I must be easy. I stopped up short at Quinn's AU fic where Jack is given a dishonorable discharge and told Daniel will be fired if Jack ever sees him again, ground my teeth, and soldiered on because I was curious about the story.
It was a good story, but the premise was terribly flawed by a factual error. DADT does not apply to Daniel. Period. The end. And for Hammond to threaten to fire Daniel under DADT--well, civilians are protected from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, so Jack could have gotten Hammond in a lot of trouble. A LOT of trouble.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
carisma_sensei
no subject
Date: 2005-07-10 01:50 am (UTC)It was a good story, but the premise was terribly flawed by a factual error. DADT does not apply to Daniel. Period. The end. And for Hammond to threaten to fire Daniel under DADT--well, civilians are protected from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, so Jack could have gotten Hammond in a lot of trouble. A LOT of trouble.