wasn't asked, didn't tell, but lesbian sergeant still fired?

[werepossum]

The problem I have isn't with the military, because they have to go with whatever rules they have.

The police on the other hand seem to have done this to punish her for not cooperating. Police are virtually immune for far too much.

This. "Don't ask don't tell" should also apply to third parties unless there is a pressing issue to do so, since the whole point of the policy is to limit discharges to situations where homosexuality becomes an issue.

 

[nobodyknows]

Or they found out by some other means and then lied about it, which seems more plausible.

Either way, I have doubts that the department's weak rationale for releasing the information to the AF will protect them in civil court.

LOL, quite the conspiracy therory.

It's actually more believble that she left the marriager license out where they could se it snce she knew they would be after her spouse and was wanting to quit the military.

Now she can sue!!

I mean who leaves there marraige license laying out on the kitchen table in the first place? Mine's in my safe.

 

[K1052]

LOL, quite the conspiracy therory.

It's actually more believble that she left the marriager license out where they could se it snce she knew they would be after her spouse and was wanting to quit the military.

Now she can sue!!

I mean who leaves there marraige license laying out on the kitchen table in the first place? Mine's in my safe.

Nobody, that's why the story is suspect.

I find it more likely that the PD is covering it's ass than your fantasy.

 

[nobodyknows]

Nobody, that's why the story is suspect.

I find it more likely that the PD is covering it's ass than your fantasy.

You may be right, but I did not see a denial from her as to how the police found out her marital status? If I were her and didn't have my marraige license out in plain sight I'd sure as hell be vocal about that fact?

 

[Turin39789]

who has a kitchen table situated such that it is not only viewable from a window but close enough to read names written on a piece of paper from the outside?

 

[LumbergTech]

LOL, quite the conspiracy therory.

It's actually more believble that she left the marriager license out where they could se it snce she knew they would be after her spouse and was wanting to quit the military.

Now she can sue!!

I mean who leaves there marraige license laying out on the kitchen table in the first place? Mine's in my safe.

Gay people, who only recently have obtained the right to get married ....in a limited number of places..MAYBE

 

[nageov3t]

who has a kitchen table situated such that it is not only viewable from a window but close enough to read names written on a piece of paper from the outside?

my kitchen table is right up against my kitchen window it's a cafe table and there's only ever 1-2 people sitting at it.

 

[classy]

The officers involved should be fired on the spot.

No they shouldn't. Its unfortunate what happened, but the police did do what is right. They had a warrant for a person who was wanted for a felony and 3 minors for theft. They contacted her and she refused to help. Now she was well within her right to do so, but the police have the right to contact people and places where a possible fugitive could be staying with the help of a loved one. When a warrant is given, especially a felony, you better comply. The problem is that unfortunately for her, her relationship was in violation of her service. They would have done the same thing if it was a man and woman.

 

[Fern]

who has a kitchen table situated such that it is not only viewable from a window but close enough to read names written on a piece of paper from the outside?

my kitchen table is right up against my kitchen window it's a cafe table and there's only ever 1-2 people sitting at it.

Most kitchen tables (for eating at) are right up next to a window.

Otherwise, getting married, which is public, strikes me as violating the "don't tell' part.

Fern

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

What I find strange is that the DOD job postings I keep seeing say that the DOD is an equal opportunity employer.

Well, you see, teh gays aren't real people. And since they're not a real person, no rights apply to them and their 'condition'

So they could literally be fired for a lifestyle choice that has zero impact on their functionality, is not illegal and holds no weight in their intelligence or drive to do a good job.
Yay for the fuckwits that support da/dt, I think those idiots should get a dvda

 

[zsdersw]

Well, you see, teh gays aren't real people.

Quite right. We're not real people. We're a punchline, a joke, a bunch of "weirdos" who do things that are strange and different and not really done by anyone else. Our desires are wrong, our actions make God and Jesus cry, and we enjoy ourselves which is obviously wrong. Others are perfectly justified to feel weirded-out by our presence because we're dangerous, we're toxic, and we all have HIV/AIDS or another STD (which is God's way of punishing us for our sins, by the way).

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Quite right. We're not real people. We're a punchline, a joke, a bunch of "weirdos" who do things that are strange and different and not really done by anyone else. Our desires are wrong, our actions make God and Jesus cry, and we enjoy ourselves which is obviously wrong. Others are perfectly justified to feel weirded-out by our presence because we're dangerous, we're toxic, and we all have HIV/AIDS or another STD (which is God's way of punishing us for our sins, by the way).

And don't forget your proclivity towards fashion and design!




and I truly hope you knew I was being 100% sarcastic in the first half of my post.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Quite right. We're not real people. We're a punchline, a joke, a bunch of "weirdos" who do things that are strange and different and not really done by anyone else. Our desires are wrong, our actions make God and Jesus cry, and we enjoy ourselves which is obviously wrong. Others are perfectly justified to feel weirded-out by our presence because we're dangerous, we're toxic, and we all have HIV/AIDS or another STD (which is God's way of punishing us for our sins, by the way).

i think you missed the sarcasm...

of course it would be ironic if you were being sarcastic as well, because then i'd have missed it

 

[zsdersw]

and I truly hope you knew I was being 100% sarcastic in the first half of my post.

*touches his nose*

 

[zsdersw]

i think you missed the sarcasm...

of course it would be ironic if you were being sarcastic as well, because then i'd have missed it

I have a PhD in Sarcasm.

 

[nobodyknows]

who has a kitchen table situated such that it is not only viewable from a window but close enough to read names written on a piece of paper from the outside?

I do.

My kitchen table is against the wall, centered on a window and there is a deck on the house so it would be an easy matter to look through the window and see what was on the kitchen table, but I don't leave anything on it but my wife's mail and the sale ads.

 

[nobodyknows]

Most kitchen tables (for eating at) are right up next to a window.

Otherwise, getting married, which is public, strikes me as violating the "don't tell' part.

Fern

Exactly. Was what the police did fair? I don't think so, but did they break any law, particuarly anything they can be sued over? I just don't see it.

 

[nageov3t]

Exactly. Was what the police did fair? I don't think so, but did they break any law, particuarly anything they can be sued over? I just don't see it.

I imagine that the context in which they told the Sergeants boss, whatever it may have been, is going to come into play.

 

[nobodyknows]

I imagine that the context in which they told the Sergeants boss, whatever it may have been, is going to come into play.

Facts is facts?? ANd as Fern pointed out, marriage is "public".

No law was broken obtaining those facts so where the suit?? Her problem is with the 'don't ask, don't tell" law, not with the police. Not that I can see??

 

[nageov3t]

Facts is facts?? ANd as Fern pointed out, marriage is "public".

No law was broken obtaining those facts so where the suit?? Her problem is with the 'don't ask, don't tell" law, not with the police. Not that I can see??

if it can be shown that the police reported her with the intent to get her fired as retribution, wouldn't that be different than if the police happened to mention it to a supervisor in the context of their investigation?

 

[nobodyknows]

if it can be shown that the police reported her with the intent to get her fired as retribution, wouldn't that be different than if the police happened to mention it to a supervisor in the context of their investigation?

As was stated in the original article, the police have stated they used the information to establish a connection beyond that of just roommates between the two women.

When I put myself in the situation I clearly see a difference between the level of cooperation I would expect to give if a warrant was being served on my roomate or on my spouse. It is not the police's resposibility to worry about the federal law, they were just doing what was required for them to do their job to the best of their ability.

So sue them, I don't think they have a case at all.