"McCain says his objections to the bill aren't about whether to repeal DADT, but when to repeal it. He believes the military study being conducted now on DADT must be completed before Congress passes a law repealing it...."We have to assess the effect on battle effectiveness and morale before we move forward with repeal," said McCain, the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee."

That sounds like a reasonable position.. What's the hurry. Why not wait for the military to finish their study first - why vote on an issue without the study being completed first?

what's the hurry? just the hurry that it's long overdue. that good people's careers are being unjustly short circuited. that it affects people now, today, in fundamental ways. that it just isn't right.

kicking and screaming into the 21st centuary, many military and conservatives would delay it for years if given the opportunity. make it a law and make people get used to it. kinda like civil rights in the 60's.

given the choice, i'll bet current gay military personnel would go for change, NOW.

You would really think they would have combined this article with Harry Reid adding in Immigration Reform for Children to the same Bill.

It is obviously a Political ploy that anyone should see through.

Shame on MSN representing both of these items being attached to the same bill, but writing seperate articles.

So now Reid is attaching an immigration clause to this same defense spending bill. His last feeble attempt to win a political battle back home in the upcoming election. What slime politics. Where is the ethics and care for America in the current leadership - hint don't go looking for any cause you will die trying...

BTW where is NBC in reporting this story? Oh yeah buried elsewhere...

Don't forget, even if they vote to eliminate DADT, it will not be implemented until after the military finishes its study. I have seen interviews with gay/lesbian military who loved their jobs, who had expertise and training badly needed discharged because of this law. It is wrong to force people who want to serve their country to live a lie.

I served in the air force, and some things are better left unknown. It is not so much a problem for women, but for men it could be a serious problem.

Salt Grass,

Sad but true things are better off left unsaid. I do believe that any person that has the qualifications to join ought to be able to.

There is no greater sign of patriotism and service to ones country when you have served in the military!

Unfortunately, tigers killed many men in Vietnam.

I dont' agree.The military was against desegregation by a large majority also in the 40's and the president went ahead and ignored the advise of the military and desegregated black and white soldiers. It worked! It will work again regardless of what old men think. It needs to go!

Ive been serving for just over 20 years and I am torn. On one hand, I fail to see how someones sexual orientation can affect things like honor, valor, integrity and bravery. On the other hand, the U.S. military should not be treated like a social experiment. It is overwhelmingly unpopular in the military, and at the end of the day, I think WE should have at least some say in it.

Each junior enlisted member of the armed forces, who is single, lives in the barracks. I can only speak from what Ive seen in the Army, and in our barracks our junior personnel have roommates. These rooms are not coed, meaning a male and female will not share a room together, for obvious reasons. They do however, live in the same building. Now, since the Army does not allow males and females to live together, how does the Army ensure that two gay Soldiers that are in a relationship are not allowed to live together? But a male and female could not. This affects order and discipline, and those who do not agree with that statement have obviously never served.

So, the military has a few options. Option 1 is to keep the status quo, which works btw. Option 2 is to allow homosexuals in the Army and do nothing about the housing situation, which will adversely affect morale and discipline. Option 3 is allow every Soldier to have their own room. This would cost billions to literally double the amount of barracks space across the DOD.

Ladies and Gentlemen, DADT works. I need to remind people that it is not a RIGHT to serve in the Armed Forces. If you are so set on treating everyone equal, then lets start eliminating groups that cater to just one group of people. Can I file a lawsuit against the United Negro College Fund because they wont award me a scholarship? Doesnt matter that I'm white, isnt that discrimination? How about the Black Caucus, can an 'Asian American' legislator join?

Now, having said that...if DADT is repealled, I will support that decision. Thats what I promised to do. I do think the timing of this is politically motivated...and it bothers me to no end to have the military used as pawns in these Washington battles. Can we please wait to see what the study says, before we make the final decisions?

President Obama states that it is Congress who must end DADT due to the fact that it was codified into law in 1993 under Bill Clinton. This bill doesn't actually repeal DADT, it removes the Congressional law. It states that it goes into effect when the military finishes its study. The official repeal will then be up to the President and Secretary of Defense, and out of the hands of Congress.

Considering that a Judge has ruled DADT Unconstitutional it may well be out of the hands of both the President AND Congress. It is well past time for DADT to be removed, it has served no real purpose other than to comfort the bigots that inhabit the upper ranks of the service and fuel bigotry in the lower ranks as well as caused the discharge of thousands of otherwise good and needed troops. Considering that any GLBTs serving NOW happen to share housing with everyone else and it appears to not be causing problems, how can repealing DADT cause More problems?? People are so illogical about this facet of reality.

B. Honest.

Do you know what a blanket party is?

DADT protects people.

I lived in AZ for 21 years and grew to abhor (love that word) McCain. He is a duplitious rat that should have been removed from office after the Keating Five. He is emblematic of everything wrong with our political system.

Having said that, he is right that Reid is just playing politics. Reid knows how many votes he has and is just playing to his base. He needs to scrape up every one he can get.

if republicans were in that political position for a measure they wanted passed and moved to get it done before they risked lower numbers would that be a "shrewd political move" instead of "just playing politics?"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39177416/ns/politics/

Harry Reid also attached this to the Defense Bill.

