or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › End regulation of genitals
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

End regulation of genitals - Page 6

post #201 of 212


DADT's Continued Consequences
By Andrew Harmon

Quote:
The real consequences of allowing dont ask, dont tell" to continue?

As the legal team challenging the policy in court sees it: Gay service members will face continued investigations and discharges. And the armed forces will be weakened, not sustained, as a result.

In a Monday court filing, attorneys representing a gay Republican group that successfully sued the government in federal court asked a three-judge panel of the U.S. court of appeals for the ninth circuit to suspend dont ask, dont tell as the Justice Department appeals the case.

The group argued in its 39-page brief that the government has not met the criteria required for a stay of the lower court decision namely that it has not proven a likelihood of success upon appeal, nor has it shown that it will face irreparable injury or enormous consequences, as Defense secretary Robert Gates recently said of any abrupt demise of the policy if dont ask, dont tell is enjoined by the courts.

An injunction on DADT, the Log Cabin Republicans argued, does not negatively affect ongoing defense operations: It does not order the military to redesign its barracks, to retool its pay scales or benefits, to re-ordain its chaplains, to rewrite its already extensive anti-harassment or dignity and respect rules,' or anything else, they wrote.

In a ruling earlier this month, U.S. district judge Virginia A. Phillips, who struck down DADT as unconstitutional in September, ordered the Pentagon to suspend all enforcement of dont ask, dont tell, including ongoing discharge proceedings of gay service members; Phillips also denied a Justice Department request to block that decision. But last week the ninth circuit granted a temporary stay of Phillipss ruling upon a request by the Obama administration's Department of Justice.

Quote:
It remains sad and disappointing that the government seeks to continue to enforce 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' by its motion for a stay pending appeal, even as the President has repeatedly said that the policy 'weakens' our national security and recently said in a 'tweet' that he basically agrees with Judge Phillips's decision,"

Dan Woods, lead attorney for the Log Cabin Republicans and a partner at White and Case in Los Angeles, said in a statement following the filing.

Woods wrote to the court that the Justice Department in its arguments solely relied on case law preceding Lawrence v. Texas, the landmark 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down sodomy laws, establishing the right of private sexual relations for gays and lesbians. Nor did it take into account the ninth circuit's "Witt Standard," where the court in 2008 ruled the government must show that discharging a gay service member is vital to maintain a unit's "good order, morale, and discipline."

The Log Cabin Republicans were joined Monday by several gay organizations and service member advocacy groups, including Servicemembers United, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, the Palm Center, and Lambda Legal, which filed friend-of-court briefs arguing against further DADT enforcement.

Quote:
"For anyone who has never been forced to hide who they are, it is difficult to appreciate the Herculean nature of the task that DADT demands," Lambda Legal wrote to the court. "But the proven harms caused by the concealment of ones sexual orientation give some indication of the toll it takes. These harms include severe mental distress, social isolation, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and compromised immune system functioning, which are not inflicted when one is free to disclose ones sexual orientation."

Lambda Legal staff attorney Peter Renn further pointed to the damage caused by "don't ask, don't tell" on the macro level: "We need to stop pretending that overt displays of antigay bias don't have real-world consequences. They do," Renn said.
Quote:
"We are not debating about 'don't ask, don't tell' in a vacuum. ... People may be born gay but they aren't born antigay. They only learn how to be antigay by example, which is exactly what the government is providing here."

Attorneys expect the ninth circuit to decide on the matter this week.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #202 of 212
Appeals Court Extends Life Of Gay Military Policy
by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 1, 2010

Quote:
A federal appeals court on Monday indefinitely extended its freeze on a judge's order halting enforcement of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the U.S. government's request for a stay while it challenges the trial court's ruling that the ban on openly gay service members is unconstitutional.

The same panel, composed of two judges appointed by President Reagan and one appointed by President Bill Clinton, on Oct. 20 imposed a temporary hold keeping "don't ask, don't tell" in place.

In an eight-page order, the judges said they were persuaded by the Department of Justice's argument that U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips' worldwide injunction against the 1993 policy "will seriously disrupt ongoing and determined efforts by the Administration to devise an orderly change of policy."

Monday's decision means gay Americans who disclose their sexual orientations still can't enlist in the armed forces and can be discharged.

