Posted on 12/18/2010 1:13:48 PM PST by Pontiac
The Senate Saturday repealed the military's ban on gays serving openly in the military, by overturning the policy known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
Senators voted 63-33 to advance the bill to the floor, passing a 60-vote procedural hurdle. Final passage Saturday afternoon was 65-31.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
From the article
Sen. John McCain (R. Ariz.), a staunch opponent of repeal, called the vote a "sad day" for the military. "I hope that when we pass this legislation that we will understand that we are doing great damage, and we could possibly
harm the battle effectiveness which is so vital to the survival of our young men and women in the military," he said.
Now that homosexuals can serve openly, HOW MANY ARE THERE?
I doubt there are tens of thousands of them in all the services. I bet it turns out like the places where gay marriage is legal and there are not many occurring.
the talaban are a bunch of boy lovers.... they may find more friends in the new army
And Admiral Mullen will finally be able to come out of the closet and hang his kind
I agree. I live in a neighborhood with active and retired military. At a recent neighborhood Christmas party, DADT came up.
Laughing like crazy, they all told of owning a pink t shirt worn under BDUs that read Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Even the married military couples confessed to wearing them.
It’s an Air Force inside joke. None I know intend to retire or leave.
Does anyone know what the just passed bill actually says?
I’ve read in more than one place that repealing DADT puts the military right back to where it was before DADT was enacted - in other words, recruits will again be asked their orientation and rejected if gay. I’ve also read that the UCMJ is unchanged and that gay acts are still prohibited. In other words, without specifically changing the UCMJ or adding othe language, simply repealing DADT is actually a step backwards for the gay lobby.
Could this repeal have the exact opposite of it’s intended effect? Anybody here in a position to know for certain?
Until the sensitivity trainers and command emphasis on “Kunbayah” take hold.
I’m the only one on here advocating a ban on gays serving in the armed services - the pre-1993 policy and every one else wants to restore a fig leaf. This IS conservatism?
ROFL!
oh great, well i am contractually obligated to server until 2014. it hasnt been fun as of late anyway. seems the army is more concerned about CYA and they do that by forcing everyone into briefings annually, big waste of my f’ng time.
According to some things I’ve read approximately 33% or better of your COMBAT troops [the ones that matter] will not re-enlist or will leave the services if they can. The military is NOT a jobs training program, nor some half-assed sociology project. Our government, and society seem to have forgotten that.
And there’s a great deal of difference between “Don’t ask, Don’t tell’ and open homosexuality on unit cohesion, and combat effectiveness.
I still don’t understand how repeal of a Clinton policy reverses articles in the USMCJ!
Does the bill congress just pass actually change the USMCJ???
Anyone know???
I dont know, but I am in the national guard and my state has for the last 2 years had a homosexual harrassment policy, attend 2 briefings...we kinda of laughed it off but I am sure the higher ups are serious about this shit.
I don’t see a difference between living a lie and acknowledging it. If you were gay, would it affect me? Not in the slightest. And my values are not dependent on knowing whether or not someone’s sexual orientation differs from mine.
It could effect you if your foxhole buddy had to make the choice of saving you, or his “bunk buddy” in a combat situation, or if the guy you were in competition for a promotion had the “inside” track, especially in a military where your actions will probably be seen as homophobic, and requiring command remedial action.
The lame duck Rats are like the Nazi werewolves determined to wreak as much damage as possible at the end of WW2, OIF vet
I agree with you voodoo. The UCMJ prohibits service members from engaging in sexual activity with one another. So, you will not have sodomy in the barracks. In addition, a DI can now ask a recruit if he is gay, when he could not before. The recruit has to be truthful or face discipline. Just because he cannot be discharged does not mean that he has to be accepted. Really, this may not be very good for gays.
Does the bill congress just pass actually change the USMCJ???
Anyone know???
It doesn't. What does, however, is the recent Federal court ruling, which would require massive changes to the UCMJ...
the infowarrior
Republicans who voted for this are on the “target list” for their next elections.
By the way, for those who didn’t know, Senator-elect Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania supports the homosexualization of the military.
Mark this day as the day between “Proud American Military” and “Ubama’s Homo Military”. So down the road, when trading military stories the first question will be, “So, when did you serve - - in the homo military or the real one before that?”
>>> What does, however, is the recent Federal court ruling, which would require massive changes to the UCMJ...
Which would require? or does require? Is the ruling still on appeal to SCOTUS?
So many unconstitutional federal court rulings of late...
To what ruling do you refer?
I dont know but that is an interesting take on things that I have not heard before.
Well, they destroyed the military.
Now using that destruction they will move on to society.
What scum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.