Federal court rules against military gays policy

**The 9th Circus - at it again

Federal court rules against military gays policy**

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.

more…

I will agree that the days of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy are numbered, but I’m not convinced this case is likely to do the trick. In general, members of the military have more limited protections than civilians, and the military is free to follow its own policy on a lot of things, especially a policy which if I recall was endorsed by Congress.

This would easily have been dismissed a few years ago, but the Lawrence case does add an interesting wrinkle.

Regardless, I think the current policy will be scrapped by the next administration.

The single biggest reason I oppose allowing gays to serve openly in the military is because I really don’t want to sit through more sensitivity training…and they’ll hit us up with a bunch of it.

I’ve served with people I either later found out were gay…or knew then that they were gay. I disagree with the lifestyle but it doesn’t make them worse Soldiers. As long as there’s not a bunch of “in your face” gays then I really have no problem with allowing them to serve openly.

As Bill Hicks said: "Gays in the military . . . here’s how I feel about it, alright? Anyone . . . DUMB enough . . . to want to be in the military, should be allowed in.

Gmags, the U.S. military is a proud profession, and they deserve better than snide insults like that. They are protecting your butt, in case you didn’t know it. They don’t insult you, you shouldn’t insult them. Thank them, instead…Roanoker

The 9th circus hoodlums in robes should be impeached , stripped of their positions and locked up for 20 years for being purveyours of travesties to justice for so long and so much.

Impeach all immoral judges and justices!!!

All Catholics should demand the impeachment of such agents of immorality.

Homophiles, pedophiles and all sexual deviants belong in jail, not in the military or anywhere else.

They aren’t protecting me, but rather the government’s agenda and corporate interests. They proclaim “counter-terrorism” while they themselves are participating in activities similar to the real terrorist organizations.

And that agenda, and those interests, just so happen to be supporting your freedom as well as a higher standard of living than what you would have otherwise.

Gmags, you might consider getting to know, as friends, some people in the military. You will discover that they aren’t so different from you.

As for the court ruling… gays are already in the military. They have been since its beginning. All the court ruling will do is to allow them to serve without fear of persecution.

The court ruling will allow the homophile agenda to spread in the military.

That court ruling must not be followed.

How are corporate interests supporting my freedom? I’m not too keen of war profiteering, if that is how our high standard of living is maintained. How is the government, through its limitation of personal freedom via wiretapping and the Patriot Act, supporting freedom?

Nor am I, but is “war profiteering” a substantial part of the US economy? What part of your income and wealth are you willing to return out of principle?

Gmags, I am not too keen about the Patriot Act or warrantless wiretapping, and I won’t try to defend them here (we have plenty of CAFers who would do so willingly). But don’t you think our freedoms extend beyond the ability to be wiretapped or the provisions of the Patriot Act? I am just asking for a little perspective.

Nor am I, but is “war profiteering” a substantial part of the US economy?

At times such as now, you betcha.

What part of your income and wealth are you willing to return out of principle?

I think I know what you are asking, but please clarify.

Gmags, I am not too keen about the Patriot Act or warrantless wiretapping, and I won’t try to defend them here (we have plenty of CAFers who would do so willingly). But don’t you think our freedoms extend beyond the ability to be wiretapped or the provisions of the Patriot Act? I am just asking for a little perspective.

Such as the freedom to purchase relatively cheap fuel for _____ years.

:thumbsup:

GMAG,

As one of those “dumb enough” to devote, to date, 18 years of my life to serving in the military, I hereby REPLEDGE to defend your right to say stupid things.

You type in english because of a Soldier, enjoy.

QFT. :thumbsup:

Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. Thank You.

THANK YOU!!!

And God bless you.

Daddums :slight_smile:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.