Is it not still not against the military code of conduct to be openly gay and serving?
Once they go through the roll out period, no, it will not be against the military code of conduct.
I honestly believe most of the push to repeal DADT was for the purpose of making a point. When I see lines at San Francisco recruiting offices I ciuld be convinced to alter my position.
You are very much incorrect. There are plenty of closeted gays in the military, and now they won’t have that strain anymore.
They won’t have the strain of being discharged for it. But they’ll still have all the strain that civilian closeted folks have.
But they won’t have to remain closeted to keep their jobs. They may choose not to tell anyone, but if anyone finds out, it doesn’t mean they’re automatically discharged.
Like I said in the first sentence of my post.
What does the Code of Conduct have to do with being gay? 
No, that’s the entire point of repealing DADT. Being openly gay has nothing to do with “conduct.”
I think what the OP is asking about, and it’s something I’ve been wondering, is that before “don’t ask, don’t tell” you could be kicked out of the military for being gay, so wouldn’t repealing DADT still allow the military to kick out gays, since they were able to before?
As I understand it, the bill that repeals DADT doesn’t technically take effect until such time, if and when, the military rescinds the policy forbidden openly gay people to serve.
I remember hearing that it would take a congressional act to remove the ban on gays, so does the new law JUST repeal DADT, or does it also allow for gays to serve?
Actually, what the Congress wants may become moot if there are more court rulings like this
If necessary (and I don’t know if it is) President Obama can now issue an executive order removing any rules against gays in the military. DADT was a law that prevented him from doing so.
“DADT repeal” is a misnomer, really; what the act repeals is 10 U.S.C. 654, which is the law that forbids gays from serving in the military. DADT, the executive order, will be moot once that is repealed.
OK, that makes a lot more sense.
I in no way rendered an opinion to the contrary. That said, presuming that the vast majority of those in the military (gay or straight) value their careers, I find it highly unlikely that those who are gay will flaunt their sexual preferences. Like it or not, right or wrong, doing so will hinder their advancement.
BTW, I very much appreciate the service of all, gay or straight. As a former Marine, I can say that the only thing that mattered to me was performance, trust and dignity.
You can be out without being flamboyant.
Where does Tim mention flamboyance?
I wonder how far this will go? Same sex couples in base housing? Or maybe they have to get an apartment off base. There’s a lot of details the military will have to work out.
This adds an entirely new dimension to fraternization. It’s already a punishable offense for officers and enlisted to date. Now, they have to factor in same sex couples. The same rules will have to apply to them.
It’s going to be a mess for awhile. The military is adaptable and will work it out eventually.
This will have to be applied equally to same sex couples.
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/fraternization.-ukn.htm
He said “flaunt their sexual preferences”. I’m assuming he’s talking about being fabulous, and not simply a second lieutenant talking about his boyfriend while off duty, because that would be awfully ridiculous considering that very few people would have a problem with that second lieutenant mentioning his girlfriend.