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.
Now it's a matter of impementing the ban. I have two proposals. First allow any service member who doesn't want to serve with openly gay service members to request and receive an honorable discharge. It's only fair since their enlistment contract has been unilaterally altered by the government. They didn't bargain for this and they ought to be able to opt out. Freedom of choice, after all.
Secondly, and I believe someone else has already suggested this, gays should be treated as a separate gender and be segregated in their own living quarters. We don't have co-ed barracks. The same should apply to gays in the military.
Now it's a matter of impementing the ban. I have two proposals. First allow any service member who doesn't want to serve with openly gay service members to request and receive an honorable discharge. It's only fair since their enlistment contract has been unilaterally altered by the government. They didn't bargain for this and they ought to be able to opt out. Freedom of choice, after all.
Secondly, and I believe someone else has already suggested this, gays should be treated as a separate gender and be segregated in their own living quarters. We don't have co-ed barracks. The same should apply to gays in the military.
Why? Just because they don't have to worry about being discharged should anyone discover they are gay doesn't mean anything else is different. People knowingly serve with gay people now, people knowingly sleep in the same quarters. This sounds like something a 13 year old would write.
Secondly, and I believe someone else has already suggested this, gays should be treated as a separate gender and be segregated in their own living quarters. We don't have co-ed barracks. The same should apply to gays in the military.
Lame argument. Sexuality is not gender. Gay people do not represent a "third gender." A lot of people on this board need to take a remedial biology class, apparently.
We do not have separate facilities based on who people prefer to have sex with, otherwise gay men and straight women would use the "people who like sex with men" bathroom, and gay women and straight men would use the "people who like sex with women" bathroom.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,774,755 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimMe
Now it's a matter of impementing the ban. I have two proposals. First allow any service member who doesn't want to serve with openly gay service members to request and receive an honorable discharge. It's only fair since their enlistment contract has been unilaterally altered by the government. They didn't bargain for this and they ought to be able to opt out. Freedom of choice, after all.
Secondly, and I believe someone else has already suggested this, gays should be treated as a separate gender and be segregated in their own living quarters. We don't have co-ed barracks. The same should apply to gays in the military.
Do you think that enlistees "bargained" for multiple deployments in Iraq or Afganistan? Do you think they "bargained" for stop loss orders that force them to remain in the military long after their enlistment time is up? In the military, once you sign up, you don't get ANY say so in where you go, what you do or who you serve with. You are given orders and you follow them. That is the first thing your TI teaches you when you arrive in San Antonio (I assume the other services do too). The enlistment contract does not say "we guarantee that you will not serve with a homosexual".
Secondly, and I believe someone else has already suggested this, gays should be treated as a separate gender and be segregated in their own living quarters. We don't have co-ed barracks. The same should apply to gays in the military.
Sexual orientation is on a continuum. Most guys are straight, but according to studies, about 1/3 of all men have at least one same-sex encounter in their lifetimes. You can't categorize sexual orientation in the same way that gender is categorized.
Now it's a matter of impementing the ban. I have two proposals. First allow any service member who doesn't want to serve with openly gay service members to request and receive an honorable discharge. It's only fair since their enlistment contract has been unilaterally altered by the government. They didn't bargain for this and they ought to be able to opt out. Freedom of choice, after all.
Secondly, and I believe someone else has already suggested this, gays should be treated as a separate gender and be segregated in their own living quarters. We don't have co-ed barracks. The same should apply to gays in the military.
No. Now we can finally stop wasting taxpayer dollars on discharging trained soldiers for no good reason. The military lost over 10% of their foreign-language speakers because of DADT. What a stupid waste.
Did we need that many french speaking soldiers ? Give me a break......if you are a homosexual and you purposely join an orginization that you KNOW does not allow you to talk about or promote your particular brand of sex then dont whine cry and **** and moan about being a victim when you are ejected for doing just that. It was just that simple........I don't care what any one says this is going to have a detrimental effect on our Military.
Did we need that many french speaking soldiers ? Give me a break......if you are a homosexual and you purposely join an orginization that you KNOW does not allow you to talk about or promote your particular brand of sex then dont whine cry and **** and moan about being a victim when you are ejected for doing just that. It was just that simple........I don't care what any one says this is going to have a detrimental effect on our Military.
No it's not stop whining. Nobody is "promoting a brand of sex". No "brand of sex" has much place in the military.
Thinking about all those people who have, over the years, suggested mandatory national service by our young people makes me wonder how the "gay issue" would be treated if that were the case.
Personally I think this repeal had to happen. No only did it not used to be there (and hey, the military seemed to get on ok FOREVER without it), but it would be easy to avoid a draft because very few of today's youth are embarrassed to say they are gay if it meant getting out of going to war. Gay would be the new Canada. And then YOU would be complaining about how gay people are being treated "special" by not having to go to war. You know you would.
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.
Give me a break......if you are a homosexual and you purposely join an orginization that you KNOW does not allow you to talk about or promote your particular brand of sex then dont whine cry and **** and moan about being a victim when you are ejected for doing just that. It was just that simple........I don't care what any one says this is going to have a detrimental effect on our Military.
