IcyPatriot

Case is not over but it struck me reading it ... like why did this take so long?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...tutional-.html

Wolfpack

Am I the only one that finds it a little offputting that a judge (who I assume has no military experience but if I'm mistaken please feel free to correct me and I'll gladly admit I was wrong) can issue a ruling that significantly impacts the way the military is run? I mean, it's offputting in a separation-of-powers way of speaking.

IMHO, I don't think this ruling will be implemented. Oh don't get me wrong... Don't ask, don't tell was already on its way out the door, but it will be done along the timetables of the civilian leadership, not some dumb broad from her ivory towers.

But I'm sure this forum's liberal will do their usual complaining against judicial activism, right ladies? Right...? Hello.........?

wistahpatsfan

No. You're not the only one who feels this way. There are many Americans who think that the military should be allowed to operate independently of the civilian sector in America, but don't count me as a member of that club. The military, in America at least, answers to the People. Not every single sector of our society needs to be somehow integrated and in sync with the military.

The military is, by its nature, a dysfunctional and radical institution which must, according to the Constitution, answer only to the People. That way, we aren't held hostage by them and their radical views on the world. It is why we have laws against their operation within our borders. The Founders had serious reservations about giving the military too much freedom and saw it as a tool for the defense of the US when it was needed.

Your reference to "dumb broad in her ivory tower" is interesting.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

fleabassist1

Doesnt the judge know that open gay men can't fight the same as straight or closet gays?

I hear its something to do with a restroom somewhere...

__________________
GO PATRIOTS!!!!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

wistahpatsfan

Yeah, that's another thing...
Whoever comes out (pun intended) and says that gays people aren't worthy of fighting for their country should immediately be drafted to take the place of one gay soldier. If that person is a politician, they must relieve a gay officer of his duties. Most of these jackasses need some real-world experience before they start spewing about who should and shouldn't be allowed to fight for their country.

Maybe there should be a gay combat unit (with women, too) that could go toe-to-toe with some radical Muslim terrorists, kick their arses, and embarrass the hell out of the homophobes in both the Middle East and America.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa

Nah, not interesting or even surprising. He's just upset because the number of women desperate enough to make him bacon and eggs without peeing in them first is dwindling down to non-existant.

Harry Boy

Who gives a *****, the troops themselves will handle the awkward situations, the troops themselves will probably handle the whole thing.

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

Wolfpack

WPF, I am disappointed in you. You promised me you would work on your reading comprehension, but it is clear you have made no progress whatsoever on that front. You're still stuck with the understanding of the average 3rd grader.

I love our system where civilians control the military. Citizens (including any who served and any who didn't) elect the civilian authority that controls our military. It's a brilliant system which was pretty radical at the time. But that's not what we're talking about here.

It's patently absurd to use Constitutional grounds to reject this policy. Here's a newsflash for you: You do not have the Constitutional right to serve in the military. Last time I checked, blind people have Constitutional rights, don't they? Deaf people have Constitutional rights, don't they? People with cancer have Constitutional rights, don't they?

Well guess what? None of those people are allowed to enlist in the military. Why didn't the judge extend the Constitution to those groups as well?

Wolfpack

If only you had the brain of the average 10 year old you would see how hypocritical you have been from one post to the next..!!

First you talk about how wonderful it is that civilians control the military, and you also self righteously explain how you support that idea. Then, in your very next post you say that you think that anyone who supports a specific policy (which you happen to disagree with) should immediately be drafted and sent to the Russian front..!! I guess you think civilians should control the military, but only if they agree with everything you say, huh?

Ah, WPF, what a delightful buffoon you are!!

Wolfpack

"Sweetheart?"
"Yes, dear?"
"Did you pee all over the bathtub again?"
"Yes, I did. But don't worry. It's beautiful and ethereal and perfectly sanitary. So get in there."
"Yes, dear."