Comments on: Rudolph: Repealing DADT Is Only the First Step

By: SteveMD2

SteveMD2 — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 09:09:46 +0000

One of the leaders of the support DADT is a woman named Donnely. Looking at her name, it is almost certain that she rims the Pope daily to get her marching orders.

And what they fear is that all those conservative boys from the south who are in the army will suddenly discover that that gays are good people, and they can trust them with their lives, which is what the army is about – everyone working for a common purpose, and supporting each other.

The only funny thing about their fear is that there are so many gay people out in the army, and polls say that 73% of the troops are fine with having out gay comrades.

Someday they will write about our time, probably sooner rather then later. And the book will be called “Civilization?”

By: AW

AW — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 15:00:26 +0000

There are more obstacles than just repealing DADT. May of the family and social services available to military personnel have been contracted out to civilian providers that have ties to conservative religious organizations. During the past couple of decades, the military has become very strongly influenced by these groups. Its going to take a lot of time and effort to give GLBT personnel fair and equitable access to these services after the repeal is passed. It won’t be easy.

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:48:55 +0000

Do not expect this to happen during the Obama administration due to his defense appointments thus far. Even if the house/senate dems push for it, the administration will make sure it gets burried. Based upon his choices and actions, if DADT is repealed it will be as a way of providing reparitive therapy to the gay soldiers, probably instituted by his WH office of faith based initiatives. I feel sorry for any LGBT that is still expecting “change”.

By: Dana

Dana — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:15:17 +0000

Todd: To my knowledge, current proposals to repeal DADT also would add a policy of non-discrimination based on sexual orientation–but it’s still all up in the air until it comes to a final vote.

By: Todd

Todd — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:59:02 +0000

When they talk about repealing DADT do they mean the armed forces policy regarding homosexuality in it’s entirety or just DADT?

By: Dave in Ohio

Dave in Ohio — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:01:38 +0000

I agree. I believe the only reason this was ban was created is to simply deny us the right to marriage. Because it is really hard for anyone to argue the fact that if a person can risk their life to defend our country shouldn’t that very same person have the right to recieve every right that our country has to offer.

By: Dana

Dana — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:38:59 +0000

JJ: I used “LGBT” at the beginning of this article because I do believe that repealing DADT “is a necessary and important step towards equality for LGBT Americans.” As I said, however, it is only the first step, not the only one–but that doesn’t make my above statement any less accurate. I hope that it is indeed followed by legislation that clearly permits any otherwise qualified American to serve, regardless of sexual orientation OR gender identity. I do use “lesbian and gay” later in the piece when I am more specifically referring to sexual orientation.

By: jose-vera

jose-vera — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:30:54 +0000

Bob, ah Wow ” Why hasn’t Obama repealed DADT, DOMA yet”? In three weeks?Not even the economic stimulus package has passed. And you actually answer your own question bro “If republicans are giving him a hard time about the stimulus, what about DADT, ENDA, DOMA”?

By: CArolyne

CArolyne — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:22:52 +0000

OK Bob,
I want the guy to repeal all those anti-gay policies, but your post? ahhhhhhh well…. I hope most of us don’t see things from your point of view.

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:20:26 +0000

My partner and I are holding out, hoping he will move in due time. I will give him (POTUS) the benefit of the doubt, that he is working under the pressures that are inherent in changing a major policy. However, I will not stay in this service forever, while I sacrifice my relationship for the “comfort of others.”