I am pretty sure adding immigration to the bill is a political ploy.

Oh how this administration loves to Camouflage their true agendas. They could care less about the gays. Our service men and women deserve equal treatment and protection no matter what. Reid and Pelosi should be sent out with the troops, see how many would protect them. They are using the gays for their political plan. They are HUMAN BEINGS serving to protect this country and should not be used for politics!

GOD BLESS ALLLLL OUR SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN!

The federal judge who made the ruling has no say in military matters. SHe can rule anything she wants on DADT; her ruling has no effect on the repeal. It's meaningless; it's ammunition for the lobbyists.

Restricting free speech is unconstitutional, yet the military does it to all its members. There are restrictions placed on military members that go directly against the Bill of Rights, but they are necessary for order and discipline. And service members know this going in.

The Navy wives were always out on the town, when hubby was out to sea.

oh my! those promiscuous heterosexuals!!

lol

What an idiotic thing to say I can't stand McCain, but he was a genuine war hero.

What a trash heap you keep in your head.

Why is he a "genuine war hero:? Because he got shot down and held prisoner?

I guess that makes everyone in Guatanamo a "genuine war hero" to their people, too.

Is he a hero because he got into the USNA only on his daddy's coattails, not on his own merits?

Was he a hero when he repeatedly got demerits at the USNA for insubordinatioon?

IS he a hero for finishing at he bottom of his class when he was gifted such an extraordinary opportunity?

Was he a hero when he crashed FOUR different planes, mostly while hotdogging?

Was he a hero when he came back from Vietnam and immediately started cheating on the wife who had waited for him all the time he was a POW?

Was he a hero when he was cheating on that same wife with women who were subordinates to him in the military? Both of which I believe are violations of military codes of conduct.

Was he a hero when he dumped that wife to marry a rich young tart that wanted to help finance his political career?

If a man like that is your idea of a "hero", you have some pretty low standards.

McCain is uniquely UNfit to be determining who is fit to serve this country.

And anyone who has read, UNDERSTANDS and SUPPORTS the United States Constitution and it's guarantee of equality for all citizens.

Guess you're not one of them.

Maybe you should go live in a country more suited for your kind of bigoted ideology, where religious zealots run the government.

Iran, perhaps?

zivo,

Ever heard of the UCMJ? If you think there's equality in the military, you're sadly mistaken. There's two separate rules, Military and Civilian.......and for what Bob posted, he's right.

Also if you think a Private that just joined the Army has the same rights as a Sergeant, or a Sergeant has the same rights has a Captain, you might want to rethink what you said..............

"And anyone who has read, UNDERSTANDS and SUPPORTS the United States Constitution and it's guarantee of equality for all citizens."

Sure KeepN it, I'll ask you, where were you? Please tell me what you know? By the way what General was in the Green Zone? Strong word there, "slaughter", You compare McCain with the Soldiers in Iraq? I'm puzzled, you "worked" for the Navy, so that tells me you weren't in the Navy, but you sure know about the Green Zone. Yes, I know all four services were there, but that also tells me you were a cilivilan over there making some big bucks-Right? Bottom line is, you pretty much disrespected everyone that serves/served in the Military by your stupid comment, just keeping you Real!!!

Paul, didnt you know it is so much easier to sit here on a message board and be a big man than it is to actually do something? I am not going to criticize the contractors here in Iraq, they are doing a fantastic job....but they all realize that when bullets start flying they are going to hide in a bunker while the military members go after the people doing the shooting.

But, KeepN it Real, if you were indeed a contractor in Iraq, your sense of right and wrong sure didnt keep you from VOLUNTEERING to go to Iraq in the first place to make that money. You obviously had no moral issues with YOUR part of the war. Next time you want to see a hypocrite, I would suggest looking in the mirror.

Also, I would dare say that someone who's idea of war is sitting in the Green Zone definately lacks the credibility to criticize anyone who fought in Vietnam.

It is a sticky issue. Let me ask you Kevin, would you have a problem being in the Military if no one asked you if you were gay and you did your job?

I think people generalize Gays as fags. I personally don't care if their gay or not when it comes to preforming their job and I served 20 years in the Army. I knew a couple af Gay guys and I knew one that used it to get out of the Army to not deploy. There's many factors on this issue and they all can't be addressed.

it's a lovely world in black and white ain't it.

As a NCO in the US Army I am angered whenever anyone gives reason for repealing DADT for any reason except that it would be what is best for the soldiers(not just gay ones either). Eventually this country is going to accept homosexuals just like other minority groups that have been discriminated against. Until that time we need to do what is best for all members in the armed forces, and one day when our country accepts homosexuals, then it will be in the military and its soldiers' best interest to have them serve.

I hate when people try to compare this with integrating blacks, homosexuals do not have numbers near that amount. That makes a huge factor into whether or not it's best for ALL soldiers. Wake up and smell the roses, not all American soldiers are going to readily accept homosexuals, especially those in combat arms portion of the military. They also won't have the same strength of numbers as did black soldiers when they were integrated.

Forcing our Armed forces to dramatically change policy, especially if they don't want to, while they already have a heavy workload to prove a point is self-destructive. The bottom line is what is best for our soldiers, because what is best for them will make our armed forces stronger and that is best for America.