Gates: 'More humane' enforcement of gay ban studied

[babylonsister]

Gates: 'More humane' enforcement of gay ban studied
By Roxana Tiron
Posted: 06/30/09 04:50 PM


Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Wednesday that the Pentagon is looking into “more humane” ways to comply with a law that bans openly gay people from serving in the military.

Gates said that the Pentagon’s general counsel is exploring ways of making the law, known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” more flexible until it is eventually changed, according to the Pentagon’s news service.

Gates' remarks, made aboard a military plane on the way to Germany on Tuesday, come one day after President Obama reiterated his support for repealing the 1993 ban during a reception with gay and lesbian advocacy groups.

The Obama administration has come under criticism from gay-rights advocates for not moving fast enough on a presidential campaign pledge made by Obama.

“What we have is a law, not a policy or regulation,” Gates said on Tuesday, according to the American Forces Press Service. “And as I discovered when I got into it, it is a very prescriptive law. It doesn’t leave a lot to the imagination or a lot of flexibility. So one of the things we are looking at is, is there flexibility in how we apply this law?”

Gates indicated that Pentagon lawyers are researching whether military officials can ignore the policy in cases where members of the military are “outed” against their will.

“Does that force us to take an action?” he asked. “I don’t know the answer to that. I don’t want to pretend to. But that is the kind of thing we are looking at.”

more...

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gates-more-humane-enforcement-of-gay-ban-studied-2009-06-30.html

[Arkana]

1. This is good news, right?

Right?

[babylonsister]

3. It seems to me Gates is trying to address some issues that

haven't been up until now, so I think it's good news.

[sandnsea]

2. "Don't Ask"

I would say if somebody outs someone else, the first question should be

Well Who Asked You??

And then turn around and walk away.

And Congress has got to get on this, it's absurd.

[LiberalFighter]

9. If they are going to follow the law then unless a member of the military

tells someone in the military anything else that happens should not be considered.

If someone says they are same-sex preference on tv but doesn't tell someone in military command directly they are protected.

If someone asks and they find out the information it would be protected because they are not suppose to ask.

[sandnsea]

13. That is what is happening

Someone in the military is telling someone else in the military. Which means it will go up the chain of command until someone has to "ask", which is why I said that when the very first report is made, the response should be "who asked you?". Nobody is asking for these gay troops to be outed, so there's a pretty simple way to stop that. Don't Ask. And if nobody is asking, then no troop needs to be running around stirring up trouble.

Until the law is reversed.

[ruggerson]

20. Congress IS on this

HR 1283 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1283

[Cha]

4. It's going to happen and

this is the road we're on.

[HopeOverFear]

5. humane? What are they, dogs?

sheesh.

[babylonsister]

7. It's not a word used solely for animals...

characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy for people and animals, esp. for the suffering or distressed:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/humane

[harry_pothead]

6. I suppose it is good news.

Moving on to a new kinder gentler homophobia.

[zulchzulu]

8. A way to make it “more humane” is perhaps to...um...

OVERTURN IT!

[mopinko]

10. perhaps the search will lead nowhere, and they will have to repeal it.

now that we have franken, we have the votes. obama is smart to force this to go through channels. there will be a lot less blowback, i think.

[masuki bance]

11. Wait a second...

I thought keeping the pressure of the discharges on was a strategy that the administration wanted so that there would be pressure on Congress, so they would be forced to pass legislation, so then Obama could sign it, so an executive order couldn't be overturned by the next admin.

W'ev.

[ruggerson]

15. exactly - they're all over the map on this

[bluedawg12]

16. DADT is inhumane even down to matters of health care privacy.

Gays lack confidentiality in their conversations with doctors, chaplains, and counselors on matters of sexual orientation, and that leads some to not seek appropriate care.

[flpoljunkie]

12. Evidently the military it not following the 'Don't Ask' part of Don't Ask, Don't Tell' law either.

And, what is being done about that, if anything?

[LittleBlue]

14. I know this is not fast enough for most, but it's definitely progress

And really, who actually wants their son or daughter (gay or straight) to go to Iraq? Maybe it's a blessing in disguise for those folks.

[joeybee12]

17. This makes me sick...

...and if it doesn't make you sick, then WHY NOT?

[Prism]

18. I can no longer keep the administration's explanations straight

They cannot do anything unilaterally, then they can but don't want to, then they're not going to, now they're looking into the application of the law, but then they don't feel they have the discretion, and now they really hope Congress is paying attention, but then they're tossing it to a thousand agencies, but now we're back to examining it very closely.

It's becoming dizzying.

Sometimes I wonder if the conversation between the President and his advisors on DADT boils down to:

President Obama: "We're working on this repeal, right?"

Advisor: "Yeah . . . somewhere . . . you know . . . over there."

President Obama: "Excellent."

I haven't seen this much punting since I vacationed in London. Sometimes the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, but it seems with DADT you have both hands, a foot, some knees, a couple of elbows, and potentially a spleen flying around in there.

[ruggerson]

19. and Gibbs' daily comments just exacerbate the web of inconsistencies