Romans 1:26-27 - "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
Seems to be the chaplins jobs mainly consist to aid in helping all those in the military dealing with sin, why would that change? Hetro's have been adulterous, fornicators and also somdomizers, pedophiles, and so on , so I believe the chaplins have much to still do in the military, quit crying about the gays being the root of all evil, you hipocrites make me sick to my stomach.
This is bullshit! I didn't fill out the damn survey nor did any of my fellow comrades because we were too busy doing more with less!!! I'm not sure where the 116,000 responses are coming from. Furthermore, I'm so glad a bunch of assholes who have never served a day in the military get to tell us what to fucking do. How about spending more time on issues that will affect us in a positive way than trying to degrade the military from the inside out...Merry Christmas Everyone.
@MrConcrete71179 Thanks Mr. Concrete. I totally agree with you! I'm very pissed about this whole situation and it's not gonna last. This whole repeal is a joke.
Of the respondents who had experience with gays in their unit, 6% said their presence had a positive impact on their personal morale, 66% said no impact, and 28% said negative impact. Likewise, regarding overall unit morale, 3% said positive impact, 64% no impact, and 27% negative impact.---More generally, 73% of respondents said that they felt comfortable in the presence of gay and lesbian personnel.
@hiccera it is and always should be about moral - as you can see from the poll people with actual experience have noted a negative effect on morale - not because they don't like homosexuals, 3/4 don't care about that, but because it has an actual negative effect on morale
Serving openly will create a whole new level of tension, lawsuits, rules, disciplines, additional training ie sensitivity training, morale problems, infighting, and a whole host of unnecessary soldiers will have to endure because of PC! It is more important than training men and women to keep the country safe. You think our soldiers aren’t stresses enough? Is that it? You want to throw more PC garbage at them? You’re ok with disrupting what has worked since the beginning of our military history?
If gays, and lesbians are accepted openly into the military God will allow a form of judgement to fall on US. Maybe the 26-27 series of nuclear suitcase bombs or the 200 foot tsunami will hit the US. These two catastrophe will come to the US.
Rep Murphy is a typical liberal hypocrite who is more concerned with homosexuals getting discriminated instead of stright white boys like me who are discriminated because of Affirmative Action which stupid white liberals like him support. Unbelievable.
Anyone who is gay or a lesbian, who wants to pick up a gun and defend their country to the death, deserves to of course do it, and to NOT be hasseled for their sexuality. If anything, she or he is, unfairly, worried they will not shine bright enough - and it will probably be more oft than not that they go above and beyond the call more than is expected of them - giving all, more times than was necessary to accomplish the mission. Good luck from Canada, your little bro to the North.
Powell is so wrong. I talk with troops everyday and they are AGAINST repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell by a factor of 55 percent. but the Liberal Media keeps distorting that message. They keep reporting that supposedly 70 percent want it repealed. But actual service members in the military Don't want it to End.
The cost of DADT on gay, lesbian, bi, and transgender servicemembers, on straight servicemembers and even on the military itself is too damn high! Whole units have DIED because the gay in their midst was removed by some homophobic commander who was too immature to handle the sexuality of people who are not heterosexual. Time to get rid of it.
Do you believe this people? Grown-up proffessionals arguing about a simple thing that shouldn't even be debated about. It's simple, get rid of DADT! It's unfair, and it's childish.
It's just stupid immatuer kids joining the army that are homophobic and it places the nations senators backs against the wall because they need them to fight. They need to use a character building questionaire that asks them if they have problem with equality.
If we're really worried about sexual assault in our military, maybe we should focus on the 87% that is perpetrated by men on women. Should we ask the heterosexuals to hide their sexuality now?
i will remove my objection to gays serving openly when they force women and men to cohabitate -- no separate bathrooms, showers, sleeping areas for anyone -- in this way you would remove the double standard that would be created by allowing homosexuals to serve openly
but that said - anyone found to have lied in order to enter service under false pretenses or to have violated a well known standard like DADT simply because they did not think it fair or right should still be dealt with properly
I shared a bathroom with tons of gay people at college. I also used the same showers as them, and they saw me in a towel millions of times...Was never a problem. Also, a lot of schools do have co-ed bathrooms, and they seem to be working out.
And, as mentioned before, gay guys serve openly in countries like Israel, that have top notch military. So what's your response to that?
Just admit it man. You're a straight up homophobe.
@gnr2391 yep- oh wait - did you ask my homosexual friends that - oh what have they really been saying behind my back - lol
they are not talking co-ed - no, they are talking forced cohabitation of same sex - up this to full cohabitation and i remove all reserve - oh wait, women will not let men into their berthing - for the same reason homosexuals should not force straights into sharing theirs - get it yet???
Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ not in yourselves.. Gays need to be helped and God can Heal and help in any situation, And that means ANY Situation.
If a male soldier doesnt want his body looked at by anyone (gays or not) that is his affair. He can report that to his commander if it happens. It is not Obama's business nor any gay rights group to force it. His body is his, and if he is married his wife does not want her husbands body looked at and lusted over by gays. Get it?
@ighforever why was this marked as spam - more suppression of speech from the left???
hey assholes, just because you do not like someones message does not give you the right to mark something they said as spam so as not to let others see it
@ninetysevenecho i'm sure you're trying to say something insightful and full of meaning to support your claim as to why so-called "being straight" is righteous while being gay is "evil"...but, honestly, as i read that, all i heard in my head was..."blah-blah-blah-HATE-blah-blah-moron-blah-blah-HATE-blah-blah-stick-up-your-butt-blah-blah-repressed-homosexual...blah"
There is no evidence that suggests gays diminish the functionality of the military. The British had a similar policy & repealed it. Guess what happened to their military... they function EXACTLY the SAME. Gays already come out to close friends in their units & these friends usually protect them. So why protect the bigots if there is an overwhelming number of soldiers PROTECTING gays from these policies? What makes the bigots so goddamn special that they can have a policy based on 0 evidence?
If you can pass the training, then you should be fit to fight, physically and mentally, if a gay guy is tough enough to pass marine boot camp or even SEAL training, then he is suited to fight.
Homosexuals are eithe sexual deviants, brain damaged, or genetic defectives. Either way, I have a problem with being forced to live with them. If DADT gets repealed, I'll be on wrong look away from an assault charge (which is only a pg 11).
@nov284 Well then you fail to uphold the US army principles on several counts and should be dishonourably discharged. You are a disgrace to your armed forces and constitution and I hope you are paralysed by an IED or captured.
@AnthemicPolemic When you're willing to force your mother/sisters/wife/daughter to undress, shower (without curtain), and redress in front of a high school football team, I'm willing to listen. Because that's the best analogy that I can give for what these douchers that have never, will never, and never wanted to serve in the military are trying to require me to submit to. I don't mind working with/for a homo. I am violently opposed to being required to share berthing or head spaces w/ homos.
@nov284 Yeah, because you are stupid. If you weren't stupid you wouldn't hate them. Because hate is from fear, and fear is from ignorance. It's funny how the more you learn the harder it is to hate things. Interestingly, stupidity and ignorance are two of the only things that become easier to hate the more you understand and are exposed to them. I know guys in all branches who would find your attitude a disgrace and would much rather serve with a whole division of 'homos' than one of your kind.
@AnthemicPolemic Actually, it's not hate. I don't have a problem in the world with people doing those things that make them happy, and I reject outright notion that the govt should try to regulate what happens between two consenting adults. My neigbors are lesbian, as is my sister inlaw. Another dude I grew up around turned out to be a pole smoker. I mock them all, good-naturedly, and get ribbed in turn. The difference is that I'm not required to shower or dress where they can watch.
@nov284 lol awwwww are you self-conscious? poor thing. I bet you aren't that good looking naked either. lol Wether you are naked or clothed or even wrapped in a trench coat it is all the same. No one can force you to have sex with them. If you don't want to sleep with a guy then don't. lol Why do I even have to explain this? :D
@TMBrd89 Clearly you've never heard of rape. Rape: N; The act of forcing sexual intercourse or other sexual activity upon another person, without their consent and/or against their will. From Latin rapiō (“‘to abduct or seize by force’”). I love how people sneer when I say I'm not comfortable being required to live with a complete stranger I know to be a homo, as if I have no legitimate concern. I say if we force men and homos to co-habitate, we need co-ed berthing and headspaces aboard ship.
@nov284 I've slept in the same room with gay men before and spent the night completely unmolested. Just because a guy likes dick doesn't necessarily mean he likes yours. I think you might be flattering yourself just a little.
@streetswell I've never made the argument that they would (how anyone could think I'm even remotely attractive, hell, how I ever lost my virginity, is proof that god is indeed merciful. imho Quasimoto probably has a leg up on me in the sexy dept.), only that they may. And as far as sleeping in the same room as a homo, I'm sure that once I had a chance to talk to him, and get....comfortable?....I wouldn't be as leery. Hell, I struggle to get more than an hour or two of sleep a night as it.....
@streetswell cont.... surrounded by any group of people at all. Suffice to say I don't trust your average person much further than I can see him, and I don't trust your average Marine even that far. Something about changing the rules of engagement, spreading dis-information, and Strategically Transfering Equipment to an Alternate Location.
@nov284 With respect, I think you're just buying into the fiction that gay men are pathologically compelled to fuck anything in sight that has a penis. I have more than a few gay friends who haven't been laid in months who will tell you it's just not so.
@streetswell Think of it like this. If you see a girl naked, are you automatically going to shitcan morals, consent, and laws, and just pounce on her? I'm going to say, probably no. Will you take a moment to enjoy the scenery, even if she's a 4 or a 5 at best? Probably yes. I can only assume that homos feel the same way about looking at other men, and, much like that hypothetical girl, I don't relish the idea of having some dude staring at me, especially when I can't avoid being around him.
