Why would they want to serve Openly anyway..but yea is that true?
2007-07-04 12:34:05 · 17 answers · asked by Gabby 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I mean wouldnt that Just Like they Say Upset there moral or whatever and I mean Soldiers are not alowwed to kiss or hold hands or whatever on the Job regardless ne wayz. I dont have a problem with it at all!!
2007-07-04 12:38:17 · update #1
I dont have a problem with it for the last time!! Just Please answer the question is it true?
2007-07-04 12:39:07 · update #2
She will not and can not make it happen. For the same reasons Bill could not.
It is against the law to have homosexual relations, under the UCMJ which is part of the Constitution. It takes an act of Congress and the Senate to change it. Along with the will of the American people.
It is not going to happen any time soon.
So for now the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue" Policy will have to do.
The Manauls for Courts Martial, are in fact a part of the Constitution, The UCMJ is contained in these Manuals.
2007-07-04 13:46:42 · answer #1 · answered by Dennis F 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I have no idea....ask her the next time she visits your city. Personally, I don't have a problem with. There are gays serving now! I don't see what all the hype is about anyway. People are punking out of serving just by saying they are gay. Our forces could use some help in the 'trenches'. If you don't believe it, ask ask any Soldier, Sailor, Airman, or Marine that is on or about to go on their third or forth deployment. If allowing gays meant I could stay home (in the states) long, give them their gear!!! Everyone should have the opportunity to serve their country. Think back to when you were in a fire fight, would have cared who was keeping the enemy off your back....a straight man, gay man, or woman? Another warm body throwing rounds down range is ALWAYS appreciated and welcomed. I would rather have a gay man willing to fight to the death than a straight man that is willing to give up and they know there is no where to run.
The UCMJ already covers anything they could do from disgracing the uniform to having sex on duty to PDA.
In the last two years or so, those that fought the hardest against gays have ended up being gay. I have started raising an eyebrow to those that project an image of being the all american manly man.
What do you call a 'so-called man' that punks out of their military obligation just by saying they are gay?
2007-07-08 18:20:36 · answer #2 · answered by Airdale 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The president doesn't have the authority to change the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Only Congress can change it. What the first Clinton did was an executive order that didn't change the fact that you can't practice homosexuality and be in the military, they just tweaked the entrance and service requirement so that nobody asks and nobody tells, but it's still the case that if you are outed somehow, you are gone.
2007-07-04 20:19:05 · answer #3 · answered by The Scorpion 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
From what i have heard, she has not came right out and said it, but she would favor doing that, yes. Most likely, she would wait a few months before doing so. After Bill was torn a new one for his attempts, she would likely slowly implement it.
And, I served with eight years with plenty of people everybody knew were gay. Some were jerks, some were great people, just like heterosexuals are sometimes good or bad. The only people that cared and whose morale was hurt were the substandard joes we were always having trouble with anyway. Everyone else minded their own business. I had to live in close quarters with plenty of people whose personal views or actions I severely disapproved of, but you just don't think about it during work.
Edit
Dennis, UCMJ is not part of the constitution. Congress cam change it at anytime with a simple majority.
2007-07-04 19:55:37 · answer #4 · answered by Chance20_m 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes. And it's about time. Gays have served the US in every conflict, often with distinction.
When you're in combat there are only two things you need to know about the guy next to you:
1. Can he shoot?
2. Will he point the gun at the enemy?
If the answers to those questions are yes, he's your brother.
2007-07-04 19:45:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Ask Hilary!
2007-07-04 19:41:28 · answer #6 · answered by kitkatish1962 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really don't see that happening anytime soon. Guys in the military are very opinionated, and obviously they're willing to die for their belifes, open gays in the military just wouldn't work. Not until they're openly accepted by society, which will happen eventualy just not soon.
2007-07-04 19:40:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
haha here is the bottom line. Your question is irrelevant because she is not going to get elected.
2007-07-04 20:45:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. Her husband couldnt get it done how could she do it. She is no where as good a politician as her husband.
2007-07-04 19:42:49 · answer #9 · answered by eric l 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who knows what she will do. She can't stop them if they still keep silent.
2007-07-04 20:29:18 · answer #10 · answered by Lisa P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