New Day for the Military

[JonC]

Just spoke to a young man who went out of state to marry his boyfriend so that he could be a dependent and receive military benefits. Guess it’s a new day for the military. I feel for the commanders - this is going to be a difficult issue.

 

[JonC]

Looking at what I posted, I need to clarify (I’m sure some are thinking “why is this in politics?”


The individual is in the National Guard of a state that does not recognize same sex marriage. The Guard, of course, is federal and state. So the soldier receives all of the federal pay and benefits of being in a reserve service. But here is where it is interesting. The soldier is under state jurisdiction (he is title 32) and receives state benefits as well. Basically, his “husband” is enrolled in deers, receives benefits, but can’t really be recognized as a spouse under state law. Or, does the federal government force state organizations to recognize same sex spouses?



(I suppose state benefits to the spouse are minimal – some educational opportunities/scholarships, family support and readiness programs, etc).

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

It sure ain't my Army anymore.

raying:

 

[JonC]

It sure ain't my Army anymore.

raying:

Since the military is a microcosm of society, I think that it was just a matter of time. As this is a DoD policy it will affect all military forces. What I was wondering was how it would be handled by the National Guard. They receive federal pay and benefits - so on this part it will be exactly like all services. But they will be operating under a jurisdiction that doesn’t (in many cases) recognize same sex marriage.

It may end up not being an issue at all. I don’t know.

 

[just-want-peace]

Since the military is a microcosm of society, I think that it was just a matter of time. As this is a DoD policy it will affect all military forces. What I was wondering was how it would be handled by the National Guard. They receive federal pay and benefits - so on this part it will be exactly like all services. But they will be operating under a jurisdiction that doesn’t (in many cases) recognize same sex marriage.

It may end up not being an issue at all. I don’t know.

Oh make no mistake, it will be an issue. There is no way this current immoral gov't and/or the deviants will pass up a chance to cram their ideology down the state's throat.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

It sure ain't my Army anymore.

raying:

This is true, and let this all sink in for those who may feel obligated to stand up and celebrate and glorify the military at the next sporting event (or church service) they attend.

Of course, one wonders when it was that the Army was actually 'ours' (i.e. the people) , since they seem to fight wars nowadays more on behalf of the power elite than they do defending our actual borders from an actual invasion.

So while we can appreciate the courage of those soldiers who are willing to sacrifice for their country, we can also lament the fact that their sacrifice is missplaced (wasted) by those (neocons and neolibs) who send them overseas for unnecesarry wars and that so many die or return home mentally and physically broken.

Alas, the US military has evolved from a force which defends our people's freedoms to an expeditionary force for the power elite and an experimental lab for social engineering which is becoming increasing hostile to Christians.

 

[JonC]

The problem, of course, is that you (and I) do not determine the necessity of the wars of our nation. Look at the number of people who objected to our involvement in WW2 (I think that we were right to become involved, admittedly a perspective from hindsight, but many objected). The military serves at the discretion of the nation – it is here that their willingness for sacrifice is noted (not in the justness of the war – but in the honor of their action). Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with the OP.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

This is true, and let this all sink in for those who may feel obligated to stand up and celebrate and glorify the military at the next sporting event (or church service) they attend.

Of course, one wonders when it was that the Army was actually 'ours' (i.e. the people) , since they seem to fight wars nowadays more on behalf of the power elite than they do defending our actual borders from an actual invasion.

Sorry, Thomas, but this wasn't the point of my post and I have to reject your response to it.

1) I will always honor the military men and women who serve, regardless of sexual or "gender" preference, because serviing is an honor and a duty. Anyone who successfully serves is worthy of being honored for that service.

2) That the military fights wars "on behalf of the power elite" is an extremist view, from either a reactionary or a liberal base, and I don't accept it as a valid view.

 

[North Carolina Tentmaker]

Alas, the US military has evolved from a force which defends our people's freedoms to an expeditionary force for the power elite and an experimental lab for social engineering which is becoming increasing hostile to Christians.

By "the power elite" of course you mean those civilian leaders elected by the citizens of the United States right?

 

[Doubting Thomas]

By "the power elite" of course you mean those civilian leaders elected by the citizens of the United States right?

No, I'm talking about the monied special interests/lobbies (megabanks, corporations, MIC, etc) that have an inordinate amount of influence on our elected officials and therefore on our foreign policy, regardless of which party is power or what the American people actually want.

 

[JonC]

No, I'm talking about the monied special interests/lobbies (megabanks, corporations, MIC, etc) that have an inordinate amount of influence on our elected officials and therefore on our foreign policy, regardless of which party is power or what the American people actually want.

So you mean those who actually pay for and control the leaders elected by the citizens of the United States...right? :smilewinkgrin: