House Votes to Overturn Military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy

[Chieppa1]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/15/house-schedules-vote-militarys-dont-ask-dont-tell-policy/

WASHINGTON -- The House on Wednesday voted to overturn the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, setting up another showdown in the Senate.

The vote was 250-175

Instituted in 1993 by President Clinton, the rule banned gays from openly serving in the armed forces.

Many observers say that this is the last chance for Democrats to try to repeal the measure, as the House flips to Republican control in January.

Republican critics contend that changing the policy during a time of war is inappropriate.

The issue now heads to the Senate, where senators could soon vote on an identical bill.

The sponsors of the legislation, Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., insist that they have the 60 votes necessary to overcome a procedural challenge and pass the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., says that the legislation could be up for consideration during the waning days of the current lame duck session.

More than 13,500 service members have been dismissed under the 1993 law.

The Obama administration supports the repeal, but is appealing the ruling of a California federal judge that the ban on gays serving openly in the military is unconstitutional. The administration says Congress should overturn the policy. But gay rights groups say they will shift their focus back to the courts if Congress fails to act.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/15/house-schedules-vote-militarys-dont-ask-dont-tell-policy/#ixzz18DuOdPEK

[nobody's_hero]

I wonder how Rand Paul will vote on this. I'm glad the House overturned it; this is probably the only thing the Democrats have done right since Obama was elected.

[dannno]

^RP will vote to overturn.

[Chieppa1]

^RP will vote to overturn.

And, RP did vote to overturn.

[Pericles]

What an idiot that reporter is. DADT is what allowed gays to serve in the military without having to declare they were not gay (as before the policy was put in place). If it becomes an issue, out they go, but the witch hunt is what the DADT was designed to stop.

[oyarde]

Hopefully , when this is all said and done with , there will be no witch hunts .

[QueenB4Liberty]

What an idiot that reporter is. DADT is what allowed gays to serve in the military without having to declare they were not gay (as before the policy was put in place). If it becomes an issue, out they go, but the witch hunt is what the DADT was designed to stop.

I'm pretty sure under DADT you could accuse someone of being gay and they'd be kicked out, whether or not they were actually gay, it didn't matter. I've heard there was some kind of "trial" but still. DADT is bad policy and should be overturned. Or at least the military should be able to decide who serves. But then again, the government shouldn't be able to discriminate and the army is the government.

[Pericles]

As I was in the Army at the time and got the mother of all lectures on it, I felt qualified to comment.

[oyarde]

I'm pretty sure under DADT you could accuse someone of being gay and they'd be kicked out, whether or not they were actually gay, it didn't matter. I've heard there was some kind of "trial" but still. DADT is bad policy and should be overturned. Or at least the military should be able to decide who serves. But then again, the government shouldn't be able to discriminate and the army is the government.

Army is the most descriminatory employer I could think of , though all those are physical , mental , security type things .

[Brett85]

"Republican critics contend that changing the policy during a time of war is inappropriate."

Well we're always at war, so basically they're saying that the policy can never be changed.

[oyarde]

"Republican critics contend that changing the policy during a time of war is inappropriate."

Well we're always at war, so basically they're saying that the policy can never be changed.

Actually , they are correct . Where the problem lies is with Marines and Army Combat Arms . They cannot afford that problem with us having as many troops as we have involved in Afghanastan. From a practical point , they are correct .

[oyarde]

If we were not in Afghanistan , with unemployment currently where it is , they could probably afford to roll the dice on it if they wanted to ....

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm pretty sure under DADT you could accuse someone of being gay and they'd be kicked out, whether or not they were actually gay, it didn't matter. I've heard there was some kind of "trial" but still. DADT is bad policy and should be overturned. Or at least the military should be able to decide who serves. But then again, the government shouldn't be able to discriminate and the army is the government.

I was in the Marine Corps from Jan 1993 to Nov 1996, and my experience was that your supposition is absolutely not true. DADT put an abrupt end to all that, and in fact protected service members from 3rd party accusations altogether, as nobody was allowed to ask to confirm a suspicion or an accusation. The only way you could run afoul of the sexual orientation policy was to publicly 'out' yourself and pretty much flaunt it amongst your peers and superiors. I'm not saying that I know for a fact my experience was typical, and since I'm not gay I recognize that this was not an issue I particularly looked for, but what you say is nothing that I would recognize from my time in the service.

[oyarde]

I'm pretty sure under DADT you could accuse someone of being gay and they'd be kicked out, whether or not they were actually gay, it didn't matter. I've heard there was some kind of "trial" but still. DADT is bad policy and should be overturned. Or at least the military should be able to decide who serves. But then again, the government shouldn't be able to discriminate and the army is the government.

I can see myself now when I was a twenty year old nco : ) , I would have been having a bad day ... I would have said " Hey private so and so , run down to the LT and tell him I am gay " . : )

[QueenB4Liberty]

I was in the Marine Corps from Jan 1993 to Nov 1996, and my experience was that your supposition is absolutely not true. DADT put an abrupt end to all that, and in fact protected service members from 3rd party accusations altogether, as nobody was allowed to ask to confirm a suspicion or an accusation. The only way you could run afoul of the sexual orientation policy was to publicly 'out' yourself and pretty much flaunt it amongst your peers and superiors. I'm not saying that I know for a fact my experience was typical, and since I'm not gay I recognize that this was not an issue I particularly looked for, but what you say is nothing that I would recognize from my time in the service.


Ok Gunny, I believe you. I don't know anything except what I've been told so I guess a lot of people are very uninformed on the issue.

[oyarde]

Ok Gunny, I believe you. I don't know anything except what I've been told so I guess a lot of people are very uninformed on the issue.

I am not real familiar with it as well , read the policy once a long time ago . I got out in 91 , before dadt .Hell , we should all probably read what they are currently using .