The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Current Events

Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-13-2010, 08:24 PM   #46
BigV
Goon Squad Leader
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 27,063
Point of order, HM.

The discrimination will continue long after this is done "properly". It will just be more fuel for someone's poutrage. Generations will have to pass for this to fade into the background noise.
__________________
Be Just and Fear Not.
BigV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2010, 08:29 PM   #47
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
nah - I think as the nest generation comes into control this will end very quickly.
I sincerely hope so anyway.
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2010, 08:34 PM   #48
Happy Monkey
I think this line's mostly filler.
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
Indeed; I meant discrimination enshrined in law.

But, I'm optimistic about our youth. If we can get the discrimination out of our law, I think it will fade (not fade out, but fade) in society quickly.
__________________
_________________
|...............| We live in the nick of times.
| Len 17, Wid 3 |
|_______________| [pics]
Happy Monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 02:28 PM   #49
piercehawkeye45
Franklin Pierce
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey View Post
Indeed; I meant discrimination enshrined in law.

But, I'm optimistic about our youth. If we can get the discrimination out of our law, I think it will fade (not fade out, but fade) in society quickly.
Yup. Homophobia will alway linger around like racism and sexism and could easily be brought back under the right social conditions. I still see it all the time with my peers. My generation will end the discrimination against gay people from the state, not from our society.
__________________
I like my perspectives like I like my baseball caps: one size fits all.
piercehawkeye45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2010, 03:21 PM   #50
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
In my OP, I essentially said that Sec Gates is a closeted homophobe.

Now, even though I understand (and predicted) that the Obama Administration
would be required to appeal Judge Phillips' decision and subsequent directive to stop
enforcing DADT, it is apparent that Gates is having his homophobic way.

First he requires a new study by the military with yet another another report due Dec 1st 2010.
Oh by coincidence, that will to be after the midterm elections when hopes there will be more homophobes in congress.

Now, Gates is working his ways to stall time
to create a whole new form of segregated military... so we can have:

Male Officers' quarters (straight)
Female Officers' quarters (straight)
Male Officers' quarters (G/L/T)
Female Officers' quarters (G/L/T)

Male Enlisted' quarters (straight)
Female Enlisted' quarters (straight)
Male Enlisted' quarters (G/L/T)
Female Enlisted' quarters (G/L/T)

Legally married Officers' quarters (both partners straight)
Legally married Officers' quarters (both partners G/L/T)
Legally married Officers' quarters (one partner G/L/T)
Legally married Enlisted' quarters (both partners straight)
Legally married Enlisted' quarters (both partners G/L/T)
Legally married Enlisted' quarters (one partner G/L/T)


Not legally married Officers' quarters (both partners straight)
Not legally married Officers' quarters (both partners G/L/T)
Not legally married Officers' quarters (one partner G/L/T)
Not legally married Enlisted' quarters (both partners straight)
Not legally married Enlisted' quarters (both partners G/L/T)
Not legally married Enlisted' quarters (one partner G/L/T)

There will also have to be studied whether or not G/L/T's must be segregated from one another.
And of course every battle plan will have to have separate orders issued because
these groups can not possibly fight together as that would be upsetting to the morale of the troops.

Obama was naive and got himself screwed when he kept Gates on as Sec of Defense as a gesture of reconciliation with GWB.

Times Editorial
Don’t Stay the ‘Don’t Ask’ Ruling
Published: October 16, 2010

Quote:
The Obama administration has conjured up some inflated fears to justify its decision to appeal an injunction that brought a screeching halt to investigations and discharges of gay men and women serving in the military.
Quote:
Clifford Stanley, the under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness, said in a court filing that ending the antigay policy would require training, and reworking regulations on issues like housing, benefits and standards of conduct. He said the Army had to consider the “rights and obligations of the chaplain corps.” Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said the military had to consider whether barracks should be segregated and whether partners of gay soldiers should have benefits.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2010, 08:57 AM   #51
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Associated Press
Judge likely to deny gov't on gay troops order
By JULIE WATSON , 10.19.10, 09:14 AM EDT

