That's exceptional, America!
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
That's exceptional, America!
Congress to gays and 9/11 rescue workers: Drop dead.
Welcome to bizarro-world 1964....and it's only going to get worse.
Comments (88)
--snip--
16.In October 2009, Joint Force Quarterly, a top military journal published for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, published a study entitled, “The Efficacy of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’” written by Col. Om Prakash, an active duty officer in the Air Force. The report found “there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly.” Based on this research, it concludes that “it is not time for the administration to reexamine the issue; rather it is time for the administration to examine how to implement the repeal of the ban.” The article was selected as the first-place winner of the Secretary of Defense National Security Essay competition.
--snip--— Talking point sleuth- --snip--
15.In July 2008, a bipartisan panel of retired flag officers released a report called the “Report of the General/Flag Officers’ Study Group,” that represented what John Shalikashvili called “one of the most comprehensive evaluations of the issue of gays in the military since the Rand study” in 1993. The panel, which studied the issue for over a year by drawing on live and written testimony from experts and a review of literature, found that lifting the ban is “unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline, or cohesion.”
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - --snip--
10.A 2001 paper in the peer-reviewed journal of civil-military relations, Armed Forces & Society, argues that Israel’s 1993 decision to lift its gay ban did not influence military performance. It then assesses three arguments raised by experts who claim that Israeli experiences are not relevant for determining what would happen if the U.S. Congress and Pentagon lifted the American gay ban. In particular, it assesses the claims that most gay Israeli combat soldiers do not disclose their sexuality to peers, that some receive special treatment, and that cultural differences distinguish the U.S. and Israeli cases. The authors argue that the Israeli experience is not identical to the situation in the U.S., but that its lessons are instructive and lend weight to the claim that American military effectiveness would not decline if known homosexuals were allowed to serve.
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - --snip--
9.In 2000, after Britain lifted its ban, the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, conducted exhaustive studies to assess the effects of openly gay service in Britain, Israel, Canada, and Australia. Researchers there reviewed over six hundred documents and contacted every identifiable professional with expertise on the policy change, including military officers, government leaders, academic researchers, journalists who covered the issue, veterans, and nongovernmental observers. Palm found that not one person had observed any impact or any effect at all that “undermined military performance, readiness, or cohesion, led to increased difficulties in recruiting or retention, or increased the rate of HIV infection among the troops.” Palm researchers found that, “in each case, although many heterosexual soldiers [continued] to object to homosexuality, the military’s emphasis on conduct and equal standards was sufficient for encouraging service members to work together as a team” without undermining cohesion
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - --snip--
8.A 2000 report from the UK Ministry of Defence said the lifting of the ban was “hailed as a solid achievement” that was “introduced smoothly with fewer problems than might have been expected.” The changes had “no discernible impact” on recruitment. There was “widespread acceptance of the new policy,” and military members generally “demonstrated a mature and pragmatic approach” to the change. There were no reported problems with homosexuals harassing heterosexuals, and there were “no reported difficulties of note concerning homophobic behavior amongst Service Personnel.” The report concluded that “there has been a marked lack of reaction” to the change.
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - --snip--
7.The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences studied the situation and concluded in a report released in 1994 that anticipated damage to readiness never materialized after the ban was lifted: “Negative consequences predicted in the areas of recruitment, employment, attrition, retention, and cohesion and morale have not occurred since the policy was changed.
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - --snip--
5.In July 1993, Rand researchers at the National Defense Research Institute, a think tank founded by the Air Force, completed a study commissioned by Defense Secretary Les Aspin. Prepared by over 70 social scientists based on evidence from six countries and data analyses from hundreds of studies of cohesion, concluded that sexual orientation alone was “not germane” in determining who should serve. Rand found that “none of the militaries studied for this report believe their effectiveness as an organization has been impaired or reduced as a result of the inclusion of homosexuals.” In Canada, where the ban had just ended, Rand found “no resignations (despite previous threats to quit), no problems with recruitment, and no diminution of cohesion, morale, or organizational effectiveness.” The same conclusions were reached about Israel. The study reported that even in those countries where gays were allowed to serve, “in none of these societies is homosexuality widely accepted by a majority of the population
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - --snip--
4.In 1993, GAO reported its findings from its study of twenty-five foreign militaries, with special focus on Israel, Canada, Germany and Sweden. According to its final report, “Military officials in all four countries said that the presence of homosexuals in the military is not an issue and has not created problems in the functioning of military units.” A key factor, said the report, was that homosexuals are reluctant to openly admit their sexual orientation even once the ban is lifted
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - --snip--
3.In 1992, the Government Accountability Office conducted its own study of the gay exclusion policy. Its researchers looked at seventeen different countries and eight police and fire departments in four U.S. cities and reviewed military and nonmilitary polls, studies, legal decisions, and scholarly research on homosexual service. The GAO recommended in an early draft that Congress “may wish to direct the Secretary of Defense to reconsider the basis” for gay exclusion.
--snip--— Talking point sleuth 
TPS - so if I read your last post correctly, 1 judge overturned DADT but was stayed by the 9th Circuit (the most liberal court)from overturning it and SCOTUS upheld the stay - basically resulting in the status quo.
