Don't Ask Don't Tell, Obama Repeal of American Tradition
In December 2010, the lame duck Congress passed legislation to allow gays to serve in the military.
Since the National Guard belongs to the states, this new Obama Policy does not necessarily apply, and legislation has been introduced in
Virginia, to confirm that the state militia under the US Constitution
does not have to follow the dictates of the Obama Administration and
the Federal Government.
Del. Bob Marshall (R-Prince William) argued the Virginia National Guard should continue to bar gays and lesbians from serving openly, despite a Congressional vote to repeal the policy that has barred their open service at the national level.
The Defense Department is working to formulate regulations to enact the Congressional
action and President Obama has said the policy will be repealed before the end of the year.
Among those speaking on Marshall's behalf were a retired Marine brigadier general who commanded a battalion in Vietnam and Herb Titus, a professor who Marshall noted several times taught Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) in law school. (Campaign flashback--Titus served as chairman of a
three-member group that supervised the writing of McDonnell's thesis.)
Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall (R - Prince William) proposed a bill in the 2011 Virginia General Assembly that would effectively ban openly gay men and women from serving in the Virginia National Guard.
He introduced the bill after President Obama signed a bill in December that ended the U.S. military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. For 17 years "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" banned openly gay men and woman from serving in the U.S. Armed Forces.
On the CBS 6 News at 5:30 Wednesday, Sam Brock asked Del. Marshall about the merits of bring a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" type policy into the Virginia National Guard.
"Unit cohesion is compromised, "Del. Marshall said. "You are going to have a significant departure from ground troops because they do not want to serve under these conditions. They do not enlist under these conditions."
"Pakistan does not allow open homosexuals. China does not do it. India does not allow it. The Russians don't do it. We're pushing the envelope here and we're going to jeopardise our alliances when we fight beside Muslim troops who have a real hard time dealing with this kind of behavior, " said Del. Marshall. http://www.wtvr.com/news/wtvr-virginia-lawmaker-fights-to-ba-01262011,0,4958944.story
Virginia Delegate Wants To Keep Ban On Gay Service For Virginia National Guard
Virginia Delegate Robert Marshall is drafting a bill to ban lesbians and gays from serving in the Virginia National Guard despite the fact that this would be illegal. This follows the vote in the Senate lifting Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He is taking his idiotic reasoning from Tony Perkins, who has claimed all sorts of erroneous things, and in the process gotten his group, the Family Research Council, labeled a hate group.
Marshall said:
"This policy will weaken military recruitment and retention, and will increase pressure for a military draft. After 232 years of prohibiting active, open homosexuals from enlisting in our military, President Obama and a majority in Congress are conducting a social experiment with our troops and our national security... In countries where religions and cultures find homosexual acts immoral, the Obama administration's repeal policy will work to the detriment of all American troops in securing local cooperation with our nation's foreign policy goals."
Which is a lot of Perkins brand baloney. Of course, to throw in a bit
of Tea Party logic here, he cites as his authority for this bill Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 of the Constitution which he believes gives his state the authority to continue the ban by "reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the disciple prescribed by Congress."
He even went on to say "The Constitution never would have been ratified if states were not reserved unqualified control of the militia, now called the National Guard."
The National Guard is far more of a Federal militia now, and the Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15 gives the national government authority over the state militias when it said "To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions." The National Guard's standards are those determined by the United States military and Congress.
Claire Guthrie Gastanga, the general and legislative council for Equality Virginia, pointed out that the National Guard is subject to the same rules as the rest of the military noting:
"Any state statute seeking to set different standards for the Virginia National Guard would be a nullity with no effect. It is a shame that Delegate Marshall would dishonor the brave men and women serving in our National Guard by seeking to make political points at their expense and waste the time of his colleagues in the Virginia General Assembly who have pressing matters to attend to like balancing the budget and finding solutions to the traffic problems that are the real and present concern of his constituents."
Marshall's contact information for those wishing inform him that he cannot go against the law:
Marshal, Robert G. District 13. Capital Office (804) 698-1013 District Office (703) 853-4213
Below is Virginia bill, that would keep the current standard of
conduct, and would therefore continue the practice of banning gays
from serving in the Virginia National Guard. Main author is Dr. Herb
Titus, former Dean of the Regent School of Law.
Summary of the Bill:
Eligibility for service in the Virginia National Guard. Declares a person ineligible to serve in the Virginia National Guard if he would be ineligible to serve pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 654 and any accompanying
Department of Defense Regulations implementing and enforcing this provision,
as the law and regulations were in effect on January 1, 2009.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2474
Offered January 21, 2011
A BILL to amend and reenact 44-2 of the Code of Virginia, relating to eligibility for service in the Virginia National Guard.
----------
Patron-- Marshall, R.G.
----------
Referred to Committee on Rules
----------
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
Legislative Findings
1. The Virginia National Guard is one of the organized Militias of the several states.? State organized Militias were not created by the United States Constitution or the United States Congress, but pre-existed the ratification of the United States Constitution.
2. State organized militias are mentioned in the United States Constitution in Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16: granting to Congress the limited authority To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; and To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress. All other powers over state Militias belong to the states.
3. The Militia provisions of the United States Constitution reflect both the importance of state Militias, and the founders concern of the dangers of a large standing army in times of peace.
4. Whereas the Armed Forces of the United States reports to the President of the United States, unless the Virginia National Guard has been called into actual service, it reports to the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
5. Unlike the provisions authorizing Congress to "raise and support" armies and "provide for a navy," the Militia provisions of the United States Constitution did not grant to the federal government the power to "constitute" the Militia, but only to organize, arm and discipline "the Militia" Thus, the Constitution left it to the several states to determine eligibility for service in the Militia, that is, to decide who will actually comprise the Militia.
6. Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story noted in his Commentaries on the Constitution: "The power over the militia ... was limited, and concurrent with that of the States. The right of governing them was confined to the single case of their being in the actual service of the United States.... It was then, and only then, that they could be subjected by the general government to martial law. The power to discipline and train the militia, except when in the actual service of the United States, was also vested exclusively in the States; and under such circumstances was secure against any serious abuses."
7. Thus, although Congress may determine who is eligible to serve in the Army, Navy and Air Force, if a person is not within the pool of persons determined by the state to constitute the Militia, Congress has no power to override state law to expand the pool of persons which the state must permit to serve in its state Militia. No person enlisting in the U.S. Army, Air Force or Navy automatically becomes a member of the National Guard of any state.
8. The federal Militia Act of 1903 recognized that the state National Guard is the "organized militia" of the several states. Between 1881 and 1892, state legislatures revised their military codes to provide for an organized Militia force. Most states changed the name of their organized Militias to the National Guard, following the example of New York.
9. The Supreme Court has explained the interrelation of the state National Guard and the federal government. Since 1933 all persons who have enlisted in a State National Guard unit have simultaneously enlisted in the National Guard of the United States. In the latter capacity they became a part of the Enlisted Reserve Corps of the Army, but unless and until ordered to active duty in the Army, they retained their status as members of a separate State Guard unit. Under the 1933 Act, they could be ordered into active service whenever Congress declared a national emergency and authorized the use of troops in excess of those in the Regular Army. Perpich vs. Department of Defense 496 U.S. 334 (1990).
10. Any person who enlists in a State's National Guard is a member of a separate and distinct "State Guard unit" unless and that until is called into actual service. Congress's constitutional authority over State National Guard applies only to such Guard Units as called up in the actual service of the United States, and does not extend to defining and determining who constitutes "the Militia." At the end of such actual service, the National Guard member reverts to his or her status as a member of his State Guard.
11. A state may have different eligibility standards for membership in
a State's National Guard than for membership in the Armed Forces of the United States (e.g., education, driving record, drug use, criminal record, age, and other criteria). Such eligibility standards are not within the power of the U.S. Congress because they are not matters of "discipline." "training," "arming" or "organizing" the Militia, or National Guard. At present, the Virginia National Guard and the U. S. Army have different eligibility admission criteria than the Armed Forces of the United States, and the Commonwealth of Virginia has authority to determine whether or not an active, open and practicing homosexual should serve in the Virginia National Guard. There is no constitutional right to serve in the National Guard.
12. The primary purpose of the Virginia National Guard, as with all military organizations, is to prepare for and to prevail in combat to defend the Commonwealth and the Nation should the need arise.
13. The conduct of military operations requires members of the National Guard to make extraordinary sacrifices, including the ultimate sacrifice, in order to provide for the common defense.
14. Success in combat requires military units that are characterized by high morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion. One of the most critical elements in combat capability is unit cohesion, that is, the bonds of trust among individual service members that make the combat effectiveness of a military unit greater than the sum of the combat effectiveness of the individual unit members.
A. In 1993, at a U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Dr. William Henderson, former commander of the Army Research Institute, and author of Cohesion: The Human Element in Combat, testified that unit cohesion is the condition which makes soldiers willing to risk death to achieve a common objective. Dr. Henderson testified that introducing service members who acknowledge that they engage in same sex behavior into units with soldiers opposed to homosexuality would seriously impair cohesion.
B. Dr. David Marlow, then chief of military psychiatry, Walter Reed Army Institute Research, testified that, The impact on cohesion depended on two things: whether or not [there was] knowledge that people were homosexual, [and] whether or not they brought overt homosexual behaviors into the group.
C. A Military Working Group, appointed in 1993 by Defense Secretary Les Aspin found it would be very difficult for an open homosexual to exercise authority or serve effectively as a leader since the values and lifestyle might be perceived as contrary to those in the unit. That ineffectiveness would be further undermined by perceptions of unfairness or [same sex] fraternization.
D. The report concludes that once an individual's homosexuality is known, the Military Working Group concluded that allowing open homosexuals in an environment of forced association and limited privacy will constitute a major and unacceptable invasion of what little privacy remains.
15. Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life in that -
(i) the extraordinary responsibilities of the armed forces, the unique conditions of military service, and the critical role of unit cohesion, require that the military community, while subject to civilian control, exist as a specialized society; and
(ii) the military society is characterized by its own laws, rules, customs, and traditions, including numerous restrictions on personal behavior, that would not be acceptable in civilian society.
16. A November, 2010 Pentagon Study reported:
A. That 48.9 percent of Army and 59.7 percent of Marine combat troops believed repeal of DADT would negatively affect trust; 47.5 percent of Army and 57.5 percent of Marine combat troops said repeal would negatively affect their ability to get the job done.
B. Religious and moral objections predominated among objections to repeal of DADT. Chaplains, who supported integration of the services after WW II, are adamant in their opposition to the repeal of DADT. It is unrealistic to assume that moral/religious troops opposed to DADT repeal will not result in early troop departures from the military.
C. Fully 32 percent of ground combat Marines said they would leave the service sooner than planned. An additional 16.2 percent would consider leaving early. The report noted that 21.4 percent of Army combat arms personnel would leave sooner than planned, and 14.6 percent would think about leaving, a potential loss of 36 percent of our ground troops.
In view of this 2010 Pentagon Study, the Commonwealth of Virginia, which has a public interest in maintaining the highest standards of conduct to attract and keep recruits for our National Guard, cannot afford the loss of qualified personnel which would follow the acceptance of practicing homosexuals in the Virginia National Guard.
17. Despite the anticipated loss of qualified personnel, the Pentagon Working Group seeking to support Congressional repeal of 10 USC 654, has recommended the Uniform Code of Military Justice decriminalize sodomy which is a major vector for disease producing life-shortening medical conditions.
18. The Virginia National Guard has been and can be anticipated in the future to engage in actual combat which routinely makes it necessary for members to live in work in conditions that t are spartan, primitive, and characterized by forced intimacy with little or no privacy.
19. The prohibition against active and or open homosexual conduct is a longstanding element of American military law is of long standing.
A. On March 11, 1778, Gen. George Washington drummed out of service Lt. Gotthold F. Enslin, the first soldier to be dismissed from the U.S. military for homosexuality.
B. After 1900, military personnel were punished for committing homosexual acts, usually categorized as sodomy. Prior to World War II, Homosexual behavior was prosecuted as conduct unbecoming an officer or, for enlisted members as conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline.
C. The Articles of War in 1916 under President Woodrow Wilson established an article prohibiting the offense of sodomy. In the Manual for Courts-Martial, Congress included consensual sodomy as Article 93 of the Articles of War. Also, unit commanders could discharge soldiers for inaptness or for undesirable habits (Section VIII of Army Regulation 615-200).
D. During World War II under President Roosevelt, the Army developed a medical approach to discharge for homosexuality. In 1947 under President Truman, the Army's policy was revised to discharge soldiers identified as having homosexual tendencies.14
E. In 1950, the Army's policy under President Truman stated, True, confirmed, or habitual homosexual personnel, irrespective of sex, will not be permitted to serve in the army in any capacity and prompt separation of known homosexuals from the army is mandatory.
F. In 1978 under President Carter, the DOD issued the Report of the Joint Service Administrative Discharge Study Group which recommended that the military reaffirm the longstanding ban on homosexuals, Homosexuality is incompatible with military service. It called for the statement, Processing (for separation) is mandatory unless ... the allegations are groundless,
E. On January 28, 1982, also under President Carter, the Pentagon published a conduct-based policy, which authorized separation of persons who by their acts or statements, demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual conduct, and eliminated homosexual tendencies as a reason for separation.
20. Consistent with the wisdom of the Armed Forces over all of its existence up to recently, The Virginia National Guard must maintain personnel policies that not admit persons whose presence in the military would create an unacceptable risk to high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
44-2 of the Code of Virginia is amended to add a new subsection C, and then reenacted as follows:
44-2. Composition of National Guard.