It also heightens pressure on the Obama administration to persuade the U.S. Senate to repeal the 1993 law before a new Congress is sworn in.

The court ordered the government to submit its brief in its broader appeal by Jan. 24 and gave Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights group that sued to overturn "don't ask, don't tell" in Phillips' court, until Feb. 22 to reply. It did not schedule oral arguments in the case.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #203 of 212
Rights group asks Supreme Court to suspend 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'
Daniel Makosky on November 6, 2010 12:05 PM ET

Quote:
[JURIST] The Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) on Friday filed a petition asking the US Supreme Court; news archive to rescind the stay preventing the suspension of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) 10 USC § 654; JURIST news archive policy. The LCR are seeking to overturn the indefinite extension report of a temporary stay issued by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit earlier this week for the duration of the appeals process, or alternately to temporarily block the military from discharging those in violation of the policy. The group argues that the earlier order is premised on an abuse of discretion that failed to properly consider Lawrence v. Texas. They also contend that the court inaccurately balanced the competing interests involved, saying that "[a]ny alleged harms to the government are entirely bureaucratic, procedural, and transitory in nature, and are sharply outweighed by the substantial constitutional injury that servicemembers will sustain from a stay of the district court's judgment." The Ninth Circuit is not expected to issue a final ruling in the matter until next year.

Since the enactment of DADT in 1993, approximately 13,000 servicemen and women have been discharged from the armed forces as a result of the policy. In September, a federal judge for the US District for the Western District of Washington ordered that a US Air Force officer be reinstated after being previously discharged under DADT. Also in September, the Senate rejected a cloture motion on a defense appropriations bill that would have repealed the policy. In May, the House of Representatives and the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) voted to repeal the policy after President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates agreed to a compromise that would prevent the repeal from taking effect until the completion of a review to determine what effects the repeal would have on military effectiveness, soldier retention and family readiness.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #204 of 212
Obama administration asks Supreme Court not to block 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'
Aman Kakar at 12:19 PM ET

Quote:
[JURIST] The Obama administration filed a brief Wednesday asking the US Supreme Court not to rescind the stay preventing suspension of the military's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy. The filing is in response to a petition filed last week by the Log Cabin Republicans asking the court to overturn the indefinite extension of a temporary stay issued by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The government asked the court not to interrupt the policy while it is being considered in lower courts. Additionally, the filing contends that the Log Cabin Republicans bear a heavy burden in asking to overturn the indefinite extension:
An applicant for vacatur of a stay pending appeal granted by a court of appeals ordinarily must demonstrate, first, a reasonable probability that the case will eventually come before this Court for plenary consideration; second, a significant possibility that a majority of the Court eventually will agree with the District Court's decision; and, third, that the failure to vacate the stay probably will cause irreparable harm that outweighs the irreparable harm to the government from a vacatur of the stay.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #205 of 212

Cindy McCain Speaks Out Against Dont Ask, Dont Tell


Quote:
Sen. John McCain's wife is speaking out against the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in an anti-bullying campaign, posing a sharp contrast to her husband's efforts to keep the anti-gay ban in place.

Quote:
"Our political and religious leaders tell LGBT youth that they have no future," Cindy McCain says in the ad made by the gay rights campaign NOH8. The group was started after the passage of Proposition 8, the measure that prohibits same sex-marriage, passed in California.

"They can't serve our country openly," she adds in the video, which features celebrities like Denise Richards, Gene Simmons and Dave Navarro.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #206 of 212
High court rejects plea to block gay military ban

Quote:
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court is refusing to block enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military while a federal appeals court considers the issue.

The court on Friday denied a request from the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights group, to step into the ongoing federal court review of "don't ask, don't tell." The Obama administration urged the high court not to get involved at this point.

Last month, a federal judge ruled that the policy violates the civil rights of gay Americans and she issued an injunction barring the Pentagon from applying it. But the San Francisco-based appeals court said the policy could remain in effect while it considers the administration's appeal.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #207 of 212
Quote:

Thanks jg for the update.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #208 of 212
I first glance over this article thinking it just more on DADT, however on further reading I realized that it really is so much more discriminatory. Why should gay or lesbian military personnel who place their lives on the line just as any straight military person receive less severance pay?

ACLU files suit over military discharge pay policy Ashley Hileman on November 12, 2010 1:51 PM ET

Quote:
[JURIST] The American Civil Liberties Union filed a class action lawsuit ; press release-- ACLU Challenges Discriminatory Military Policy Cutting In Half Separation Pay For Honorably Discharged Gay And Lesbian Service Members, Wednesday over a US military policy that cuts the separation pay of honorably discharged gay and lesbian service members in half. The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of all service members involuntarily discharged in the last six years who were otherwise eligible to receive full separation pay, but instead received only half as a result of the separation pay policy. In the complaint, filed in the US Court of Federal Claims, the ACLU challenged the policy, which the Department of Defense adopted in 1991, two years before Congress enacted the "Don't Ask Don't Tell Policy" (DADT) [10 USC § 654]. The plaintiffs contend the pay policy discriminates against homosexuals because, under federal law--10 USC § 1174, all service members are entitled to separation pay if they have been involuntarily discharged after completing at least six years of service. Joshua Block, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Project stated, "[b]y denying servicemen and women full separation pay, the military is needlessly compounding the discrimination perpetuated by 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The separation pay policy, unlike DADT, can be changed without congressional approval.

無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #209 of 212
Why are the
Quote:
Marines the military's biggest backers of 'don't ask, don't tell'?

Quote:
After 17 years, "don't ask, don't tell" may finally be on its way out. Even if the Senate resists the latest efforts to end the policy, it appears that most members of the military - from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on down - support the law's repeal.

That is clear from early reports about a survey sent to 400,000 active duty and reserve service members on "don't ask, don't tell" that will be officially released next month. More than 70 percent of respondents, spanning all branches of the military, said the effect of repealing the prohibition on openly gay troops would be positive, mixed or nonexistent. But about 40 percent of the Marine Corps respondents expressed concern about lifting the ban....
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #210 of 212
'Don't ask, don't tell' gay soldier ban set for repeal
Quote:
The US Senate has taken a key step towards allowing gay people to serve openly in the military.
Senators decided by 63-33 to advance a bill to overturn the "don't ask, don't tell" policy for a final vote, which is expected soon.
Repeal is now said to be certain, as the House of Representatives has already backed it. President Obama had promised to overturn the policy.
Opponents argue that the change will damage troop morale.

It's about time to end this policy and allow gays and lesbians to openly serve in the military.


無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #211 of 212
Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal: American reaction
Quote:
US President Barack Obama has signed landmark legislation allowing openly gay people to serve in the military.

It came after the Senate and House of Representatives both approved the repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" law, which bars gay people in the military from revealing their sexual orientation.

More:

Obama signs DADT repeal before big, emotional crowd
Quote:
President Obama signed the landmark repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy Wednesday morning, handing a major victory to advocates of gay rights and fulfilling a campaign promise to do away with a practice that he has called discriminatory.

無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #212 of 212
I've always thought DADT was bad policy. In my mind it should have been "either or." Either you ban homosexuals from the military, or you allow them. I always thought this was Clinton trying to have it both ways and not having the guts to do what he actually wanted to.

As for the policy: There are two parts to this. One is the process. The other is the decision itself. Let's start with the decision.

1. I see no good reason why gays shouldn't be able to serve. They should be held to the standards of discipline the same as anyone else. Men and women already serve together, and they must control themselves. This is no different. The only possible arguments against, I think, are: A) It may disrupt unit discipline in the short term (during implementation) and B) Many other nations and cultures are not as open about homosexuality as we are. Could it lead to less respect for the U.S. armed forces? Could it provide yet another reason for radical Islamists to attack our troops? Of those two argument, I believe only the last one is a potential concern.

2. Now, the process: This is what I really have a problem with. The military really didn't get adequate time to study and report out on this major change. And it was passed through a lame duck Congress that the people don't want anymore, hence the November election. It really stinks of Pelosi, Reid and Obama ramming it though, just like they are ramming through the START treaty.

I also suppose I don't know that now is the best time to do this. We're embroiled into mideast conflicts and are facing a host of problems at home. Is now the best time to make a major change in structure like this? On the other hand, perhaps this is the best time. We'll be able to have more qualified people serve, especially those who are fluent speakers of mid-east languages, and what not.

Overall I think the decision is the right one. But as I stated, I have some concerns about both it and the process by which it came about.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › End regulation of genitals