Fed. Judge Just Issued Worldwide Permanent Injunction Against Don't Ask/Don't Tell (page 3)

beksbks

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2010/10/us-district-court-judge-virginia.html

What a load of right wing horse manure.

I never really understood why "don't ask - don't tell" was a problem for gay soldiers. Why would you want to be asked and why would you want to tell about your sexual orientation? Why is it your employer the Army's business? And what benefit do you get from making it so?

Gay people, help me out here. I'm not trying to be a jerk. I just don't understand. Is there something more to the law that I'm missing?

Justitia Themis

I'm not gay, so I can't speak for their emotions. However, in some cases, people have been "outed" as being gay by fellow soldiers or others who have a grudge against them. One of the justifications of banning gays is that they might be more at risk for blackmail because of being homosexual. The obvious counter-argument to that is...don't criminalize it and it will not be an issue. Here is a case that was decided last month in my area.

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/09/major_margaret_witt_case_may_b.php

Someday, we're all going to look back at this whole hunting-and-trapping-the-gays-out-of-the-military thing and just laugh. Or cry. Or both. But until that hypothetical enlightened age, there's Major Margaret Witt, a decorated 19-year veteran of the Air Force whose lawsuit may help bring an end to "Don't ask, don't tell."

In 2004, the husband of a woman Witt was dating sent a note to the Air Force outing her as a lesbian. She would eventually be discharged three years later.

Witt sued, and now she finds herself in U.S. District Court in Tacoma with a chance to argue for her reinstatement. An argument that will center on whether or not her status as a lesbian "hurt morale and unit cohesion."

A flight nurse at McChord, Witt was literally the Air Force's poster child, as her face was used on the Nurse Corp's promotional fliers. And a year before getting the boot, Witt received her second medal for saving the life of a Defense Department employee on a flight from Bahrain.

Should Witt's trial, expected to take seven days, end in her favor, it could give a big push to DADT opponents in Congress looking to whack the law in the next defense bill. An effort already helped along by last week's decision in a California federal court that the policy is unconstitutional.

The government is expected to argue that, along with her orientation, Witt also should have been fired because she committed adultery. A precedent that, if enforced, would shrink our armed services to approximately the size of Hungary's. And even though it shouldn't matter, here's another uncomfortable detail the feds probably won't acknowledge: it's now six years later and Witt is still with the same woman.

UPDATE: In making his decision, U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton said that Witt being a lesbian didn't hurt her unit's morale or cohesion.

"I appreciate the Court's belief in the professionalism of the military," Witt said after today's decision. "Many people forget that the U.S. military is the most diverse workforce in the world--we are extremely versed in adaptation. Thousands of men and women who are gay and lesbian honorably serve this country in our military. Wounded personnel never asked me about my sexual orientation. They were just glad to see me. I can't wait to rejoin my unit."

Mad Sweeney

I was under the impression that "don't ask - don't tell" made it easier for gay people to serve because the military wasn't allowed to ask and the soldier wasn't compelled to tell.

Is the name of the law a complete misnomer?

leavingwt

Mad Sweeney: Under the DADT policy, if it becomes known that the service member is gay, they are fired. This (basically) means the service member must lead a secret, double life, so that others won't find out.

JeffT

I'm not gay, so I can't speak for their emotions.

Have you ever been in the military? If not, you don't know what it's like to get shot at either.

For the record, I think there should be a means for people to serve their country, but I don't think a directive from a judge is the way to go about it.

PS, how does a US judge is a "worldwide injunction?'

james_woods

Mad Sweeney: Under the DADT policy, if it becomes known that the service member is gay, they are fired. This (basically) means the service member must lead a secret, double life, so that others won't find out.

That is true. Always has been true, if you think about it. However: I question the wisdom of having openly gay (acting out openly gay, I mean) people in the military. What may be legal and constitutional on the streets of San Francisco might be impossible to manage in the military. I also question the constitutionality and wisdom of having civilian court judges attempt to rule on what is essentially military conduct rules - what if she decides next that adultery is OK between officers, the enlisted, and/or each others wives or husbands? After all, that is legal for civilians...

beksbks

That is true. Always has been true, if you think about it. However:

I question the wisdom of having openly gay (acting out openly gay, I mean) people in the military. What may be legal and constitutional on the streets of San Francisco might be impossible to manage in the military.

Wow

james_woods

Wow

And here is another WOW for you, Beks - a LOT of our military leaders also question this.

Justitia Themis

PS, how does a US judge is a "worldwide injunction?'

She can issue an injunction that covers all U.S. military properties worldwide. The US has bases in about 150 countries worldwide. On a side note...NO country has a base inside the US. :)

Fed. Judge Just Issued Worldwide Permanent Injunction Against Don't Ask/Don't Tell

Share this