Federal Judge Orders Halt to 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Enforcement

[SoonerATC]

Rather than focus this thread on whether gays should or should not serve openly (they obviously should not), this decision is infuriating because it is another example of one person overturning the decision of the group. The Senate Armed Services Appropriations Bill was defeated because the repeal of DADT was included in the Bill's language. It was defeated legitimately through legislative means, and now one person has decided that they are going to overturn that.

I'm seriously sick and tired of our country being controlled by a few, powerful elites. When the hell is this going to stop? Congress has all but been made irrelevant through the appointment of Czars, judges overturning the decisions Congress makes and overturning the votes of the citizens (Proposition 8 - TWICE). I'm honest to God ready for a revolution in this country.

 

[donner]

not taking sides, really, but just because congress or anyone else passes a law doesn't make that law constitutionally legal.

Judges have always 'interpreted' the law and if that interpretation is wrong then the system is setup for the case to move upward to the supreme court. Just seems like another step in the process here.

All it takes is for another 'powerful elite' judge to say that DADT is legal and suddenly there is legal confusion and things shift back to the other side.

 

[RickN]

Rather than focus this thread on whether gays should or should not serve openly (they obviously should not), this decision is infuriating because it is another example of one person overturning the decision of the group. The Senate Armed Services Appropriations Bill was defeated because the repeal of DADT was included in the Bill's language. It was defeated legitimately through legislative means, and now one person has decided that they are going to overturn that.

I'm seriously sick and tired of our country being controlled by a few, powerful elites. When the hell is this going to stop? Congress has all but been made irrelevant through the appointment of Czars, judges overturning the decisions Congress makes and overturning the votes of the citizens (Proposition 8 - TWICE). I'm honest to God ready for a revolution in this country.

It gets a step closer every time something like this happens.

 

[okgirl]

What I don't understand about this, and correct me if I'm wrong, but why does it even matter if anyone knows they are gay or not? It's not like they are there to find a "partner" nor are they going to get any special privileges. They are in the military to protect this country. How does being gay have ANYTHING to do with that?

 

[Glocktogo]

Silly judge if you ask me. His injunction isn't worth the paper it's written on. If the Dept. of Defense declines to acquiesce to his "order", where is his jurisdictional authority over them? Does he really think he'd be able to find them in contempt and jail them for their disobedience? Does he really think he'd be able to enforce this? Good luck with that!

I'd love to see the DoD piss on his shoes on this one. These rogue federal judges need to be reigned in on legislating from the bench.

 

[Glocktogo]

What I don't understand about this, and correct me if I'm wrong, but why does it even matter if anyone knows they are gay or not? It's not like they are there to find a "partner" nor are they going to get any special privileges. They are in the military to protect this country. How does being gay have ANYTHING to do with that?

It has to do with military discipline and order. There were a LOT of rules and regulations I didn't agree with in the military, but one followed orders or suffered the consequences. Everyone knows you check your rights at the gate when you join the military. It has to be that way or there would be chaos and a severe degradation of mission readiness as a result. The military simply cannot function in the same manner as a civilian corporation.

 

[jbarnett]

Silly judge if you ask me. His injunction isn't worth the paper it's written on. If the Dept. of Defense declines to acquiesce to his "order", where is his jurisdictional authority over them? Does he really think he'd be able to find them in contempt and jail them for their disobedience? Does he really think he'd be able to enforce this? Good luck with that!

I'd love to see the DoD piss on his shoes on this one. These rogue federal judges need to be reigned in on legislating from the bench.

I completely agree.

 

[1911DA]

New replacement for the platoon in a hot war zone:

Hi Sarge! I'm Jerry and I'm gay.........

Platoon Sargent: Good...... take the point and move out

 

[Seadog]

It has to do with military discipline and order. There were a LOT of rules and regulations I didn't agree with in the military, but one followed orders or suffered the consequences. Everyone knows you check your rights at the gate when you join the military. It has to be that way or there would be chaos and a severe degradation of mission readiness as a result. The military simply cannot function in the same manner as a civilian corporation.

That sums it up well.

 

[guns are dumb]

Rather than focus this thread on whether gays should or should not serve openly (they obviously should not), this decision is infuriating because it is another example of one person overturning the decision of the group. The Senate Armed Services Appropriations Bill was defeated because the repeal of DADT was included in the Bill's language. It was defeated legitimately through legislative means, and now one person has decided that they are going to overturn that.

I'm seriously sick and tired of our country being controlled by a few, powerful elites. When the hell is this going to stop? Congress has all but been made irrelevant through the appointment of Czars, judges overturning the decisions Congress makes and overturning the votes of the citizens (Proposition 8 - TWICE). I'm honest to God ready for a revolution in this country.

What you are suggesting is democratic rule instead of republican rule. Our country was founded as a republic to ensure that the beliefs of the majority doesn't overrule the rights of the few.

Whether it is your moral belief that Proposition 8 should stand as voted is irrelevant to the fact that this country was founded on giving all men and women equal rights, and some men and women still do not have equal rights. It is within our country's checks and balances system, the way it was designed 200 years ago, to have a judge overrule a vote even if it is an unpopular decision.

Please understand, I'm not suggesting that gay marriage is moral or immoral (I'll leave my personal beliefs out of this), I'm saying it doesn't matter, according to our founders and if we extend some rights to one group without extending those to the other, we are in fact guilty of the same evil they sought to escape by leaving Europe.