I have frequently made the argument that members of Congress who support DADT and other religious based - read that Christianist - discrimination need to resign from office for breach of their duties under the U. S. Constitution which was adopted on September 17, 1787 in Philadelphia. Article VI of the Constitution makes two things very clear: (1) members of the House of Representatives and the Senate are REQUIRED to take an oath to support the Constitution - and that means ALL of it - and (2) religious tests are banned. Despite this clear language of Article VI, DADT constitutes a de facto religious test: only those who subscribe to an anti-gay belief system are allowed to serve in the U.S. military. DADT has always been ALL about religion and nothing else. Combat readiness and other canards are smoke screens that Judge Phillips found to be unsupported by the facts in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States last week. One has to wonder why the media doesn't DEMAND an explanation from DADT supporters to questions on camera: do they support the U.S. Constitution? If they answer yes, then follow up with the question of why they are supporting an unconstitutional religious test against gays. Talk Heads of the Christian Right should be likewise put on the spot and shown to be seeking to subvert the very Constitution they claim to support. Here's the text of Article VI:*
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
*
In an editorial calling upon Judge Phillips to issue a permanent injunction against the enforcement of DADT, the New York Times reviews the falsehoods used to try to justify the clearly unconstitutional DADT. Here are highlights:
*
For almost a generation, the argument against allowing gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military rested heavily on the claim that they would damage the morale and readiness of America’s armed forces.
*
A judicial opinion last week by Virginia Phillips, a federal trial judge in California, musters compelling logic and persuasive evidence to show that the policy has done the opposite and has damaged the interests of the United States. Judge Phillips also made a strong case that the federal statute enacting the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy violates the Constitution.
*
While the administration waits for Congress to repeal the statute, it should halt enforcement of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
On Thursday, the plaintiffs in the case, the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay organization, proposed that Judge Phillips keep Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others from enforcing the statute or applying the policy and suspend any pending investigations or discharges. The Obama administration must now decide how to respond. It would be in keeping with the judge’s opinion for her to do just what the plaintiffs propose.
*
Judge Phillips found that it has contributed to “critical troop shortages” and caused the discharge of members with critical skills like fluency in Arabic, medicine and counterterrorism.
*
The enormous investment has been squandered. The cost of replacing them also is high. While the military was discharging gay soldiers, it was redressing troops shortages in wartime by giving “moral waivers” to convicted felons who lacked the required education and physical fitness to serve and were more likely to be drummed out because of misconduct.
*
While fighting Islamic extremism, it is far past time that the USA start fighting the religious extremism within its own borders and that extremism flow principally from one source - Christian extremists who seek to subvert the Constitution in order to enshrine their toxic beliefs in the nation's laws. The days of special rights for Christianity need to end.
*
For almost a generation, the argument against allowing gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military rested heavily on the claim that they would damage the morale and readiness of America’s armed forces.
*
A judicial opinion last week by Virginia Phillips, a federal trial judge in California, musters compelling logic and persuasive evidence to show that the policy has done the opposite and has damaged the interests of the United States. Judge Phillips also made a strong case that the federal statute enacting the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy violates the Constitution.
*
While the administration waits for Congress to repeal the statute, it should halt enforcement of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
On Thursday, the plaintiffs in the case, the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay organization, proposed that Judge Phillips keep Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others from enforcing the statute or applying the policy and suspend any pending investigations or discharges. The Obama administration must now decide how to respond. It would be in keeping with the judge’s opinion for her to do just what the plaintiffs propose.
*
Judge Phillips found that it has contributed to “critical troop shortages” and caused the discharge of members with critical skills like fluency in Arabic, medicine and counterterrorism.
*
The enormous investment has been squandered. The cost of replacing them also is high. While the military was discharging gay soldiers, it was redressing troops shortages in wartime by giving “moral waivers” to convicted felons who lacked the required education and physical fitness to serve and were more likely to be drummed out because of misconduct.
*
While fighting Islamic extremism, it is far past time that the USA start fighting the religious extremism within its own borders and that extremism flow principally from one source - Christian extremists who seek to subvert the Constitution in order to enshrine their toxic beliefs in the nation's laws. The days of special rights for Christianity need to end.
No comments:
Post a Comment