fed judge orders end to all DADT actions

[Doc]

Grace62 wrote:
But she was awarded a financial recovery by the ninth circuit, and this case established a standard that PREVIOUS dismissals under DADT will be null and void and the soldier must be reinstated with back pay IF the military cannot prove that the soldier's presence harmed morale.

I'm not going to argue with you over the differences between a tort action and a federal civil rights suit. Go read a book.

...

As for what the case stands for, it stands for the premise that discriminatory policies in the military on the basis of sexual orientation must serve a substantial government interest in the 9th Circuit and the government's lawyers didn't meet their burden of proof... in the 9th Circuit.

[Black Tea]

Fine, and they should allow any hetrosexual be granted an honorable discharge if requested.

[Grace62]

Black Tea wrote:
Fine, and they should allow any hetrosexual be granted an honorable discharge if requested.

I tend to agree. If you're too immature to get over your homophobia, you're too immature to serve in the armed forces.

[davester]

Black Tea wrote:
Fine, and they should allow any hetrosexual be granted an honorable discharge if requested.

Yep, just like they allowed all racists to be granted honorable discharges when they started allowing non-whites in.

[Black Tea]

And you can be sure there will be an upsurge in "friendly fire" incidents.

[Grace62]

Black Tea wrote:
And you can be sure there will be an upsurge in "friendly fire" incidents.

No there won't. Gay soldiers have been serving for a long time, and everybody knows it. Grow up.

[Black Tea]

Here's another question, our soldiers aren't allowed to take Bibles when they fight in Muslim countries, because Bibles are illegal there.

Being gay is also illegal in Muslim countries (they hang them you know), so gays won't be allowed there either?

Maybe that's why Obama is fighting that judge?

[Grace62]

Black Tea wrote:
Here's another question, our soldiers aren't allowed to take Bibles when they fight in Muslim countries, because Bibles are illegal there.

The Pentagon's General Order 1 prohibits American troops from attempting to convert people in foreign countries. They can however have their own personal Bible or other religious book, as they could anywhere. They can and do have worship on base, Bibles and all, as they would anywhere.

Being gay is also illegal in Muslim countries (they hang them you know), so gays won't be allowed there either?

By that logic we better not have any Jewish soldiers either, and the women soldiers better stay covered in burqas.

Maybe that's why Obama is fighting that judge?

[davester]

Black Tea seems to operate in a fact-free zone (related to O'Reilly's "no spin zone", but not to be confused with the reality distortion field).

[OWC Jamie]

Black Tea wrote:
Here's another question, our soldiers aren't allowed to take Bibles when they fight in Muslim countries, because Bibles are illegal there.

Being gay is also illegal in Muslim countries (they hang them you know), so gays won't be allowed there either?

Maybe that's why Obama is fighting that judge?

that's only half true.
last year the military ordered Bibles burned, but they were bibles printed in the local afghan languages potentially used for proselytizing the natives.
Bibles that the locals (generally) can't read are fine, and they can't be handing them out to the native pops, either.

There might be some special agreement with Saudi Arabia .




------
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/...code1.html

possessing and distributing is a no-no
possessing would appear to be OK
course there's a don't ask and don't tell policy here, too.