"Don't ask, don't tell" Air Force suit reinstated

[FreeState]

Source: Seattle Times

A federal appeals court has reinstated a lawsuit filed by a decorated Air Force major who was discharged because she is gay.

A three-member panel of the 9th Circuit Court ordered a Seattle trial judge to review the lawsuit filed by Maj. Margaret Witt using a higher standard of scrutiny than simply the fact that she was a lesbian in violation of the military doctrine known as "don't ask, don't tell." U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton dismissed Witt's lawsuit in July 2006, finding that the doctrine represented a "rational response to a legitimate governmental concern" — the discipline and combat-readiness of U.S. troops. The military contends that discipline would be undermined by the existence of openly gay soldiers, sailors or airmen.

However, a three-member panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has sent the case back to Leighton with orders to do what no other court that has considered this issue has done so far — require the government to show that discharging gays from the military furthers a "significant government interest," a higher burden of proof.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy prohibits the military from inquiring about a service member's sexual orientation, but requires the discharge of anyone who acknowledges being gay or who engages in homosexual activity.

Read more: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004429623_webgayruling21m.html

---

Good this failed "policy" needs to be denounced and eradicated once and for all. Let all that are willing law abiding citizens serve.

[Eric J in MN]

1. They let people serve who haven't been "law abiding citizens."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/22/america/22waiver.php

U.S. Army and Marine Corps grant more felony waivers
By Lizette Alvarez
Published: April 22, 2008

Strained by the demands of a long war, the U.S. Army and Marine Corps recruited significantly more felons into their ranks in 2007 than in 2006, including people convicted of armed robbery, arson and burglary, according to data released Monday by a House committee.

The number of waivers issued to active-duty army recruits with felony convictions jumped to 511 in 2007, from 249 in 2006. Marine recruits with felony convictions rose to 350 from 208.

[FreeState]

2. Oh I know that - but maybe if they let GLBT persons serve openly they would not have to

give waivers for army recruits with felony convictions.

Kind of sickening that convicted felons can serve but not GLBT persons.

[Ian David]

3. I would like to offer an alternative to repealing DADT- Equal Treatment

Discharge anyone from the military who reveals their sexual orientation to be either gay OR straight.

No more photos of your wives or girlfriends... nothing that would "out" you as gay OR straight.

Fair and equal.

[Athelwulf]

5. I like that! n/t

[wmbrew0206]

14. Won't work

You have to shown a marriage license and give name and SSN info for a military spouse to be enrolled in DEERs (the military health care system).

Also, the military is also a social organization. The social angle helps develop the comradeship need in an organization where your life depends on the guy next to you.

[Occulus]

16. So... we can't do that, because then straight people would get the same treatment WE do?

"We" being people like myself. I clearly recall one gay soldier being discharged who was then told he had to repay the education he got while enlisted.

So straight spouses lose benefits for proclaiming they're straight. I have no problem with this. The state of Michigan recently told its public universities the same thing. Oh- except that we can't even GET married in Michigan... the state was telling that to universities who enacted the benefits on their own, voluntarily.

Equal justice under the law: say you're either gay or straight and you lose you benefits. That, or repeal DADT. It's just that simple.

[wmbrew0206]

17. I'm not adovacting the DADT policy

I'm responding to the poster above who wants to eliminate anyone in the military from stating their orientation.

This would be impossible because of the requirements for health care and the social part of the military.

[Ian David]

19. I still think we should try MY way for maybe a month or two, just so people know how it feels. n/t

[Ian David]

18. Then it would seem DADT runs contrary to that goal. n/t

[wmbrew0206]

20. In a way, it does

If there is a military member that continuously shows up to social functions without a date, rumors get started. Having rumors floating around about a member of your unit hurts it.

Rumors undermines the morale of the unit and hurt effectiveness.

[Athelwulf]

4. Letting gays serve actually has a POSITIVE effect.

LONDON, May 20 — The officer, a squadron leader in the Royal Air Force, felt he had no choice. So he stood up in front of his squad of 30 to 40 people.

“I said, ‘Right, I’ve got something to tell you,’ ” he said. “ ‘I believe that for us to be able to work closely together and have faith in each other, we have to be honest and open and frank. And it has to be a two-way process, and it starts with me baring my soul. You may have heard some rumors, and yes, I have a long-term partner who is a he, not a she.’ ”

Far from causing problems, he said, he found that coming out to his troops actually increased the unit’s strength and cohesion. He had felt uneasy keeping the secret “that their boss was a poof,” as he put it, from people he worked with so closely.

Since the British military began allowing homosexuals to serve in the armed forces in 2000, none of its fears — about harassment, discord, blackmail, bullying or an erosion of unit cohesion or military effectiveness — have come to pass, according to the Ministry of Defense, current and former members of the services and academics specializing in the military. The biggest news about the policy, they say, is that there is no news. It has for the most part become a nonissue.

Gay Britons Serve in Military With Little Fuss, as Predicted Discord Does Not Occur -- The New York Times, May 21, 2007.

About the claim that "discipline would be undermined by the existence of openly gay soldiers, sailors or airmen", doesn't the military run ads that say, "We'll discipline you, make you a better person, blah dee blah"? If any given soldier is not disciplined, isn't it the military's job to discipline them?

It appears the reality is not that gays would undermine the military's discipline. The reality, it seems, is that the military, for some reason, doesn't want to discipline gay soldiers.

[Zhade]

6. Excellent. Let's not forget that this travesty was part of Bill Clinton's "liberal" policies...

...along with the reprehensible DOMA.

[ohio2007]

7. President plans to kill off every single homosexual

Jammeh also ordered any hotel or motel housing homosexuals to close down, adding that owners of such facilities would also be in trouble.

He said the Gambia was a country of believers, indicating that no sinful and immoral act as homosexual would be tolerated in the country.



He warned all homosexuals in the country to leave, noting that a legislation “stricter than those in Iran ” concerning the vice would be introduced soon.

President Jammeh said he was bent on making the Gambia one of the best countries to live in, adding that his government had spent over US$ 100 million towards the development of the country since 1994.

He said, however, that almost 98 per cent of the amount had gone to foreigners. Panapress .





http://en.afrik.com/article13630.html

pwned !

[DeSwiss]

8. Federal court rules against military gays policy

Source: (AP)

Federal court rules against military gays policy

By GENE JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
7 minutes ago

SEATTLE - The military cannot automatically discharge people because they're gay, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday in the case of a decorated flight nurse who sued the Air Force over her dismissal. The three judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not strike down the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But they reinstated Maj. Margaret Witt's lawsuit, saying the Air Force must prove that her dismissal furthered the military's goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.

The "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue, don't harass" policy prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but requires discharge of those who acknowledge being gay or engaging in homosexual activity.

Wednesday's ruling led opponents of the policy to declare its days numbered. It is also the first appeals court ruling in the country that evaluated the policy through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.

When gay service members have sued over their dismissals, courts historically have accepted the military's argument that having gays in the service is generally bad for morale and can lead to sexual tension. But the Supreme Court's opinion in the Texas case changed the legal landscape, the judges said, and requires more scrutiny over whether "don't ask, don't tell" is constitutional as applied in individual cases.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_re_us/military_gays

---

- Step-by-step the lunacy is being dismantled....
========================================================================
DeSwiss


http://atheisttoolbox.com/">The Atheist Toolbox

[Ian David]

9. I would like to offer an alternative to repealing DADT- Equal Treatment

Discharge anyone from the military who reveals their sexual orientation to be either gay OR straight.

No more photos of your wives or girlfriends... nothing that would "out" you as gay OR straight.

Fair and equal.

[Divine Discontent]

10. I agree... if convicts can serve - GLBT should be protected by their GOVT

and if they cannot swallow that in the military - then FINE - no pictures of any spouses.

[wmbrew0206]

15. Won't work, see my above post.

[dbackjon]

11. EXCELLENT!!

[TechBear_Seattle]

12. Federal court rules against military gays policy

Source: Associated Press

SEATTLE (AP) — The military cannot automatically discharge people because they're gay, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday in the case of a decorated flight nurse who sued the Air Force over her dismissal.

The three judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not strike down the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But they reinstated Maj. Margaret Witt's lawsuit, saying the Air Force must prove that her dismissal furthered the military's goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.

The "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue, don't harass" policy prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but requires discharge of those who acknowledge being gay or engaging in homosexual activity.

Wednesday's ruling led opponents of the policy to declare its days numbered. It is also the first appeals court ruling in the country that evaluated the policy through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.



Read more: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iusf0qzmyeUxdw-9g2DKh42LzkNwD90QIVSG1

[ccharles000]

13. This is good but...

I will not be happy till Don't ask Don't tell is gone.

[Honeycombe8]

21. Let me guess. The fed. judge is Republican. Yep...the wedge issue is starting to be used. nt

[FreeState]

22. DADT is not a wedge issue - the majority of voters are for repealing it

with most polls showing between 60% - 78% of the public wanting it repealed. The only ones making it a wedge issue are those giving power to the GOP to make it one.

[Honeycombe8]

23. The gay marriage issue, like in 2004, is still a wedge issue. There're already ads on it for GOP.

I question the timing of it all. Convenient that there are hallmark decisions in two consecutive Presidential election years.

The GOP needs someone or something to get their party members excited enough to show up at the polls. This will work for them, since the majority of Republicans are vehemently opposed to gay marriage.

[buckrogers1965]

24. Let gays serve openly.

Discharging gay people for being themselves is a stupid policy that gives the bad guys the ability to black mail our soldiers with the secret that they are gay. It is our own prejudice that gives the bad guys this handle on a segment of the population.

We want ethical, honest soldiers, but we force them to lie in order to serve. All this does is train everyone that lying is the policy that we should all lie in order to do whatever we want. How crazy is that?

Of course we need to train people how to deal with the new reality in non violent, non confrontational ways. And gays need to be trained on what being openly gay in the military means. I.E., just because you are openly gay doesn't mean you can hit on your fellow soldiers. People are bound to be a little bit enthusiastic about things for a while, but then they will just settle down and deal with it.

As far as their sexual tension argument goes, that might have made sense back 100 years ago when the Army was all male, but we have mixed male and female units in nearly every occupation. So isn't there already sexual tension?