So in two cases (1996 & 2010) that we are aware of SCOTUS has remained silent on the matter with the effect of having the military ban on gays to remain in effect. I don't see that as encouraging to anyone who thinks the SCOTUS will go activist on this matter.— bird11
RG.... Yeah basically you take away their 'right to free education, their right to allowances paid by the tax payers while the country is fiscally bankrupt the far left always react like this, do something they dont like they break windows, deface war memorials, ect ect
@MSL those liberal scumbags that attacked the Prince Of Wales are guilty of high treason and should be arrested, tried, and hanged as stated in our law. Course sadly as our courts are filled with bleeding heart liberals that wont happen, maybe they should turn the army on them, a few batton rounds followed by a bayonet charge will get this trash of the streets of the capital and back into class.— PAEnglish- --snip--
18.A 2009 study published in the journal, Military Psychology, has documented the tangible costs of forcing service members to conceal their identities. The study, “Sexual Orientation Disclosure, Concealment, Harassment, and Military Cohesion: Perceptions of LGBT Military Veterans,” is the first empirical analysis of the relationship between sexual orientation concealment and unit cohesion in the military. The study found that sexual orientation disclosure is positively related to unit cohesion, while concealment and harassment are related negatively, meaning they appear to reduce cohesion. This means that the only empirical evidence linking assessing the relationship between open homosexuality and unit cohesion shows the link to be positive, not negative, because of the damage of the closet to the morale and readiness of gay troops, and by extension to the readiness of units.
--snip--— Talking point sleuth - The Supreme's didn't intervene pending the outcome of the appeal. And all of that is in reference to DADT - not a ban of homosexuals in the military. IMO, DADT may actually be even more unconstitutional than a ban - but ultimately, if DADT is repealed, SCOTUS will likely have to rule on a ban.
Again, even this court would have a hard time ruling in favor of blatant discrimination, especially since the experiences of other militaries shows that not substantial harm results from allowing gays to serve in the military.
Still, the current SCOTUS is so ideologically biased, it's hard to say. One thing is for sure, however, if SCOTUS rules a ban constitutional, the Taliban will be proud.— Talking point sleuth - TPS, I agree DADT is probably unconstitutional - it is certainly as the 4th Circuit said - INCONSISTENT with the current U.S. law. I think what you are failing to grasp from my statements is that repeal of ONLY DADT or the decision that DADT is unconstitutional leaves you with the 1993 law that bans gays in the military. That is all I am saying.
DADT isn't the issue in reality - DADT isn't necessary if you lift the ban on gays serving. Currently people are not discharged from the service under DADT because the SAY they are gay the are discharged because they ARE gay. (DADT actually has a provision where they can ignore it if the military believes someone SAYS they are gay simply to be discharged).
BTW - have you noticed I have NOT stated an opinion on the ban? I'm discussing law so you can stop trying to sway whatever opinion you think I have on the ban.
— bird11 - ===]]] BTW - have you noticed I have NOT stated an opinion on the ban? I'm discussing law so you can stop trying to sway whatever opinion you think I have on the ban. [[[===
Sure, I noticed that. My assumption is that is because you don't think there should be a ban. Despite your toadyistic tendencies, you do generally run with the moderate on "social" issues.
I'm not trying to sway your opinion - as I assume you're against the ban.
I also get what you're saying about the 1993 law, and I'm simply saying that if DADT were lifted, and the policy went back to one based on that law, SCOTUS would likely have to rule on the ban. They could duck it and say that it is a matter for Congress, but my guess is that it would be too high a profile issue for them to pass. There are a lot of big egos on the court, and I can't see them passing up an opportunity for such a historic ruling.— Talking point sleuth
Popular Posts
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- Andrew Sullivan
- Blinq
- Blogorrhea
- Blonde Sagacity
- Free Republic
- Instapundit
- James Taranto
- ScrappleFace
- The Corner
- Buzzmachine
- Eat the Press
- Editor and Publisher
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Media Bloodhound
- Mickey Kaus
- Pressthink
- Romenesko
- The Inksniffer
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Above Average Jane
- BlankBaby
- Citizen Mom
- Keystone Blog
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- Phawker
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Philly Future
- Phillyblog
- Phillyist
- The Clog
- The Next Mayor
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Young Philly Politics
- Afro-Netizen
- All-Spin Zone
- Atrios
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- Booman Tribune
- CorrenteWire
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- iFlipFlop
- Kiko's House
- MyDD
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Rowhouse Logic
- Slacktivist
- Suburban Guerilla
- Tattered Coat
- upyernoz
- AmericaBlog
- Andy Borowitz
- BuzzFlash
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Daily Kos
- David Sirota
- Drudge Report
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Fire Dog Lake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hullabaloo
- Jesus' General
- Jon Swift
- Josh Marshall
- Juan Cole
- Kevin Drum
- Mad Kane
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Oliver Willis
- Raw Story
- Swing State Project
- Talk Left
- Taylor Marsh
- TBogg
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Think Progress
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- A Citizen's Blog
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Beer Leaguer
- Dick Polman
- Phillies Nation
- Philling Station
- Shallow Center
- The 700 Level
- The Good Phight
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: