- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,859
- Reaction score
- 30,124
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
That explains the mass court martials we currently experience...
no...wait...
Holy bat****.
If that was commonly accepted we would have had...like...4 posts on this thread.
The current plan is a multi year plan to study and slowly implement the policy change.
The current plan is a multi year plan to study and slowly implement the policy change.
It's not about whether there will be any problems or not. It's about a difference of opinion in how big and significant those problems will be and whether those problems are enough to justify keeping DADT in place. Just because doing something will cause problems, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.
Mass court martials? How many? When? Where? Why? Circumstances? Links? 10 years in the Navy, and I never seen anyone get in trouble at all for hurting or even harassing a gay person. Now I have heard about units/personnel in the Navy, Marines and Army (don't know a whole lot about the AF) that gave guys crap for being gay, but these incidents didn't involve violence or even harsh words. Now of course I've heard about the occasional case where someone claims that someone else was gay and was either hitting on them or asked them out, and the person got ticked off and beat the crap out of the gay guy, but I don't know of any mass court martials recently or even a huge amount of cases of these things happening. Most people are too concerned about getting in trouble to beat someone up for looking at them or just for being gay. And most gays probably aren't going to actually hit on a straight guy. Most gay guys seem to know which guys are gay or straight, unless the guy is metro, but then he probably wouldn't beat the gay guy up for hitting on him.
Again, you're wrong. The UCMJ makes sodomy illegal for straights the same way it's illegal for gays. Just like adultry is illegal, IAW the UCMJ and a married couple that engages in a swinger lifestyle, the service member in that couple can be subject to military discipline.
So, no, there isn't a double standard.
Wow...my wife is right...sarcasm DOESNT translate well...
Thats the point. There WASNT mass Court Martials and since it was implemented the policy has worked as advertised.
I'm sorry, I just realized I read that wrong. My bad. I apologize for the rant.
But DADT still makes things unfair for gays, even if it is more fair than the previous policy.
But the rules and/or punishments are not the same. A heterosexual couple caught having sex in a base parking lot would face NJP, probably lose rank and pay, and be put on restriction. A homosexual couple caught in a base parking lot would face the same plus be administratively discharged from the military. Also, a heterosexual military member is allowed to marry his chosen partner, a homosexual military member is not, even if it is legal. Even an attempt to marry someone of the same sex, whether the marriage would be legal or not, will get you discharged. Big discrepancy in policy, since the military doesn't throw the hetero member out for marrying the person he/she loves.
Also, I've heard of very few cases where a heterosexual person would be investigated for violating the UCMJ when they admit to getting a bj, or anal. Can't say the same for gays. Enforcement of the UCMJ isn't fair.
No worries. bleieve it or not I really dont take any of this seriously. Read...type...breathe...
A hetero couple caught committing sodomy would face a courts martial and probably a stiffer penalty than a gay soldier who was simply discharged.
So, I guess you're right, there is a discrepency and gay soldiers who are discovered should be outright court martialed vice simply receiving a less than honorable discharge. Agreed?
When I was in the service, I saw more cases of heteros being court martialed for committing sodomy than I did gays getting discharged under DADT.
Again, you're wrong. The UCMJ makes sodomy illegal for straights the same way it's illegal for gays. Just like adultry is illegal, IAW the UCMJ and a married couple that engages in a swinger lifestyle, the service member in that couple can be subject to military discipline.
So, no, there isn't a double standard.
This actually happened, and the guys got NJP and discharged. A hetero couple would get the NJP unless they requested court martial. It's not automatic, at least not anymore.
Did those couples get caught doing it someplace they weren't supposed or were they turned in?
As I thought, it's all about a gay soldier being able to advertise his/her sexuality to the rest of the world.
DADT discharges are not generally for sodomy.
Whaaaaaaaat? Whats to study? You mean there MIGHT actually be problems???
Then why the hell didnt you just admit that...say that...90 posts ago instead of arguing that its silly to think there would be?
Technically they are, because Article 134 is what supports the ban on gays in the military.
If sodomy wasn't a crime, there probably wouldn't be any precedence for a ban on gays.
And you are wrong. Please read the document I linked earlier in this thread for all the information and more on this subject.
This is how I keep myself from ranting to my husband about all the injustices I see during a day. Like I told him the other night, I know what the reality of the world is, and that I can't change it by myself, but the more people who hear (see) what I want changed and how, the better the chances of getting it changed. If people don't know what you want to change, chances are it will never happen.
Gays openly in the military is a big issue to me because I had a good friend put out because of military policies toward gays. And I hate things that aren't fair.
We have on this board two I think gays who served in the military. One was a nuke in the navy. Interestingly(at least to me), both are very conservative.
Of course the problem is that some see them as gays, instead of as people who served their country. People use labels so they can distance themselves from what is actually happening. Gays are scary, though most gay people are not when you actually get to know them.
oh lawd, here we go with the homophobe line of bull****, again.
I'm not wrong. Google, "Article 134 DADT", and see what you come up with.
Have you ever even read Article 134?
The only way that DADT will be able to be repealed is to either ignore Article 134, as it applies to homosexuals, or to abolish it all together. I don't see how they're going to be able to do either of those.
Link your doc please, this 'puter is slower than Christmas.
No, it's about making the process as smooth as possible. The people doing the study on how to change the rules just met last week(I think, maybe week before) for the first time, and are looking at how to make the changes in the best way.
oh lawd, here we go with the homophobe line of bull****, again.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?