What can Obama do himself?

[Simplicio]

@Tom_Tildrum

IIRC, prior to 1993, gays were dischargeable from the military pursuant only to Defense Department policy, not statute.

Is this right? I thought sodomy was against the UCMJ in the early 90’s, which was why Congress was needed. Just from memory though, so I might be wrong.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Simplicio

Is this right? I thought sodomy was against the UCMJ in the early 90’s, which was why Congress was needed. Just from memory though, so I might be wrong.

The UCMJ still contains the 1917 prohibition on sodomy, although it’s the old-school type - oral and anal sex between heteros counts as sodomy, not just between teh gays.

It remains to be seen whether Lawrence v. Texas applies or not.

[Zsofia]

@jayjay

I’ll admit that I was only a little baby political junkie back in the first Clinton admin, but how did that happen? Truman integrated the military with an executive order. How is it that Congress somehow seized that power from the president in 1993? And if it did happen that way, why did Clinton let them?

This was the example I was going to use, Santo Rugger, but a few other notable results of executive orders that come immediately to mind:

Paved the way for Japanese internment camps
Restricted public access to some presidential papers
Renunciation of certain chemical weapons
Prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation in the civil service
Creation of government entities like the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission

In other words, the sort of thing that you’d expect to be done with laws.

[Chronos]

The UCMJ still contains the 1917 prohibition on sodomy, although it’s the old-school type - oral and anal sex between heteros counts as sodomy, not just between teh gays.

Wouldn’t that also only apply to sex while on active duty? I can see the military possibly not wanted any sex at all on active duty, even heterosexual-- sex between soldiers could undermine organization, frequenting prostitutes or easy locals could put the soldiers at risk of VD (or worse, if the partners in question are enemy sympathisers), and spouses aren’t usually available when deployed.

[Tom_Tildrum]

@Simplicio

Is this right? I thought sodomy was against the UCMJ in the early 90’s, which was why Congress was needed. Just from memory though, so I might be wrong.

Sorry, I wasn’t as clear as I could have been. The DOD directives that I mention relate to discharge, not criminal prosecution. And they do not require proof of actual sodomy.

Homosexual conduct is grounds for separation from the Military Services under the terms set forth in paragraph H.1.b., below. Homosexual conduct includes homosexual acts, a statement by a member that demonstrates a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts, or a homosexual marriage or attempted marriage. A statement by a member that demonstrates a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts is grounds for separation not because it reflects the member’s sexual orientation, but because the statement indicates a likelihood that the member engages in or will engage in homosexual acts. A member’s sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter, and is not a bar to continued service under this section unless manifested by homosexual conduct in the manner described in paragraph H.1.b.

[Peter_Morris]

What can Obama do himself?

Anything, if he’s prepared.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

Start a global thermonuclear war that will utterly destroy humanity. But I don’t think he will.