Court orders immediate halt to gay military ban

AP ^ | 07-06-2011 | Staff

[Red Badger]

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A federal appeals court has barred further enforcement of the U.S. military's ban on openly gay service members.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said Wednesday the "don't ask, don't tell" policy must be immediately lifted now that the Obama administration says it's unconstitutional to treat gay Americans differently under the law.

[dirtymac]

Well, they have destroyed the education system in this country, the major media and it’s sham reporting, much of the court/justice system, and now the military is going the same way.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

According to the UCMJ, which hasn't been changed, it is illegal to engage in homosexual acts: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Uniform Code of Military Justice [excerpted]: Article 125. “(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient 
to complete the offense. (b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall by punished as a court-martial may direct.”

By that rule, a soldier can be court-martialed for having oral sex with their opposite sex spouse.

[tumblindice]

San Francisco supports homosexuals. Who saw that coming?

These guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBXu-iY7cw

[Bringbackthedraft]

the 9th Sicko Court does it again?

[Red Badger]

Yes...
That was the 1950’S era......

[xzins]

All of which I agree with. However, both Congress and Commander in Chief have disagreed with that, and the president on constitutional grounds. Those are the 2 constitutional bodies charged with directing the military. How could the court find otherwise?

I disagree with all three.

[newzjunkey]

The policy is already on the way out in an orderly fashion by a legislative act passed by congress and signed by Obama.

I have to ask WHY was this even before the 9th circus? Who the hell are they to accelerate the timeline?

[xzins]

It’s a good question. The only thing I can think of is that the word “unconstitutional” came out of the Commander in Chief’s mouth.

[Red Badger]

The Congress has sole constitutional authority to make rules for the military, not the President/CIC or the courts.............

[xzins]

You are correct about the Congress having authority to regulate the military. In this instance, they, too, have sided with changing DADT. That gave the courts, in my non-lawyer opinion, the open door to walk through and say to the world that it should be done sooner rather than later. They were supported in that by the CINC’s comment that DADT is unconstitutional. That is my point. The court had an open door and they walked through it. Given the background, I can see how they’d logic their way to such a conclusion.

[Red Badger]

Given that this was the 9th Circus, They went in the ‘back door’....................

[jpsb]

Yes, as I've mentioned before this will certainly hurt retention and recruitment perhaps fatally. But the Marxists know what they are doing and they are slowly destroying all of the institutions capable of resisting them.

[Buffalo Bob]

The Sodomites have gotten their way, and they will destroy my beloved US Armed Forces.

From this point onward - I will treat them as the Enemy, for they have earned that title...

• I will stop treating homosexuals with fairness or decency in any fashion.
• Whenever possible, I will hinder cooperation with homosexuals in corporate or in private life.
• I will expose their wickedness and evil at every opportunity.
• I will ensure my children and their friends are taught that homosexuality is evil, and that homosexuals are to be shamed, shunned and scorned.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

That was the 1950’S era......

So you'll agree then that the regulation, which still appears in the UCMJ, is not enforced.

[Red Badger]

It would be difficult to enforce without witnesses or video.............

[lentulusgracchus]

How the h... can it be 'unconstitutional' to treat those that exhibit 'homosexual behaviour' different than those that exhibit hetrosexual behavior when in the military???

One, this is the Ninth Circus popping off, the most-reversed appeals bench in the galaxy.

Two, this is all about queer money in politics. Adam Nagourney of the New York Times let the cat out of the bag last week on Charlie Rose when he commented that gay money "has been huge in politics since 1992" -- there's a large part of your answer.

The sodomites have been buying support in both political parties. So far, it has bought them a lot.

Movement gays would like to expand on that political success, and eradicate all resistance to homosexuality from American politics, morals, and culture.

[lentulusgracchus]

How many homosexual men really want to go sign up for the Marines and go off to Paris island? A lot of them would rather work in restaurants around Atlanta.

Some of them are hypermasculine and like all the adrenalin and testosterone. To them, Parris Island would be like Fire Island with more toys.

[sickoflibs]

RE :"Movement gays would like to expand on that political success, and eradicate all resistance to homosexuality from American politics, morals, and culture."

I can live with liberal state legislatures passing gay marriage laws if that's when their liberal voters want, but Federal judges forcing this crap on the entire country(federal government) with made up rights pisses me off.