Public opinion supports the repeal of DADT policy.  This seems to be a blow to civil rights.  The 3 missing votes were from 1 new Democrat, Joe Manchin  from West Virginia and 2 Republicans.  There was defense department support for repealing this antequated policy.  Both Senators Warner and Webb voted to repeal it and for the military funding. 

There is strong rumor that Joe Liebermann and Susan Collins will introduce an independent, separate repeal of DADT. 


15 Thoughts to “Vote to Repeal DADT Fails 57-40”

  1. Of course, unless Congress also repeals Article 125 – Sodomy from the Unified Code of Military Justice, all of those open homosexuals will STILL be illegal. Yes, I know that straights do it too, but, homosexuals are limited to those acts.

    Repealing DADT had also better include actual permission for gays to serve. I find it interesting that the troops on the front lines are opposed to this by at least 60-80%. You get more support, the farther away one is from the front.

    Again, will this decision, at this time, enhance combat readiness. If not, the leave it as is.

  2. Er, Cargo, homosexuals aren’t limited to sodomy. And you are leaving lesbians out of the mix here.

    I think it sucks that anyone has to hide who they are. So long as it doesn’t get in the way of taking orders, who cares what you do in your spare time? No one has ever complained about straight service people screwing prostitutes or international civilians. I guess any behavior is okay so long as it takes place between straight people?

    Note one of the loudest dissenters is the senator from AZ. If you are different in any way, I would stay clear of AZ, the state of discrimination.

  3. Under Art 125, oral sex is considered Sodomy. That’s why I said homosexual instead of gay. Covers everybody.

    I’m ambivalent as I can see how both sides have valid points. Personally I don’t care who a service member sleeps with. However, issues of berthing, health, unit cohesion, etc., arise.

    Remember, one does not have a right to serve in the military. The military does have some requirements that may seem arbitrary, but they do affect military readiness.

    Again, all I’m saying is that this Article of the UCMJ would have to be removed for the repeal of DADT and permission for homosexuals to serve to mean anything. And Congress makes those laws.

  4. Then all the straight people had better stop doing it also.

    Its time for our elected officials to grow some nads and stop descriminating.

    Anyone in the military do does sodomy should be discharged. That would make it fair.

  5. Formerly Anonymous

    There seems to be a lack of understanding about show votes here. This vote on DADT was doomed to failure as was the DREAM Act vote and last Saturday’s votapalooza on tax cuts. There are at least three votes that made it clear they would vote to repeal DADT on a clean bill after the tax deal was done. Everybody knew the math wasn’t there, but Reid scheduled a vote anyway.

    After the dust clears and the tax deal is done, DADT will be repealed under Lieberman’s bill in a couple of weeks. Regardless of if you are pro or con on DADT, a two or three week delay isn’t that big a deal. I think nation will somehow survive another two or three weeks with DADT in place.

  6. When service members are caught in certain conditions, ie, having sex when they’re not supposed to, having sex with a married service member not their spouse, fraternization, etc, this charge IS applied if this is what they did. We had a Senior Chief and a 1st class get charged with it as part of their Captain’s mast for being “caught in the act” when we were deployed in Kuwait.

    Part of the punishment was having to call their respective spouses and the senior enlisted was sent home. He lost out on A LOT of income. He was going to stay on with the incoming relief battalion. E-8 salary, hazardous duty pay, etc….tax free. Went home to Wal-Mart job. Not near as much $.

  7. @Cargosquid
    Cargo, thank you for your service. (And no, I am not being sarcastic 🙂 )

  8. @Posting as Pinko
    Never thought it for a moment. Thanks. And I thank you on behalf of all the other vets.

  9. That seems horribly paternalistic on the part of the navy. Having to tell one’s spouse is not necessarily what’s best for everyone concerned.

  10. Kelly3406

    I actually took the time to read the results of the famous DADT survey. It appears to me that Admiral Mullen and the SecDef cherrypicked the results. For example, a plurality stated that they personally would not mind gays in the military. But a larger plurality stated that their friends and colleagues would oppose gays in the military. A large plurality stated that sharing showers/latrines/tents would compel them to either avoid their gay compatriots, have a discussion with the gay person about expected behavior, or ask for reassignment by their commander.

  11. Mullen is known in the the Navy, even at the enlisted levels, to be a “politician.” And not in a good way. That said, I’ve run across many an infantryman that has told me, “Gays in the Army? If so, I hope its one of those big, buff gays that can carry my ass out of the field of fire if I’m wounded.”

  12. What about their gay compatriots who are there now?

    I never knew the military really cared what people thought. I thought it was jump…how high being the right response.

    I suppose I don’t see the difference in a gay who is there and not able to admit it and a gay there who is able to admit it.

  13. @Cargosquid
    LOLOL!!! Great (and practical) response!

    Since gay people are already serving and are probably friends with straight people, seems to me there should be some heavy thinking going on if DADT IS repealed.

  14. Actually, homosexuality continues to be a security and a health risk to the military system. Even if gays are allowed to serve openly, unless that gay is out, it will provide an enemy with a major blackmail opportunity, albeit a lesser one than now. The same thing happens with adultery. That is why adultery IS punishable by the UCMJ.

    As for health reasons, HIV is more prevalent in the homosexual community by a wide margin. Gay men tend to be more promiscuous, for many reasons, than straight men, though, perhaps not through a lack of trying. 😉 The military worked incredibly hard to clean up its blood supply. And battlefield transfusions and donations still happen.

    Yes, I know that the “social conservatives” should just “get over it.” However, many serving will leave the service. More will not enlist. Not just because that there are gays in the military, but, because of the perception that this is just another liberal social experiment and another attempt to change the last conservative bastion of the US.

    DADT is working. We are at war. What is the big rush to change it now?

  15. George S. Harris

    I agree with Cargo’s point about health issues. Why do we want to take on a group of people whose sexual practices make them a health liability? And as to “battlefield transfusions”–a reality that still exists. The security risk piece may be arguable today, but as Cargo notes, if they are not “out” and don’t want to be “out”, it can be a serious issue.

Comments are closed.