In the lead-up to DADT repeal, the Religious Right went to great lengths to portray the members of the United States armed forces as an elite fighting force which happens to be populated by people are too sissy to deal with being around openly gay people. It was super weird.

But now that repeal is about to become official [tomorrow], it looks like the military is going to be just fine, thankyew:

For some gay service members, the fear of discovery and reprisals dissipated months ago when a federal court halted all investigations and discharge proceedings under “don’t ask, don’t tell,” while military leaders prepared the armed services for its end.

Several have come out to their peers and commanders.

A few have since placed photographs of their same-sex partners on their desks and attended military barbecues and softball games with their significant others. In San Diego, about 200 active-duty personnel — both gay and heterosexual — made up the nation’s first military contingency to participate in a Gay Pride march this summer, carrying banners identifying their branches of service. An Army soldier had tears, saying she was touched by the thousands cheering them on, after hiding her identity for so long.

[...]

Air Force Capt. Diane Cox, whose gay son served in the Navy, said she got into heated debates with service members vowing not to take showers and share rooms with gays before Congress voted to repeal the law, but after the military held sensitivity trainings to explain the new rules “everybody just shut up.”

Ha. The rest of the article sadly features more “not shutting up” from, you guessed it, chaplains. They are still very worried whether or not they, who are supposed to be able to minister to any and all troops in a time of war, will still be free to get a little gay-hatin’ in on the side. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: that these chaplains are so worried about people taking away their precious right to discriminate says more about them as human beings than it does about gay troops.

[Note from Evan:  This is Jenny Blair, and she's going to be pitching in a bit with the writing around here.  Welcome her!]

One of only two law schools in the nation to have denied military recruiters access to its campus during the “don’t ask, don’t tell” era recently announced it will lift its ban once DADT is repealed in September.

Unlike the overwhelming majority of American law schools, the Vermont Law School has kept recruiters off its campus because the military’s barring of openly non-heterosexual people violated a non-discrimination policy that the school adopted in 1985. That lack of hypocrisy cost VLS dearly–to the tune of some $500,000 a year in federal funds since 2000–when the Defense Department decided to withhold federal funding from all universities of which any part prohibited military recruiters. [The Defense Department can do that because of the Solomon Amendment, which prevents schools from receiving federal funding if they don't allow military recruiters on campus.]

In other words, the students, faculty, and trustees of Vermont Law School said no thanks to over $5 million in order to uphold the school’s own stated principles. Who says lawyers’ loyalties are for sale? Bravo, VLS.

Whine, Alliance Defense Fund, whine:

“Our troops’ religious liberties are in unprecedented jeopardy because the government has caved in to pressure from small groups of activists to impose homosexual and bisexual behavior on our military,” ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Daniel Blomberg said in a statement Friday.

The ADF statement came just after the Obama administration cleared the last hurdle in ending the so-called “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which barred openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual persons from military service. The ban will end after the 60-day waiting period, on September 20.

Once that happens, the first casualty may well be the religious freedom of chaplains and service members, Blomberg said. “No formal protections have been adopted despite many having been proposed,” he complained. “No Americans, and especially not our troops, should be forced to abandon their religious beliefs.”

Gawd, they’re melodramatic when they’re playing victim. Let’s break this down.

First of all, this has nothing do to with “our troops’ religious liberties.” One of the ways the Christian Right lies is by delusionally acting as if they represent the mainstream of America, or in this case, the mainstream of our troops. They do not. The majority of troops don’t care what the sexual orientation of the people they serve with is. They care whether or not they can do their jobs. It is a declining minority of troops who are so uncomfortable in their skin/religiously brainwashed that they are obsessed with other peoples’ sexuality.

Moreover, this has nothing to do with “religious liberties” in the first place. Are gay soldiers going to prevent these few wingnut soldiers from worshipping as they see fit? No? Well then, their religious liberty is intact! I am quite aware that the Christian Right views itself collectively as the World’s Best Snowflake Baby, due all the care, concern and deference their little hearts desire, but nowhere in the concept of “religious freedom” is the idea that they should be protected from people who think differently from them. Moreover, the bitching about the chaplains is always cute, as chaplains in a diverse environment such as the military are expected, as part of their job description, to be able to minister to all different kinds of people, including the many, many straight troops who have no interest in their bewildering, Philistine beliefs about human sexuality. And the idea that a wingnut outfit such as the Alliance Defense Fund is blubbering about chaplains being denied their “right” to preach hatred against gay people tells us more about their whiny, weird obsessions than it does about anything involving DADT repeal in the US military.

Finally, the quote about troops being forced to “abandon their religious beliefs” is simply insane to anyone with a triple digit IQ so I’m not spending a paragraph correcting it.

Hey ADF: stop whining. The Military isn’t whining. Try to follow their example.

[h/t  Andrew Belonsky]

Here you go:

Top defense officials plan to certify Friday that the Pentagon is ready to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military, officials said, a landmark moment after almost two decades of controversy.

The military now has to resolve crucial questions such as what benefits same-sex couples will receive.

While the military will be free to provide some services to same-sex spouses, such as family support for spouses of deployed service members, federal law blocks it from providing them the full range of health, housing and education available to heterosexual couples.

Primary Obama! He hates us! Primary him with an “unelectable pony-promiser!”

[h/t Joe]

More good news.  Though Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has technically been repealed, as we all know, there has been an injunction in place essentially preserving the ban while the military prepares for the policy change.  The Ninth Circuit has put a stop to that, and the Pentagon says they’ll comply with the court order:

Even with Obama’s support for ending the 18-year-old policy, Obama’s justice department asked the appeals court to keep the injunction in place to give the military more time to prepare for admitting gay soldiers.

On Wednesday, a three judge-panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals noted that the process of repealing DADT is now “well under way”.

The government “can no longer satisfy the demanding standard” to keep the injunction on hold, the court ruled.

The Pentagon said it was still studying the ruling, but added it would comply with the court order.

Dave Lapan, a military spokesperson, said the US military was immediately taking “steps to inform the field of this order.

Step by step, the discriminatory institutions are falling away.  It’s always nice when the courts give the administration a little nudge, though.

UPDATE:  Predictably, the self-loathing gay wingnut part of the internet has found a reason to hate this victory, as there is no victory for LGBT rights that they are ever truly happy about.

Oh, it is so nice, at the end of certain culture war battles, battles where we as LGBT writers and activists have to deal with the kicking and screaming children of the Religious Right in order to gain our equality, to see that the actual adults affected by the changes are acting like, well, adults! Here is Michael Barrett, the top NCO of the Marine Corps, talking to Marines in South Korea about DADT repeal:

“Get over it.” That’s the ultimate message delivered to marines by the top non-commissioned officer of the Marine Corps regarding the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT).

[...]

The Wall Street Journal reports that Sgt. Maj. Barrett brought out a small copy of the Constitution and referenced Article 1, Section 8. “It says, ‘Raise an army.’ It says absolutely nothing about race, color, creed, sexual orientation.” He then asked if everyone in the group joined the Marines to protect their nation, going on to say, “How dare we, then, exclude a group of people who want to do the same thing you do right now, something that is honorable and noble?”

Sgt. Maj. Barrett concluded by saying “Get over it… Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines.”

I would extend that sentiment to dead-end brats like Tony Perkins and his various hate group cohorts. The rest of the country is handling this like grown-ups; it is high time that the Religious Right learns how to play well with others in a secular, diverse society.

It’s Bryan Fischer time, so turn of your brain, because Bryan turned his off years ago.  Bryan starts a new column about DADT repeal — yes, wingnuts are still crying about it — suggesting that, now that gays can serve openly, wingnuts like Bryan, but who happen to be in the military, are going to become victims of “hate crimes” at the hands of gay soldiers:

Get ready for an entire spate of hate crimes in the U.S. military, perpetrated by homosexual activists against servicemembers, especially officers, who have deeply held religious convictions about the acceptability of homosexual behavior.

Wait, does he think gay soldiers are going to maim and kill straight soldiers? Is this really what he’s going with?

I received a communique from a career United States Air Force officer, a man who has been an officer for 19 years. He understandably wants his identity to be protected so that he can finish his military career without himself becoming the victim of a hate crime perpetrated by homosexuals.

If that nineteen-year officer is really so terrified that he needs his anonymity protected, I’m more worried about him being able to finish the day without soiling his britches after being attacked by his own shadow.

Says this experienced officer, based on the training he was just recently subjected to:

“Homosexuals are now a protected class of people in the Air Force. Any form of discrimination against them — even an objection to the sexual lifestyle or behavior — is now taboo and will be severely punished.”

Severe punishment for merely expressing reservations about the normalcy of homosexual behavior? Can you say “hate crime?” I certainly can.

Of course you can, Bryan, but like most wingnuts, you don’t speak English very well, and your grasp of words’ actual definitions is wanting.

“Dialog (sic) of any dissenters during the training was noticeably absent because they feared how their objections might be view by the senior leaders in the room…who control future jobs and promotions. The direction from the lawyers and senior officers in the room was clearly vocalized: adhere to the new policy or you will be punished.” That’s the very definition of a hate crime.

No, it isn’t. You actually have to be threatening the well-being of someone. Simply wingnutting your paws together and stomping around saying your religion makes you scared of gayness doesn’t count.

The fact that this hate-crime threat intimidated these officers into silence became clear based on what happened after the officers – who uttered not a peep of protest in the training sessions – were free from the constraints of the training room. They “spent considerable time discussing the indoctrination, the double standards, and the problems we’ll face in the future.” In other words, when they could speak freely without worrying about becoming the victim of a hate crime, they expressed all kinds of problems with the change in policy.

So, some poorly constituted officers ran away to cry about gays together and…yeah, I’m still not seeing the hate crime. Remember when Sarah Palin started emanating things from her mouth about “blood libel,” completely unaware of the definition of the term? This is like that.

The officer who wrote to me went on to explain that there was “absolutely no discussion about the right of personnel to be free from unwanted sexual attraction…the guy who asks me out on a date Monday afternoon will be granted the right to shower with me on Tuesday morning…While there is currently some leeway for heterosexuals to object to intimate quarters with homosexuals…senior leaders in the room made it clear that such objections will not be tolerated for long.”

Oh, my. Part of the reason wingnuts are so afraid of gay men is that they’ve been taught such silly lies about us. There is no gay man I have ever met who would ever ask Bryan Fischer on a date, and considering the kind of people who would listen to his program or read his words without laughing, that officer can rest assured that there is nothing sexual about him, to anyone. Also, gay men don’t tend to ask guys out who aren’t either definitely gay or have given us a good reason to believe that they are gay. It’s sort of…yeah, I know! I can’t believe I’m having to rebut such childish stupidity either, you guys.

And the campaign of intimidation is working. “I don’t know of a single officer who is willing to buck the system and oppose the policy…The senior officers shrug their shoulders and say, ‘I’m not about to let this destroy my career and result in the loss of my well-being and pension.’

[...]

Hmmm. “Destroy career…loss of pension…sacrifice my career.” All because of prejudice against one’s religion. Hate Crimes R-Us.

No, it has nothing to do with your religion. Christianity is very much allowed, will continue to be allowed, etc. Of course, most Christians aren’t buck-toothed, mouth-breathing bigots like Bryan Fischer and his Air Force Officer penpal, but idiots slip through every crack and infest us all, so it’s unfortunate but unsurprising that there are a few in the military, bothering everyone.

This officer does not think that things will stop here. He predicts, as I have from the beginning, that we will soon see a “barrage of lawsuits arguing in favor of homosexual military spouses.”

And this is a hate crime, because…and yeah, the gay spouse thing will have to be dealt with, especially once DOMA is defeated. It’s kind of part of the idea of “equality.” I love how wingnuts always talk about these things as if they’re a secret nobody knows yet.

Bottom line: when it comes to hate crimes, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Homosexual activists have a cudgel in hand, and they’re coming after you.

As that’s the end of the article, I assume that after hitting “publish,” Bryan and his Air Force friend immediately ran under their beds to hide from gays, and haven’t been seen since. It’s okay, guys. You can come out now.

It makes me happy when Elaine Donnelly opens her mouth. Out of all the Religious Bigot Activists, she is one of the most consistently stupid, most consistently wrong ones of all! Indeed, her record of being right about anything rivals Bill Kristol’s, but she’ll never make as much money for being wrong as he does, because she chose the wrong subject to be a hack about. [He chose:  everything; She chose: gays] ANYWAY, what is coming out of Elaine’s wordhole right now?

Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness (CMR), believes “this statement [regarding the repeal] [of DADT, by Obama] suggests that the president’s political promises to LGBT left activists, the ones who promote lesbian, gay, bisexual [and] transgender causes, are more important than his responsibilities as commander in chief.”

She suggests the president wants to deliver certification of the repeal during “LGBT Pride Month” in June — something he proclaimed last June and the year before that, deviating only slightly from Bill Clinton’s proclamation of “Gay & Lesbian Pride Month” in June 2000.

“This would be highly irresponsible,” Donnelly contends. “There will be a political price to be paid, whether the president realizes that or not. His base will vote for him anyway, but other voters who support the military are likely to consider that action on his part to be an affront to the military, certainly unfair to the troops.”

Ha ha, aren’t you glad you are not Elaine Donnelly?  I mean, if the best artistic representation of my brain involved a GIF of a ping-pong ball slamming against the inside walls of a skull, I would be dejected and bitter!

ANYWAY, so Elaine, in the above quote, was speaking to her hate group of choice, the “news” arm of the Amurkin Famly Sociashun, and she is not happy about the things Barack Obama said about the military!  Apparently, buried deep within the document, he said that he is against any backwoods, buck-toothed morons [my words] who want to repeal his repeal of DADT!  CAN YOU IMAGINE?!

But the problem, for people like Elaine, is that she is soooooo tied up in her bigoted, uneducated, preconceived notions about homosexuality that she cannot understand the following facts, due to aforementioned ping-pong brain problems:

1.  Openly gay service strengthens the military, because it allows qualified people to stay and encourages other qualified people to join.  I mean, especially with Arabic translators, since they were disproportionately affected by DADT.  And who are you terrified of, Elaine, besides gays?  Yes, that is right, you are terrified of brown people with funny names.  Silly idiot.  But lots of them speak Arabic, so it behooves [look it up, Elaine] us to have lots of qualified people who are able to speak with them, in their language!  [Yes, there are other languages, Elaine.  Crazy, I know!]

2.  The GREAT majority [to the tune of like 75%!] of the country supported DADT repeal!  The only political price to pay would be to lose the votes of the 25%, consisting entirely of mindless dingbats, who were against it!  They also are the mindless dingbats who still aren’t sure, even after seeing every document imaginable, that the president was born in the United States, because on top of being mindless dingbats, they are also pigheaded racists who can’t handle the specter of a black man who is smarter and better than they are.  And he is.  Smarter.  Better.  They weren’t voting for him in 2012 anyway, so it’s not really a “loss,” per se.

3.  Hey Elaine, do you remember that time you embarrassed yourself testifying in Congress, when Patrick Murphy tore you apart, and we all laughed and giggled, for obvious reasons, but also because you showed up wearing a pink triangle?!  Good lord, woman, get a job!  Oh what, you have no discernible skills?

Oh well.  Some people get “Left Behind” in this society, I guess.  Elaine Donnelly got Left Behind.  By reality.  Should we feel sorry for her, or just move on?  I pick “move on.”

