DADT confusion...

[kirby]

I thought the constitution was designed to insure Civilian control of the Military. Why is Dont Ask, Dont Tell repeal being conditioned on the Military dictating when/how it will be implemented? I thought the Military was supposed to follow the orders given to it.

[donco6]

1. Except when it's politically inexpedient.

Then it's more a "avoid the blame" game.

[marshall]

2. That bridge was crossed when DADT was passed

Now what was done must be undone by the same process.

[Unvanguard]

3. Mainly because Senators like Nelson won't go along with it otherwise. n/t

[David__77]

4. Because of political expedience.

I'm gay, and repeal of this law has always been last on my list of priorities. ENDA, marriage rights, school curricula, etc., are FAR more important to me. But if this helps in an ancillary way achieve THOSE objectives, then fine...

[Unvanguard]

5. I'm somewhat disappointed that we're getting this and not ENDA.

But stopping the ruining of people's careers because of their sexual orientation, and stopping the forced closeting of thousands of people, is a good thing.

[David__77]

6. People's careers are ruined from there being no ENDA as well.

And while you choose to enter the military, everyone must work to support themselves, yet in many states you can be fired based on sexual orientation alone. I see that as far more significant than dropping this military gay ban.

[Unvanguard]

7. You are correct, and we are on the same page on this.

I just wanted to emphasize that the real difference this will make (assuming they do manage to ultimately get rid of the policy) shouldn't be discounted.

[David__77]

8. It's a start, it's true.

But it wouldn't bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the armed forces, so, presumably, there could still be coercion to quit, etc. We'll see how it plays out. I expect the polls to close a lot on this issue, especially among Republicans. But, overall, it's a winning issue for Democrats.