U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-29-2010, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Orlando, Florida
43,858 posts, read 43,559,234 times
Reputation: 58603

Advertisements

I worked for the Navy for years. Everyone knew who was straight. Everyone knew who was gay. There are a handful of people in the military who have chosen go public trying to make a big issue out of something that most other people in the military could care less about.

As a woman in the military, if you are going to take every sex joke and remark as 'personal sexual harassment'....you need to grow up or find another career choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-29-2010, 11:12 AM
 
Location: FLG/PHX/MKE
7,289 posts, read 12,865,601 times
Reputation: 11529
People whose sexual preference "is their first priority" (straight or gay) are probably a low percentage of the military. I would think that the sacrifices that accompany many military assignments would be pretty obvious to people who prioritized the ability to have limitless sex, over service to their country. That goes for straight family guys, mothers, gays, and everyone else. Gay people don't place sex as any more or less of a priority than do straight people, except on television and in the media, where sensationalism sells.

Furthermore, if a guy's first priority is getting his tool polished, why the hell would he take a dirty job that could potentially shove him into some third world armpit for months or years at a time, with a bunch of guys who might be pissed off that he's gay in the first place? Why would that guy pass up a normal, clean job in a big city, where he could get action 7 days a week, 365 days a year without any drama? The only difference I can see is service to country. That would make his first priority service to country. Not sexuality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2010, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Don't be a cry baby!
1,310 posts, read 1,144,870 times
Reputation: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davachka View Post
This argument, which I have heard before, is just a cop out in my opinion. I would like to hear the statistics on how many gay soldiers have assaulted straight ones? Gays live with straight roomates, create bonds/friendships with straight friends, etc. It is not that they are base sexual feelings with no control of their sexuality and are just going to sexually assault every man in their barracks. Female soldiers are assaulted extremely often by male soldiers by the way.(This is my point, why increase the chances of whatever sexuality harassment. Men and women are separated for a reason and this reason should be the same for homosexuals.)
No, its not a cop-out and to brush that off as you have done is no less what is being done to others. Why do you expect to be heard if you won't listen either?(no malice in that statemnt )

So are you are asking the USAF to re-write their rules and regulations for a special group? It’s never as simple as it seems.
If you or I wish to be homosexual and serve in the armed forces then that shouldn't be a problem but if we want special treatment for it then that is asking too much. If you or I see that life in the military could be a problem, as a homosexual, then guesses what, don't enlist.
I could care less what a person’s sexual preference is but don't expect the whole freaking world to stop and applaud.

Here’s a good slogan, “Don’t like, don’t join”.


(We may just have to agree to disagree )

Uniform Code of Military Justice - UCMJ


In general. The gist of this offense is a violation of the custom of the armed forces against fraternization. Not all contact or association between officers and enlisted persons is an offense. Whether the contact or association in question is an offense depends on the surrounding circumstances. Factors to be considered include whether the conduct has compromised the chain of command, resulted in the appearance of partiality, or otherwise undermined good order, discipline, authority, or morale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 07:59 PM
 
3,651 posts, read 8,111,745 times
Reputation: 2747
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToucheGA View Post
What about heterosexual soldiers who are attracted to soldiers of the opposite sex? Should we ban women (or men) from military service as well? Should we ensure that all air traffic control centers are staffed by heterosexual members of the same sex? What about other high-strees occupations?

When somone is dodging bullets, the idea of hitting one someone is going to be the last thing on thier mind.
I'm sorry but frankly it's clear you either didn't read or comprehend my posts, or prefer to simply twist my words (hopefully not). Regardless, I see no point in responding until you actually reply to what I said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2010, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Florida
416 posts, read 536,245 times
Reputation: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by joey2000 View Post
I have never been to the moon. Therefore, I don't believe anyone else has. Sorry but that is basically your logic. And you also oversimplify in that we aren't simply talking about "performance as a soldier," but how that could affect them in combat. It is amazing to me that people are unable and/or unwilling to accept or even consider that when someone is in an extremely dangerous, stressful situation, that being in that situation with a person/persons they could have romantic and/or sexual feelings for could negatively impact their ability to do their job as effectively and objectively, to say nothing of how it could impact those around them who might now have to worry about being "hit on" - and when I say worry I don't mean in an anti-gay, hateful way. But again, the PC Monster rears its head
They seem to serve fine with the "worry" that they could be fatally shot, or captured and tortured, but we should concern ourselves with their "worry" that someone they work with may "hit on" them.... because homosexuals are so feckless as to hop around with sexual partners who have no desire to sleep with them. Yes, I see

It must rank up there with their worry that the female soldiers would "hit on" them. A pointless unnecessary and highly unrealistic "worry".