A. The National Guard shall consist of the regularly enlisted militia and of commissioned and warrant officers, who shall be residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia and shall fall within the age limits and qualifications as prescribed in existing or subsequently amended National Guard regulations (army and air), organized, armed and equipped as hereinafter provided. Upon original enlistment members of the National Guard shall not be less than seventeen nor more than fifty-five years of age, or, in subsequent enlistments not more than sixty-four years of age. All enlistments in the National Guard of persons under the age of eighteen years made prior to June 27, 1958, shall be held, and the same are hereby declared valid and effective in all respects, if otherwise valid and effective according to the law then in force.
B. Notwithstanding the above, persons otherwise qualified but residing outside the Commonwealth of Virginia may enlist or serve as commissioned or warrant officers in the National Guard.
C. No person ineligible to serve in the Armed Forces of the United States under 10 U.S.C. 654 and accompanying Department of Defense Regulations implementing and enforcing this provision as in effect on January 1, 2009, shall be eligible to serve in the National Guard.
Hold your homosexuals! Military ban not over yet
Look what needs to be done before changes take effect ...
Posted: December 20, 2010
10:52 pm Eastern
WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 17: U.S. President Barack Obama waves after he signed H.R. 4853 the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010 into law December 17, 2010 at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, DC. The $858 billion bill will extend the Bush-era tax cuts for two more years and unemployment benefits for 13 months. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
America's military isn't going 'gay' quite yet.
While President Obama plans this week to sign the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy banning open homosexuality in the military, the policy must remain in force until the president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can certify that the change will not impair combat readiness.
Before that happens the military must rewrite laws and regulations that could affect same-sex relationships, such as the Uniform Code of Military Justice ban on sodomy, and also indoctrinate soldiers, sailors and airmen to tolerate open homosexuality. The transition period is expected to take a year.
"It's important for people to know that this is not over," said Robert Knight, a leading opponent of the homosexual political agenda. "There are no permanent victories or defeats in politics. And this can be reversed at some point, in a more conservative Congress."
"Congress will have to legalize consensual sodomy, which is currently illegal under the UCMJ," said retired Army Col. Dick Black, former chief of the Army's Criminal Law Division and a Virginia state legislator. "There's a backlash brewing. This is a very serious issue for a lot of people. We're entering the presidential season, and if there's a candidate who says he will issue an executive order to ban homosexuality in the military, a lot of people would be very fired up about that."
WND Exclusive IN THE MILITARY
Chaplains predicted to resist 'gay'-ban repeal
Opponents demanding hearings from House Republicans
WASHINGTON The U.S. military will begin this month to train service members to accept open homosexuality in the ranks, the Pentagon has announced.
But critics say many members of the military's roughly 3,000-strong corps of chaplains, expected by the Pentagon to play an important role in the transition to a "gay"-friendly military, are likely to resist the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
"Opposition is going to be broad, especially among the evangelical chaplain community," said Billy Baugham, executive director of the International Conference of Evangelical Chaplain Endorsers.
Homosexuality is a crime (Lev. 20:13), and for Christians to publicly refer to this criminal activity as "gay" or as a "life style" is an anti-Biblical presupposition that suggests to the public, and to our civil officials, that the laws against sodomy can be ignored. To ignore what God says is to mock God, and for Christians to suggest that it is permissible for civil officials to ignore the Commandments of
God is iniquity -- anomia -- Greek for lawlessness (Matt. 7:23).
Homosexuality Is A Crime By Jim Rudd The Covenant News ~ December 9, 2008
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Leviticus 20: 13
When ministering to homosexuals, one of the first things we let them know is that there is no such thing as a right to commit sodomy.
A legitimate American English word to describe homosexuals is sodomite. The term sodomite describes the nature of their crime and the sin they must repent from. Just like adulterer, rapist, and murderer are all proper terms for people who commit these crimes, each also describes their sin. Sodomite is the correct term for homosexuals who commit the crime of sodomy -- not gay. http://www.covenantnews.com/rudd010411.htm
Roy Moore's Morally Courageous History Lesson That Homosexuality Is "High Treason Against The King Of Heaven," Contrary To Right Reason, Natural Order
Share
ROY S. MOOREROY S. MOORE
By John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
President Obama, referring to the necessity of homosexual sex perverts being allowed to serve openly in our military, says no one should be prevented from service to our nation "just because they are gay." Interesting phrase, "just because they are gay," as if being "gay" is like being left-handed or having blue-eyes But, is being "gay" like being left-handed or having blue eyes? No.
The following are excerpts from remarks by former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy. S. Moore re: a case involving a lesbian woman seeking custody of a child. http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=1731
