• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gay National Guardsmen denied benefits by four states

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,551
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Oklahoma governor orders National Guard to stop equal treatment of gay service members and spouses | Breaking News | Wisconsin Gazette - Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) News

Texas Guard Refuses To Process Same-Sex Benefits : NPR

Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have all had orders issued by their governors to stop processing applications for National Guardsmen who want to receive benefits for their same-sex partner which the Pentagon has given a blanket approval for.

This line hits me the worst:
Maj. Gen. John Nichols, the commanding general of Texas Military Forces, wrote to service members in a letter obtained by the AP that because the Texas Constitution defines marriage as between a man and a woman, his state agency couldn't process applications from gay and lesbian couples. But he said the Texas National Guard, Texas Air Guard and Texas State Guard would not deny anyone benefits.

Yes, Texas, the state where the Constitution denies you freedoms rather than enshrine them. Seriously where do these folks get off on talking about being "pro-military?"
 
Oklahoma governor orders National Guard to stop equal treatment of gay service members and spouses | Breaking News | Wisconsin Gazette - Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) News

Texas Guard Refuses To Process Same-Sex Benefits : NPR

Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have all had orders issued by their governors to stop processing applications for National Guardsmen who want to receive benefits for their same-sex partner which the Pentagon has given a blanket approval for.

This line hits me the worst:


Yes, Texas, the state where the Constitution denies you freedoms rather than enshrine them. Seriously where do these folks get off on talking about being "pro-military?"

Technically Wiseone, until they are federalized, they aren't part of the U.S. Army. As the anti Second Amendment lefties claim, they are just the militia.

But both sources you provided have an agenda and are bias so there might be more to the story ?

Your just starting to see opposition of DADT starting. The LGBT wanted to be treated as equal, they got the whole nine yards and they wanted more. I think they blew it big time with the DOD celebrating diversity week on military installation and allowing political activist booth onboard military installations. If the LGBT can do it, why not Communist Party USA or the KKK ? Back lash time, it's a coming.

Here's the bigger story.

Senator: Re-Naming of Gay Marriage Leave 'No Fix'

A revised Defense Department policy intended to quell criticism of its August announcement of up to 10 days uncharged marriage leave to gay and lesbian service members assigned where they can't legally marry fails to "fix" the issue of giving same-sex couples a special benefit, says Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Service Committee.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel notified Inhofe in a Sept. 6 letter that, given the senator's concerns, Hagel had met with service secretaries and the Joint Chiefs to review the issue. Based on those discussions, Hagel told Inhofe, Jessica L. Wright, acting under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness, had issued "clarifying guidance" to the services.

The "marriage leave" provision previously inserted in the DoD Instruction 1327.06 on "Leave and Liberty Policy and Procedures" was removed. Instead, language was inserted that allows the services to grant "administrative absences" to any member wishing to marry who is assigned more than 100 miles away from an area where they legally can marry. More -> Senator: Re-Naming of Gay Marriage Leave 'No Fix' | Military.com

There's a whole lot of unhappy campers because gays want more privialeges than the straight members of the military.

Complaints Over Time Off for Gays to Wed Flood In | Military.com

Debate Over Gay Marriage Leave Heats Up | Military.com

Some Vets See Gay Marriage Leave as Unfair | Military.com
 
First off the National Guard is every bit a part of the Army as the active duty service is, any and every regulation that applies to a Soldier like myself applies to the National Guard.

National Defense Act of 1916 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

National Guard Bureau - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Secondly, there's no back lash to DADT in the military, it simply doesn't exist. There's a few individual cases of people leaving over the repeal, but frankly the Army is better off without them. If they can't find it within themselves to lead Soldiers and to obey orders because one of their superiors or subordinates may be homosexual, then they aren't needed in the military pure and simple.

Don't Ask Don't Tell resulted in tens of thousands of service members being forced out of the military, which clearly had a much bigger impact on unit readiness and operational ability than the few dozen that have left over the repeal of DADT.

And lastly, as you quoted, yes some gay service members can get special leave but that's only because unlike straight service members they may not be able to marry in their current location and will have to travel to a state that does allow gay marriage. If you don't want them to have special leave, let them be married on the same grounds as straight folks.
 
Dontaskdonttellcredible.jpg


Look at this trash, its ****ing shameful. Its beyond don't ask, don't tell, its don't ask, don't tell, don't do, don't even think about it.

