DISGRACE: One More Nasty Anti-LGBT Brief From the Justice Department

[Bluebear]

Just when you thought it was safe to go into the water, the Obama Justice Department has done it again. The first brief defended Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) with a tone-deaf vigor that was simply shocking. This time the brief is in response to the Log Cabin Republican case against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Once again not content to do a pro forma response, the Department of Justice seems to go out of its way to support DADT before the Courts.

Joe Sudbay at AmericaBlog.com has highlighted some of the points of the brief which is breathtaking in some of the language it uses. For example,

Because Congress could rationally have concluded that the DADT Policy is necessary to maintain unit cohesion, accommodate personal privacy, and reduce sexual tension for military effectiveness, LCR’s facial due process challenge fails.

Reduce sexual tension? What sexual tension exists? For God sakes, the right wing will have a field day with the above quote. Does the Department of Justice have any evidence that sexual tension even exists? The only tension I know about is the one where over 14,000 LGBT soldiers have been dismissed from the military thus disrupting their duties in the military.

http://www.davidmixner.com/2010/03/one-more-nasty-antilgbt-brief-from-the-justice-department.html#more

[Mojeoux]

1. These are grown-ups? n/t

[BlueIris]

4. It is hard to believe that adults wrote that.

One of my more "WTF?" moments this year.

[Bluebear]

7. 'reduce sexual tension for military effectiveness'

Can you believe it?

[BlueIris]

9. No.

At minimum, it's profoundly insensitive. At worst, ignorant. Either way, totally unprofessional and beneath the level of discourse I expect from a federal agency.

[Ian David]

2. But on the OTHER hand...

Justice Dept Makes Rare Intervention in Gay Rights Bullying Case

NPR reports on the case of a gay Mohawk, NY teen and his father, who with the New York Civil Liberties Union sued the teen's high school after it refused to take action following repeated bullying from classmates. In "a novel interpretation of the Title IX statute, which prohibits discrimination against students on the basis of gender", the Obama administration has gotten involved:

Now the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division has asked a judge for permission to intervene on Jacob's behalf.

"We haven't seen this kind of involvement in quite some time," says Hayley Gorenberg of Lambda Legal, a national gay rights legal organization. "It's a long time coming, and we really need it."

Republicans who worked in the Civil Rights Division under previous administrations agree that this is a case conservatives generally would not make.

The Justice Department's argument hinges on a broad reading of the law known as Title IX. Title IX is typically used to protect students from gender discrimination, but in this case, Obama administration lawyers argue that the law also covers discrimination based on gender stereotypes — that is to say, boys who are beaten up for being effeminate.

More:
http://www.towleroad.com/2010/01/justice-dept-makes-rare-intervention-in-gay-rights-bullying-case.html

[Bluebear]

6. Sorry, but posting "Justice dept. makes RARE intervention" doesn't negate the posted story

[xchrom]

3. What the Hell? Isn't there a 'Don't be dumb, don't be stupid'

Policy at Justice?

If there isn't there should be and whoever wrote
that should be fired.

[Echo In Light]

5. k/r

[Robb]

8. Oh for crying out loud. WTF.

Absurd. K&R.