@nov284 There are rules in place to deal with harassment. Besides, guys who shower together are gonna see each other naked, straight or gay. If you have a problem with guys seeing you naked, you probably shouldn't join the military.
@streetswell And in spite of those rules, we still have segregated berthing spaces and bathrooms. Leads me to believe that whatever people prattle about professionalism, they still recognize human nature and fallibility. I don't have a problem with being naked around most dudes, because when I look around, I notice people are meeting my eyes. Not looking a little lower. I guarantee they're going to have a rash of assault charges if DADT gets repealed. And now homos are a protected class...
@nov284 You need to do some research on the rate of murders and assaults committed against gay people before you can call them "protected". And if straight soldiers assault gay ones once DADT is repealed, they'll be punished and made an example of.
You don't seem bigoted to me, just misinformed. I think once you meet some average gay people, you won't be so afraid.
@streetswell Hell, next time I get into a fight, I need to make sure they aren't black, latino, gay, pedophiles, ex cons, rapists, etc etc or face federal charges for a "hate crime." I maintain that DADT is a good compromise. The only people I've seen get kicked out as opposed to swept under the rug were the ones that the command couldn't ignore. And there's a difference between being a homophobe and not wanting to cohabitate, same as I'm not an aquaphobe, but I don't toss blood in the....
@streetswell Oh, by the way, or I'd have tacked it onto my last post. "made an example of" is such a nice euphamism for having your life ruined, your civil liberties stricken, your job opportunities torched, for reacting in, I would argue, the natural way (for a class A personality) to a leering dude you have zero chance to avoid.
@streetswell Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ not in yourselves.. Gays need to be helped and God can Heal and help in any situation, And that means ANY Situation.
If a male soldier doesnt want his body looked at by anyone (gays or not) that is his affair. He can report that to his commander if it happens. It is not Obama's business nor any gay rights group to force it. His body is his, and if he is married his wife does not want her husbands body looked at and lusted over by gays
@streetswell gee, you know, i have too, but the issue is i was not forced to -- got that - were you forced to? -- if not then listen to the men in uniform who also do not want to be forced to - the government has no right to force these honorable men and women into this situation -- lets take away the double standards now - you want homosexuals in and out and open -- mix it all - men with women with men who like women and women who like men and guys who like guys and ladies who like ladies......
@hiccera Soldiers have already been "forced" to deal with racial and gender integration, and they did just fine with it. Poll data shows that a good 70% or so of U.S. soldiers don't care whether or not they serve alongside gay people, so don't project your own homophobia onto them.
@streetswell i posted some poll results way up near the top -- go read them -- what makes you think that i am homophobic just because i don't agree with you on this issue? -- a bit of a leap considering you don't know a thing about me and seemingly have not read my comments carefully --
the survey you refer to is probably the most recent one that was not sent to everyone and only had less than 25% returned -- yeah, lets base our whole policy on that
@hiccera If you're referring to the study survey sent to all of the military and their families, 116,000 responses were logged. That's far large enough of a sample size in statistics. It's safe to assume that those who did not send back a response didn't care enough one way or another to make their voice heard.
@tnucaturner Bullshit! 54 percent of it was sent to the Coast Guard. The other was sent to combat support units. The very fact that this study was even sent out in the first place is a joke. The questions were a bunch of bullshit too. The repeal isn't gonn last. I give it two years.
@hiccera good point and thanks for speaking the truth. It's funny how everyone who debates on here that is for the repeal of DADT uses the word homophobe or racist. It really makes them look stupid! This whole move on the liberals is a waste of time! It's not even about race! It's about behaviour and these maniace want to be considered there own race or something. I never understood the liberal mindset in regard to gays? Have a great day .
@boatstaylor It is not the position of the federal government to dictate ideology to any of its employees; whether it be citizen or soldier. Homosexuality is a sexual preference; it does not dictate behavior, and even if it did, it is not the position of government to question it.
i want to know why is it so important for gay people to serve openly in the army whats the reason for it? i don't think this is the right time for it we all know whats going to happen if Don't Ask, Don't Tell is gone. your going to have a big division in the army and recruitment is going to go down and alot of fight are going to break out so why is it so people if we know whats going to happen? just like the desegregation of the military in 1948
I don't think ending DADT is a good idea. I predict that if they do, they will still have some sort of restrictions on open behaviour of the homosexual persuasion. The military will probably make restrictions on public displays of affection more stringent on everyone. I think a good compromise would be to keep DADT, BUT eliminate any ability to penalize a military person for being gay. The changes probably will not be fully what the homosexual activists are looking for.
@MrDetwaa yep we sure do - if they are discovered lets find how to deal with them under the UCMJ and remove them as needed or at the very least punish them for their deception upon entry (if prior to DADT) or simply let them be by not asking and they not telling (because i don't care about their private sexual life) - oh lord, that would mean keeping DADT as is - here though is the snafu - changing the policy gives a homosexual more rights than a heterosexual serviceman - so i'm not for change
We need good soldiers. There are 65,000 military personal that currently serve who are gay, that put their lives on the line for your safety and to protect your freedoms, and you should be grateful.
I was in the military, I think it is a bad idea. The military is not full of intellectuals from Berkley, it is made up from individuals from poorer upbringings by and large. Whether right or wrong these men tend to have strong biases, whether by faith or by bigotry. You are really about to open Pandoras box.
gotta love DADT...the supporters try to make it sound rational and constitutional but what it's basically saying is..."we don't think humans have self-discipline or control when it comes to interacting with your fellow man"...
@nov284 LMFAO XD I didn't know that you were such a pussy that you could be raped by a gay guy. I guess you must be pretty scrawny. Oh yeah here is a little hint for you. HINT: RAPE IS NOT PART OF ARMED FORCE CODE. That means if anyone rapes you they are breaking the law, moron. And just cause a guy is gay does not mean he is going to rape you. That's like saying cause you are a guy you will rape any girl that sleeps near you. Really how stupid are you, you backwards hick?
@TMBrd89 love the ad hominum attack, btw, really strengthens your position and shows your maturity. Actually, you made my point for me. We should repeal dadt and require women to live and bath with men. Co-ed all the way. Actually the point you seem to be making is that a sexual deviant has more self control than a normal man? Maybe something got lost in translation. By all means oh wizard oh wise one, please educate po' lil ole me.
@nov284 its okay! Your are absolutely fine! Don't blame yourself cause you DIDN't know. See having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you isn't fun. Especially if they are screaming and fighting back lol. At least that is what I assume. Besides gay people aren't sexual deviants any more than straight who engage in anal and oral sex. and that is most of them lol. Its okay that your ignorant, no body is mad at you. So don't worry. Okay? Now cheer up
@TMBrd89 And yet we have rapists in our society. Not really the point I was aiming at though. Even if there was bullet proof glass separating us, I still wouldn't want to be required to expose myself to a homo for much the same reason a woman wouldn't want to be required to expose herself to me under the same circumstances. Even if there is zero threat of physical interaction I still don't want to be looked at "that way" by a man least of all genetically defective or brain damaged men.
Funny I figured that the majority of gay guys are more intelligent then you. but then again the majority of straight guys are too. So basically what you are saying is that you would rather instead of knowing is gay and not. Allowing you to stay away cause of your own personal hatred. You would rather shower with a bunch of men having no clue who is gay or not gay? REALLY? You would rather not know who wants to bend you over in the shower? I guess cause you want it to be a surprise LMAFO XD
@TMBrd89 I can respect the fact that you disagree, and I'm willing to debate on the meets, but I'm curious as to why you keep trying to provoke me? Responding in kind to your insults is beneath me and would only help you paint me as some homophobic bigoted coward. I assure you that, based on others I've debated (successfully, I feel), there are more than enough points for you to make on the merits without reducing yourself to these...insults. Have some self respect.
@TMBrd89 I don't deny that I categorize homosexuality as A: genetic defect (creating a barrier to procreation which in nature causes this behavior to stop showing up except as a display of dominance/submission in pack animals) B: brain damage (would explain why natural urges for the opposit sex are suppressed/supplanted) or C: sexual deviance (similar in nature to any number of fetishes). I'm more than happy to debate the nature/cause of the behavior and it's effect without personal insults. U?
@nov284 Sorry no dice little man. Beside you are very articulate with your purposes. They are all different causes and have very little relation. On is cerebral damage, another is genetic defect. It funny do you even know the concept of Natural Selection? Do you even have an idea of what cause sexual fetishes? Random Trauma with unknown causes? A non-breeding yet dominate sexual trait? A unknown and little studied sexual euphoria? Do you even reason out the shit that you put out?
@TMBrd89 Do you ever attempt to look at the facts of a situation, try to consider how other people feel, or do you resort immediately to banal insults? I don't claim to be a geneticist, nor a psychiatrist. If it's genetic, then there should be a way to cure it, but I guarantee that the same people that handed out flyers advertising the best gay-bars around, gave advice on what kind of lubes were best, and how to land an older guy to kids as young as 2nd grade won't let it be cured.
@nov284 lol Who is being vitriolitc now? LOL There is a difference between pedophiles and homosexuals as well as heterosexual. Even thought majority of pedophiles identify as straight. lol You know what it is okay to go to gay bars and and straight bars. It is okay to talk about sex with your peers. Wether they are straight or not. I have talked to straight guys about their relationships with women and how it differs from mine. Its okay. The only person that needs to be cured it you!
@TMBrd89 My apologies, my intent wasn't to insinuate that all homos feel that way. I'm quite certain that more than a few homos were (or would be) just as horrified as I was when I read that article. I have met a number of people for whom sexual orientation was a private matter, not a banner, and those were people that I could respect. What irritates me are those people that are busy throwing their sexuality in everyone's face and trying to make a big hairy deal of their personal life....
@nov284 Once again you speak out of ignorance. You never once become upset with people who tell you that they are married. Yet they are flaunting their orientation. You never get upset whe people tell you that they are having a baby. But there they have told you that they had sexual realtionship and now have the result of it. Infact in arguing this subject you shoved in my face how you would rather have showers with women. Its not about flaunting it is that you are scared of gay and it shows.
@TMBrd89 True, I've mentioned my preference in the course of debate, but I don't dress in garrish clothing, put together a parade, and slam people on various sites because they disagree with me. Sometimes I wonder if the debate is about "equality" or rubbing the collective nose of straight people in all the perceived wrongs of the past. It may surprise you that I'm actually on (what I'll guess is) your side on gay marriage. State recognized unisex civil unions and the churches sort out marriage
@TMBrd89 And I'll confess my biggest....hell my only real problem with homosexuals in the military is being forced to live with them, whether I like it or not. Working for, with, or over them doesn't bother me one little bit. It's not about fear, it's about being required, yet again, to sacrifice what I remain convinced is good, moral, and just, in favor of what, in the end, is mere political theater. Another dog and pony show by people that don't care, they just want to buy your vote regardless
@TMBrd89 On a completely unrelated note, I have to confess. I like you. You're insulting, presumptuous, biased. But you're not stupid, merely ignorant and prejudiced by your environment. I'm sure the same could be said for me, probably worst. Well fought, worthy adversary.....
@nov284 I must admit gay bars suck. They are boring and strangely decorated. People who should never dance, dance and do it horribly. However, as far as the military goes, it is all about telling gays that they can't. When you do that to anyone. It makes them want it even more. Especially when it is a right of passage such as being in the army, getting married, and adopting kids. It has all the marks of saying you aren't good enough.
@TMBrd89 cont... As far as gay bars...I'm not going to say anything's wrong with them, I just wish they were labeled better. Some friends and I got bum gouge about a place in Wilmington called Ibiza's. "Best kept secret in Wilmington" and "Girls everywhere." Yea. I swear, the pool tables were extra low, walls painted purple, glow in the dark stars everywhere, love seats...I couldn't quite put my finger on what was wrong untill I saw a dude kiss the guy next to him. I've never run so fast...lol
@theesch Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ not in yourselves.. Gays need to be helped and God can Heal and help in any situation, And that means ANY Situation.
If a male soldier doesnt want his body looked at by anyone (gays or not) that is his affair. He can report that to his commander if it happens. It is not Obama's business nor any gay rights group to force it. His body is his, and if he is married his wife does not want her husbands body looked at and lusted over by gays.
There are issues like this that need to be fixed before we can talk about gay marriage. In my opinion this is a much more important issue at hand. I'm straight and I'm sure I could talk all I want about my significant other to my army pals but someone else can't because they are gay? That's wrong. There's nothing right about treating these amazing military folks like second class citizens. God bless all our service people and bring them home safe.
I'm not quite sure how this should be repealed. On the one hand, DADT was issued as a way of weakening enforcement of a law passed by Congress that banned gays outright, and the President cannot overturn laws. On the other hand, Congress holds the purse, but it is the President who wields the sword: he is called Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces for a reason.
It annoys me to no end that the government tiptoes around these religious groups instead of putting them into their place. Under the Constitution no church has any business in politics. Considering how much money and effort these organizations put into pressuring the federal and state governments to influence social, education and other policy areas, it is time that their tax-free status is revoked. Either they declare themselves political pundits or they shut up.
This entire cohesion argument is flim flam. When folk make comments along the lines of feeling unsafe showering and sharing the same sleeping quarters with homosexual personnel it is actually a reflection on them, not the homosexuals. In essence they are projecting the idea that they themselves have no self-control and, thus, they expect others to be like that as well. It would stand to reason that they are in fact the weak link and the real threat to group cohesion.
We have a zero tolorance policy against sexual harrassment and discrimination in the military. That automatically addresses any such issues with inappropriate conduct. There are already gays serving in the military along with straights and there are no problems with unit cohesion. Therefore the policy of DADT is pointless and we need to get rid of it. In fact, it's having the exact opposite effect on the military that they wanted when they initiated it.
1. Yes, and that is a modesty issue. Men and women are two different sexes so it makes sense that they would have seperate quarters.
2. The only difference between an open gay and an in the closit gay is the perception of the people around them, which isn't their problem, so why do they pay for it?
3. Most people in the military are professional enough to handle a gay or lesbian co-worker. I've seen gays get kicked out before and everybody thinks it sucks and is completely unfair.
"Modesty issue? But it isn't a modesty issue when 2 gay guys are sharing a bunk (it is possible)?"
No, that's not a modesty issue. In fact, there is NO issue there as long as there is no misconduct.
"Yes it is a perception issue but a deterrent as well"
What exactly does that mean? Deterrent to what? To whom?
3. No. I'm saying that men and women should be professional enough to work with each other regardless of sexuality. It's pretty simple actually and happens all the time.
Because you HAVE NO ARGUMENT! There is no evidence whatsoever that gays serving openly would hurt unit cohesion. That's the crock! Your entire argument is based on homophobia. And irrational fears should not be the basis for discrimination, period! Gays already serve and straights already cohabitate with them, so nothing would be different at all. The only difference would be in the perception of a homophobic individual. That's all!
When a woman feels uncomfortable undressing in front of a man does that make her male phobic? Answer that.
I REPEATEDLY ARGUE that I don't have a problem with gays serving only a problem WITH COHABITATION. Hell, we need soldiers right now.
DON"T ASK DON"T TELL at least keeps homosexuality in the closet. it gives gays the PRIVELEDGE to serve in a DISCRIMINANT organization. It isn't a RIGHT like you claim.
The fact that you have no consideration for people's privacy (at least heterosexuals) shows that your discriminant towards straight people's feelings.
My argument is based in REALITY (human nature, sexuality, privacy, army morale).
You want to FORCE your PROGRESSIVE Thinking on everybody else and dismiss what is a REAL problem.
3. (con't) Most people (gay and straight) think it's unfair and wrong. The only thing that kicking that individual out usually does is "weaken" the team and lower moral. It does not benefit the military in any way to discharge a fighter pilot, an Arabic linguist or a field medic because of their sexuality. It's ridiculous and it hurts the mission! This is the irony because the justification for DADT is to preserve "unit cohesion" and moral. There is nothing to support that at all!
3. Unfair to whom? To the straights that have to deal with the unwanted sexual tension or the fact that they are considered less professional as they separate men and women for sexual reasons...
Yes it hurts the morale when a soldier is killed or a beloved soldier is kicked out for being gay....
However, it hurts the morale when cohabitation exists and soldiers are denied their privacy....
"unwanted sexual tension" - If there is any sexual tension, it's because they created it themself or it's all in their mind. Why should a gay person have to pay for someone elses sexual tension problem? If a straight person is not professional enough to handle the fact that someone they work with is gay, then THEY can get out (or choose not to join). Why does the gay person (who's done nothing wrong) be kicked out?
"Straights feel uncomfortable undressing in front of gays"
No, YOU feel uncomfortable undressing around gays. And if that's the case, YOU should not join the military. Either that, or YOU should get over it. The point is, that's YOUR problem, not the gays, and not the other straights that don't have a problem with it, so why are THEY discriminated against because of YOUR issue with them? I rest MY case!
Dude you are the most hard headed person I have debated on these forums.
I have just poked a hole in your flawed logic man.
I am a soldier. I am speaking from personal experience here. I guarantee you it ain't just me.
You have argued continually that this is a perception issue. If it TRULY is a perception issue than women and men can learn to share rooms together. Afterall, feeling "uncomfortable" is nothing more than a perception issue and people can learn to get over it.
You didn't poke a hole in anything. All you did was display your own insecurities about gays. Sorry to break it to you but YOU don't represent most folks in the military. I am ALSO speaking from personal experiences (in case you didn't pick that up from my handle) and I guarantee you that you represent the minority, NOT the majority!
If you were enlisted I would understand. I actually don't have a problem with officers as they tend to be segregated from the soldiers.
Guarantee.? I spent 7 and 1/2 years in the miltary sir. LOL, I can recall having discussions with soldiers joking about their "insecurities" of taking showers next to each other. I am talking about showers with straight guys (no gay guys in this picture).
I'm not an officer, that's just my handle. If you must know, I'm a Tech Sergeant in the Air Force and I've been in for 12 years. I've had gay co-workers before. One guy I found out about after he separated. Another got kicked out because he was outed. They were both good troops and kicking them out did no good for morale or unit cohesion. So I've actually witnessed this happen before. That's why its so ridiuculous and needs to stop.
The military is not an organization for homosexuals-- They used to say that about blacks too. Times change my friend and people get over their prejudices. The military is an organization for citizens of the United States. Sexuality is irrelevant!
While were at it, we should allow the mentally challenged and handicapped join. Lets allow criminals and pedophiles to enlist as well. Equal opportunity right?
It's not about winning right....only about EQUALITY and PROGRESSIVES getting their way.
Mentally challenged, elderly and handicapped people are physically incapable of performing certain tasks required in the military. Homosexuals can (and do) do the same job heterosexuals can, so that logic is highly flawed! Criminals and pedophiles break the law. Homosexuality is not a crime so that logic also fails.
No it's not every straight soldiers problem, only the homophobic ones. And homophobia is simply another type of prejudice that the military would be better off without anyway. We're supposed to be professionals. If you can't understand what unethical is, then there is no way for me to make you understand. It's a very simple concept that most "good" people can grasp. People can use "fears" and "insecurities" to justify almost any injustice, but at the end of the day, it's about right and wrong.
Morality means doing the right thing, period. Homophobia is wrong, prejudice and injustice are wrong. Therefore anyone who champions those things is also wrong.
I already explained why you can't equate the different sexes with sexual orientation as it pertains to this argument. You simply ignored it. But again since it doesn't equate, there is no comparrison here. I have to go to work now, so I'll have to continue this later.
This whole issue with the showers is just really silly. Gays and straights in the military take open showers all the time and there are never any problems. Again, how would it be any different if the gay guy was out? What exactly has changed here and why would it damage unit cohesion. Nothing has changed except that you know something about them that you didn't know before. And if that causes a breakdown in morale, then its because of YOU, not the gay guy! Unless there is misconduct involved.
"The very fact that I KNOW I am serving with a bunch of homosexuals adds an EXTRA stress that isn't needed" - And who's fault is that? The gay person or yours? If you have a problem with it, then it's your problem. Why do they get punished because of your insecurity about them?
No, it's not the gay guys problem. He doesn't have a problem, you do. You are the one that's stressed. He is just himself, gay. You are the one that has a problem with that, he doesn't. Therefore the problem is YOU, and if YOU are the problem you can deal with it in a number of ways. Don't join up, choose to get out, or learn to get over your prejudice. Kicking someone else out because of your insecurity is unethical.
Okay the let me rephrase, prejudice! Does that work better? In the case of mentally or physically disabled, legal discrimination makes since because they can't do the job. No business would hire a person incapable of doing the job would they? However, if they tried to avoid hiring (or firing) someone because of their sexuality or race or religion, it'd be a class a lawsuit now wouldn't it.
Privacy is not a priority in the military. We don't always have the luxury of privacy. Usually we do and usually privacy is not a problem. In the cases where there is none, you suck it up and deal with it. You don't kick certain people out because of it, that's ridiculous!
You keep trying to equate gays serving openly with women serving in the military but you haven't really thought that through. Women are not discriminated against for being women. With the exception of certain positions, they are allowed to serve as women. They can live their lives in private and still serve. Gays cannot so there is no comparrison here. There is no evidence that open gays would damage morale, therefore ending discrimination for the good of the mission should be a priority.
Segregate? What purpose would that serve? Segregating the sexes is already a reality and technically feasible. Separating people by sexuality is not feasible and it's also pointless according to most people in the military (they've done polls on this by the way). The military allegedly has a ZERO TOLORANCE policy against discrimination and sexual harrassment, so that renders your statement completely inaccurate!
So yeah we don't segregate them we just don't let them in.
Discrimination? So what now...we let people with mental problems in the service now.....because I just talked to a recruiter who showed me regulations that prohibit people with anxiety problems (or even a history) from joining the army.
So let me get this straight, since gays are a minority that makes discrimination okay? Is that really what you're saying here? It's okay to discriminate as long as it's done to a minority?
And I'm saying that separating them is unnecessary. The military has rules against misconduct (discrimination, sexual harrassment and sexual assault). If military personal are in fact "professionals" then there is no reason to seperate gays and straights. Again, most people are fine with this idea. Every other military has openly gay soldiers and it works! There is no discrimination against straights because they will still have the option of coming in and serving.
On the one hand you say that we should separate men and women (even though we are PROFESSIONALS) but we shouldn't separate gays from non gays (because we are PROFESSIONALS)
This is a PURELY LOGICAL ARGUMENT.
You notice that I didn't go on about any religious objection....
I find it hilarious that you bring up modesty as it relates to men and women but seemingly it goes out the door when homosexuality is involved....
The military demands professionalism out of its soldiers....we might as well get rid of segregating the sexes....afterall we are all professionals and are focused on the mission nothing else LOL>...
Denial of privacy? Are you serious? That's part of being in the military. Sometimes there is no privacy. We are all used to dealing with that. You deal with that from day one (basic training).
Modest doesn't apply to members of the same sex. Men don't strip in front of women because it's usually embarrassing and uncomfortable for BOTH parties and vice versa and would constitute sexual harrassment. A male stripping on the company of another male is not sexual harrassment unless there is misconduct involved. There is no modesty issue with the same sex (regardless of sexuality). So it's a big difference. In addition seperation by orientation is not feasable, nor is it necessary.
Just because homosexuals are homosexual, does not mean they just want to have sex with EVERYONE of the same sex. Many heterosexuals control themselves around the opposite sex, and homosexuals do so around the same sex already as well.
Romans 1:26-27 - "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
lizzarddawg 9 months ago
@lizzarddawg go fuck yourself.
rugbyhitz 8 months ago 3
@VeteranConservative 2.5% of military personnel are gay? How did you get that statistic?
RebelWrestler45 9 months ago
thanks Patrick, Ms. Donnely is wack!
ChadDouglasPA 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hi brother needs to chat a, latin women busizz4me.info
MoniRokse 11 months ago
I am not going to look into this, but I wonder how many of these congressional types have been in the service....
cochranexyz 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Seems to be the chaplins jobs mainly consist to aid in helping all those in the military dealing with sin, why would that change? Hetro's have been adulterous, fornicators and also somdomizers, pedophiles, and so on , so I believe the chaplins have much to still do in the military, quit crying about the gays being the root of all evil, you hipocrites make me sick to my stomach.
Missytrilakes 1 year ago
This is bullshit! I didn't fill out the damn survey nor did any of my fellow comrades because we were too busy doing more with less!!! I'm not sure where the 116,000 responses are coming from. Furthermore, I'm so glad a bunch of assholes who have never served a day in the military get to tell us what to fucking do. How about spending more time on issues that will affect us in a positive way than trying to degrade the military from the inside out...Merry Christmas Everyone.
MrConcrete71179 1 year ago
@MrConcrete71179 Thanks Mr. Concrete. I totally agree with you! I'm very pissed about this whole situation and it's not gonna last. This whole repeal is a joke.
boatstaylor 11 months ago
You can tell Donnelly is twisting herself into knots trying not to say "faggot" or "pervert".
streetswell 1 year ago
read these 2006 poll results
Of the respondents who had experience with gays in their unit, 6% said their presence had a positive impact on their personal morale, 66% said no impact, and 28% said negative impact. Likewise, regarding overall unit morale, 3% said positive impact, 64% no impact, and 27% negative impact.---More generally, 73% of respondents said that they felt comfortable in the presence of gay and lesbian personnel.
hiccera 1 year ago
@hiccera it is and always should be about moral - as you can see from the poll people with actual experience have noted a negative effect on morale - not because they don't like homosexuals, 3/4 don't care about that, but because it has an actual negative effect on morale
hiccera 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Serving openly will create a whole new level of tension, lawsuits, rules, disciplines, additional training ie sensitivity training, morale problems, infighting, and a whole host of unnecessary soldiers will have to endure because of PC! It is more important than training men and women to keep the country safe. You think our soldiers aren’t stresses enough? Is that it? You want to throw more PC garbage at them? You’re ok with disrupting what has worked since the beginning of our military history?
BlackRepublican2010 1 year ago
@BlackRepublican2010 Thanks for speaking the truth! We shouldn't have to put up with this political testing bullshit in the military.
boatstaylor 11 months ago
12-18-10 This day will go down in history as PROGRESS.
lesbianmusic 1 year ago
If gays, and lesbians are accepted openly into the military God will allow a form of judgement to fall on US. Maybe the 26-27 series of nuclear suitcase bombs or the 200 foot tsunami will hit the US. These two catastrophe will come to the US.
TheIggy457 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Rep Murphy is a typical liberal hypocrite who is more concerned with homosexuals getting discriminated instead of stright white boys like me who are discriminated because of Affirmative Action which stupid white liberals like him support. Unbelievable.
3dartistguy 1 year ago
Anyone who is gay or a lesbian, who wants to pick up a gun and defend their country to the death, deserves to of course do it, and to NOT be hasseled for their sexuality. If anything, she or he is, unfairly, worried they will not shine bright enough - and it will probably be more oft than not that they go above and beyond the call more than is expected of them - giving all, more times than was necessary to accomplish the mission. Good luck from Canada, your little bro to the North.
fuhmeregan 1 year ago
Wow, ms. Donnelly sure is ignorant.
chorgaparada 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nancy Pelosi's lapdog Patrick Murphy lost the election. He's finished.
JimmyFormerMarine 1 year ago
Powell is so wrong. I talk with troops everyday and they are AGAINST repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell by a factor of 55 percent. but the Liberal Media keeps distorting that message. They keep reporting that supposedly 70 percent want it repealed. But actual service members in the military Don't want it to End.
3dartistguy 1 year ago
The cost of DADT on gay, lesbian, bi, and transgender servicemembers, on straight servicemembers and even on the military itself is too damn high! Whole units have DIED because the gay in their midst was removed by some homophobic commander who was too immature to handle the sexuality of people who are not heterosexual. Time to get rid of it.
EdM021 1 year ago 2
What a pain.. Just don't say anything.. idiots.
0o0oOoOoO 1 year ago
@0o0oOoOoO
Do you not value the first amendment?
gnr2391 1 year ago
Do you believe this people? Grown-up proffessionals arguing about a simple thing that shouldn't even be debated about. It's simple, get rid of DADT! It's unfair, and it's childish.
marikitna 1 year ago
Just reading this comments, it's so sad to see how ignorant some people are and it's even sadder that they actually think their points are valid.
chickenbuttguesswhat 1 year ago
@chickenbuttguesswhat Well, DADT has been repealed. Goes to tell those people who are ignorant how their voice was really heard.