[Warning:  This piece is completely freaking long.  I have tried to make it enjoyable.  If you don't like that, read something different.]

I have been arguing with myself over whether to post on this screed by someone called “Jim O’Neill,” because to do so could be very time consuming.  First of all it is so long-winded that to address its points could take the entire day.  Even simply mocking the piece, paragraph by paragraph, could take an hour.  What we have here is a guy who seems to have gone quite far off his rocker, who believes that obscure, fringe sources and unhinged hatemongers like NARTH and Scott Lively, who are rejected by the entire scientific and mental health communities, are somehow the only ones telling him the truth, and who truly thinks he has found a  nugget of an idea in stating that the “homosexual agenda” is actually the same as the “Islamist agenda,” because both [he says] are misogynistic!  Uh, yeah.  All you lesbians?  You hate women.  So much.  And all you gay men who shout “divaaaaaa!” at the ceiling any time a woman does something “fierce,” are also he-man woman haters.  Also, apparently liberals don’t care about female genital mutilation in the Islamic world.  Actually, I learned all about that issue from liberal sources.  Anyway, but first, before we enter the biggest vortex of stupid I’ve ever encountered [and this is in a world that contains Peter LaBarbera], let’s look at his bio, because it’s funny:

Born in June of 1951 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Jim O’Neill (constitutionalwrites.com) proudly served in the U.S. Navy from 1970-1974 in both UDT-21 (Underwater Demolition Team) and SEAL Team Two. A member of MENSA, he worked as a commercial diver in the waters off Scotland, India, and the United States. In 1998 while attending the University of South Florida as a journalism student, O’Neill won “First Place” in the “Carol Burnett/University of Hawaii AEJMC Research in Journalism Ethics Award.” The annual contest was set up by Carol Burnett with the money she won from successfully suing the National Enquirer for libel.

He is in MENSA, you guys! You know, I have had the opportunity to join MENSA, and have never done so, mostly because I don’t care, but even if I did, you would NEVER see my “MENSA membership” in my bio. I mean, my goodness. But also, he was a Navy SEAL! Now, as we all know, Navy SEALs are trained to be bad-ass and do things like shoot Osama bin Laden in the face, but this does not tell us anything about their perceptive capabilities when it comes to subjects like homosexuality, now does it? Indeed, there are gay Navy SEALs!  This would freak Jim O’Neill out, a lot, as you will see.

Also, your fancy pants college journalism award is named after a campy gay icon, so there is that.

Anyway, let’s jump into the vortex of stupid, but we’ll try not to stay too long.  The supposed thesis of this word salad is that gays should not be able to serve in the military:

(Read More)

[As long as marriage equality is legal in that state.]

So look here, according to Max Read at Gawker, “the Navy is getting a special reward for shooting Osama Bin Laden: Gay marriage!” What a fine reward that is!  For serious, though:

The Navy will allow its chaplains to officiate same-sex marriages once the military’s ban on gay marriage is officially lifted this summer, according to a new memo written by Navy’s head chaplain, Rear Admiral Mark Tidd.

Ha ha, remember how much screaming wingnuts did during the repeal fight, along the lines of “What about the chaplains?!?!” Watch this:

The memo reads: “Regarding the use of base facilities for same-sex marriages, legal counsel has concluded that generally speaking, base facility use is sexuality orientation neutral. If the base is located in a state where same-sex is legal, then base facilities may normally be used to celebrate the marriage.”

Navy marriages on Navy bases typically involve Navy Chaplains, but the memo goes on to say the chaplains involvement is not mandatory and he or she could decline to participate if gay marriage is not “consistent with the tenets of his or her religious organization.”

See? If you’re a poopypants bigot chaplain and you don’t feel up to supporting all the people under your supposed care, you can stay in your quarters that day and cry or whatever, while everybody else is having a good time at a gay wedding.  Everybody wins!