Quote:
What's ridiculous is comparing best friends to a romantical and/or sexual relationship.
Best friends are closer than kin, someone you'd die for, you'd kill for, someone you care more for than yourself or at least as much as, and you're telling me that such feelings won't get in the way of men doing their jobs but taking a relationship one step further to sexual partnership will. Try thinking about it for some time before giving one line quips.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2010, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Retirementland
1,234 posts, read 2,395,463 times
Reputation: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by joey2000 View Post
I have never been to the moon. Therefore, I don't believe anyone else has. Sorry but that is basically your logic.
If you're going to make an assertion, be prepared to provide proof. We have evidence of people having made a trip to the moon. We do not have proof that gay soldiers are any less capable of doing the job and maintaining a non-sexually-driven relationship with their fellow men or women.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2010, 04:16 PM
 
556 posts, read 671,991 times
Reputation: 849
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToucheGA View Post
What about heterosexual soldiers who are attracted to soldiers of the opposite sex? Should we ban women (or men) from military service as well? Should we ensure that all air traffic control centers are staffed by heterosexual members of the same sex? What about other high-strees occupations?

When somone is dodging bullets, the idea of hitting one someone is going to be the last thing on thier mind.
Yeah, uh, no. Why do you thin k women aren't on the front lines of combat situations? Because 1. female service members tend to give it up to further themselves, and 2. rape, or at least the accusation of it. I can't imagine the amount of "booohooo my feelers got hurt" and "So and so touched me/said something/looked crooked/HARRASMENT" there will be if the military is opened up to homosexuals openly.

You are not allowed to be gay in the military. DADT was created so that no one was allowed to ASK a service member if they were gay, therefore protecting their job.

You can't have pink hair, facial piercings, certain tattoos, certain medical conditions etc in the military. Are pink haired, tattooed, people with nose piercings and asthma being discriminated against by the military? OR is it that they just don't make regs for service?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2010, 04:18 PM
 
556 posts, read 671,991 times
Reputation: 849
Quote:
Originally Posted by GloryB View Post
I worked for the Navy for years. Everyone knew who was straight. Everyone knew who was gay. There are a handful of people in the military who have chosen go public trying to make a big issue out of something that most other people in the military could care less about.

As a woman in the military, if you are going to take every sex joke and remark as 'personal sexual harassment'....you need to grow up or find another career choice.

EXACTLY!!!!! I shall rep you NOW
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2010, 04:51 AM
 
17,853 posts, read 11,749,501 times
Reputation: 4113
No. There shouldn't be DADT.

These lists give more perspective on this issue.

These are the countries that DON'T allow gays to serve openly:

Cuba
People's Republic of China
Egypt
Greece[1]
Iran
Jamaica
North Korea
Pakistan
Saudi Arabia
Serbia
Singapore
South Korea[2]
Syria
Turkey[3]
Venezuela
Yemen
United States

Rather embarrassing to have the United States on that list isn't it?

These are the countries that DO allow gays to serve openly:

Albania
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Canada
Colombia
CzechRepublic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
The Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Russia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
United Kingdom
Bermuda
Uruguay

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_...n_the_military

Last edited by Ceist; 10-03-2010 at 04:59 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2010, 02:24 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,302 posts, read 3,754,492 times
Reputation: 2524
Quote:
Originally Posted by fallingwater View Post
I kind of a problem with it and this why. First off I have no problems with gays wanting to serve their country or get married, or adopt children etc. My problem with the "Don't Ask, Don't tell" is society has this "in your face" type mentality going on right now. It is very fashionable to be gay right now. Even the gay community puts pressure on some to come out of the closet before they are ready. Or some simply do not feel the need to advertise that they are gay.

My concern is actually for the welfare and safety of gay soldiers. I am not saying all soldiers are like this but I have quite a few friends and family that have been in the military. Most (not all) are very macho and homophobic. I have a nephew in Iraq and he tells me things that go on which I will not give in great detail here but a lot of things get covered up. Gang type mentality, heavy drug use, women having sex with superiors to get out doing certain assignments, some constantly getting crappy assignments if they do not sleep with someone and so forth. So my concern is, if lets say two gay men are caught by their peers having sex and those peers are homophobic, what do you think the outcome will be? Of course the government should protect its soldiers but realistically I am not so sure this would happen all the time. I personally think it could cause violence, however I am truly hopeful that society will eventually accept people for who they are and none of this be a problem. I think we have a long way to go yet though.
Your concern for the welfare and safety of gay Soldiers is nice. However, if they are willing to face the contempt of others, let them. Rosa Parks realized there were going to be consequences for sitting in the wrong section of the bus, did she not? The same way with gay Soldiers. Let them make their way through it, take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top