AlexDiavolo1 1 year ago
It's just stupid immatuer kids joining the army that are homophobic and it places the nations senators backs against the wall because they need them to fight. They need to use a character building questionaire that asks them if they have problem with equality.
offerp84 1 year ago
If we're really worried about sexual assault in our military, maybe we should focus on the 87% that is perpetrated by men on women. Should we ask the heterosexuals to hide their sexuality now?
vpt05001 1 year ago
all u guys that dont want gays to seve in military are pussys
Sgtturtle22 1 year ago
i will remove my objection to gays serving openly when they force women and men to cohabitate -- no separate bathrooms, showers, sleeping areas for anyone -- in this way you would remove the double standard that would be created by allowing homosexuals to serve openly
but that said - anyone found to have lied in order to enter service under false pretenses or to have violated a well known standard like DADT simply because they did not think it fair or right should still be dealt with properly
hiccera 1 year ago
@hiccera
I shared a bathroom with tons of gay people at college. I also used the same showers as them, and they saw me in a towel millions of times...Was never a problem. Also, a lot of schools do have co-ed bathrooms, and they seem to be working out.
And, as mentioned before, gay guys serve openly in countries like Israel, that have top notch military. So what's your response to that?
Just admit it man. You're a straight up homophobe.
gnr2391 1 year ago
@gnr2391 yep- oh wait - did you ask my homosexual friends that - oh what have they really been saying behind my back - lol
they are not talking co-ed - no, they are talking forced cohabitation of same sex - up this to full cohabitation and i remove all reserve - oh wait, women will not let men into their berthing - for the same reason homosexuals should not force straights into sharing theirs - get it yet???
hiccera 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ not in yourselves.. Gays need to be helped and God can Heal and help in any situation, And that means ANY Situation.
If a male soldier doesnt want his body looked at by anyone (gays or not) that is his affair. He can report that to his commander if it happens. It is not Obama's business nor any gay rights group to force it. His body is his, and if he is married his wife does not want her husbands body looked at and lusted over by gays. Get it?
Jesus is Lord.
ighforever 1 year ago
@ighforever why was this marked as spam - more suppression of speech from the left???
hey assholes, just because you do not like someones message does not give you the right to mark something they said as spam so as not to let others see it
hiccera 1 year ago
@ninetysevenecho i'm sure you're trying to say something insightful and full of meaning to support your claim as to why so-called "being straight" is righteous while being gay is "evil"...but, honestly, as i read that, all i heard in my head was..."blah-blah-blah-HATE-blah-blah-moron-blah-blah-HATE-blah-blah-stick-up-your-butt-blah-blah-repressed-homosexual...blah"
theesch 1 year ago
@ninetysevenecho...obviously, sarcasm is something you're not familiar with. i'm not for DADT, i'm against it.
theesch 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no evidence that suggests gays diminish the functionality of the military. The British had a similar policy & repealed it. Guess what happened to their military... they function EXACTLY the SAME. Gays already come out to close friends in their units & these friends usually protect them. So why protect the bigots if there is an overwhelming number of soldiers PROTECTING gays from these policies? What makes the bigots so goddamn special that they can have a policy based on 0 evidence?
HBanana55 1 year ago
You are great Patrick Murphy! A very honorable and tough man.
TheOcantomi85 1 year ago
God bless Mr. Murphy...
alps112001 1 year ago
Murphy for President!
raidersfan8 1 year ago
If you can pass the training, then you should be fit to fight, physically and mentally, if a gay guy is tough enough to pass marine boot camp or even SEAL training, then he is suited to fight.
grantsdaman01 1 year ago
Homosexuals are eithe sexual deviants, brain damaged, or genetic defectives. Either way, I have a problem with being forced to live with them. If DADT gets repealed, I'll be on wrong look away from an assault charge (which is only a pg 11).
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 idiot!
henrikstaaf 1 year ago
@nov284 Well then you fail to uphold the US army principles on several counts and should be dishonourably discharged. You are a disgrace to your armed forces and constitution and I hope you are paralysed by an IED or captured.
AnthemicPolemic 1 year ago
@AnthemicPolemic When you're willing to force your mother/sisters/wife/daughter to undress, shower (without curtain), and redress in front of a high school football team, I'm willing to listen. Because that's the best analogy that I can give for what these douchers that have never, will never, and never wanted to serve in the military are trying to require me to submit to. I don't mind working with/for a homo. I am violently opposed to being required to share berthing or head spaces w/ homos.
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 Yeah, because you are stupid. If you weren't stupid you wouldn't hate them. Because hate is from fear, and fear is from ignorance. It's funny how the more you learn the harder it is to hate things. Interestingly, stupidity and ignorance are two of the only things that become easier to hate the more you understand and are exposed to them. I know guys in all branches who would find your attitude a disgrace and would much rather serve with a whole division of 'homos' than one of your kind.
AnthemicPolemic 1 year ago
@AnthemicPolemic Actually, it's not hate. I don't have a problem in the world with people doing those things that make them happy, and I reject outright notion that the govt should try to regulate what happens between two consenting adults. My neigbors are lesbian, as is my sister inlaw. Another dude I grew up around turned out to be a pole smoker. I mock them all, good-naturedly, and get ribbed in turn. The difference is that I'm not required to shower or dress where they can watch.
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 lol awwwww are you self-conscious? poor thing. I bet you aren't that good looking naked either. lol Wether you are naked or clothed or even wrapped in a trench coat it is all the same. No one can force you to have sex with them. If you don't want to sleep with a guy then don't. lol Why do I even have to explain this? :D
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 Clearly you've never heard of rape. Rape: N; The act of forcing sexual intercourse or other sexual activity upon another person, without their consent and/or against their will. From Latin rapiō (“‘to abduct or seize by force’”). I love how people sneer when I say I'm not comfortable being required to live with a complete stranger I know to be a homo, as if I have no legitimate concern. I say if we force men and homos to co-habitate, we need co-ed berthing and headspaces aboard ship.
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 I've slept in the same room with gay men before and spent the night completely unmolested. Just because a guy likes dick doesn't necessarily mean he likes yours. I think you might be flattering yourself just a little.
streetswell 1 year ago
@streetswell I've never made the argument that they would (how anyone could think I'm even remotely attractive, hell, how I ever lost my virginity, is proof that god is indeed merciful. imho Quasimoto probably has a leg up on me in the sexy dept.), only that they may. And as far as sleeping in the same room as a homo, I'm sure that once I had a chance to talk to him, and get....comfortable?....I wouldn't be as leery. Hell, I struggle to get more than an hour or two of sleep a night as it.....
nov284 1 year ago
@streetswell cont.... surrounded by any group of people at all. Suffice to say I don't trust your average person much further than I can see him, and I don't trust your average Marine even that far. Something about changing the rules of engagement, spreading dis-information, and Strategically Transfering Equipment to an Alternate Location.
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 With respect, I think you're just buying into the fiction that gay men are pathologically compelled to fuck anything in sight that has a penis. I have more than a few gay friends who haven't been laid in months who will tell you it's just not so.
streetswell 1 year ago 2
@streetswell Think of it like this. If you see a girl naked, are you automatically going to shitcan morals, consent, and laws, and just pounce on her? I'm going to say, probably no. Will you take a moment to enjoy the scenery, even if she's a 4 or a 5 at best? Probably yes. I can only assume that homos feel the same way about looking at other men, and, much like that hypothetical girl, I don't relish the idea of having some dude staring at me, especially when I can't avoid being around him.
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 There are rules in place to deal with harassment. Besides, guys who shower together are gonna see each other naked, straight or gay. If you have a problem with guys seeing you naked, you probably shouldn't join the military.
streetswell 1 year ago
@streetswell And in spite of those rules, we still have segregated berthing spaces and bathrooms. Leads me to believe that whatever people prattle about professionalism, they still recognize human nature and fallibility. I don't have a problem with being naked around most dudes, because when I look around, I notice people are meeting my eyes. Not looking a little lower. I guarantee they're going to have a rash of assault charges if DADT gets repealed. And now homos are a protected class...
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 You need to do some research on the rate of murders and assaults committed against gay people before you can call them "protected". And if straight soldiers assault gay ones once DADT is repealed, they'll be punished and made an example of.
You don't seem bigoted to me, just misinformed. I think once you meet some average gay people, you won't be so afraid.
streetswell 1 year ago
@streetswell Hell, next time I get into a fight, I need to make sure they aren't black, latino, gay, pedophiles, ex cons, rapists, etc etc or face federal charges for a "hate crime." I maintain that DADT is a good compromise. The only people I've seen get kicked out as opposed to swept under the rug were the ones that the command couldn't ignore. And there's a difference between being a homophobe and not wanting to cohabitate, same as I'm not an aquaphobe, but I don't toss blood in the....
nov284 1 year ago
@streetswell ....water untill sharks show up then hop in with them to get a closer look.
nov284 1 year ago
@streetswell Oh, by the way, or I'd have tacked it onto my last post. "made an example of" is such a nice euphamism for having your life ruined, your civil liberties stricken, your job opportunities torched, for reacting in, I would argue, the natural way (for a class A personality) to a leering dude you have zero chance to avoid.
nov284 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@streetswell Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ not in yourselves.. Gays need to be helped and God can Heal and help in any situation, And that means ANY Situation.
If a male soldier doesnt want his body looked at by anyone (gays or not) that is his affair. He can report that to his commander if it happens. It is not Obama's business nor any gay rights group to force it. His body is his, and if he is married his wife does not want her husbands body looked at and lusted over by gays
Jesus is Lord
ighforever 1 year ago
@streetswell gee, you know, i have too, but the issue is i was not forced to -- got that - were you forced to? -- if not then listen to the men in uniform who also do not want to be forced to - the government has no right to force these honorable men and women into this situation -- lets take away the double standards now - you want homosexuals in and out and open -- mix it all - men with women with men who like women and women who like men and guys who like guys and ladies who like ladies......
hiccera 1 year ago
@hiccera Soldiers have already been "forced" to deal with racial and gender integration, and they did just fine with it. Poll data shows that a good 70% or so of U.S. soldiers don't care whether or not they serve alongside gay people, so don't project your own homophobia onto them.
streetswell 1 year ago
@streetswell i posted some poll results way up near the top -- go read them -- what makes you think that i am homophobic just because i don't agree with you on this issue? -- a bit of a leap considering you don't know a thing about me and seemingly have not read my comments carefully --
the survey you refer to is probably the most recent one that was not sent to everyone and only had less than 25% returned -- yeah, lets base our whole policy on that
hiccera 1 year ago
@hiccera If you're referring to the study survey sent to all of the military and their families, 116,000 responses were logged. That's far large enough of a sample size in statistics. It's safe to assume that those who did not send back a response didn't care enough one way or another to make their voice heard.
tnucaturner 1 year ago
@tnucaturner Bullshit! 54 percent of it was sent to the Coast Guard. The other was sent to combat support units. The very fact that this study was even sent out in the first place is a joke. The questions were a bunch of bullshit too. The repeal isn't gonn last. I give it two years.
boatstaylor 11 months ago
@hiccera good point and thanks for speaking the truth. It's funny how everyone who debates on here that is for the repeal of DADT uses the word homophobe or racist. It really makes them look stupid! This whole move on the liberals is a waste of time! It's not even about race! It's about behaviour and these maniace want to be considered there own race or something. I never understood the liberal mindset in regard to gays? Have a great day .
boatstaylor 11 months ago
@boatstaylor It is not the position of the federal government to dictate ideology to any of its employees; whether it be citizen or soldier. Homosexuality is a sexual preference; it does not dictate behavior, and even if it did, it is not the position of government to question it.
RebelWrestler45 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"There are 65,000 military personal that currently serve who are gay"
What do you base that on?
JimmyFormerMarine 1 year ago
@JimmyFormerMarine they are obviously the ones who ignored DADT and told him lol
hiccera 1 year ago
Comment removed
brothergillis 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i want to know why is it so important for gay people to serve openly in the army whats the reason for it? i don't think this is the right time for it we all know whats going to happen if Don't Ask, Don't Tell is gone. your going to have a big division in the army and recruitment is going to go down and alot of fight are going to break out so why is it so people if we know whats going to happen? just like the desegregation of the military in 1948
attie3 1 year ago
@ercvstr - Why 65,000 exactly? How do you know there are not 64,999 or some other number you produce out the air?
JimmyFormerMarine 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't think ending DADT is a good idea. I predict that if they do, they will still have some sort of restrictions on open behaviour of the homosexual persuasion. The military will probably make restrictions on public displays of affection more stringent on everyone. I think a good compromise would be to keep DADT, BUT eliminate any ability to penalize a military person for being gay. The changes probably will not be fully what the homosexual activists are looking for.
tickyul 1 year ago
Get them out. Obama is not doing his job. Impeach him.
JimmyFormerMarine 2 years ago
@JimmyFormerMarine if these were valid reasons to impeach, bush would have been gone a LONGGG time ago
strongbad4usean 1 year ago
We don't need queers in our military.
JimmyFormerMarine 2 years ago
I have news for you, we already have "queers" in the fuckin military.
MrDetwaa 2 years ago 14
@MrDetwaa yep we sure do - if they are discovered lets find how to deal with them under the UCMJ and remove them as needed or at the very least punish them for their deception upon entry (if prior to DADT) or simply let them be by not asking and they not telling (because i don't care about their private sexual life) - oh lord, that would mean keeping DADT as is - here though is the snafu - changing the policy gives a homosexual more rights than a heterosexual serviceman - so i'm not for change
hiccera 1 year ago
Jimmy,
We need good soldiers. There are 65,000 military personal that currently serve who are gay, that put their lives on the line for your safety and to protect your freedoms, and you should be grateful.
ercvstr 1 year ago
I was in the military, I think it is a bad idea. The military is not full of intellectuals from Berkley, it is made up from individuals from poorer upbringings by and large. Whether right or wrong these men tend to have strong biases, whether by faith or by bigotry. You are really about to open Pandoras box.
joshtaylor7054 2 years ago
agree 100%
ojennzrofskyg 2 years ago 2
Josh,
The military integrated racially well before the Civil Rights movement. This occurred with the same biases and it was overcome then.
ercvstr 1 year ago
gotta love DADT...the supporters try to make it sound rational and constitutional but what it's basically saying is..."we don't think humans have self-discipline or control when it comes to interacting with your fellow man"...
theesch 2 years ago 9
@theesch Explain, if you can, exactly how is the DADT policy unconstitutional?
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 LMFAO XD I didn't know that you were such a pussy that you could be raped by a gay guy. I guess you must be pretty scrawny. Oh yeah here is a little hint for you. HINT: RAPE IS NOT PART OF ARMED FORCE CODE. That means if anyone rapes you they are breaking the law, moron. And just cause a guy is gay does not mean he is going to rape you. That's like saying cause you are a guy you will rape any girl that sleeps near you. Really how stupid are you, you backwards hick?
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 love the ad hominum attack, btw, really strengthens your position and shows your maturity. Actually, you made my point for me. We should repeal dadt and require women to live and bath with men. Co-ed all the way. Actually the point you seem to be making is that a sexual deviant has more self control than a normal man? Maybe something got lost in translation. By all means oh wizard oh wise one, please educate po' lil ole me.
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 its okay! Your are absolutely fine! Don't blame yourself cause you DIDN't know. See having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you isn't fun. Especially if they are screaming and fighting back lol. At least that is what I assume. Besides gay people aren't sexual deviants any more than straight who engage in anal and oral sex. and that is most of them lol. Its okay that your ignorant, no body is mad at you. So don't worry. Okay? Now cheer up
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 And yet we have rapists in our society. Not really the point I was aiming at though. Even if there was bullet proof glass separating us, I still wouldn't want to be required to expose myself to a homo for much the same reason a woman wouldn't want to be required to expose herself to me under the same circumstances. Even if there is zero threat of physical interaction I still don't want to be looked at "that way" by a man least of all genetically defective or brain damaged men.
nov284 1 year ago
Funny I figured that the majority of gay guys are more intelligent then you. but then again the majority of straight guys are too. So basically what you are saying is that you would rather instead of knowing is gay and not. Allowing you to stay away cause of your own personal hatred. You would rather shower with a bunch of men having no clue who is gay or not gay? REALLY? You would rather not know who wants to bend you over in the shower? I guess cause you want it to be a surprise LMAFO XD
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 I can respect the fact that you disagree, and I'm willing to debate on the meets, but I'm curious as to why you keep trying to provoke me? Responding in kind to your insults is beneath me and would only help you paint me as some homophobic bigoted coward. I assure you that, based on others I've debated (successfully, I feel), there are more than enough points for you to make on the merits without reducing yourself to these...insults. Have some self respect.
nov284 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 I don't deny that I categorize homosexuality as A: genetic defect (creating a barrier to procreation which in nature causes this behavior to stop showing up except as a display of dominance/submission in pack animals) B: brain damage (would explain why natural urges for the opposit sex are suppressed/supplanted) or C: sexual deviance (similar in nature to any number of fetishes). I'm more than happy to debate the nature/cause of the behavior and it's effect without personal insults. U?
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 Sorry no dice little man. Beside you are very articulate with your purposes. They are all different causes and have very little relation. On is cerebral damage, another is genetic defect. It funny do you even know the concept of Natural Selection? Do you even have an idea of what cause sexual fetishes? Random Trauma with unknown causes? A non-breeding yet dominate sexual trait? A unknown and little studied sexual euphoria? Do you even reason out the shit that you put out?
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 Do you ever attempt to look at the facts of a situation, try to consider how other people feel, or do you resort immediately to banal insults? I don't claim to be a geneticist, nor a psychiatrist. If it's genetic, then there should be a way to cure it, but I guarantee that the same people that handed out flyers advertising the best gay-bars around, gave advice on what kind of lubes were best, and how to land an older guy to kids as young as 2nd grade won't let it be cured.
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 lol Who is being vitriolitc now? LOL There is a difference between pedophiles and homosexuals as well as heterosexual. Even thought majority of pedophiles identify as straight. lol You know what it is okay to go to gay bars and and straight bars. It is okay to talk about sex with your peers. Wether they are straight or not. I have talked to straight guys about their relationships with women and how it differs from mine. Its okay. The only person that needs to be cured it you!
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 My apologies, my intent wasn't to insinuate that all homos feel that way. I'm quite certain that more than a few homos were (or would be) just as horrified as I was when I read that article. I have met a number of people for whom sexual orientation was a private matter, not a banner, and those were people that I could respect. What irritates me are those people that are busy throwing their sexuality in everyone's face and trying to make a big hairy deal of their personal life....
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 Once again you speak out of ignorance. You never once become upset with people who tell you that they are married. Yet they are flaunting their orientation. You never get upset whe people tell you that they are having a baby. But there they have told you that they had sexual realtionship and now have the result of it. Infact in arguing this subject you shoved in my face how you would rather have showers with women. Its not about flaunting it is that you are scared of gay and it shows.
