This is how much of a nerd I am, I've been watching CSPAN-2 since it took up the START Treaty.
But, this morning, the Senate and Sen. McCain just finished up a speech on DADT.

It sounds like it will be repealed maybe even this morning.

Senate just voted 63-33 to head to final vote on repeal DADT.

Ptown <--- NERD!!! lol, j/k

btw, are you interested in politics as a potential career? I only ask because I personally don't know anybody as interested in foreign policy and CSpan2 like you are. And Im just guessing that there's more than just curiosity involved (?)

Politics, no. Policy, yes. Meaning, I hate political office, but love the civilians behind the scenes that implement, advise and help write policy on foreign policy. So, think of people in the State Department, Defense, intelligence agencies, and outside contractors and think tanks.

Repealed:
65-31 the Senate repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Of note, Brown and Voinivich voted for the repeal.

ptown_trojans_1;605191 wrote:Repealed:
65-31 the Senate repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Of note, Brown and Voinivich voted for the repeal.

I'm really excited about this!

I think the majority of servicemen/women don't give a damn who's gay or not, they care about being able to stay alive and getting the job done; being gay doesn't hinder this one bit.

A double dose of good news today with this vote and the Dream Act failing.

Being that I'm gay, I'm delighted that DADT is now history. I have known many gay people who have served in the military, and I assure you they did nothing to cause any kind of disruption. The repeal is a good thing for America!

This is a very good thing. I don't care whether someone is gay or not, if they want to serve in the military they should be able to. We don't stop gays from serving in political office, why shouldn't they be allowed to serve in the military? Finally Congress is coming to its senses.

Ok, a couple questions now. I assume gay service members will be treated the same as straight service members...for example, 2 gay males will not be able to live in the same room, like a male and female could not. 2 gay service members will not be allowed to be alone together without the door to their room being open or a third party being present, just like now with males and females. there are other examples, but i think you get the idea. but how will any of these problems be resolved without forcing gay service members to come out so they can be identified and treated fairly? if a 1SG doesnt know 2 soldiers are gay and assigns them the same room, why cant a male and female be assigned the same room? and dont give me that "well not all gay people want to have sex with each other" because not all males and want to have sex with females either.

The military has a code of conduct it takes pretty seriously, from what I understand. If one military member makes an unwanted sexual advance on another (regardless of gender) there would be hell to pay. If two military members have sex together (regardless of gender) at a time and place when they should not (or at all), there will be hell to pay.

Seems to me the guidelines are already in place to deal with any and all possible situations -- except of course if a military member is a bigoted piece of crap and decides he/she doesn't want to stay in the same room with a gay service member.

It's not unlike what the military went through when it led the way in desegregation a number of years ago. They dealt with the bigotry then -- and can deal with it now.

See how easy that was?

CenterBHSFan;605255 wrote:I'm really excited about this!

I think the majority of servicemen/women don't give a damn who's gay or not, they care about being able to stay alive and getting the job done; being gay doesn't hinder this one bit.

For the most part. I think the one branch of service whose soldiers have the biggest issue with it are the Marines. At least, the men in the Marines have the beef. I think it is no secret that a good number of women in our military are already gay or bi-sexual.

Writerbuckeye;605498 wrote:The military has a code of conduct it takes pretty seriously, from what I understand. If one military member makes an unwanted sexual advance on another (regardless of gender) there would be hell to pay. If two military members have sex together (regardless of gender) at a time and place when they should not (or at all), there will be hell to pay.

Seems to me the guidelines are already in place to deal with any and all possible situations -- except of course if a military member is a bigoted piece of crap and decides he/she doesn't want to stay in the same room with a gay service member.

It's not unlike what the military went through when it led the way in desegregation a number of years ago. They dealt with the bigotry then -- and can deal with it now.

See how easy that was?

Actually it wasn&#8217;t that easy because nothing you did addressed the situations I pointed out. How about just address this one for now. A male and female cannot live together, will 2 gay men be allowed to live together? And if not, how will we know? And if so, why cant a male and female live together?

