This court decision seems incorrect to me

[mickeyd]

Earlier this week, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (Philadelphia) rendered a 2-to-1 decision that would allow educational institutions to bar recruiters from their campuses in protest of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military.  

The court case came about because of a recent law change requiring suspension of government contracts with universities that impose such restrictions.  Several university law schools, including New York University, George Washington University, Stanford, and Georgetown, brought the suit to block implementation of the law.

The government has not yet decided whether to appeal the ruling.

The bottom line is that the nation is at war, and our military manpower is stretched extremely thin. Regardless of one's opinions concerning the "don't
ask, don't tell" policy, there have to be better ways to express those opinions than directly impeding recruitment of the manpower needed to defend our country.

What is your opinion on this timley issue while the USA is in the middle of an armed coflict?

 

[Cut-Throat]

in protest of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military.

Well, I'm in favor of Civil Rights and Freedom. So if they are protesting because the military is treating Gays different than other folks then I'm all for it.

When the U.S. stops fighting for Civil Rights of their Citizens, then I'm not sure I want to be on the side of United States. I guess I'm for Freedom, no matter what your choices of life are. - Even I don't agree with them.

 

[FlowGirl]

I thought prior to this decision the University as a whole would be punished for the actions of only one department (in this case the law school). That hardly seems fair either.

Honestly, I don't know if this is a good decision or not, but I don't think the fact that we are at war and hurting for manpower should have any bearing on the case. I would feel very uncomfortable if the court was making decisions based on whether it was a convenience for military recruiting and the War on Terror rather than whether it is right or wrong according to the Constitution.

 

[rockpile]

You'd think with the military's desparate need for bodies to send overseas they wouldn't give a damn about people's personal sexual orientation.

 

[SDY888]

You'd think with the military's desparate need for bodies to send overseas.....

The tragedy is that there is no shortage of ''bodies'' to be returned (of all the Nations/Nationalities involved).

Simon888

 

[mickeyd]

How will the military obtain good new lawyers if access to these law schools is denied?  

Soldiers, marines, sailors, and airmen need good lawyers to represent them in legal disputes with their branch of service.

If the door is shut on graduates of these schools the quality of representation will decrease.  Will justice be served by this?

Probably not....

 

[Cut-Throat]

How will the military obtain good new lawyers if access to these law schools is denied?

Maybe the Military needs to change their tune.

 

[FlowGirl]

How will the military obtain good new lawyers if access to these law schools is denied?  

Soldiers, marines, sailors, and airmen need good lawyers to represent them in legal disputes with their branch of service.

If the door is shut on graduates of these schools the quality of representation will decrease.  Will justice be served by this?

Probably not....

You make some good points, but I still don't see why this is relevent to the case. Witholding funds from schools because they won't allow military recruiters on campus is either an abridgement of the law school's first amendment rights to freely associate or it isn't. I'm not a constitutional lawyer, so I have no idea if this was a good call from a legal perspective. However, the law should be the only thing that matters - not whether it makes a recruiter's job more difficult.

BTW, I can think of lots of ways to get good lawyers to serve as JAG officers. There are other ways to advertise, and paying them more might be a good start. I also know that at least the USMC has a very competitive scholarship program for current officers wanting to attend law school. I have a friend who's applying for it after he finishes his tour in Iraq. If accepted he'll attend law school fulltime at goverment expense, all the while getting his full O-3 pay and allowances. My husband considered doing the same but decided that he was having too much fun in the infantry to consider leaving it for a "desk job". *sigh*

 

[John Galt]

Too many laws - too many lawyers.

JG

 

[yelnad]

I agree with the court decision. Unfortunately the university I work for gets so many military and government contracts, that'll it'll never boot ROTC from campus.

 

[brewer12345]

Frankly, I'd like to see the military recruiters booted from all college/university campuses. If anyone really wants to be trained to be cannon fodder, there are plenty of sucker recriuiting offices off campus.

 

[BigMoneyJim]

At first glance it appears to me that the "gay" issue is a red herring to the core issue: Can the government deny contracts to institutions that disallow Army recruiting. If so, does this apply only to colleges? Public colleges? Should the Army be able contractually stipulate they can recruit GI's at Lockheed and Boeing?

This is the first I've heard of the case, so I'm probably missing something.

If the Army doesn't have enough people to fight our wars then either cut back on wars, raise the incentives for recruitment or start up the draft again. Seems simple enough to me aside from the political ramifications.

 

[Tadpole]

Since many of you are parents, I am surprised at your reaction to this. I would have thought you would be upset at the No Child Left Behind provision for recruiting in your schools. PTAs in many states are quite upset. Apparently, if schools get money, military recruiter get student records unless a parent signs a form to withhold the record.

http://www.fairfieldweekly.com/gbase/News/content.html?oid=oid:37281
No Child Left Unharassed
Bush holds school dollars as "ransom" to build a poor-people's army

October 9, 2003

http://www.pta.org//ptawashington/issues/rights.asp

Military Recruitment
School district must notify parents of high school students that military recruiters have access to students' names, addresses, telephone numbers, and other additional information. Under the law, military recruiters are entitled to this information unless the parent says no. If you have not been notified about your right to remove your child from this list, contact your school principal or school district office. (Section 9528 of ESEA)

 

[John Galt]

My children are all grown. But, even if they were
not, this would not get me worked up. It's just
one more step on our march to '1984'. I've got bigger
fish to fry.

John Galt

 

[rockpile]

Hey JG,
If we end up in the same "re-education" camp, we can fry your fish together.

Big Brother NeoCon is watching ALL of us.

 

[BUM]

Right! The bottom line is that the nation is a war. I don't care who I share a fox hole with as long he can do his job.

 

[yelnad]

Big Money Jim -- It's not a "gay" issue. It's an issue of accepting federal funding. Traditionally, the gov't says you need to follow their rules in order to accept their funds. Institutions of higher education are finally turning that around on them. You need to follow our rules in order to recruit on our campuses.

 

[brewer12345]

Since many of you are parents, I am surprised at your reaction to this. I would have thought you would be upset at the No Child Left Behind provision for recruiting in your schools. PTAs in many states are quite upset. Apparently, if schools get money, military recruiter get student records unless a parent signs a form to withhold the record.

http://www.fairfieldweekly.com/gbase/News/content.html?oid=oid:37281
No Child Left Unharassed
Bush holds school dollars as "ransom" to build a poor-people's army

October 9, 2003

http://www.pta.org//ptawashington/issues/rights.asp

Military Recruitment
School district must notify parents of high school students that military recruiters have access to students' names, addresses, telephone numbers, and other additional information. Under the law, military recruiters are entitled to this information unless the parent says no. If you have not been notified about your right to remove your child from this list, contact your school principal or school district office. (Section 9528 of ESEA)

Reason #486 why my kids will never set foot in a public school.

 

[JWV]

I agree with Brewer, I'm so glad my 15 and 11 year old boys are being schooled at home. The Government Nanny system can be scary.

Also, JG, might you whistle a slightly different tune if your sons weren't adults now?

(No flame please, I've had members of my family, as far back as anyone can remember, who have fought, died and been disabled to protect my right to say what I want.)

Judy

 

[John Galt]

No Judy, even if my kids were still in school I would feel
the same. Not saying I don't see the problem, just
that it's the way the world is going and you and I
won't stop it (neither will either major political party).
So, I am picking my fights and there are a lot of issues
that worry me much more than this one. BTW, all
of my grandkids are home schooled which I think is neat,
although kind of a strain on their parents I would imagine (four of them so far).
My teacher friends (mostly NEA libs) think home schooling is the work of Satan, or maybe the
religious right wackos

JG