Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gov't quietly changes rules on sexual orientation and security clearances

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 04:12 AM
Original message
Gov't quietly changes rules on sexual orientation and security clearances
This is a copy of a post from the GLBT forum. I thought it was of enough general importance that the rest of DU might want to know.

Here's the original thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=29986&mesg_id=29986

Government quietly changes rules on sexual orientation and security clearances

Newly revised guidelines issued by President Bush's National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley (right) once again allow consideration of sexual orientation when issuing security clearances. This information was first reported today by the news site Raw Story (Full Story: U.S. quietly tightens access to classified information). The language change between the 1997 version and the 2005 guidelines is seemingly minor:

1997: Rules stated that sexual orientation “may not be used” as a basis for disqualifying applicants.

2005: The revision states that clearances cannot be denied "solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the individual."Text


Full Story:
http://pageoneq.com/news/2006/rules_031306.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 04:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. Kick for the gays who are going to be denied jobs.
And for the nation that's going to be less safe because we don't hire the most qualified people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 04:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. Wow. Lucky for Jeff Gannon he made it in before they shut the door!
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
file83 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 04:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. So these new rules basically mean you can only discriminate
based on sexual orientation only if you can tag on something else...

"Your clearance was turned down because you are Gay and...

...have an Air America bumper sticker on your car."
...forgot to wear your little American flag lapel pin."
...a Democrat."
...don't dress well."
...a Muslim."
...your name is Ken Mehlman."
...Gay."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dunvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 04:52 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. I think you're right...but mainly they'll use gay plus...
...homosexual as grounds.

Bastards. Again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 04:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I'm a lesbian. Female and gay should be grounds enough. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
6. here's what drives me crazy -- how many of these tapeworms have been hired
and believe the facsist horseshit that this admin puts out and will be around after?

this stuff just bothers me to no end.

sexism and homophobia is so rampant anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sutz12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 06:32 AM
Response to Original message
7. And the problem is.....
so many people will believe that they are security risks because they are gay, when the only reason they would be security risks is because our oppressive culture makes them vulnerable to blackmail because they have to hide their sexual orientation.

Nice Catch-22 for the guv'mint to depend on. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 06:38 AM
Response to Original message
8. Back to the 50's.
As it nears the end of Bush's 8 years I feel we will see more of this? By the way did Norton leave because of the oil spill in Alaska? You have to hunt for it as I have not seem it on cable. Read in in Anchorage paper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 06:40 AM
Response to Original message
9. Our country is in a very sorry state
And far too few care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sperk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-14-06 06:45 AM
Response to Original message
10. So Rove finally lost his security clearence?
Guess they're not expecting anymore Jimmy/Geff's at the
White House.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC