U.S. judge orders 'don't ask, don't tell' injunction on gay troops
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
Millions in global aid for Iraq remain unspent
( 0 )
-
U.N. Security Council blames Syrian gov't for Houla killings
( 5 )
-
U.S. drones kill 5 militants in Pakistan
( 9 )
-
NATO has fight on its hands in Afghanistan - Panetta
( 6 )
-
Iran may rethink 20% enrichment: spokesman
( 2 )
-
- 秘書及び業務サポート
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥4.0M / Year
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- ALT - Mie Prefecture - Yokkaichi City - June start
- NPO法人グローバル教育推進機構（GLAD), Mie
- Salary: ¥230,000 / Month For a full working month. Some months differ.
Order by Time Order by Popularity
19 Comments
Login to comment
0
djuice
Once the don't ask, don't tell policy is canked completely, you will see a sudden spike in same sex sexual harassment complaints, and their is likely to be an increase in assaults on gay members. The reason for this is that in the military, sexual harassment is determined by the impact on the victim, not the intent of the offender. Just wait and see...
0
medievaltimes
Just curious. Do other countries have "morale problems" because of gay soldiers? I never really hear anything about this issue...except when it comes to the American military.
0
RomeoRamenII
This judge has no standing to issue such an order. Our military does not answer to civilian courts. They answer to the UCMJ.
RR
0
Triumvere
And here is betting you are wrong. As you say, just wait and see.
You really have no idea what you are talking about.
0
adaydream
Looks like the judge does have jurisdiction and the authority.
I don't think that we're going to see much action. The military doesn't really want to fight this in the courts. The administration doesn't want to try to take this through the legislators and this way Obama can allow it become a done deal without any effort. < :-)
0
Alphaape
So now the question I have to ask, if gays can openly serve in the military, will they have the same restrictions placed on them as heterosexual members, i.e. not being able to go to the massage parlors and visiting prostitutes?
Also, since the UCMJ defines gay as "sodomy" I guess this rule will be taken out of the UCMJ. If that is done, then will Adultery also be removed. After all, it would not be fair if gays can sodomize (which if you believe in a Christian/Jewish/Muslim religion) it is a sin but will be condoned, then adultery (which is also forbidden) should be allowed.
After all, it's just being fair to heterosexuals.
0
smithinjapan
Alphaape: "Also, since the UCMJ defines gay as "sodomy" I guess this rule will be taken out of the UCMJ. If that is done, then will Adultery also be removed."
Do we really need to get into the specifics about what sodomy and adultery compose (interesting that you would capitalize 'Adultery')? You seriously don't know the difference? Let me then ask you this... let's say a priest in Italy sodomizes a little boy, is it adultery? or how about a man and woman that like to play a little dirty and have anal sex, are they cheating on each other?
You guys and your inane fears crack me up.
0
TimRussert
Are you planning on joining the US Army? If not, why the inane need to comment on its code of justice?
0
Alphaape
smithinjapan, it is because of "sea lawyers" like you that I ask. The issue will come up. If you are not in the military, you probably don't know of all of the Trafficing In Persons (TIP) training that one must go through. It all has to deal with GI's not buying the local "bar girls" and the punishments you can receive. A prime example of this can be seen outside any of the bases in Korea where numerous places that are involved in TIP are Off-Limits to US military persons.
All of this is based on the "heterosexual" relationship. It has not training on the homosexual aspect. So, will I as a heterosexual have to go through the homosexual training, will the gay bars that offer prostitution now be off-limits, not because they are gay but because of the selling of sex?
These are the questions that can come up. When people just try to put their "ideological" beliefs on an issue with really knowing what the results will be are the reasons why we have so many screwed up rules now.
I bet this judge has never served in the military, and has no idea about the situation I have described (which is not some theoretical situation but one that happens all the time).
yes, we do. Adultery in the USMC is defined as sex between a married person (heterosexual) and someone who is not their spouse (either male of female). So since you seem to have all the answers, will it be Adultery if a male (in a gay marriage if it is approved) commits adultery with another man? Or will this just be a law for heterosexuals?
0
smithinjapan
TimRussert: "Are you planning on joining the US Army? If not, why the inane need to comment on its code of justice?"
傍目八目, my friend. Much like when it comes to politics, you guys can't see the forest for the trees about your own system. Being a member of the army or not has no relevance about gays being able to state their sexual preference.
Alphaape: "will the gay bars that offer prostitution now be off-limits, not because they are gay but because of the selling of sex?"
Show me a gay bar that is legally allowed to prostitute because of the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. Until then, all your comments are moot.
"yes, we do. Adultery in the USMC is defined as sex between a married person (heterosexual) and someone who is not their spouse (either male of female)."
