|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 02:42 PM Original message |
Another way to think about ending DADT. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud Liberal Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 02:49 PM Response to Original message |
1. That's a refreshingly rational way at looking at the situation IMHO |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 02:52 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. The I stands for "intersexed," meaning people with |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud Liberal Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 02:59 PM Response to Reply #2 |
5. I see. Thanks! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:03 PM Response to Reply #5 |
8. No problem. Glad to help with the information. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 02:53 PM Response to Original message |
3. If it is not appealed, it can't be thrown out by a higher court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 02:57 PM Response to Reply #3 |
4. I'm not entirely sure that is true. There's considerable discussion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud Liberal Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:00 PM Response to Reply #4 |
6. Maybe a group of homophobic service members |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:02 PM Response to Reply #6 |
7. That could happen, yes, and they might end up with standing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:25 PM Response to Reply #6 |
18. No, LCRs or some others in another district could, and it could be found |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Renew Deal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:31 PM Response to Reply #6 |
25. They found some to challenge Obama's birth certificate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:05 PM Response to Reply #4 |
9. Can you point me to someone suggesting otherwise? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:15 PM Response to Reply #9 |
13. You could start at this link: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:21 PM Response to Reply #13 |
16. I've read that already, actually. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:28 PM Response to Reply #16 |
21. I don't know enough to answer that question. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
POAS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:10 PM Response to Reply #3 |
11. Not true |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:17 PM Response to Reply #11 |
14. It's true that this district court ruling is not binding as precedent anywhere else. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
POAS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:27 PM Original message |
There are several possibilities but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:43 PM Response to Original message |
28. So they would be challenging the injunction? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
POAS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:30 PM Response to Reply #28 |
38. It wouldn't necessarily be an appeal but rather |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:34 PM Response to Reply #38 |
39. Thanks for looking. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
POAS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #39 |
44. My point is not about |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
POAS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 12:54 PM Response to Reply #39 |
54. Found another case that throws new light |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 11:56 AM Response to Reply #38 |
53. But anyone can sue even if the statute is repealed by Congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
POAS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 12:57 PM Response to Reply #53 |
55. See post #54 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:27 PM Response to Reply #14 |
20. Why is this worldwide injunction legitimate? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unvanguard (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:29 PM Response to Reply #20 |
22. It would be stayed in ten seconds by a higher court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:23 PM Response to Reply #3 |
17. It can't, but every other district still has it as an open question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
POAS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:07 PM Response to Original message |
10. Having a district court ruling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:13 PM Response to Original message |
12. Waiting for an appeal from Congress is likely to take years. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:18 PM Response to Reply #12 |
15. Actually, an EO from the President would be vulnerable to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:25 PM Response to Reply #15 |
19. I don't like silent disagreements with no explanations on a discussion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:33 PM Response to Reply #19 |
26. Well, I think the rejection of that repeal was more a strategy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:03 PM Response to Reply #26 |
37. Well, I hope you are right. But I have watched Republicans |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Renew Deal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:30 PM Response to Original message |
23. My problem with the executive order method is what you broght up. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
readmoreoften (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:30 PM Response to Original message |
24. Meanwhile, the LGBTQI people in that position have spoken for themselves and they don't need you to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:47 PM Response to Reply #24 |
30. I'm not fantasizing, and there are many people serving today |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 06:30 PM Response to Reply #24 |
60. Anyone, straight or LGBTQI can rely too much on their feelings |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cronus Protagonist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:34 PM Response to Original message |
27. Oh, so THAT'S why we should shut up and let them FUCK US one more time? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:50 PM Response to Reply #27 |
32. Well, thanks for replying to my post. I think, though, that you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluenorthwest (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 10:53 AM Response to Reply #32 |
50. The words of Lt Dan Choi: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 06:28 PM Response to Reply #27 |
58. Out on the streets jobless and disgraced? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Philosopher (621 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:46 PM Response to Original message |
29. If it began as an act of Congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JuniperLea (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:48 PM Response to Reply #29 |
31. Once it's gone... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:55 PM Response to Reply #31 |
34. I agree with you on that. The conditions have changed. The tide, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JuniperLea (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:46 PM Response to Reply #34 |
42. I do too... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:52 PM Response to Reply #29 |
33. Personally, I think the time is past when DADT could be enacted again. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 03:58 PM Response to Original message |
35. To the folks that want a 'judge' to rule instead of Congress to vote... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:01 PM Response to Reply #35 |
36. Yup. I realize that patience has run out on this issue. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 06:34 PM Response to Reply #35 |
61. Yes and if DADT were found unconstitutional in the SCOTUS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
crazyjoe (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:37 PM Response to Original message |
40. If obama declared he would never end DADT and gay people should stay in the closet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
VMI Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:44 PM Response to Reply #40 |
41. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 06:39 PM Response to Reply #40 |
45. But, he has never said any such thing. And he won't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FreeState (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 02:09 PM Response to Reply #45 |
57. But I've never heard him say Transgendered Americans deserve to to serve |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 06:29 PM Response to Reply #40 |
59. This is not true |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ignis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Oct-15-10 04:59 PM Response to Original message |
43. Caution does not excuse political cowardice. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 08:44 AM Response to Original message |
46. K&R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 08:55 AM Response to Original message |
47. First of all, the legislative route would be the best way to go, I agree with you, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 09:10 AM Response to Reply #47 |
48. Right on. At some point you have to say not on my watch and stop doing wrong even when you can't set |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluenorthwest (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 09:45 AM Response to Original message |
49. Lots of imagination being used when all you have to do is ask |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rusty fender (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 11:16 AM Response to Original message |
51. Legislatively reversed yes, but the House has voted already to reverse |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 11:51 AM Response to Original message |
52. Your OP is based on an incorrect premise |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FreeState (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-16-10 01:43 PM Response to Original message |
56. Take the T and I out of GLBTQI for this - repealing DADT does nothing for transgendered |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Tue Jun 25th 2024, 09:42 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC