<?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: US bill could see witness immunity for gay soldiers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/</link>
	<description>News, reviews and comment from Europe&#039;s largest gay news service</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:28:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chester</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85975</link>
		<dc:creator>Chester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 09:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85975</guid>
		<description>unfortunately Obama&#039;s office has used homophobic language before so I wouldn&#039;t rely on him to oppose homophobia</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>unfortunately Obama&#8217;s office has used homophobic language before so I wouldn&#8217;t rely on him to oppose homophobia</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85873</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:12:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85873</guid>
		<description>Perhaps Obama could issue such an order, but he chooses not to. Perhaps he is keeping his election promise of being a President of ALL US citizens, not just of those who voted for him. Instead of doing what Bush did and imposing his will on others, he&#039;s engaging in the debate about DADT.

By doing this he will ensure that when it is repealed it has support from ALL sides of the US political spectrum, because they have been consulted. This means that it is far less likely ever to be re-instated by a future President than it would be if he simply reversed it by Executive order. 

It also means that for those who know little about DADT and its effects, the debate may open their eyes to the injustices of it. If he simply banned the policy with no consultation, Fox News and all the other right wing media outlets would have a field day and declare him a pinko commie. If there&#039;s a debate more people can make up their mind that DADT is a waste of time and money and damages, rather than protects the US Army.

Good things are worth waiting for and are all the sweeter if you&#039;ve had to work for them. Admittedly it&#039;s been a long wait, but I&#039;d rather the slow and cautious method that gets it right than the bull in a china shop approach that causes a backlash.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps Obama could issue such an order, but he chooses not to. Perhaps he is keeping his election promise of being a President of ALL US citizens, not just of those who voted for him. Instead of doing what Bush did and imposing his will on others, he&#8217;s engaging in the debate about DADT.</p>
<p>By doing this he will ensure that when it is repealed it has support from ALL sides of the US political spectrum, because they have been consulted. This means that it is far less likely ever to be re-instated by a future President than it would be if he simply reversed it by Executive order. </p>
<p>It also means that for those who know little about DADT and its effects, the debate may open their eyes to the injustices of it. If he simply banned the policy with no consultation, Fox News and all the other right wing media outlets would have a field day and declare him a pinko commie. If there&#8217;s a debate more people can make up their mind that DADT is a waste of time and money and damages, rather than protects the US Army.</p>
<p>Good things are worth waiting for and are all the sweeter if you&#8217;ve had to work for them. Admittedly it&#8217;s been a long wait, but I&#8217;d rather the slow and cautious method that gets it right than the bull in a china shop approach that causes a backlash.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chester</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85835</link>
		<dc:creator>Chester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:47:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85835</guid>
		<description>Kaz - he is precisely that and worse</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kaz &#8211; he is precisely that and worse</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kaz</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85823</link>
		<dc:creator>Kaz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:12:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85823</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m pretty sure that an executive order was issued to de-segregate the military, so I don&#039;t know why it can&#039;t be used to end DADT.  It just seems like another politician not keeping their campaign promises to me</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m pretty sure that an executive order was issued to de-segregate the military, so I don&#8217;t know why it can&#8217;t be used to end DADT.  It just seems like another politician not keeping their campaign promises to me</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simon Murphy</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85769</link>
		<dc:creator>Simon Murphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:04:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85769</guid>
		<description>Obama is a moron. 

He is commander in chief. He can issue an immediate executive order suspending DADT.

A bill to grant immunity would not be necessary if that 2-faced typical politician Obama simply abided by his pre-election promisess.

He is such a disappointment. His mantra of &#039;change&#039; seems pretty meaningless based on his inaction on his promises towards the LGBT community</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama is a moron. </p>
<p>He is commander in chief. He can issue an immediate executive order suspending DADT.</p>
<p>A bill to grant immunity would not be necessary if that 2-faced typical politician Obama simply abided by his pre-election promisess.</p>
<p>He is such a disappointment. His mantra of &#8216;change&#8217; seems pretty meaningless based on his inaction on his promises towards the LGBT community</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Riondo</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85765</link>
		<dc:creator>Riondo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:52:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85765</guid>
		<description>Why is the Commander in Chief p***ing about like this? He has the constitutional right to end DADT now!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is the Commander in Chief p***ing about like this? He has the constitutional right to end DADT now!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Abi1975</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85758</link>
		<dc:creator>Abi1975</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:04:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85758</guid>
		<description>I bet Obama could use the 13,000 sacked for being gay now he needs 30,000 for his Afghanistan surge.

Let us not serve we don&#039;t care its better for us.  After all the world would be a better safer place if all the male heterosexual bigots where off killing each other.  We could just get on with our life&#039;s and take control.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I bet Obama could use the 13,000 sacked for being gay now he needs 30,000 for his Afghanistan surge.</p>
<p>Let us not serve we don&#8217;t care its better for us.  After all the world would be a better safer place if all the male heterosexual bigots where off killing each other.  We could just get on with our life&#8217;s and take control.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chester</title>
		<link>http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85730</link>
		<dc:creator>Chester</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:37:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/03/us-bill-could-see-witness-immunity-for-gay-soldiers/#comment-85730</guid>
		<description>they need immunity but more importantly to reject DADT completely</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>they need immunity but more importantly to reject DADT completely</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 1/21 queries in 0.017 seconds using apc
Object Caching 991/992 objects using apc

Served from: www.pinknews.co.uk @ 2012-02-12 15:29:19 -->