Glad you can admit that the USMC is not a dictionary, but an outdated source of info. I find it all the more interesting that you back up my point that sodomy and adultery are not at all the same thing while you compare them to being the same earlier using your outdated dictionary.
0
Alphaape
USMC should be UCMJ
smithinjapan, just shows you are spouting the normal left diatribe and didn't notice my mistake.
Anyone of them should be able to do so. Prostitution is illegal, for both types I agree. But, a smart ACLU lawyer could get a person off if they were caught simply by stating he may have been there, but he was adhering to the DADT rule and not engaging in any activity. But in the cases I cited, entire bars are placed off limits due to TIP. So if I wanted to go into one and just drink, I couldn't becuase of the activity that goes on there.
That is my point, if the UCMJ is going to allow sodomy, which some may find morally wrong, then why should someone be charged with Adultery while sodomy is allowed?
So I guess in your world it's all moral relativism, nobody is wrong as long as you "feel good" and do "your thing."
0
Good_Jorb
Adultery in theory is a breach of contract, sodomy on the other hand isn't. I would imagine that if gay marriage were aloud, then gays would be charge with adultery as well. If sin is standard for law, soldiers would be arrested for masturbating, as it to can be considered to be sinful, lustful thoughts, coveting and all that jazz but yet there is no law against it.
0
Sarge
"don't ask, don't tell"
What a load of horse manure.
0
limboinjapan
The question was asked if other countries have a problem with gays serving in the military well the answer is simple nearly all NATO members have no problem with a total of 30 countries even Israel has no problem with it, basically most of the democracies except the USA and a few other backwards places.
At a time where the USA needs troops and is granting special dispensations to convicted criminals in order to fill the ranks you would think they would prefer to have a non-criminal homosexual watching your back the a former criminal that may even still be in a gang.
I would never join any military and I am not convinced as to the gay lifestyle as being normal but I also think what my beliefs are, and what they chose to do are two different things and if I were ever to be put in a situation where I was in the military I would not care if the guy watching my back is gay or strait all I care is that I can trust him and I would trust a gay over a criminal any day.
The USA keeps saying that it has separation between church and state but it is clear that the real reason for opposing gays in the military is due to religious views and pressure.
This ruling will give everyone a way out of this insanity, by being able to blame the courts.
0
Triumvere
They are already on the battlefield, Love. They've always been there. They just weren't allowed to admit that they were gay. You wouldn't have been able to tell the difference if you met one.
0
adaydream
Alphaape, don't ask us these questions, we're ALL sea lawyers out here.
I never received orders not to visit massage parlors. < :-)
0
Klein2
"I have never seen a gay who behaves like a real man, i.e. being brave, firm, strong...how can gays be good soldiers? This... This is MADNESS!"
Madness? This is SPARTA! Gay people can be very good soldiers. My bet would be that you have seen plenty of gay people behaving like real men. It stands to reason.
Hahaha..."brave, firm, strong"??? Honey, you had me at "real man"!
I guess Triumvere and I are saying the same thing here.
It is a little shocking that AlphaApe??? is describing intensive training about massage parlors and prostitutes. Huh? If that is what the military is all about, maybe the meaning of "real men" should not be debated at all. Buncha kids playing with guns and having sex, sounds like.
0
tigermoth
I guess I just don't see why everybody gets so wrapped up with this issue. What are people so afraid of with someone being gay? Are they afraid they'll substitute the GI issue curtains with Channel drapes? Are the soldiers afraid they'll get raped in the showers? Come on, you have more of a chance of that as a twelve year old going to your local catholic church. What's the big deal - what are Americans so afraid of? Is it really that we still cling to some outdated moralistic code doled out by adherence to 'good Christian beliefs'? In reality porn sites record the most hits for a reason. All of these good old hypocritical christians are mostly the ones looking. If someone finds happiness in a person of the same sex, or for that matter a tree - if they aren't doing anything lewd in public or hurting anyone - who gives a sh*t. Why don't we spend more time focusing on the important things.
I'm not gay, and yes the idea of it grosses me out frankly. But what people do in the privacy of their own homes, and who they choose to be with is their own business, and should remain that way. Is it such a great fear that male soldiers will rape female soldiers serving along side them? Aren't they supposed to be adults and professionals? So why think someone who is gay will act as anything but a professional soldier? If someone is willing to fight and die for their country, my country, I say good on them and support them 100%. They're more 'manly' - whatever that is - that most of us. Just shows that for all of our progress we still have a very long way to go.
0
Taka313
Tigermoth,
I worked with a homophobe in the Navy. We called him "WestPac Jack." He was terribly afraid of a gay man seeing him naked in the showers and getting excited. The guy was missing teeth, obese and had hygiene issues.
I had to remind him that if he didn't have a problem with women beating down his doors, odds are, gays won't be either.
Taka
Back to top