What a canard. Just because two men are gay, does not mean they want to have sex with one another. You pointed that out yourself. Since their genders are the same, and the facilities are divided according to gender (and gay is not a different gender), then you know the answer AND as I noted, the code of conduct takes care of the rest.

You want to make this more difficult than it is -- but you're flailing badly.

There is no way they will be separating gays and straights in the barracks. I mean on a ship we have limited room and we have at least 7 gay men that are openly gay on my ship of 220 people. I don't think anyone has any problems being in the same berthing as them.

Writerbuckeye;605556 wrote:What a canard. Just because two men are gay, does not mean they want to have sex with one another. You pointed that out yourself. Since their genders are the same, and the facilities are divided according to gender (and gay is not a different gender), then you know the answer AND as I noted, the code of conduct takes care of the rest.

You want to make this more difficult than it is -- but you're flailing badly.

You are trying to make it simplier than it is, but it clearly isn't since DADT won't be repealed until a new policy is set by the military by the sec def, joint chiefs, and obama.

If code of conduct takes care of everything, why can't a male and female live together if they aren't having sex? You think physical gender is the only reason? Ha, that's funny.

What about when a gay soldier is counseling another gay soldier? will a third party have to be present like when a straight male is counseling a straight female or vice versa?

Glory Days;605488 wrote:Ok, a couple questions now. I assume gay service members will be treated the same as straight service members...for example, 2 gay males will not be able to live in the same room, like a male and female could not. 2 gay service members will not be allowed to be alone together without the door to their room being open or a third party being present, just like now with males and females. there are other examples, but i think you get the idea. but how will any of these problems be resolved without forcing gay service members to come out so they can be identified and treated fairly? if a 1SG doesnt know 2 soldiers are gay and assigns them the same room, why cant a male and female be assigned the same room? and dont give me that "well not all gay people want to have sex with each other" because not all males and want to have sex with females either.

You seem really caught up on this.

No, gay dudes won't be seperated from straight dudes.

While it may seem like the same thing, it isn't.

I repeat: being gay is NOT another gender. Your questions are silly and getting sillier.

I Wear Pants;605646 wrote:You seem really caught up on this.

No, gay dudes won't be seperated from straight dudes.

While it may seem like the same thing, it isn't.

When did I say gay dudes would be seperated from straight dudes? Having 1 gay dude and 1 straight dude living together is ideal, no one would be worried about the other being interested in the other. Its when 2 gay guys live together. Maybe one will find the other attractive, but the other doesn't feel that way etc.

Writerbuckeye;605651 wrote:I repeat: being gay is NOT another gender. Your questions are silly and getting sillier.

You are right, gay is not a gender. And you are missing the point. people aren't seperated now just because of the physical differences. A straight dude isn't going to make sexual propostions to another straight dude during counseling. However a straight male might with a straight female, hence why 3rd parties need to be present.

Glory Days;605676 wrote:When did I say gay dudes would be seperated from straight dudes? Having 1 gay dude and 1 straight dude living together is ideal, no one would be worried about the other being interested in the other. Its when 2 gay guys live together. Maybe one will find the other attractive, but the other doesn't feel that way etc.

So you want people to have to declare whether they are gay?

I Wear Pants;605684 wrote:So you want people to have to declare whether they are gay?

Me? No. But you are catching on now to my point. How else will these situations be handled correctly without gays having to out themselves when they join or something? Its not an easy solution to just repeal DADT and its probably going to remain in effect for a while until these things can be worked out.

Yes it is.

Just repeal it. If there is misconduct, be it between gays or two heterosexual people of different genders you should deal with it the same way.

It is easy.

ptown_trojans_1;605191 wrote:Repealed:
65-31 the Senate repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Of note, Brown and Voinivich voted for the repeal.

I have not paid much attention to this, but does not a repeal of a law by default send it back to it prior state? Did they include in the repeal any changes to the previous policy? Can the military leadership now ask? And if so what provisions are in place to guide them in any actions they may perceive necessary to a subordinates answer? Or refusal to answer?