Panetta: So far, DADT A "Non-Event"

[JollyRoger]

My point was its about to get even worse.

We are going to declare war on another concept and get over-committed in another non-essential war?

 

[MobBoss]

We are going to declare war on another concept and get over-committed in another non-essential war?

Well, the concept we will declare war upon will be the military itself. Thats what always happens in a downsizing period....at least until we manage to get into another non-essential war.

 

[MobBoss]

Again:

Again...you have no cencept of the reasons why that stat exists. For example, you do realize that many women end up asking for discharge because they become pregnant, and being pregnant is another reason where someone can request honorable discharge and get out of their contract?

Point being Form, not all discharges are negative, and many are indeed to the benefit of the individual being discharged.

That is a national disgrace. Not only is it a persecution of women, it is racist as well.

Very easy to allege when one has not a single clue as to the context of the discharges in question. Quoting stats with no context to allege they mean what you think they mean is nothing more than propaganda. Something you say you dispise, but are more than willing to use to prop up your own points when needed.

 

[JollyRoger]

Well, the concept we will declare war upon will be the military itself. Thats what always happens in a downsizing period....at least until we manage to get into another non-essential war.

I don't see the need for a bloated military. We have a deficit and its a nice fat target for cuts.

 

[MobBoss]

I don't see the need for a bloated military. We have a deficit and its a nice fat target for cuts.

What I am talking about even goes beyond just simple budget cuts.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

How does a homosexual talk about his loved one, in the same manner as heterosexuals do, without outing themselves?

 

[Flying Pig]

In the same way that an unmarried man talks about his own without 'outing himself' as unmarried (or at least he did back when such things were scandalous) - talking about 'my SO' and avoiding the use of pronouns. In fact, such pronoun avoidance is normally a pretty good indicator.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Really?

Not talking about marital status is a little easier than hiding the fact Steven isn't a woman. And I'm sure the army has strong regulations that soldiers hide pictures of their families.

 

[Flying Pig]

Just go out with a 'Sam' or an 'Evelyn' then, I suppose...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And photoshop the pictures or carry around one of Steven in a dress.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Again...you have no cencept of the reasons why that stat exists. For example, you do realize that many women end up asking for discharge because they become pregnant, and being pregnant is another reason where someone can request honorable discharge and get out of their contract?

Again, do you have any evidence at all that those represent most of the cases? And even if it is true, what does that possibly have to do with women in the Air Force being 62% of the discharges under DADT?

And why are racial minorities disproportionally affected under DADT? What does that possibly have to do with being pregnant? Why isn't it a case of obvious racism to persecute them more than whites?

Does the term "red herring" ring any bells?

Point being Form, not all discharges are negative, and many are indeed to the benefit of the individual being discharged.

Where did I ever claim they weren't? What about all the others which you earlier tried to claim hardly exist? Again, there are thousands of documented cases of men and women being forced to leave the service against their will. There was nothing "voluntary" about it, and there were likely no other charges contemplated against them prior to that. If there were, there would have been no reason to remove them under DADT.

Very easy to allege when one has not a single clue as to the context of the discharges in question. Quoting stats with no context to allege they mean what you think they mean is nothing more than propaganda. Something you say you dispise, but are more than willing to use to prop up your own points when needed.

You seem to be the one who has "no clue" in these particular matters. And you continue to use "propaganda" techniques instead of even trying to address the real issues.

say1988 is right. The more you post, the more obvious it is why DADT was terminated by those who are the real experts in the military regarding this very topic. Now all we have to do is to start prosecuting people for their persecution and discrimination of women and gays, which in the latter case you even admitted earlier continues to occur. But there doesn't appear to be much of a desire to do so, unlike persecuting gays and women who refused to have sex.

The military continues to show they are either incompetent or willfully incapable of maintaining proper criminal procedures regarding a number of different matters. DADT is yet another one. The law was intended to stop persecution of gays while requiring them to not flaunt being gay, as though that was ever a real problem. Instead, it was turned into yet another way to persecute them and even heterosexual women. Shame on this country for allowing them to do so for nearly two decades. At least this reprehensible policy was finally ended, despite the objections of many Republicans including yourself.

 

[MobBoss]

Again, do you have any evidence at all that those represent most of the cases? And even if it is true, what does that possibly have to do with women in the Air Force being 62% of the discharges under DADT?

And why are racial minorities disproportionally affected under DADT? What does that possibly have to do with being pregnant? Why isn't it a case of obvious racism to persecute them more than whites?

Because correlation =/= causation. The answers to your questions are probably far simpler than some grand conspiracy to institutionalize racism and sexism.

Does the term "red herring" ring any bells?

Where your points are concerned; absolutely.

Where did I ever claim they weren't? What about all the others which you earlier tried to claim hardly exist? Again, there are thousands of documented cases of men and women being forced to leave the service against their will.

No, there isnt. The stat makes no mention of whether they left via their own request for discharge or not. You listing some website that give a mere handful of one-sided testimony doesnt prove this in any way, shape or form.

There was nothing "voluntary" about it, and there were likely no other charges contemplated against them prior to that. If there were, there would have been no reason to remove them under DADT.

Your lack of the admin separation process shows here. When someone is facing such a discharge any and every possible chapter that applies to that discharge is mentioned. Its quite common to have seen DADT discharges accompanied with chapters on misconduct, or AWOL or various other chapters pending on the same soldier.

You seem to be the one who has "no clue" in these particular matters.

Dude, its a simple fact I have 25 years of personal experience in dealing with this. ITS MY JOB on a daily basis. Your zany 'loose change' allegations have simply no bearing on the reality of the situation at all.

And you continue to use "propaganda" techniques instead of even trying to address the real issues.

I've provided far more non-biased links and sites as proof. 'Jezebel' indeed and articles 20 years old indeed.

Now all we have to do is to start prosecuting people for their persecution and discrimination of women and gays, which in the latter case you even admitted earlier continues to occur.

Of course it does, and guess what...it always will. Thats simply human behavior in action. As long as we have laws we will have people that will break them.

But there doesn't appear to be much of a desire to do so, unlike persecuting gays and women who refused to have sex.

Pure speculation based on total ignorance.

 

[Formaldehyde]

A Republican congressman has introducted an amendment to the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act which would protect homophobic and bigoted chaplains from supposedly being discriminated against, while another wants to ensure that homosexuals can't possibly be married on DoD property:

GOP Proposals Aim to Upend “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Repeal

Two anti-gay measures have been introduced in the House Armed Services Committee in an apparent attempt to undermine the successful implementation of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, a move advocates and defenders of openly gay military service say is unnecessary and unprecedented.

One proposal seeks to amend the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act by providing religious liberty protections to military chaplains and service members who disapprove of homosexuality on the basis of morality and religion.

Introduced by Representative Todd Akin (R-Missouri), the amendment states, “The armed forces shall accommodate the conscience and sincerely held moral principles and religious beliefs” of service members “concerning the appropriate and inappropriate expression of human sexuality and may not use such conscience, principles, or beliefs as the basis of any adverse personnel action, discrimination, or denial of promotion, schooling, training, or assignment.”

The other amendment, offered by Representative Steve Palazzo (R-Mississippi), would ban the use of Department of Defense military properties to “officiate, solemnize, or perform a marriage or marriage-like ceremony involving anything other than the union of one man and one woman.”

The two congressmen offered their amendments within hours of President Barack Obama’s full embrace of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples on May 9.

“At the end of the day, Mr. Akin is talking about a problem that does not exist,” said Army veteran Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, during a telephone press availability, Thursday, May 10.

“What is new here and unprecedented is that he’s seeking an exemption for individual service members and chaplains who may have a problem with gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military,” said Sarvis.

“[Akin] wants an exemption, or in his words protections, for that individual service member or chaplain to be able to express his opposition publicly to [military] policy as long as he wraps the expression of that policy [objection] to a moral principle or sincerely held religious belief,” Sarvis added.

“That would be a very dangerous precedent to set” insofar as “any number of policies or directives” with which a service member “might disagree” would be open to criticism, explained Sarvis.

For example, he said, “A service member might say, ‘It’s against my moral beliefs or principles to be serving with people of color.’”

For his part, Akin said in a statement, “We have heard stories of military chaplains facing censorship for their opposition to the liberal agenda. Liberals may have successfully ended ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ but they should not be allowed to force members of our military to give up their religious beliefs. That is simply unacceptable and unconstitutional.’

But Sarvis countered: Akin’s “alleged cases have not been documented and have not been investigated.”