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 True, I've mentioned my preference in the course of debate, but I don't dress in garrish clothing, put together a parade, and slam people on various sites because they disagree with me. Sometimes I wonder if the debate is about "equality" or rubbing the collective nose of straight people in all the perceived wrongs of the past. It may surprise you that I'm actually on (what I'll guess is) your side on gay marriage. State recognized unisex civil unions and the churches sort out marriage
nov284 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 And I'll confess my biggest....hell my only real problem with homosexuals in the military is being forced to live with them, whether I like it or not. Working for, with, or over them doesn't bother me one little bit. It's not about fear, it's about being required, yet again, to sacrifice what I remain convinced is good, moral, and just, in favor of what, in the end, is mere political theater. Another dog and pony show by people that don't care, they just want to buy your vote regardless
nov284 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 On a completely unrelated note, I have to confess. I like you. You're insulting, presumptuous, biased. But you're not stupid, merely ignorant and prejudiced by your environment. I'm sure the same could be said for me, probably worst. Well fought, worthy adversary.....
nov284 1 year ago
@nov284 I must admit gay bars suck. They are boring and strangely decorated. People who should never dance, dance and do it horribly. However, as far as the military goes, it is all about telling gays that they can't. When you do that to anyone. It makes them want it even more. Especially when it is a right of passage such as being in the army, getting married, and adopting kids. It has all the marks of saying you aren't good enough.
TMBrd89 1 year ago
@TMBrd89 cont... As far as gay bars...I'm not going to say anything's wrong with them, I just wish they were labeled better. Some friends and I got bum gouge about a place in Wilmington called Ibiza's. "Best kept secret in Wilmington" and "Girls everywhere." Yea. I swear, the pool tables were extra low, walls painted purple, glow in the dark stars everywhere, love seats...I couldn't quite put my finger on what was wrong untill I saw a dude kiss the guy next to him. I've never run so fast...lol
nov284 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theesch Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ not in yourselves.. Gays need to be helped and God can Heal and help in any situation, And that means ANY Situation.
If a male soldier doesnt want his body looked at by anyone (gays or not) that is his affair. He can report that to his commander if it happens. It is not Obama's business nor any gay rights group to force it. His body is his, and if he is married his wife does not want her husbands body looked at and lusted over by gays.
Jesus is Lord.
ighforever 1 year ago
Debates about gays in the military always degenerates into straw man arguments.
backwoodsninja 2 years ago
Comment removed
JimmyFormerMarine 2 years ago
There are issues like this that need to be fixed before we can talk about gay marriage. In my opinion this is a much more important issue at hand. I'm straight and I'm sure I could talk all I want about my significant other to my army pals but someone else can't because they are gay? That's wrong. There's nothing right about treating these amazing military folks like second class citizens. God bless all our service people and bring them home safe.
suckanorange 2 years ago
Mike Fitzpatrick for Congress in 2010!
JimmyFormerMarine 2 years ago
I'm not quite sure how this should be repealed. On the one hand, DADT was issued as a way of weakening enforcement of a law passed by Congress that banned gays outright, and the President cannot overturn laws. On the other hand, Congress holds the purse, but it is the President who wields the sword: he is called Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces for a reason.
Dacadvid 2 years ago
Were you in the Australian Army? What percentage of your army is gay?
JimmyFormerMarine 2 years ago
It annoys me to no end that the government tiptoes around these religious groups instead of putting them into their place. Under the Constitution no church has any business in politics. Considering how much money and effort these organizations put into pressuring the federal and state governments to influence social, education and other policy areas, it is time that their tax-free status is revoked. Either they declare themselves political pundits or they shut up.
bannol 2 years ago
This entire cohesion argument is flim flam. When folk make comments along the lines of feeling unsafe showering and sharing the same sleeping quarters with homosexual personnel it is actually a reflection on them, not the homosexuals. In essence they are projecting the idea that they themselves have no self-control and, thus, they expect others to be like that as well. It would stand to reason that they are in fact the weak link and the real threat to group cohesion.
bannol 2 years ago
Very good point. Couldn't have said it better myself. Comraderie based on sexual orientation is as shallow as comraderie based on faith.
Savior20061 2 years ago
It's not about feeling "unsafe" Sparky. No guy wants a gay guy getting peeks and lusting after their body, not even privately. GET IT?
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
"homosexual personnel it is actually a reflection on them"
So what your saying is if I gawk at a female's breasts in the shower and she feels uncomfortable about it.....that's a reflection on her right?
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
We have a zero tolorance policy against sexual harrassment and discrimination in the military. That automatically addresses any such issues with inappropriate conduct. There are already gays serving in the military along with straights and there are no problems with unit cohesion. Therefore the policy of DADT is pointless and we need to get rid of it. In fact, it's having the exact opposite effect on the military that they wanted when they initiated it.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
1. They still separate men and women even though there are policies against sexual harassment.
2. There are gays in the military who do not serve OPENLY There is a difference.
3. What opposite effects do you speak of?
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
1. Yes, and that is a modesty issue. Men and women are two different sexes so it makes sense that they would have seperate quarters.
2. The only difference between an open gay and an in the closit gay is the perception of the people around them, which isn't their problem, so why do they pay for it?
3. Most people in the military are professional enough to handle a gay or lesbian co-worker. I've seen gays get kicked out before and everybody thinks it sucks and is completely unfair.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
1. Modesty issue? But it isn't a modesty issue when 2 gay guys are sharing a bunk (it is possible)?
2. Yes it is a perception issue but a deterrent as well.
3. So what your saying is if a woman and a man are living together they should be professional enough to restrain themselves?....
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
"Modesty issue? But it isn't a modesty issue when 2 gay guys are sharing a bunk (it is possible)?"
No, that's not a modesty issue. In fact, there is NO issue there as long as there is no misconduct.
"Yes it is a perception issue but a deterrent as well"
What exactly does that mean? Deterrent to what? To whom?
3. No. I'm saying that men and women should be professional enough to work with each other regardless of sexuality. It's pretty simple actually and happens all the time.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Work together yes!!! Share a ROOM together? NO!!
The modesty argument is a crock of shit and you know it. I know you could care less who is sharing rooms as your advocating cohabitation.
Why is it that you ignore the whole argument. It isn't about working together it is about a privacy issue.
The fact that privacy is limited in the military is precisely why we DO NOT need cohabitation.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
"Why is it that you ignore the whole argument"
Because you HAVE NO ARGUMENT! There is no evidence whatsoever that gays serving openly would hurt unit cohesion. That's the crock! Your entire argument is based on homophobia. And irrational fears should not be the basis for discrimination, period! Gays already serve and straights already cohabitate with them, so nothing would be different at all. The only difference would be in the perception of a homophobic individual. That's all!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Captainbryce.
When a woman feels uncomfortable undressing in front of a man does that make her male phobic? Answer that.
I REPEATEDLY ARGUE that I don't have a problem with gays serving only a problem WITH COHABITATION. Hell, we need soldiers right now.
DON"T ASK DON"T TELL at least keeps homosexuality in the closet. it gives gays the PRIVELEDGE to serve in a DISCRIMINANT organization. It isn't a RIGHT like you claim.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
The fact that you have no consideration for people's privacy (at least heterosexuals) shows that your discriminant towards straight people's feelings.
My argument is based in REALITY (human nature, sexuality, privacy, army morale).
You want to FORCE your PROGRESSIVE Thinking on everybody else and dismiss what is a REAL problem.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
3. (con't) Most people (gay and straight) think it's unfair and wrong. The only thing that kicking that individual out usually does is "weaken" the team and lower moral. It does not benefit the military in any way to discharge a fighter pilot, an Arabic linguist or a field medic because of their sexuality. It's ridiculous and it hurts the mission! This is the irony because the justification for DADT is to preserve "unit cohesion" and moral. There is nothing to support that at all!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
3. Unfair to whom? To the straights that have to deal with the unwanted sexual tension or the fact that they are considered less professional as they separate men and women for sexual reasons...
Yes it hurts the morale when a soldier is killed or a beloved soldier is kicked out for being gay....
However, it hurts the morale when cohabitation exists and soldiers are denied their privacy....
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
"unwanted sexual tension" - If there is any sexual tension, it's because they created it themself or it's all in their mind. Why should a gay person have to pay for someone elses sexual tension problem? If a straight person is not professional enough to handle the fact that someone they work with is gay, then THEY can get out (or choose not to join). Why does the gay person (who's done nothing wrong) be kicked out?
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Modesty is just a perception right? I mean afterall, there are cultures where woman walk around topless.
You have just proven my point. Straights feel uncomfortable undressing in front of gays. I rest my case.
Sexual orientation is a problem why is why gays need to not serve openly.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
"Straights feel uncomfortable undressing in front of gays"
No, YOU feel uncomfortable undressing around gays. And if that's the case, YOU should not join the military. Either that, or YOU should get over it. The point is, that's YOUR problem, not the gays, and not the other straights that don't have a problem with it, so why are THEY discriminated against because of YOUR issue with them? I rest MY case!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
OMG.
Dude you are the most hard headed person I have debated on these forums.
I have just poked a hole in your flawed logic man.
I am a soldier. I am speaking from personal experience here. I guarantee you it ain't just me.
You have argued continually that this is a perception issue. If it TRULY is a perception issue than women and men can learn to share rooms together. Afterall, feeling "uncomfortable" is nothing more than a perception issue and people can learn to get over it.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
You didn't poke a hole in anything. All you did was display your own insecurities about gays. Sorry to break it to you but YOU don't represent most folks in the military. I am ALSO speaking from personal experiences (in case you didn't pick that up from my handle) and I guarantee you that you represent the minority, NOT the majority!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Or your an officer LOL. Well that explains it.
If you were enlisted I would understand. I actually don't have a problem with officers as they tend to be segregated from the soldiers.