And the worst part is that guy on the top talking about we need to avoid making this a hassle, I'm assume he means for themselves because I'm pretty sure PFC Howard already has a big ****ing hassle on his hands being booted out of the Army, because he's "still one of our Soldiers." What kind of ****ed up logic is that.
 

Attachments

  • Dontaskdonttellcredible.jpg
    Dontaskdonttellcredible.jpg
    90.6 KB · Views: 109
Oklahoma governor orders National Guard to stop equal treatment of gay service members and spouses | Breaking News | Wisconsin Gazette - Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) News

Texas Guard Refuses To Process Same-Sex Benefits : NPR

Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have all had orders issued by their governors to stop processing applications for National Guardsmen who want to receive benefits for their same-sex partner which the Pentagon has given a blanket approval for.

This line hits me the worst:


Yes, Texas, the state where the Constitution denies you freedoms rather than enshrine them. Seriously where do these folks get off on talking about being "pro-military?"

Can they do that?????????
 
First off the National Guard is every bit a part of the Army as the active duty service is, any and every regulation that applies to a Soldier like myself applies to the National Guard.

No, not true at all. The NG is organized under militia laws. That's why there is no Posse Comitatus violation when the NG operates in civilian disasters.

And just how many gays are serving? We have roughly 150 million US citizens in the right age range to serve. Even going with the gay propaganda groups figure of 10% that's 150 thousand gay folks as base. Over half of those are women and less likely to serve. And of the remaining just ballparking, only half are eligible to serve (felons, gang members, physical disability, etc.). So we end up with a pool of about 50 thousand who could serve. And that's considering the high 10% gay population figure (low figures are 2-3%).

Roughly 10% of eligible citizens sign up. With that in mind there's 5 thousand plus gays serving at best. Out of a force of approximately half a million.
 
Last edited:
Oklahoma governor orders National Guard to stop equal treatment of gay service members and spouses | Breaking News | Wisconsin Gazette - Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) News

Texas Guard Refuses To Process Same-Sex Benefits : NPR

Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have all had orders issued by their governors to stop processing applications for National Guardsmen who want to receive benefits for their same-sex partner which the Pentagon has given a blanket approval for.

This line hits me the worst:


Yes, Texas, the state where the Constitution denies you freedoms rather than enshrine them. Seriously where do these folks get off on talking about being "pro-military?"

Saw this coming years ago - anytime rights are distributed and seen unevenly throughout a nation, there are going to be conflicts and some are pretty serious. This will continue to be so until everyone's on the same page.
 
Btw, the special leave because they have to travel to a state where gay marriage is allowed is BS. Not all states allow first cousins to marry either. Do those wishing to marry their first cousin get the leave as well?
 
No, not true at all. The NG is organized under militia laws. That's why there is no Posse Comitatus violation when the NG operates in civilian disasters.

And just how many gays are serving? We have roughly 150 million US citizens in the right age range to serve. Even going with the gay propaganda groups figure of 10% that's 150 thousand gay folks as base. Over half of those are women and less likely to serve. And of the remaining just ballparking, only half are eligible to serve (felons, gang members, physical disability, etc.). So we end up with a pool of about 50 thousand who could serve. And that's considering the high 10% gay population figure (low figures are 2-3%).

Roughly 10% of eligible citizens sign up. With that in mind there's 5 thousand plus gays serving at best. Out of a force of approximately half a million.

Kinda like when the 82nd Airborne, a National Guard division, responded to Hurricane Katrina. Right?? Right?!?!

The Army response to Hurricane Katrina | Article | The United States Army

And hey, 5,000 Soldiers plenty to me to justify equal treatment, especially if they served honorably.
 
Oklahoma governor orders National Guard to stop equal treatment of gay service members and spouses | Breaking News | Wisconsin Gazette - Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) News

Texas Guard Refuses To Process Same-Sex Benefits : NPR

Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have all had orders issued by their governors to stop processing applications for National Guardsmen who want to receive benefits for their same-sex partner which the Pentagon has given a blanket approval for.

This line hits me the worst:


Yes, Texas, the state where the Constitution denies you freedoms rather than enshrine them. Seriously where do these folks get off on talking about being "pro-military?"

Pro military and pro gay are not the same thing.
 
No but I'm sad to see that the desire of many folks to discriminate against gays outweighs their desire to respect military service.