So what else is new?

“You can preach to your own congregation that Judaism, Islam, Wicca, atheism is not the path to salvation – but as a chaplain you shouldn’t be preaching to your units that Jews, Muslims, Wiccans, or atheists should be kicked out of the military,” Fulton wrote. “Chaplains are sworn to support all soldiers; and if you can’t do that, it’s a violation of your oath.”

Since when has an oath to defend and support the Constitution ever stopped the persecution of blacks, gays, and now even women in the military?

 

[Formaldehyde]

"Gay midshipmen say they find acceptance".

As more and more gay military academy students come out of the closet, they are finding acceptance and even defense of their sexual preferences from their fellow classmates. Annual service academy alumni dinners for gay officers are no longer held in secret. At least one gay midshipmen couple are even planning to openly date each other at the annual "Ring Dance".

This year, the first since the Clinton-era policy was repealed, Atwill says change has come to the academy. And talking about his sexual orientation, rather than being a career-ending offense, has rallied midshipmen to his defense.

"Pretty much everybody in my company knows now," Atwill said, and "they actually stand up for me." If his friends hear someone make a negative remark about homosexuality, he said, they "don't hesitate" to tell that person "it's not cool to do that anymore."

Eight months after the repeal, midshipmen both gay and straight describe a quiet but significant transformation at the Naval Academy. Gay midshipmen are seeking recognition for a student club. Last month, for the first time, faculty members and staff attended an off-campus dinner that had been organized secretly every year by and for gay midshipmen.

And Atwill and his boyfriend, classmate Nick Bonsall, planned to go together to the Ring Dance, a formal ball held each spring for third-year midshipmen.

"It's been really great, actually," Bonsall, 20, of Middletown, Del., said of life at the academy since repeal. "Everyone has been really accepting of us."

But some worry how they will be accepted once they graduate, and senior officers are still hesitant to come out of the closet in fear that it will jeopardize their careers:

The experience at Annapolis this year mirrors those at the other service academies, but some future officers worry about what happens after they graduate. While their generation might be accepting, the broader military is made up of people of all ages and backgrounds. Some senior officers say privately that they won't come out for fear of jeopardizing their careers.

Gay cadets at the U.S. Military Academy and the Coast Guard Academy are forming clubs. Gay alumni at the Air Force Academy hosted their first football tailgate last fall, and gay alumni at the Air Force Academy and West Point held their annual dinners on campus for the first time.

But at the Naval Academy, while several gay midshipman describe a new level of comfort on campus, some wonder how they will be accepted after they leave Annapolis and join the fleet.

"For me, personally, it's still a concern," said Atwill, 23, of Bolton, Ky. "When I become an officer, I'm kind of worried about whether or not my sailors will take it the wrong way if I give them a pat on the back or, you know, happen to be in the bathroom at the same time as them.

"I'm afraid that if they know that I'm gay, that if I was even to look at them wrong, they may end up somehow turning that against me."

 

[JollyRoger]

Time to take out the Mission Accomplished banner.

 

[Formaldehyde]

You never know if another Republican becomes president or the Republicans control both houses. Those who attended the military academy version of their prom holding hands could find themselves looking for different careers.

 

[JollyRoger]

Then you just add "ary" to the first word of the banner.

 

[capslock]

"Gay midshipmen say they find acceptance".

As more and more gay military academy students come out of the closet, they are finding acceptance and even defense of their sexual preferences from their fellow classmates. Annual service academy alumni dinners for gay officers are no longer held in secret. At least one gay midshipmen couple are even planning to openly date each other at the annual "Ring Dance".



But some worry how they will be accepted once they graduate, and senior officers are still hesitant to come out of the closet in fear that it will jeopardize their careers:

Ha, I gotta show this to my Academy brothers.

Noone cares if Cadet Joe Schmoe is gay, but the Gay Clubs are taking it too far. They are an unnecessary distraction. They are exactly the reason why people uppossed ending DADT.

 

[JollyRoger]

DADT itself was an unnecessary distraction as are those that are somehow confessing "distraction" by the existence of gay clubs.

 

[capslock]

They are midshipmen. Not Gay-Midshipmen. Simply Midshipmen. They are seperating themselves, and there are no unique flowers in the military. THere is no place for Gay Clubs in any military organization, period.