The DADT Repeal Whitewash

Flopping Aces ^ | 04-28-10 | CJ

[Vigilanteman]

If Boehner and the GOP had any balls, they would simply vote to defund implementation of this monstrosity.

[ransacked]

Then we can safely assume NO ONE will vote to defund this monstrosity!

[Domalais]

You expect the military to operate democratically? We should ask the Soldiers if they are okay and hold their hands and talk about feelings?

[TheOldLady]

These Bunnies Are Planning To Donate
Are You?
Give what you can
Or sign up to donate monthly
and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10

Lazamataz’s fate is hanging in the balance!

[central_va]

You expect the military to operate democratically? We should ask the Soldiers if they are okay and hold their hands and talk about feelings?

You want to clarify your meaning, just what are you saying? DADT is a good thing? What?

[jmaroneps37]

Congress has to change the UCMJ to take out sodomy as a CRIME to make this work. We can STILL stop this threat to our war fighters from their enemies in the DNC and Taliban.

[OldGoatCPO]

Wrong!!!!! Tier 2 training we were told that article 192 (I think) will remain except it will be changed to make forcible sodomy a crime. As if rape is not already a crime. I asked my Congress critter to introduce a bill similar to most States making sex illegal in a public place. Barracks are not private, they are in fact public. His aid said DOD does not see a need because all the good little gay boys and girls will practice self discipline. Sex in the barracks is a problem now, one you will not hear about guess what happens when gay boys can bugger each other in a room shared with a heterosexual. Guess who will be threatened if he complains.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

The fact that the GOP majority in the House has not defunded this monstrosity shows that they have either no principles or no courage.

[Domalais]

The UCMJ hasn’t been enforceable against consensual sodomy ever since the Supreme Court struck down state (Texas, I think) sodomy laws decades ago.

[Domalais]

My meaning is that civilians run the military. It’s not the military’s job to question the government’s orders unless they are unconstitutional. It’s the military’s job to execute to the best of their ability.

Elections have consequences. Congress has ordered the military to train and be ready to repeal DADT, and that’s exactly what they’re going to do. Anything else would be against the spirit of the constitution.

[little jeremiah]

With all due respect, you’re out of your freaking mind. Forcing “gay” rights on anyone, what to speak of the military, is in direct opposition to the intent of the Constitution and the founders of this country would be disgusted and horrified beyond belief to read your comment. “Gay” rights are ah ultimate affront to the Constitution. Why should the military allow mentally ill moral degenerates into the ranks?

One reason only - to destroy the military and turn our country into a morally degenerate tyranny.

[Domalais]

Why should the military allow mentally ill moral degenerates into the ranks?

Because Congress said to. It's their duty to obey.

Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution:
Congress shall have power... To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

[little jeremiah]

Well, when Congress is a bunch of renegade socialist thugs perhaps “our” side playing by the Marbury rules, while they fight dirty, isn’t the way to do it.

Homosexuals are degenerate mentally ill people who should never be in the military.

And the morally depraved members of Congress who voted to repeal DADT will hopefully be voted out soon.

[Domalais]

Elections have consequences.

[central_va]

My meaning is that civilians run the military. It’s not the military’s job to question the government’s orders unless they are unconstitutional. It’s the military’s job to execute to the best of their ability.

JimRob,

this person has no business on Free Republic in my opinion. Needs the zot.

[little jeremiah]

It’s not the military’s job to question the government’s orders unless they are unconstitutional.

Oh really? That's not the in the oaths I've read.

[Domalais]

Hilarious. I support the constitution, and the military, against people who are either ignorant of both or intentionally ignoring how the country is supposed to work, and that's a bad thing.

Is your position that the military should intentionally disobey its instructions from Congress? Do you realize what that means?

From the linked article: As a Soldier, we do what we’re told. I will enforce all laws, regulations, and policies affecting my service as all good professionals do, regardless of my personal feelings on the matter.

[central_va]

IBTZ.

[Domalais]

http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/oaths.html

Enlisted are sworn to obey the orders of the President, the officers appointed over them. In additional, they are sworn to support and defend the constitution.

Officer oaths are simpler; they are the ones with the leeway to disobey orders. Their only obligation is to the constitution.

The constitution firmly establishes the power of the President and Congress to control the military. It is constitutional for Congress to regulate the military as they see fit. The only way around this is if the order itself violated some other part of the constitution. I haven’t heard a good argument yet for the repeal of DADT being unconstitutional, therefore I don’t see how any military member can be true to their oaths and disobey.