Actually the gay soldier would still get their benefits, the "spouse or parter" just would not get anything.
 
Technically Wiseone, until they are federalized, they aren't part of the U.S. Army. As the anti Second Amendment lefties claim, they are just the militia.


Aren't the Guardsmen applying for Federal ID cards and entry into DEERS?

If there was no Federal association, then what are they applying for?


>>>>
 
Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have all had orders issued by their governors to stop processing applications for National Guardsmen who want to receive benefits for their same-sex partner which the Pentagon has given a blanket approval for.


Your thread title is misleading. They aren't being denied the benefits, those State are not processing applications and directing the Guardsmen to Federal installations to file their paperwork.


>>>>
 
Actually the gay soldier would still get their benefits, the "spouse or parter" just would not get anything.


Actually the gay soldier would still get their benefits and the spouse would also qualify. These states are simply requiring them to go to a federal installation to process the paperwork.


"Partners" do not qualify for benefits for either homosexual or heterosexuals. Only spouses, those who have a valid Civil Marriage.


>>>>
 
Your thread title is misleading. They aren't being denied the benefits, those State are not processing applications and directing the Guardsmen to Federal installations to file their paperwork.


>>>>

Thats a denial of benefits, at the very least its unequal treatment because they aren't denying other benefit applications.
 
That's not the same thing, spousal benefits are part of your benefits.

But that has nothing to do with equality, what about the single soldier? Should they not get double since they don't/can't get married?
 
Actually the gay soldier would still get their benefits and the spouse would also qualify. These states are simply requiring them to go to a federal installation to process the paperwork.


"Partners" do not qualify for benefits for either homosexual or heterosexuals. Only spouses, those who have a valid Civil Marriage.


>>>>

Then I don't see what the problem is, nobody is denying benefits, they are just crying about what they have to do to get them? That's stupid, almost as stupid as those who complain about voter id laws. Good for those states for standing up for their values.
 
Then I don't see what the problem is, nobody is denying benefits, they are just crying about what they have to do to get them? That's stupid, almost as stupid as those who complain about voter id laws. Good for those states for standing up for their values.

Look man you'd be angry at any business or the government telling black individuals to use a different door, why is it different for homosexual individuals?
 
Thats a denial of benefits, at the very least its unequal treatment because they aren't denying other benefit applications.


Unequal treatment - sure. No disagreement there.

Denial of Benefits - no. The benefits that are being sought are federal and no Federal benefits are being denied.



>>>>
 
A state shouldn't have to break their constitution to recognize or give benefits to a union that is not legal :shrug: In those states they aren't married and they don't get to force their marriage beliefs upon everyone else.
 
Aren't the Guardsmen applying for Federal ID cards and entry into DEERS?

If there was no Federal association, then what are they applying for?


>>>>

I suppose they are federalised two weeks every summer.

Those in the Guard do take a different oath than those serving in the Army or reserves.

Obama's isn't the Commander in Chief of the Guard, the Governors are.

The thing is, the LGBT activist went for more than the whole nine yards, they wanted more privliges than the hetrosexuals serving in the military had and you're starting to see a backlash. Demanding extra leave with pay that the other 99 % aren't allowed to have. They blew it, it never had a damn thing wanting to be treated equally.
 
Look man you'd be angry at any business or the government telling black individuals to use a different door, why is it different for homosexual individuals?

Homosexuality is not the same as race.
 
Then I don't see what the problem is, nobody is denying benefits, they are just crying about what they have to do to get them? That's stupid, almost as stupid as those who complain about voter id laws.

Let's say you are a Guardsman in OK, your buddy can file for him & his spousal benefits at the local Armory. On the other hand you have a legal Civil Marriage and to sign up your spouse you have to drive 5-hours for 300 miles one way to a DOD military base to file the exact same paperwork to receive the exact same benefits. So in addition to the time you know have an extra 50 bucks in gas plus a lost day's wages, probably hundreds of dollars.

No they are not crying about what they have to do to get them. They are complaining (rightfully so) that they can't get them in the same manner as other legally married guardsmen. If the State Offices don't want to file the paperwork for Federal Benefits - that's fine. Then make that the rule for all Guardsmen, then we can observe how much "crying" occurs.


Good for those states for standing up for their values.


I never considered making military personnel lives more difficult as standing up for good values. But our views could be different.



>>>>>
 
Back
Top Bottom