Breaking News: Military recruiters told to accept gay applicants

[Denny Crane]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101019/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_gays_in_military_recruiting_1

WASHINGTON – A Pentagon spokeswoman says recruiters have been told that they must accept gay applicants, following a federal court decision striking down the ban on gays serving openly in the military.

Spokeswoman Cynthia Smith said Tuesday that top-level guidance has been issued to recruiting commands informing them that the military's "don't ask, don't tell" rule has been suspended for now. Recruiters also have been told to inform potential recruits that the moratorium could be reversed at any point.

Last week, a federal judge ordered the military to stop enforcing the 1993 law banning openly gay service members. The Justice Department is appealing the decision and has asked for a temporary stay.

 

[Denny Crane]

About time, eh barfo?

You said they couldn't promulgate the law.

 

[hasoos]

It's amazing how in a country where everybody is supposed to have the same rights that we continually have to go to the courts to protect individual rights because nobody else will nut up and stick up for the people who are being treated badly. Hell if it wasn't for the courts and their bravery for standing up for peoples rights, we would probably still be living in a segregated country. It would be America. The land of the free unless you are black, female or homosexual.

 

[Denny Crane]

Segregation was a product of the courts. See Plessy v. Ferguson, which made "separate but equal" the law of the land until it was overturned many decades later by Brown v. Board of Education.

The courts are giving the Pentagon a push, but the Pentagon is doing the right thing instead of fighting it further. Which it could.

 

[Natebishop3]

I wonder how this will change military logistics.

 

[Denny Crane]

I wonder how this will change military logistics.

New meaning of "rear guard"

 

[Natebishop3]

New meaning of "rear guard"

And "flanking"

 

[hasoos]

Segregation was a product of the courts. See Plessy v. Ferguson, which made "separate but equal" the law of the land until it was overturned many decades later by Brown v. Board of Education.

The courts are giving the Pentagon a push, but the Pentagon is doing the right thing instead of fighting it further. Which it could.

I know you mean well but I don't need a history lesson, but thanks though.

I am just angry that politicians won't do the right thing because they are all too concerned with the vote count. The problem being, that the best public servants are those that are unafraid to make an unpopular decision, but as long as it is the right decision, will make it.

 

[Denny Crane]

I know you mean well but I don't need a history lesson, but thanks though.

I am just angry that politicians won't do the right thing because they are all too concerned with the vote count. The problem being, that the best public servants are those that are unafraid to make an unpopular decision, but as long as it is the right decision, will make it.

Obama could have done it early in his presidency and I don't think there would have been much to stop him.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

It's amazing how in a country where everybody is supposed to have the same rights that we continually have to go to the courts to protect individual rights because nobody else will nut up and stick up for the people who are being treated badly. Hell if it wasn't for the courts and their bravery for standing up for peoples rights, we would probably still be living in a segregated country. It would be America. The land of the free unless you are black, female or homosexual.

Or a Christian.

 

[barfo]

About time, eh barfo?

Agreed.

You said they couldn't promulgate the law.

No, I said nothing of the sort. I did say that promulgate is a nice word.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

Can you be born a Christian?

Jesus was

 

[Minstrel]

Jesus was

He was born a Jew. A liberal Jew.

 

[julius]

Jesus was

Jesus was a middle eastern Jew.

btw, blazerprophet, how many more times are you going to pull the "christian victim" card? You've been riding that dead horse like a prostitute lately.

 

[maxiep]

Obama could have done it early in his presidency and I don't think there would have been much to stop him.

Instead, he's suing to bring back DADT.

 

[Natebishop3]

He was born a Jew. A liberal Jew.

Jesus was a middle eastern Jew.

btw, blazerprophet, how many more times are you going to pull the "christian victim" card? You've been riding that dead horse like a prostitute lately.

Well you guys clearly have no sense of humor. None at all. Carry on...

 

[Minstrel]

Well you guys clearly have no sense of humor. None at all. Carry on...

I thought "liberal Jew" showed a sense of humour. I thought about adding "New York" to it, but thought that might be a bridge too far, what with the lack of a New York back then.

Maybe YOU have no sense of humour.

I like that theory better.

 

[Natebishop3]

I thought "liberal Jew" showed a sense of humour. I thought about adding "New York" to it, but thought that might be a bridge too far, what with the lack of a New York back then.

Maybe YOU have no sense of humour.

I like that theory better.

New York Jew would have been funnier BECAUSE of the bridge too far.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

activist judges running craaaazy!

 

[julius]

New York Jew would have been funnier BECAUSE of the bridge too far.

The thing is, there wasn't a "New York" at the time. So that wouldn't make sense. And it would be too obvious. So I'm with Minstrel, maybe it is you who doesn't have a sense of humor. I support his theory.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/10/20/102301/judge-rejects-obama-administrations.html

Judge rejects Obama's 'don't ask, don't tell' argument

 

[Natebishop3]

The thing is, there wasn't a "New York" at the time. So that wouldn't make sense. And it would be too obvious. So I'm with Minstrel, maybe it is you who doesn't have a sense of humor. I support his theory.

But I was the one with the joke and you were the one who just shot it down with historical facts... I mean...... come on!

 

[Denny Crane]

Go Obama!

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69J3Y120101020

Appeals court stays ruling on gays in military

(Reuters) - A federal appeals court ruled on Wednesday that the Pentagon may temporarily reinstate a ban on openly gay men and women in uniform while a lengthier stay in favor of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is considered.

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco added to the disarray surrounding a landmark legal battle that already has forced the U.S. military to welcome openly gay recruits for the first time.

Siding with the Obama administration, a three-judge appellate panel lifted an injunction issued last week by U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips that barred further enforcement of a law requiring gay men and lesbians in the armed forces to keep their sexual orientation private.

 

[Denny Crane]

The Pentagon has already issued a directive to not discriminate against gay people who want to enlist. The court rulings are not really relevant anymore.

 

[julius]

But I was the one with the joke and you were the one who just shot it down with historical facts... I mean...... come on!

Apology accepted.

 

[andalusian]

New York Jew would have been funnier BECAUSE of the bridge too far.

New York Jew would equate Jesus with Amar'e. I have no idea if this would come down as funny or not.

 

[Rodolfo]

 

[BrianFromWA]

On a tangential note, how many times does a judge have to have their decision overturned before someone says that they're not really fit to be a judge anymore? Not necessarily in this case, but hasn't 9th Circuit been overturned on a lot of issues recently? Or is it just because I'm just now starting to look at things like this, and it goes on all the time?

 

[barfo]

On a tangential note, how many times does a judge have to have their decision overturned before someone says that they're not really fit to be a judge anymore? Not necessarily in this case, but hasn't 9th Circuit been overturned on a lot of issues recently? Or is it just because I'm just now starting to look at things like this, and it goes on all the time?

It goes on all the time. The 9th circuit is liberal and the supreme court is conservative. Thus they disagree often.

But, oddly enough, in this case the 9th has overruled a lower court in order to keep DADT. I don't think this means that the Supremes are going to outlaw DADT, but we'll see.

barfo