Posted on 09/04/2010 9:44:45 AM PDT by Velveeta
President Obama signed an Executive Order promulgating the 2010 changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial on August 31, 2010. The covering document is on the White House website, but the text of the changes is still neither there nor on the Federal Register and DoD websites as of 10:45 a.m., Sept. 2, 2010. The amendments take effect on September 30, 2010.
There. Fixed.
I don’t know.
If the changes are moot, then why make the changes?
Satin Doll, although I don’t thoroughly understand this, nonetheless, I want to alert you to this thread over here.
The military is a bureaucracy like any other, and they make decisions on their own schedule and nobody else's. Have you read the changes? I have, they're linked to off a blog that deals with military legal matters. They're fairly innocuous and I don't see anything in them that might impact Lakin. Click on the link below and scroll to the entry titled "2010 MCM Amendments."
Ah ha!
I smell conspiracy! There are black helicopters circling over my house even as we speak!
AMERICA IS LOSTTTTTTTTTTTTTT....
Arggghghhhhh (sound of gunfire mixed with splattering noises)
If one reads your post #25 and compares it to my post #26 they will find that you are the reasoned and logical troll. Whereas I am the sarcastic smartass troll.
According to the National Institute of Military Justice linked with this thread, the text of the changes have not been posted. The changes to which you’re referring are a part of the covering document.
I understood that to mean that the covering document is like a summary - but nobody in the public yet knows the text of the changes.
But at least we are trolls together. We should get tee shirts made up.
The link I provided clearly identify them as the changes approved by Obama earlier in the week. I believe those are the changes under discussion, and I'm sure that will become clear in the very near future.
Ah ha!
I smell conspiracy! There are black helicopters circling over my house even as we speak!
AMERICA IS LOSTTTTTTTTTTTTTT....
Arggghghhhhh (sound of gunfire mixed with splattering noises)
There are no links from the White House website that describe what the changes are.
That’s odd!
I don’t know and have no inside knowledge. I do know this, however. Sodomy is prohibited by the UCMJ and homosexuals, unlike heterosexuals, have very few options for sexual activity except sodomy.
So, for homosexuals to serve in the military AND not violate the UCMJ, they must essentially remain celibate during their tour.
Since it’s unlikely they do that (one of the arguments against letting them serve in the first place), for Obama to lift DADT, he probably is trying to combine it with also changing the law that prohibits homosexual sex in the military.
IOW, the first issue that lifting DADT raises is, okay, now what is the military policy on homosexual sodomy? Will it be allowed even though sodomy is prohibited by the UCMJ for everyone else? Will the Administration look stupid, and tick off the gay lobby, if it tries to say homosexuals can serve openly in the military, but they still can’t commit sodomy because that’s prohibited by the UCMJ?
Of course, the White House has no clue of all the legal issues it will get tangled up with if it goes ahead with its pandering plan to lift DADT. Besides UCMJ issues, the President and his DOJ will quickly be involved in lawsuits to extend military benefits (housing, joint travel orders, adoption assistance, medical insurance, commissary privileges, etc.) to homosexual partners — the list goes on.
And each and every issue will be one upon which, I can guarandamntee, our President will “act stupidly.” He’ll come out and say, “Yes, male homosexual partners should be able to join the Officers’ Wives Club” or whatever and it will be Cambridge/Ground Zero Mosque all over again.
P.S. I’m pretty sure one constituency Obama is trying very hard to reenergize before the mid-terms is homosexuals.
Yes. This has nothing to do with Lakin.
There is a process for amending the UCMJ and then the President signs off on them.
I posted that to the extent the White House seems to be managing the content of the amendments a little more closely than usual, the amendments may be about changing the UCMJ to make it more sodomy-friendly for homosexuals. ‘Cuz the President really needs to get going on that DADT if he’s going to get homosexuals out to vote in the midterms.
That said, many people were involved in the amendment process and one could have spilled the beans on any politically sensitive changes by now.
Unless the White House is not playing nice.
OK, tell me what part of the MCM changes target Lakin and make is defense even more impossible than it currently is. Can you do that for us?
Grasping at tiny straws would also be an appropriate title.
Thanks, hennie pennie. I appreciate your thoughtfulness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.