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.
The reason why DADT works is because it keeps gay people focused on the job. If gays want to open up and tell all then they will face harrassment allegations themselves. But, realistically the military would take care of it in house.
I would have an easier time believing this if it really were all 'silence' and 'live and let live.' But there are witch hunts and investigations when folks are suspected of being gay (including what they do during their off-time)...so it's not just a matter of shutting up about being gay; it's about hiding and sneaking and skulking...it's totally stupid.
If you want to say, "Hey, NO ONE in the armed forces talks about their sex lives, PERIOD," I can get on board with that. But that's not what's going on here.
Well if the answer is 'Giveing BJ's behind the gear locker" that's incompatable.......Right or wrong what you risk is some poor innocent getting fragged or float checked...More martyrs to the cause but I guess some will think it's worth it
And why is that incompatible? I've been in the military and I couldn't possibly care less who engaged in oral sex, regardless of their or their partner's gender, over the weekend. It has nothing to do with me or how they perform their duties.
What you're really saying is: "Gays are gross, and if I find out you're gay, you're getting 'fragged' or 'float checked'." So, I ask you - WHO has the problem in this scenario? I'll give you a hint, it ain't the gay person...
It is and you have an ill informed vision of gay men and women. These fears come down to a fear about sex, you see gay men and women as sexual animals not as human beings with the same love of their nation as any straight man or woman. Gay men and women serve in all of our Nato allies armed forces and in the IDF with no problems. Gay men and women serve as police officers and firefighters in close quarters for extended periods of time in confined spaces.
So your argument, that we can just allow gays to share the same living quarters and shower areas, because the libido in gays and lesbians is diminished, as compared to normal people? You come up with this simplistic argument, and tell me that I'm the one who is ill informed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newhandle
The arguement against gays is much the same as the arguement against intergration, white males feared for some strange and perverse reason black men. Now they fear gay men and women. Fears and phobias are not valid excuses to deny anyone their right to serve their nation.
Oh yeah, and the reason I disagree with 0bama's politics and agenda, is because I'm a racist too. Good grief, sorry, but all of your arguments fall flat.
Unless our NATO allies and the IDF are dramaticaly different, he is wrong.
Then I guess he is not wrong, and you are.
The IDF just got their asses kicked in 2006 by a fourth rate, rag-tag terrorist group, and they now the once imposing IDF can't defend itself any more?
JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Israel cannot defeat Hezbollah in a direct engagement and the Lebanese guerrilla group would inflict heavy damage on the Israeli home front if war broke out, a former Israeli national security adviser said Thursday.
Though outnumbered and outgunned, Hezbollah held off Israel's advanced armed forces in a 2006 war and fired more than 4,000 rockets into Israeli territory. The group has a domestic political base and has since bolstered an arsenal that Israel describes as a strategic threat.
And why is that incompatible? I've been in the military and I couldn't possibly care less who engaged in oral sex, regardless of their or their partner's gender, over the weekend. It has nothing to do with me or how they perform their duties.
What you're really saying is: "Gays are gross, and if I find out you're gay, you're getting 'fragged' or 'float checked'." So, I ask you - WHO has the problem in this scenario? I'll give you a hint, it ain't the gay person...
No, what I'm saying is that people in the real world as a rule do not like things that are different than their concept of 'Normal' and when that concept is destroyed they might tend to do stupid stuff. I'm willing to bet that some dedicated Military personal both hetero and gay will be hurt, killed, or in jail when it gets repealed.... Here's another tip.. The world is not the utopian garden of love that some people want it to be. Bad things happen to good people all the time always have and always will no matter how many people get killed for a cause or jailed as punishment........
No, what I'm saying is that people in the real world as a rule do not like things that are different than their concept of 'Normal' and when that concept is destroyed they might tend to do stupid stuff. I'm willing to bet that some dedicated Military personal both hetero and gay will be hurt, killed, or in jail when it gets repealed.... Here's another tip.. The world is not the utopian garden of love that some people want it to be. Bad things happen to good people all the time always have and always will no matter how many people get killed for a cause of jailed as punishment........
Agreed.
So, "bad things will probably happen" is a valid reason for repressing gays? Is that what you're saying?
I had a gay friend when I was in 'Nam. He was as fierce as can be. His luck ran out in an ambush. I got the guy that killed him and then dragged his body back to the boat.
Gay or straight we all bleed red.
Thank you for your service to our country. God bless you.
Why is it that some appear unable to move beyond thoughts of actual, physical sex acts the second they hear the word "gay"?
To be fair, isn't the manner in which gays conduct themselves in matters of sex, the only difference between gays and the rest?
If you place 40 straight men in a squad bay, you do not worry about distractions and disciplinary problems arising from the men over sexual encounters between them. You will have to worry if you bunk some women in with the men, and why is that? And why would the concerns be any different if you had gays and lesbians serving openly?
Inevitably this argument always results in people arguing that we should just put all the sexes and genders together, and forget the hundreds of years wisdom, for why we do not allow women to live in the men's barracks, and vice versa.
So, "bad things will probably happen" is a valid reason for repressing gays? Is that what you're saying?
Is defending YOUR definition of repression worth someones life? Either in the grave or behind bars? DO you want to tell someone that their kid, brother, sister, whatever was killed or will be incarcerated because of your perceptions?
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.
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.
You come up with this simplistic argument, and tell me that I'm the one who is ill informed?
