Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by leekohler, Mar 16, 2009.
Wow- let's see where this goes.
The policy is both absurd and a farce. The idea that homosexuality is in any way detrimental to either an individual's fitness to serve their country or any unit's fitness is ludicrous and will be cast into the garbage bin of history in due time.
If there is anyone in any unit who cannot handle a gay person alongside them, they need to be told to either handle it professionally or see about getting themselves reassigned into a non-essential position.
Of course, the reality is that probably all soldiers have served alongside gays, but just haven't known about it.
"Due time" was over 16 years ago.
What I want to know is why Obama hasn't signed an executive order ending the policy outright.
He is the commander-in-chief and has full power to do so.
What is "consulting" with Gates going to accomplish?
I'm not sure why I said that. I agree with you.
I also agree that Obama ought to just sign an executive order and be done with it. And then order into his office anyone who feels they can't handle it (be they a private or a general).
I agree- this should already be over. I guess we'll see what happens.
While I agree that the policy to be overturned (it never really made any sense to me), I believe that the people that need the most convincing are the heads of the military. Much like with integration of the armed forces, the military command had it in their head that it would hamper the ability for the military to perform, which turned out to be total bunk. I don't think Obama wants to create any sort of hostility between him and the military command, and therefore is taking it slow.
EDIT: I'm not making any judgment as to whether this caution is good or bad, I'm just explaining the thought process for not just getting rid of it immediately.
Probably find a way to make sure that the people that do come out don't get beaten to a pulp by the other solders. Im sure there are a lot of bigot solders.
That could be, but as the commander-in-chief, it's his responsibility to demonstrate strong leadership.
This policy has been terrible for 16 years, and everyone is aware of how baseless it is.
Like Truman, Obama has an active battlefield to make soldiers realize that integration isn't a bad thing. He should act, and he should act now.
Surely this will lead to the downfall of the American military as we know it as gays seduce commanding officers and persuade them to make love not war.
I agree, he should definitely act. The thing is, I've heard that many times on many different subject. Obama must act now. I think we do need to give him some time to get these things done. What is it now, 50 odd days?
I served on subs and there were som gays on board, every knew who they were but it didn't seem to matter much except for a few who were convinced just being near them would make them gay.
the law is antiquated but not what happens when some find out someone prefers the same sex.
On a more serious note- I would say the vast majority of us are fiercely competitive. Many of us are pros at survival too- having been on our own at a young age after our families cut us off. You learn very quickly in those situations.
He's moved very quickly on issues like the environment, abortion, etc to reverse the past, why not this?
What's even more relevant is that this is one thing that is almost exclusively under his control, so it is conceivably easier to accomplish this than other orders he has signed in recent weeks (like funding for abortion, stem cell research, etc).
I had mentioned in a previous thread to Lee that Obama is going to be similar to past presidents for gay rights. Informal, sentimental support followed by apathy and forcing the courts to be the "bad guys."
I doubt that in another 50 days the policy will have changed at all.
Obama hasn't repealed don't ask don't tell, because it would be unpopular with many independents. He needs their votes to be reelected in 2012. Obama is a politician, he is no different then the others. He'll do whatever gets him reelected.
I hope that Maj. Witt wins her case. It is absolutely stupid to think that a gay person can't defend their country as well as a straight person can. If someone has a problem serving with a homosexual, they obviously aren't mature enough or professional enough to serve in the military.
Maybe because he was too busy moving on issues like environment, abortions, etc.
If he did this, we'd be in a thread now talking about why Obama hadn't sorted stem cell or abortions.
My point is that we have to give him a certain amount of time to do all of these things. In a year or two when the most important things are not seen to, then it will be hammer time (can't touch this...), but after 50 days? I think it is a little harsh to be on his back already.
Well, doubt is one thing. What actually happens is entirely different. All I'm saying is for people to have a little patience (I need tiiii iiii iiiime...).
Problem with that theory is that Don't Ask, Don't Tell isn't really popular, not even with independents.
Only extremely conservative Republicans like the policy (or a more extreme version of it).
I do understand and sympathize with the impatience, but (perhaps predictably) I would be hesitant to jump in with both feet. Remember, this is a different military than we had eight years ago. Recruitment standards have been lowered, padding out the ranks with felons and gang members. Evangelical Christianity has been all but formally institutionalized within the services.
Frankly, being outed in the contemporary U.S. Armed Forces might be about as safe as being outed in a Wyoming Country and Western bar. Any policy change that does not anticipate and proactively prevent "training accidents" would be irresponsible.
The reason our military is the way it is now, is precisely because we put these kinds of limits on it. If it were fully integrated for the past 16 years, like it should have been, I doubt you'd be saying this now.
Just because there is risk involved, doesn't mean that you continue to discriminate against those who are being victimized in the first place. The good thing about doing away with DADT is being able to prevent "training accidents". Gay people will be able to address threats with superiors openly and honestly.
Some things are a more important then stem cell research, like stopping discrimination against a group of people.
One of the quirks of American politics is that if you aren't on the President's case, the Administration feels very comfortable with where it is.
My feelings are one part genuine frustration, and one part proactive protestor.
We can't afford to let Obama "Clinton" this one.
After Prop 8, the March 5th oral arguments before the California Supreme Court and a few other stories concerning how backwards the US is in regards to gay rights relative to the rest of the world, I've lost my patience.
This queen is pissed.
That's true, and it saddens me that it has to be considered in that way.
I guess I want something more than an empty promise and colorful rhetoric, and I feel we've all waited long enough.
With respect, that isn't just American politics.
Well, your frustrated part is going to have to kick your proactive protestor in the butt and get itself out on the street! A few disgruntled MR users, me included more often than not, isn't going to make a difference.
That is for damned sure.
I understand that. Damn, I agree with that. Those things, however, can't be piled onto Obama. Not just yet, at least
True, and yet not comforting in the least.
Please, I'm about to graduate from Berkeley.
Protesting is in the blood!
No they shouldn't, but they must.
It might not be fair to Obama, it wasn't fair to Truman or Ike, but it's the only way we can expect progress.
And on another level, it's time the Democratic Party decides what they want to do with us. It's not fair to keep stringing along the gay community if they aren't going to deliver.
Yet you seem to have no problem with throwing people in jail with no real evidence against them , torturing them and taking away all of their rights because they come from the same country as some terrorists
If that's not "discrimination against a group of people" then I don't know what is
I don't disagree with that. It isn't just the gay community, either. I do think he has made a solid, if unspectacular start in his first 50 days. If he continues the way he started then I then I think the country will be a lot better than it was.
Let us not forget that the country is fighting war on two fronts and in the middle of the greatest economic crisis since the 1930s.