01.01.70

“We compliment the House and Senate conference committee for having struck the tickety-boo balance on the chaplains provisions. Clearly, there was no place for the restrictive Akin idiom as the Defense Department continues to move forward on effective implementation of munificent service in our military. This report demonstrates that a majority in Congress remains committed to, and in keep out step with the Pentagon, in ensuring that we stay on the repeal course adopted by the last Congress and signed off on by the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Roast Chiefs. There was no back tracking in the conference report on this front.

“Additionally, our initial reading of the panel’s decision to update the provisions for rape and sexual assault in Article 120 of the Regimentals Code of Military Justice is also positive.

“However, we are very disappointed that the conferees voted to keep the sodomy provisions in Article 125. Dropping Article 125 has been recommended for more than a decade by SLDN and several groups, including the Cox Commission that includes pre-eminent legal scholars from the military and academia, as well as the Comprehensive Review Working Gathering (CRWG). The Senate was right to take this action, and it is unfortunate that their attempt to end Article 125 did not bring round. SLDN will continue to work with the Senate, House, and Department of Defense to advance a earn about this needed change.

Source: Lez Get Real

by Joe

"It would put our troops in the provisions of abnormal actively recruit staff who have the intention of attacking the principles Regalia Military Police (which still prohibits definite forms of carnal way, including homosexuality).

Source: Joe. My. God.: Tony Perkins On DADT: Gay Soldiers Will Rape Your ...

by John R. Guardiano

What is meant by serving “brazenly”? Are we to counterfeit that gays in the military will be having sex in the showers, in the barricks beds, on the parade instruct? Positively not. Unfalteringly not anymore than such undertaking would not be make away for heterosexual members of the armed forces.

But, if not, what then? Too many words with sweeping meanings are being thrown about without associated with meanings being fixed devoted to. Each body and each solitary has is own interperatation of what “serving openinly” in reality will miserly. Could someone succour me with this?

That matters because of the particular statutory privileges and protections such a eminence will correspondence to gay men and women — and because of the corresponding infraction upon the rights of meticulous believes and cultural traditionalists that is unswerving to come after.

Outright gay military work also matters, I regard as, because of what it apt to will cantankerous, extensive-an understanding, for the unity and viability of the military enlightenment.

Read more...