Don't Ask; Don't Tell Repeal Blocked

[Fifthfiend]

My analogies are apt as fuck.

[bluestarultor]

Unless I missed something, the Obama administration's override said nothing about it not happening, just that it needed appellate review and should not be enforced until that happens.

I'm going to come right out and agree with them. As much as I hate DADT, it is NOT one person's decision. We have processes for these things for a reason. If any one person wielded that amount of power, without even being at the head of their own branch, we'd all be right fucked. We don't even give that kind of power to our heads of state, for that matter. Giving it to a single lowly judge makes about as much sense as changing the army's uniforms all to blaze orange.

[Kim]

Right, because this is the first time in the history of the US that the judicial branch has put an end to laws that oppress minorities.

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by NonCon

Right, because this is the first time in the history of the US that the judicial branch has put an end to laws that oppress minorities.

Please find me a case where it was done by only one person.

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

I'd argue changing the military law making homosexuality illegal needs to go down first or at the same time, myself. At least for a smoother transition.

The military law that makes this illegal is DADT. When the judge talks about getting rid of DADT, that judge is talking about the military law that prevents gays from serving.

We covered this already

here

in this thread

EDIT:

multiple times

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

Unless I missed something, the Obama administration's override said nothing about it not happening, just that it needed appellate review and should not be enforced until that happens.

I'm going to come right out and agree with them. As much as I hate DADT, it is NOT one person's decision. We have processes for these things for a reason. If any one person wielded that amount of power, without even being at the head of their own branch, we'd all be right fucked. We don't even give that kind of power to our heads of state, for that matter. Giving it to a single lowly judge makes about as much sense as changing the army's uniforms all to blaze orange.

Personally I think people's rights are more important, than a completely arbitrary standard of the number of judges at a completely arbitrary level of the judiciary that are required for the acknowledgment of people's rights to count, that you just invented, here, in this thread.

EDIT: which isn't even anything the Obama administration is saying, because they are actually arguing against any judicial ending to DADT.

[Kim]

What Fifth said.

Also, I love that no matter how many times it is pointed out that DADT doesn't do anything to protect gays the way people like Nik and Blues claim; that it just serves to oppress them and act as an excuse to kick them out of the military; they still feel this unexplainable need to straightsplain about how their perspective is just so much better and clearer than the gay community's and if only we could understand like they understand. It's laughable as fuck.

EDIT: If only I were a heterosexual. Then I'd really know what's in the best interest of homosexuals. looooooolz

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by NonCon

What Fifth said.

Also, I love that no matter how many times it is pointed out that DADT doesn't do anything to protect gays the way people like Nik and Blues claim; that it just serves to oppress them and act as an excuse to kick them out of the military; they still feel this unexplainable need to straightsplain about how their perspective is just so much better and clearer than the gay community's and if only we could understand like they understand. It's laughable as fuck.

EDIT: If only I were a heterosexual. Then I'd really know what's in the best interest of homosexuals. looooooolz

Non, I say this as respectfully as possible, but go fuck yourself. I never said DADT was anything but terrible. Check my post history. Putting words in my mouth indicating a viewpoint opposite of reality just so you can be dismissive is incredibly petty.

I really, really don't care if a person is gay or not, but for the love of Christ man, get off your high horse. I want to see DADT gone just as much as you do and I don't even have to be super-extra-special gay to feel that way. I just happen to have some respect for the legal system and see how unilateral decisions can work both ways. If it's that easy to change a part of the military system, it's just as easy to decide that not going around shooting gays in the streets in Unconstitutional.

There needs to be a process for this because there needs to be a process for everything. That's why we have the systems we do.

[Kim]

Right. You totally didn't argue in defense of DADT being for our own good in spite of it not doing what you said it did.

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by NonCon

Right. You totally didn't argue in defense of DADT being for our own good in spite of it not doing what you said it did.

Exactly correct, only without the sarcasm.

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

Non, I say this as respectfully as possible, but go fuck yourself. I never said DADT was anything but terrible. Check my post history. Putting words in my mouth indicating a viewpoint opposite of reality just so you can be dismissive is incredibly petty.

I really, really don't care if a person is gay or not, but for the love of Christ man, get off your high horse. I want to see DADT gone just as much as you do and I don't even have to be super-extra-special gay to feel that way. I just happen to have some respect for the legal system and see how unilateral decisions can work both ways. If it's that easy to change a part of the military system, it's just as easy to decide that not going around shooting gays in the streets in Unconstitutional.

There needs to be a process for this because there needs to be a process for everything. That's why we have the systems we do.

There is a process for it, it's the process which happened and which Obama and you oppose for no substantive reason.

That you're paying lip service to the idea that DADT is awful while insisting that it's not AS awful as Washington failing to adhere to the process that you yourself invented, out of your own imagination, here in this thread, is at least as bad as if not more awful than if you were trying to argue that DADT is actually just aces.

You are literally saying that gay people are better off not having their rights acknowledged until they meet a completely arbitrary standard after which their rights will for real really count, instead of just going ahead and acknowledging them now which would somehow mean they wouldn't be REAL rights and doing this would lead to tyrrany unjust evil monster cheese disco dog coughdrops teapot monkeys.

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

I want to see DADT gone just as much as you do

I mean this is just plainly and on it's face untrue, it's so untrue that you show that it is untrue in literally the next sentence after you say this.

Really, just amazing.