Quote:
RIVERSIDE, Calif. -- A federal judge is expected to rule Tuesday on a government request to delay her order
halting the military from enforcing its ban on openly gay troops, and has said she'll likely deny it.
Phillips said the government has not proven that her order would harm troops or
in any way impede efforts to implement new regulations for the military to deal with openly gay service members.
Quote:
"The farther the decision gets from the presentation of evidence in the trial court,
the more likely it is that courts will assume the military must have some critically important interest at stake,"
said Diane Mazur, a law professor who opposes the policy.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2010, 09:09 AM   #52
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Phillips said the government has not proven that her order would harm troops or in any way impede efforts to implement new regulations for the military to deal with openly gay service members.
New regulations? Hello... the only new regulation is to disregard previous regulations, and treat everyone the same. Duh!
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2010, 06:20 PM   #53
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
CNN


Military recruiters told they can accept openly gay applicants
From Adam Levine, CNN
October 19, 2010 4:05 p.m. EDT

Quote:
Washington (CNN) -- The Pentagon has advised recruiting commands that they can accept openly gay and lesbian recruit candidates, given the recent federal court decision that bars the military from expelling openly gay service members, according to a Pentagon spokeswoman.
The guidance from the Personnel and Readiness office was sent to recruiting commands on Friday, according to spokeswoman Cynthia Smith.
The recruiters were told that if a candidate admits he or she is openly gay, and qualify under normal recruiting guidelines, their application can be processed. Recruiters are not allowed to ask candidates if they are gay as part of the application process.
The notice also reminded recruiters that they have to "manage expectations" of applicants by informing them that a reversal of the court decision might occur, whereby the "don't ask, don't tell" policy could be reinstated, Smith said.

Quote:
Groups representing gays and lesbians have warned against coming out to the military because the policy is still being appealed in courts.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2010, 08:14 PM   #54
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter View Post
In my OP, I essentially said that Sec Gates is a closeted homophobe.
And you base that assessment on what?

Quote:
Oh by coincidence, that will to be after the midterm elections when hopes there will be more homophobes in congress.
And you base that on what?

Quote:
Now, Gates is working his ways to stall time
to create a whole new form of segregated military...
And you base that on what?

What you don't understand is that it is a huge system and change comes slowly and needs to institutionalized. This is not simply an order that needs to be given, although it is that, it is more. Change needs to be introduced with a plan in a systematic fashion. I think most of the younger troops can accept it, most of the older folks will have to struggle with it. I support it and I am from the older group. But I am not foolish enough to think that you can foist it on the system with an order and think all will be well. It will not.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2010, 01:52 AM   #55
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Hi Merc,

Let's assume you're serious in asking on what do I base my opinions of Sec Robert Gates.
If not, I leave it to you to Google "Robert Gates DADT" and sort it out from there.

Let's also assume that Gates is an intelligent man with sufficient experience and competence to understand and lead organizational change in the federal government.
If Gates openly disagreed with the President-elect Obama about revoking DADT and could not affirmatively and honorably work towards it, he should have resigned in 2008.
If you don't buy that, it's yet another exhibit of GWB's shoddy performance by hiring an incompetent to lead the DOD.

Further, let's NOT assume I don't understand something of how management systems work, and I won't assume that you don't recognize when a manager is throwing up roadblocks to keep a change he/she opposes from occurring.

I refer you to my OP (post #1) about Gate's forcing an expansion of his study, and setting the date of the report after the midterm elections (12/1/10).
His doubling of the sample size was a bogus issue... ask a statistician the power of doubling the sample size in survey a large population... it smacks of political intrigue.
Should we really believe Gates was not aware of the balance of powers in the Senate, and the likely outcome of this November 2010 election.
Most everyone else was aware.

Here are some quotes regarding the Gates' DADT survey from the U.S. Department of Defense News

Quote:
American Forces Press Service
*News Article
Survey Will Permit Informed Decisions, Official Says
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

Quote:
WASHINGTON, July 9, 2010 – Survey responses on the possible repeal of the law that bans gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military will allow leaders to make informed decisions, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said today.
<snip>
And here are the first 11 sequential responses from members of the military in the Comments Section:

Quote:
Article is closed to new comments.
The opinions expressed in the following comments do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Defense.

7/26/2010 10:23:03 AM

Not one question about whether the servicemember would follow orders if orders to integrate were given. One wonders why? Not one question about whether existing rules prohibiting public displays of affection or unwarranted sexual advances would adequately cover the situation. Not one question about whether the most qualified member of a unit would help save the country, even if they were gay. HHHmm, wonder if there is a hidden agenda?
- Triathlete, california

7/14/2010 3:29:28 AM

I don't think that a straight guy wants to share a shower with a gay guy anymore than a straight woman wants to share a public shower with a straight guy! It is just a fact that something will have to be done to assure more privacy. 
- Denise, AL

7/12/2010 2:09:33 PM

I'm confused! Is the story really about what the Army is doing now to stay on mission with getting survey information from servicemembers? Or, is it shifting to shine a light on the Army is quick to catch when there has been a tremendousbreach of protocol?
- Anthony Lewis, DFAS

7/12/2010 9:46:29 AM

I have a powerfuld disdain for the fact that Congress appears to be ready to cram this down our throats prior to the end of the DoD assessment of the situation. I am, however, glad that we have venues for expressing our concerns. At least our senior leaders seem to care about us.
- MSgt Jack Padilla, Lackland AFB

7/11/2010 12:46:22 AM

I was very disappointed to read the survey sent to the members of the US military regarding DADT. Although you may have put a lot of time and thought into this survey, I suspect that you did not thoroughly vet it's content with LGBT individuals or organizations. There is a clear bias in the survey against the repeal of DADT. Using the word &quot;if&quot; instead of &quot;when&quot; undermines the entire process. I do hope you will revise the survey to more fairly represent the many LGBT members of the service who currently are serving and who have honorably served in the past. 
- Robert Mason, Los Angeles, CA

7/10/2010 11:05:52 PM

This survey is an obvious sham, with the questions written to achieve the desired, closed-minded answers of the homophobes. Still, there are many who can't wait to believe the official results. Just remember, the secret to success is sincerity. Once you learn to fake that, you've got it made.
- John Rochat MD, Fort Bragg, CA

7/10/2010 8:45:19 PM

I urge you to pull the survey on DADT and find a polling company that will phase the questions in an objective many and in a way that solicits responses from leading questions. 
- Michael , Yonkers NY

7/10/2010 7:49:45 PM

Mr. Secretary; as with General McChrystal, the job of the troops is to execute the law of the land and the orders and policies of the command structure. The idea of surveying the troops over a policy issue is akin to asking them if they should be deployed...they are in the service and are expected to follow the company line, agree or not. If they cannot live up to this standard, then they have no business wearing the U.S. uniform. Insert &quot;person of color&quot; of &quot;female&quot; or Muslim&quot; and you would not even consider this procedure. I am embarrassed for the DoD, and only hope you heed the wants of more than 80% of our citizens. If our soldiers cannot get past this, I am sure there are those that can, and NO ONE is irreplaceable. Thank you- a concerned and proud Washington native.
- jeff milligan, las cruces, New Mexico

7/10/2010 6:06:32 PM

As noted in many of your own EEO policy documents, &quot;What is offensive is in the “eyes of the beholder.”&quot; Some of the questions asked, the words used, and the general tone of the DADT survey are offensive to many gays and lesbians, particularly those in uniform. It is repulsive for DoD to say that outside comments regarding this survey are inflammatory or misleading. Since DoD and the Services have said they will discharge those who out themselves in this review process, outside influences are not helpful, THEY ARE REQUIRED to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. The advocacy groups have spoken, many with the input of gay servicemembers, and this survey was written with little apparent regard for the gay military personnel and their families who have been forced to serve in silence for 17 years. 
- Richard L., Norfolk

7/10/2010 3:12:15 AM

None of the questions assumes that the participant might be gay or lesbian. Odd
- Ian Mac, London
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2010, 02:03 AM   #56
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Merc, to continue...

