Thank you, Grace. That's really good to read.
So much for demoralizing the troops..
Printable View
Thank you, Grace. That's really good to read.
So much for demoralizing the troops..
An OpEd piece is not an "article"Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
It was a good read, To me it makes a point that the Israeli gays arent pushing for special status in society, that they are integrating into society instead of demanding society make changes for them. If American gay culture acted the same way we would have had gays in our military for decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by phesina
That was very interesting...he did raise a bunch of good points.
Thanks for the article Grace.:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
The article meets all the criteria of an article, therefore is in fact
an article.
We already have had gays serving in the military for decades. They don't
wait for Government approval, they just want to serve their country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
article - A story, report, or opinion piece in a newspaper, magazine, journal, internet etc.
source
article - a written composition in prose, usually nonfiction, on a specific topic, forming an independent part of a book or other publication, as a newspaper or magazine.
source
Latest news on DADT.
From POLITICO -
Quote:
New rules coming on gays in military
By: Jen DiMascio
March 25, 2010 08:22 AM EDT
Defense Secretary Robert Gates will make it more difficult to kick gays out of the military, imposing new rules for their discharge under the Pentagon’s don’t ask don’t tell ban on open homosexuality.
The changes rolled out in a Pentagon press briefing Thursday will apply to all open and future cases, but only Congress can repeal the current law barring gays from serving openly.
“It remains the law and we remain obligated to enforce it,” Gates said. “At the same time these changes will allow us to execute the law in a fairer and more appropriate manner.”
Now, the Pentagon won’t entertain anonymous complaints against members of the military, requiring third parties to give information under oath. It will also place “special scrutiny” on third parties who may be trying to harm the accused. And the Pentagon will only allow more experienced officers to initiate claims or to actually “separate” gays from the military.
The rules for what information can be used in a case will change too. Now, the Pentagon will outlaw discharges based on confidential information provided to lawyers, the clergy, psychotherapists and doctors. And information picked up during investigations of domestic or physical abuse or security clearance proceedings is also out of bounds.
The changes are being applied after a 45-day review of how service-members are discharged for their sexual orientation. The Pentagon’s yearlong study of how to implement full repeal is ongoing.
Gates and Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reiterated that any repeal of the current law should take place only after that review, due Dec. 1, is complete.
“I think it’s very important for us to go through this process,” Mullen said. “Haste could very easily generate a very bad outcome.”
The top civilian and military leaders of the Pentagon also denounced Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, for writing a letter to Stars and Stripes that publicly outlined his opposition to repeal.
“It is often stated that most service members are in favor of repealing the policy. I do not believe that is accurate,” Mixon, the commander of U.S. Army Pacific, said in the letter. “I suspect many servicemembers, their families, veterans and citizens are wondering what to do to stop this ill-advised repeal of a policy that has achieved a balance between a citizen’s desire to serve and acceptable conduct.”
Gates and Mullen said the general would have been allowed to express his views within the chain of command and should not have spoken out publicly and that the Army is addressing the issue.
“As a three-star leader in command, by virtue of that position alone, he has great influence,” Mullen said, adding that when the secretary announced the Pentagon’s review, the Army issued written guidelines about it. “If there’s policy direction that someone in uniform disagrees with … the answer is not advocacy, it is in fact to vote with your feet.”
source
How,exactly, can you vote with your feet in the military when soldiers are signed to four to six year contracts?Quote:
“As a three-star leader in command, by virtue of that position alone, he has great influence,” Mullen said, adding that when the secretary announced the Pentagon’s review, the Army issued written guidelines about it. “If there’s policy direction that someone in uniform disagrees with … the answer is not advocacy, it is in fact to vote with your feet.”
In the Washington Post and NY Times, the comment by Admiral Mullen reads . . . if officers feel so strongly that they cannot abide by policy changes, "The answer is not advocacy. It is in fact to vote with your feet."
The Officer in question is Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, the head of Army forces in the U.S. Pacific Command.
Again, overlooking the fact that until you achieve a fairly high rank, you are bound by your contract with the military.
The disconnect that shows between leadership and those who are under them is on one hand mind boggling, but at the same time, having been a part of the MBA and PC lead Army, doesn't surprise me in the least.
Then maybe those who lead must at one time have been led.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_545763.html
So, these guys weren't gay enough to compete?
Isn't that discrimination?
I was on a few teams where the girls were better than I was and had better luck scoring-if you know what I mean.;)
--------------------
Sports is such a competitive activity it doesn't surprise me that no one in the Major Leagues would admit to being gay, then you get tossed out of a game/competition because you aren't gay enough.:p
I think us straight folks should get together and picket the next time the "Gay World Series" is played.;):confused::)
No Richard, it isn't discrimination. We all know that only heterosexuals are guilty of that. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
They have a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Unless the full fledged gays want to be separate but equal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
Yes, they do but wouldn't you need some switch hitters in the dugout?
:confused:
-------------------------------
http://www.aolnews.com/weird-news/ar...y-dog/19455945
Why do people put that extra step into thinking?:eek: