<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: ANGER AS OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DEFENDS DON&#8217;T ASK, DON&#8217;T TELL	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.mambaonline.com/2011/07/14/anger-as-obama-administration-defends-dont-ask-dont-tell/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.mambaonline.com/2011/07/14/anger-as-obama-administration-defends-dont-ask-dont-tell/</link>
	<description>South Africa&#039;s leading LGBTQ news and community platform</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:31:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Robanaurochs		</title>
		<link>https://www.mambaonline.com/2011/07/14/anger-as-obama-administration-defends-dont-ask-dont-tell/#comment-12251</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robanaurochs]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.mambaonline.com/?p=17311#comment-12251</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Biassed Article. This article has failed to report the whole truth behind this decision. I don&#039;t necessarily agree with the motivation behind Obama&#039;s request, I feel that it deserves to be included in this article.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;www.pinknews.co.uk includes the following explaination:&lt;br&gt;________________________________________-&lt;br&gt;Tracy Schmaler, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said in a statement.&#8220;The department has filed a motion asking the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its order lifting the stay of the injunction on the &#145;Don&#146;t Ask, Don&#146;t Tell&#146; policy to avoid short-circuiting the repeal process established by Congress during the final stages of the implementation of repeal.&#8221;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;She added: &#8220;Senior military leaders are expected to make their decision on certifying repeal within the next few weeks.&#8221;&lt;br&gt;________________________________________-&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;My understanding is that there is a certain procedure that needs to be undertaken before the law can be repealed and this is proceeding, albeit rather slowly. What the court&#039;s doing is bypassing some of the steps. All Obama&#039;s office is doing is trying to prevent the court from doing this so that the repeal process can be completed normally.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;If I had to compare this to our getting the Civil Unions Act. This would be the same as the courts authorising gay marriages directly after parliament passed voted for the bill but before it was ratified by the NCOP and before Thabo Mbeki could sign it into law. It&#039;s not the normal course of action.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That&#039;s their argument and from a bureaucratic point of view, it&#039;s understandable.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What I don&#039;t like about Obama&#039;s decision is that it seems that he&#039;s asked the courts not to force the military to unban the law because they&#039;re still in the process of creating new policies and guidelines. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Seriously, what policies and guidelines take so long to make? Are they going to start having four sets of ablutions now? One for str8 men, one for str8 women, one for gay men (happy days), and one for gay women? I know it sounds ridiculous but I wouldn&#039;t put it past the conservatives to something like that.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Biassed Article. This article has failed to report the whole truth behind this decision. I don&#8217;t necessarily agree with the motivation behind Obama&#8217;s request, I feel that it deserves to be included in this article.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.pinknews.co.uk" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.pinknews.co.uk</a> includes the following explaination:<br />________________________________________-<br />Tracy Schmaler, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said in a statement.&ldquo;The department has filed a motion asking the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its order lifting the stay of the injunction on the &#145;Don&#146;t Ask, Don&#146;t Tell&#146; policy to avoid short-circuiting the repeal process established by Congress during the final stages of the implementation of repeal.&rdquo;</p>
<p>She added: &ldquo;Senior military leaders are expected to make their decision on certifying repeal within the next few weeks.&rdquo;<br />________________________________________-</p>
<p>My understanding is that there is a certain procedure that needs to be undertaken before the law can be repealed and this is proceeding, albeit rather slowly. What the court&#8217;s doing is bypassing some of the steps. All Obama&#8217;s office is doing is trying to prevent the court from doing this so that the repeal process can be completed normally.</p>
<p>If I had to compare this to our getting the Civil Unions Act. This would be the same as the courts authorising gay marriages directly after parliament passed voted for the bill but before it was ratified by the NCOP and before Thabo Mbeki could sign it into law. It&#8217;s not the normal course of action.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s their argument and from a bureaucratic point of view, it&#8217;s understandable.</p>
<p>What I don&#8217;t like about Obama&#8217;s decision is that it seems that he&#8217;s asked the courts not to force the military to unban the law because they&#8217;re still in the process of creating new policies and guidelines. </p>
<p>Seriously, what policies and guidelines take so long to make? Are they going to start having four sets of ablutions now? One for str8 men, one for str8 women, one for gay men (happy days), and one for gay women? I know it sounds ridiculous but I wouldn&#8217;t put it past the conservatives to something like that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
