wait what? (don't ask/don't tell)

[solarbird]

There is a report going around of Don't Ask--Don't Tell being thrown out by the military. People are going yay. I would be too, but, um... what about the Federal law?

Remember that there is a Federal law, still on the books as far as I know, passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1993, banning outright lesbian, gay, and bisexual people from military service, calling us "an unacceptable threat" to the armed forces. "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" was an implementation of that law which could be summarised as, "We acknowledge this legal ban but are simply not going to ask, and what we don't know won't hurt us. But if we find out, you're gone."

If this report is true, are they going to ignore this law? I am not aware in any way of it having been repealed. Have I missed something important here? Or is something else very, very important, and on the surface extremely bad, going on?

Comments

[wytwolf.livejournal.com]

Sounds too good to be true. I am suspicious :|

[solarbird]

NO, it sounds TERRIBLE.

The ARMED FORCES CANNOT JUST OVERTLY BLOW OFF FEDERAL LAW. If they do, the government is over.

[hubbit.livejournal.com]

I wonder if this is something that Congress or the Supreme Court can block, citing the Federal statute.

According to Professor Wikipedia, the Supreme Court has consistently refused to rule on the Constitutionality of "DADT". Perhaps this will be a catalyst.

Personally I think the whole thing is repugnant and mediaeval...you cannot claim to be a progressive country and be for rights and equality when you have a Federal statute declaring that members of the Federal military (who are essentially Federal employees) can and will be discharged for no other reason than their professed sexual orientation.

The US Government seriously needs to get rid of its own discriminatory policies before it can criticize the governmental policies of other nations.

Sometimes it makes me want to scream. They managed to give African-Americans and women the right to vote; they managed to integrate schools and the military and get rid of segregated everything, and the Supreme Court even managed to strike down state sodomy laws, and yet they still cannot stomach the idea of actually granting freedom of expression - freedom of EXISTENCE - to the LGBT community - which in this particular instance does qualify as an Oppressed People, because you are still being denied X, Y, and Z because of who and what you are.

Still a society that likes to condemn the Different. Still desperately in need of mirrors so they can see where the real problems lie.

[wrog]

My guess is that this, assuming it's for real, is basically a "stop-loss" measure. In other words, given DADT, one imagines that a quick way of not being sent back to Iraq/wherever would be to come out,... and I would not put it past the Powers That Be to simply ignore all such declarations (i.e., assume people are lying), thus effectively suspending enforcement of DADT for the sake of keeping troop strength up.

Whether they're violating the law depends on how the law defines G/L/B; i.e., is simply saying so enough to do it? I'm guessing there's discretion there.

[rmd.livejournal.com]

or maybe they realized that getting rid of all those queer arabic translators MIGHT'VE BEEN A BAD IDEA.

[wrog]

yeah, I'll be holding my breath waiting for that admission

[angharads-house.livejournal.com]

Definitely a 'stop-loss' manoeuvre.

[lostkun.livejournal.com]

Funny, I've heard nothing of this. Maybe that will change when I report to my next duty station, but none of my buds have mentioned this either, nor has it come up on any of the military forums I frequent.

Also, the poster seems fishy. They like to throw around words like "declassify" and "my CIA friend."

There's been rumors of this coming though, just not this soon.

[solarbird]

Yeah, I'm not buyin' this either.

[brombear.livejournal.com]

This is indeed fishy, although they might try and blow it off, and then when they're no longer needed, they get the boot without bennies. What makes this fishy is that to change the Uniform Code of Military Justice (the military's laws) it takes an act of Congress.

[backrubbear.livejournal.com]

That'd be an interesting Signing Statement.

[denelian.livejournal.com]

this is very strange...

"coming out" to the miltary gets one a medical discharge - which is still an HONORABLE discharge... which means getting out by being means you still get bens.

of course, it doesn't always work. i know a woman who was gay, and she tried to get out on those grounds (i have no clue why she was in the USAF. it still confuses me). the first shirt sent her to psych counseling to "help her control her delusions of bisexual attraction". not a reprogramming. i had to meet with him because she lived with my ex-husband and i. he said that he wanted her to get counseling because he thought she was lying abou being gay, and essentially accused her of cowardice. although, to be honest, i don't think he CARED if she was gay, he only cared that she was trying to get out hearly (which she was, she hated being in the AF). the counseling was supposed to "teach" her how to not let on that she was gay in front of people who would kick her out for being gay.

as for the fact that it is a federal law - i don't know. has anyone been court martialed for being gay in the military? have there been any attemted prosecutions? (i admit i quit pay much attention after i got divorced, because i lost the last of my military ties then). if its never been prosected or pushed, it depends on how they do it, how the courts interpret it NOW...

i wish they would. it's one of the stupider rules in the military. of course, i wish that they would make rape of fellow military members something punishable by death, and actually investigate those rapes, and actually do work to lower those rape stats in other ways... sigh