Guarantee.? I spent 7 and 1/2 years in the miltary sir. LOL, I can recall having discussions with soldiers joking about their "insecurities" of taking showers next to each other. I am talking about showers with straight guys (no gay guys in this picture).
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
I'm not an officer, that's just my handle. If you must know, I'm a Tech Sergeant in the Air Force and I've been in for 12 years. I've had gay co-workers before. One guy I found out about after he separated. Another got kicked out because he was outed. They were both good troops and kicking them out did no good for morale or unit cohesion. So I've actually witnessed this happen before. That's why its so ridiuculous and needs to stop.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
It ain't ridiculous.
The military is not an organization for homosexuals.
Sorry man. I am sorry about your buddies man. The military fucks over gays and straights alike.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
The military is not an organization for homosexuals-- They used to say that about blacks too. Times change my friend and people get over their prejudices. The military is an organization for citizens of the United States. Sexuality is irrelevant!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
While were at it, we should allow the mentally challenged and handicapped join. Lets allow criminals and pedophiles to enlist as well. Equal opportunity right?
It's not about winning right....only about EQUALITY and PROGRESSIVES getting their way.
Hell, we should have the elderly enlist as well.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Mentally challenged, elderly and handicapped people are physically incapable of performing certain tasks required in the military. Homosexuals can (and do) do the same job heterosexuals can, so that logic is highly flawed! Criminals and pedophiles break the law. Homosexuality is not a crime so that logic also fails.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Exactly,
STRAIGHTS WILL STOP ENLISTING.
You have just made it every Single straight soldiers problem.
Unethical!! What bunch a bull. What do you base that on?
I can say that its unethical for a male to have sexual feelings for another male.
I can say that its unethical for men and women to be separated too...after all SEGREGATION is bad....
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
No it's not every straight soldiers problem, only the homophobic ones. And homophobia is simply another type of prejudice that the military would be better off without anyway. We're supposed to be professionals. If you can't understand what unethical is, then there is no way for me to make you understand. It's a very simple concept that most "good" people can grasp. People can use "fears" and "insecurities" to justify almost any injustice, but at the end of the day, it's about right and wrong.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
So it's not a problem when a woman shares a bathroom with men. Only the male phobic ones...
Were supposed to be professionals..
If you can't understand how unethical it is then thats your problem...
Women who feel uncomfortable can use "fears" and insecurities" to justify any injustice......
But at the end of the day.....
YOU DON"T HAVE A MORAL HIGH GROUND.
YOUR A PROGRESSIVE WHO WANTS TO SHOVE YOUR AGENDA DOWN OUR THROATS.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Morality means doing the right thing, period. Homophobia is wrong, prejudice and injustice are wrong. Therefore anyone who champions those things is also wrong.
I already explained why you can't equate the different sexes with sexual orientation as it pertains to this argument. You simply ignored it. But again since it doesn't equate, there is no comparrison here. I have to go to work now, so I'll have to continue this later.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Wrong based on what philosophy? Religion?
Let me guess....progessive thinking.
Thought so.
You used a modesty argument. Then you described the feelings of human beings (YOU ADMITTED IT) when their privacy is invaded.
You destroyed your position.
If you were arguing that we need to integrate the sexes because we are all professionals.....then you would have a better argument....
In other words....attacking traditional perspectives on sexuality, modesty, social constructions of gender
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
damn you're stupid!
gjaddajg 2 years ago
This whole issue with the showers is just really silly. Gays and straights in the military take open showers all the time and there are never any problems. Again, how would it be any different if the gay guy was out? What exactly has changed here and why would it damage unit cohesion. Nothing has changed except that you know something about them that you didn't know before. And if that causes a breakdown in morale, then its because of YOU, not the gay guy! Unless there is misconduct involved.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
THATS THE POINT MAN.
Perception is EVERYTHING. The very fact that I KNOW I am serving with a bunch of homosexuals adds an EXTRA stress that isn't needed.
It is the same idead of how a WOMAN feels when she is taking a shower with a bunch of guys.
You only speak for progressives man.
The AIR FORCE is softer anyways. I am sure they will be the first to go.
THE ARMY and MARINES will be the last.
The NAVY is known for pregnancy problems out at sea man....BTW
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
"The very fact that I KNOW I am serving with a bunch of homosexuals adds an EXTRA stress that isn't needed" - And who's fault is that? The gay person or yours? If you have a problem with it, then it's your problem. Why do they get punished because of your insecurity about them?
captainbryce1 2 years ago
OMG DUDE. Unbelievable.
It's the gay guys problem. Thats exactly why DON"T ASK DON"T TELL exists right now.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
No, it's not the gay guys problem. He doesn't have a problem, you do. You are the one that's stressed. He is just himself, gay. You are the one that has a problem with that, he doesn't. Therefore the problem is YOU, and if YOU are the problem you can deal with it in a number of ways. Don't join up, choose to get out, or learn to get over your prejudice. Kicking someone else out because of your insecurity is unethical.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
DISCRIMINATION according to your definition...includes the mentally and physically challenged...
If you use a blanket statement (DISRIMINATION) then you have to explain why the military is in fact DISCRIMINANT even though they say they aren't.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Okay the let me rephrase, prejudice! Does that work better? In the case of mentally or physically disabled, legal discrimination makes since because they can't do the job. No business would hire a person incapable of doing the job would they? However, if they tried to avoid hiring (or firing) someone because of their sexuality or race or religion, it'd be a class a lawsuit now wouldn't it.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
And it makes sense that privacy is important to people.
It makes sense that the military is discriminatory.
It makes sense that gays need to find work elsewhere because it's not an organization that accomodates them.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Privacy is not a priority in the military. We don't always have the luxury of privacy. Usually we do and usually privacy is not a problem. In the cases where there is none, you suck it up and deal with it. You don't kick certain people out because of it, that's ridiculous!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Privacy is not a priority in the military. That is why they segregate the sexes.
We don't have a luxary of privacy which is precisely why gays should not be serving.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
You keep trying to equate gays serving openly with women serving in the military but you haven't really thought that through. Women are not discriminated against for being women. With the exception of certain positions, they are allowed to serve as women. They can live their lives in private and still serve. Gays cannot so there is no comparrison here. There is no evidence that open gays would damage morale, therefore ending discrimination for the good of the mission should be a priority.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
DUDE! I have no problems with women serving either but they are able to serve because WE CAN SEGREGATE THEM from the men.
There may be NO EVIDENCE according to you.
@#$@#$@ it man. IF gays get to share rooms with EYE CANDY then they need to integrate the sexes. I want to share a bunk with chics.
This is ridiculous man. Why should gays get all the fun.
The military needs to be discriminant. The moment it stops we have weakened it.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Segregate? What purpose would that serve? Segregating the sexes is already a reality and technically feasible. Separating people by sexuality is not feasible and it's also pointless according to most people in the military (they've done polls on this by the way). The military allegedly has a ZERO TOLORANCE policy against discrimination and sexual harrassment, so that renders your statement completely inaccurate!
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Gays are a minority.
So yeah we don't segregate them we just don't let them in.
Discrimination? So what now...we let people with mental problems in the service now.....because I just talked to a recruiter who showed me regulations that prohibit people with anxiety problems (or even a history) from joining the army.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
So let me get this straight, since gays are a minority that makes discrimination okay? Is that really what you're saying here? It's okay to discriminate as long as it's done to a minority?
captainbryce1 2 years ago
What I am saying IS THAT YOU CAN"T SEPARATE GAYS FROM STRAIGHTS.
That should be reason enough to not let homosexuals in. PERIOD!!
It ain't my problem that gays are attracted to the same sex.
If they change DON "T ASK DON"T TELL then there will be discrimination against STRAIGHTS
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
And I'm saying that separating them is unnecessary. The military has rules against misconduct (discrimination, sexual harrassment and sexual assault). If military personal are in fact "professionals" then there is no reason to seperate gays and straights. Again, most people are fine with this idea. Every other military has openly gay soldiers and it works! There is no discrimination against straights because they will still have the option of coming in and serving.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And it makes sense that privacy is important to people.
It makes sense that the military is discriminatory.
It makes sense that gays need to find work elsewhere because it's not an organization that accomodates them.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Yep so integrating the sexes is ago.
Afterall, professionalism should TRUMP modesty according to you.
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
You have a double standard man.
On the one hand you say that we should separate men and women (even though we are PROFESSIONALS) but we shouldn't separate gays from non gays (because we are PROFESSIONALS)
This is a PURELY LOGICAL ARGUMENT.
You notice that I didn't go on about any religious objection....
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
I find it hilarious that you bring up modesty as it relates to men and women but seemingly it goes out the door when homosexuality is involved....
The military demands professionalism out of its soldiers....we might as well get rid of segregating the sexes....afterall we are all professionals and are focused on the mission nothing else LOL>...
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Denial of privacy? Are you serious? That's part of being in the military. Sometimes there is no privacy. We are all used to dealing with that. You deal with that from day one (basic training).
captainbryce1 2 years ago
Comment removed
hypermonkey24 2 years ago
Modest doesn't apply to members of the same sex. Men don't strip in front of women because it's usually embarrassing and uncomfortable for BOTH parties and vice versa and would constitute sexual harrassment. A male stripping on the company of another male is not sexual harrassment unless there is misconduct involved. There is no modesty issue with the same sex (regardless of sexuality). So it's a big difference. In addition seperation by orientation is not feasable, nor is it necessary.
captainbryce1 2 years ago
There are issues with STRAIGHT personnel.
Just because homosexuals are homosexual, does not mean they just want to have sex with EVERYONE of the same sex. Many heterosexuals control themselves around the opposite sex, and homosexuals do so around the same sex already as well.
fucking bigots.
OneRadRudeboy 2 years ago