Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The don't ask/don't tell thing has got me thinking..... the military doesn't have to abide by alot of US laws that are in effect for employment.
For instance, minimum wage. That's a federal law and the military is exempt. (this is not to debate this....just an example) Another is disabled and overweight people don't have to be 'hired'.
So why can't the military be exempt from ...what do they call it? Discrimination of sexual orientation?
Is this why they are saying Congress should determine the outcome of don't ask/don't tell and not a court?
- An E-1 on his/her first day of Basic Training makes more than minimum wage.
- Most civilian employers have pre-hire "conditions of employment". You can't be hired as a flight attendant if you are in a wheel chair. There are certain requirements you must meet to be legally qualified to fly an aircraft. Drive a truck and so on and so forth.
- The short answer about the military is that they can set their hiring requirements to meet the demands of military jobs. Without opening up a can of worms, many see "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as a form of dsicrimination and are fighting to have it removed. Especially since gays have always and will always serve.
Last edited by Crew Chief; 10-22-2010 at 07:14 PM..
For instance, minimum wage. That's a federal law and the military is exempt. (this is not to debate this....just an example)
That is a poor example and your title "How is the military exempt from laws? can be very misleading...
There are many employments which are exempt from the "federal Wage and Hour Law", not just the US Military....
Your other examples such as disability, weight and sexual orientation are not really related, they are separate issues. Do you really need an explanation of why some people with certain types of disabilities are not allowed to be on active duty in the US Military?
The sexual orientation issue which has been discussed for years is what you are casually bringing up... Except now the policy which prohibits anyone who "demonstrate(s) a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts" from serving in the armed forces of the United States, was recently struck down by a federal judge, by imposing an injunction ordering federal officials not to enforce the policy.
Last edited by Poncho_NM; 10-20-2010 at 10:49 AM..
Assuming that Congress IS the best venue, it would be because ultimately Congress is the one who sets up the laws for the military. The SC would come into play under "unconstitutional" grounds. But as you point out, the military is a very special case in a lot of way, so it is not so simple.......
The news (some news outlets) are saying the appropriate place to 'hear' this is not a court but rather congress.
I was just wondering why that is...but then I do realize the military doesn't have to abide by some labor laws.
Never asked for an explaination of why disabled people shouldn't serve- that's rediculious!
Why is Congress the best venue for this matter?
U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips issued a worldwide injunction stopping enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. The Department of Justice attorneys have 60 days to appeal the federal court judge's injunction. Judge Phillips declared the law unconstitutional after a two-week trial in federal court in Riverside, California. Judge Phillips stated that the trial established "that the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Act irreparably injures servicemembers by infringing their fundamental rights." Judge Phillips said the policy violates due process rights, freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances guaranteed by the First Amendment. "Furthermore, there is no adequate remedy at law to prevent the continued violation of servicemembers' rights or to compensate them for violation of their rights," Phillips said. She said Department of Justice attorneys did not address these issues in their objection to her expected injunction. They said such an abrupt change might harm military operations in a time of war. The Department of Justice attorneys said Congress should decide the issue however Judge Phillips disagreed, saying the law doesn't help military readiness and instead has a "direct and deleterious effect" on the armed services by hurting recruiting during wartime and requiring the discharge of service members with critical skills and training. President Obama has made clear that, though he wants to end Don't Ask, Don't Tell Act, he wants Congress to do it by passing legislation.
At this point with the facts that have been disclosed the only reason I believe that Congress would the best venue for this matter is just to allow the Department of Defense of how to close down "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Act" but I think Congress might not have been interested, perhaps for political reasons etc...
That's all I have to say.
I have no plans into trying to turn this into a political discussion in this forum.
There is no law protecting gays. The laws and constitution only prevent discrimination on certain things, age, race, religion, nation origin, and and American's with disabilities act for handicapping conditions. There are exceptions all over the place. If you are 20 you can't buy alcohol, a business can give a senior citizen a discount and not those younger, ect. You can discriminate against people for being fat (lawsuits have been filed and lost for this one), having tattoos, height, ect.
The military has it's own criminal justice system. Haven't you ever watched JAG? LOL. I'm not exactly sure how it works with juristictional issues and so forth but the fact remains that the military justice is separate and quite different than the civilian system. They even have their own jails.
The military has it's own criminal justice system. Haven't you ever watched JAG? LOL. I'm not exactly sure how it works with juristictional issues and so forth but the fact remains that the military justice is separate and quite different than the civilian system. They even have their own jails.
bingo !
Could you imagine if any civilian employer had its own jails?
Could you imagine if US civilian employers had their own jails and new workers had to sign 4 or 6 year contracts in order to get hired?
Any civilian employer that demanded a new employee sign a 4 or 6 year contract in which the employer could not walk off the job and quit at any time w/o risking being detained would be held as practicing unconstitutional acts.
I think many civilians ( OP , for example ) have no idea how different the minitary is from the civilian world.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
