.

Lesbians in the military? When's the last time any sane person in the real world was either shocked or bothered by that? jeezus.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company causes problems and demoralization.

World has passed you by hasn't it?

He's been assigned to Porch Company, in the Rocking Chair Rangers Battalion.

 

[CurveLight]

I don't see how unconstitutional actions from the judiciary are anything to celebrate.

But then I don't really want a dictatorship either.

By all means, show us how this was unconstitutional......

(Stomping your feet with salty soaked keyboard-wet tears doesn't count)

 

[CurveLight]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company of 80 to 200 causes problems and demoralization.

You were sucking off 30-40 of those guys on fire watch so morale couldn't have been that low.....unless you weren't paying them enough money.

 

[Oddball]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company of 80 to 200 causes problems and demoralization.

So it is alright for our military men to serve along side openly gay soldiers from England, France etc, but not from the US?

Irrelevant.

Those troops joined the English and French militaries, not the American.

 

[Oddball]

I don't see how unconstitutional actions from the judiciary are anything to celebrate.

But then I don't really want a dictatorship either.

By all means, show us how this was unconstitutional......

(Stomping your feet with salty soaked keyboard-wet tears doesn't count)

Care to cite legal points and authorities for us on how civilian courts posses jurisdiction over internal military policy matters?

 

[CurveLight]

This is a travesty and set back for our armed forces. When I was in there was a lot of resentment to have a gay placed in your squad. Just having one in a company of 80 to 200 causes problems and demoralization.

So it is alright for our military men to serve along side openly gay soldiers from England, France etc, but not from the US?

Irrelevant.

Those troops joined the English and French militaries, not the American.

Irrelevant.

Our Troops served with gays and guess what? The world didn't end.

 

[CurveLight]

I don't see how unconstitutional actions from the judiciary are anything to celebrate.

But then I don't really want a dictatorship either.

By all means, show us how this was unconstitutional......

(Stomping your feet with salty soaked keyboard-wet tears doesn't count)

Care to cite legal points and authorities for us on how civilian courts posses jurisdiction over internal military policy matters?

Military issues get tried in Federal courts because Soldiers don't stop being Citizens just because they joined the military. Fucking dumbass.

 

[Oddball]

Military personnel surrender their normal civilian rights when the sign up. If you had ever been in, you'd know that.

Now, cite the legal points and authorities which give civilian courts jurisdiction in internal matters such as this, troll.

 

[CurveLight]

I don't see how unconstitutional actions from the judiciary are anything to celebrate.

But then I don't really want a dictatorship either.

By all means, show us how this was unconstitutional......

(Stomping your feet with salty soaked keyboard-wet tears doesn't count)

Care to cite legal points and authorities for us on how civilian courts posses jurisdiction over internal military policy matters?

Military personnel surrender their normal civilian rights when the sign up. If you had ever been in, you'd know that.

Now, cite the legal points and authorities which give civilian courts jurisdiction in internal matters such as this, troll.

They don't surrender the Constitution you fucking jackass. Since I'm a combat vet I'm fairly familiar with the situation so maybe you can toss out another strawman and whine some more. You're so fucking stoopid you're asking for evidence a Federal court can rule on a military policy in a thread where the op gives the evidence you request.

This is also not an "internal" military policy. Are you too fucking stoopid to understand that as well?

 

[ConHog]

By all means, show us how this was unconstitutional......

(Stomping your feet with salty soaked keyboard-wet tears doesn't count)

Care to cite legal points and authorities for us on how civilian courts posses jurisdiction over internal military policy matters?

Military personnel surrender their normal civilian rights when the sign up. If you had ever been in, you'd know that.

Now, cite the legal points and authorities which give civilian courts jurisdiction in internal matters such as this, troll.

They don't surrender the Constitution you fucking jackass. Since I'm a combat vet I'm fairly familiar with the situation so maybe you can toss out another strawman and whine some more. You're so fucking stoopid you're asking for evidence a Federal court can rule on a military policy in a thread where the op gives the evidence you request.

This is also not an "internal" military policy. Are you too fucking stoopid to understand that as well?

Actually, military personnel DO give up their COTUS protected rights when they join. They are governed by the UCMJ.

 

[Samson]

I think we all need to imagine the Big Picture.

Is there anyone here who would want :

to be rugmunching

I think not.

 

[Oddball]

By all means, show us how this was unconstitutional......

(Stomping your feet with salty soaked keyboard-wet tears doesn't count)

Care to cite legal points and authorities for us on how civilian courts posses jurisdiction over internal military policy matters?

Military personnel surrender their normal civilian rights when the sign up. If you had ever been in, you'd know that.

Now, cite the legal points and authorities which give civilian courts jurisdiction in internal matters such as this, troll.

They don't surrender the Constitution you fucking jackass. Since I'm a combat vet I'm fairly familiar with the situation so maybe you can toss out another strawman and whine some more. You're so fucking stoopid you're asking for evidence a Federal court can rule on a military policy in a thread where the op gives the evidence you request.

This is also not an "internal" military policy. Are you too fucking stoopid to understand that as well?

I didn't think you could drum up any legal point or authority on the matter, because there isn't a one. The military is a legal jurisdiction unto itself....Period.

I seriously doubt you were in the military, let alone in combat... Because if you were, you'd know this.

People surrender all their civilian rights and consent to be property of the US gubmint the day they sign their enlistment contracts or accept commission....That's one of the fist things they tell you during your first days of orientation in basic.

Since DADT only applies to military personnel and not civilian GS employees on military installations, it is internal military policy.

You haven't the first idea what you're talking about.

 

[rightwinger]

I think we all need to imagine the Big Picture.

Is there anyone here who would want :

to be rugmunching

I think not.

Does anyone really care anymore?

Do we want to get into the sexual practices of heterosexual soldiers or is that don't ask don't tell also?

 

[Oddball]

Does anyone really care anymore?

Do we want to get into the sexual practices of heterosexual soldiers or is that don't ask don't tell also?

There are restrictions against heteros in uniform as well.

Never heard of PDA rules and regs, have you?