Here are a few of Gates' comments and positions over the past 18 months:

St Petersburg Post
Obama's repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" on the back burner
Updated: Monday, March 30th, 2009 | By Angie Drobnic Holan
Quote:
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in an interview that he's not actively pursuing a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," rule, which prohibits gays and lesbians from openly serving in the military. The admission came at the end of an interview on Fox News Sunday .
<snip>
"Where does that stand? And why is there currently money in the 2010 budget to keep enforcing that policy?"
"Well, it continues to be the law," Gates said. "And any change in the policy would require a change in the law. We will follow the law, whatever it is. That dialogue, though, has really not progressed very far at this point in the administration. I think the president and I feel like we've got a lot on our plates right now, and let's push that one down the road a little bit."

Politico
May 25, 2010

Gates 'can accept' 'Don't Ask' repeal plan

Quote:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates issued a grudging -- but crucial -- statement this morning through his spokesman Geoff Morrell, as the administration pushes forward with the repeal of the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military -- but pointedly insists that Congress carry the political burden.
“Secretary Gates continues to believe that ideally the DOD review should be completed before there is any legislation to repeal the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law. With Congress having indicated that is not possible, the Secretary can accept the language in the proposed amendment," Morrell said.

Washington Post

Gates says abrupt end to 'don't ask' would have 'enormous consequences'
By Craig Whitlock and Scott Wilson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 13, 2010; 5:03 PM

Quote:
Gates declined to answer directly when asked whether the administration should appeal a federal court injunction ordering the military to immediately end the policy. But he said he wants to proceed with his preferred approach: to allow the Defense Department to complete, by Dec. 1, a review of how to integrate openly gay men and lesbians in the armed forces, followed by an act of Congress that would overturn the "don't ask, don't tell" law.
"I feel very strongly that this is an action that needs to be taken by the Congress, and that it is an action that requires careful preparation and a lot of training," Gates told reporters aboard a military aircraft as he flew to Brussels for a NATO meeting.
Gates said the Pentagon needs until Dec. 1 to resolve questions such as whether heterosexual troops would be required to share housing with gays and whether the military would be required to provide benefits for same-sex partners of service members.
"This is a very complex business. It has enormous consequences for our troops," Gates said. "As I have said from the very beginning, there should be legislation, and that legislation should be informed by the review we have underway."
With respect to Gates' current issues of "separate housing"
Should we believe that the military and/or Gates was not already aware of the existence of G / L in the military.
If he/they knew this and truly believed it to be harmful to morale, then alternative housing would have been created long ago.
The "benefits" issue is also bogus because, as Gates says, the military could simply follow the law... when legally married, partners get equal benefits.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2010, 03:14 AM   #57
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
None of that makes him queer, just an obstructionist.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2010, 09:38 AM   #58
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Never called him queer !
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2010, 01:31 PM   #59
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Wall Street Journal
OCTOBER 20, 2010, 12:30 P.M. ET

U.S. Files Appeal to Restore 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'

Quote:
Government lawyers filed an emergency request with the federal appeals court in San Francisco Wednesday seeking to suspend a lower court order that bars the military from enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" law against gays.

The filing came after U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips in Riverside, Calif., said Tuesday that her week-old order barring the military from enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" law against gays will stand.

In its filing with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Justice Department asked to suspend the ruling—a move that was expected after Judge Phillips rejected the Pentagon's request for a temporarily stay of her decision while an appeal is considered.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2010, 02:36 PM   #60
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter View Post
Never called him queer !
My bad, I misread your post.

But the more I think about it, that would explain a lot.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.