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.
It simply means they don't have to hide the fact that they are gay. It doesn't mean they're going to be running or prancing around proclaiming their 'gayness' - just that they no longer have to worry about being discharged if someone learns that they are gay.
I hope that's all it means. If that's all it means then why would they need to institute DADT at all? It was instituted for the protection of homosexual service members. The repeal may cause a repeat of what was happening in the military before DADT.
There have been roundtable discussions with some men back from combat at the VA who disagree with the repeal and were quite vocal about how disgusted they were with the possibility that DADT would be repealed.
I'm conservative. I'm a Christian. I support the ending of DADT. There have been gay people in the military even with DADT in place. I didn't keep gay people out of the military, it just kicked them out if they were proven to be gay.
I'm glad DADT was repealed because your sexuality doesn't matter when it comes to fighting for and defending the country you love. We spend a lot of money investing in our troops and it was just a stupid policy to kick them out for being gay.
Or how about some of the openly gay rugby players (including one the the best to ever play the game). I think they'd do pretty well in our military (even if they aren't American)
Somebody you know personally TOLD you.....hearsay.
ETA: Otherwise link to the discussions....
So now you're calling me a liar?
The government doesn't voluntarily post information like that, you won't find it on WikiLeaks because Bradley Manning had nothing to do with getting information on this roundtable discussion.
Here are 5 relevant questions that will have to be answered by someone once Obama signs the Repeal of DADT law whether we like it or not. These questions have never been even approached in debate and should have. Obama's New 'Gay' Force - Kevin McCullough - Townhall Conservative
I read your article. The question about housing is legit enough. So is the question about legal cases. But some of these questions are full-out retarded - just blustering by a heavily biased, misinformed, and probably homophobic columnist.
From the article:
Quote:
3. Will base commanders be required to host "pride" events that allow for similar conduct to the x-rated displays that go on in the nation's cities each year?
No, dumbass...obviously not. It's the military. They will continue to go about their mission, which is to kill people and blow things up. What cities do is none of their concern.
The fourth question is about as stupid, because it appears to be predicated on the pig-headed notion that gay people are all "flamboyant, effeminate" people who are unable to control their sex drive and must mate with everything they see. This is not even worthy of further discussion.
There are legit questions to ask and think through, but questions like that are obviously not serious - hardly "relevant" - and rob the author of credibility.
Only for 35 years? Since 1976? Isn't that around the time when the "gay movement" really became vocal?
I have said time and time again. Gays have always been in the military so what's the issue with the "serve openly"? What does it mean to serve "openly"? Different nations have different customs and regulations with regard to their military.
One thing that you are probably aware of is that when you sign up for military service your body, mind and soul belongs to the government.
What's to say that because gays will be allowed to serve "openly" without fear of being discharged for being gay, that the government won't use this as an opportunity to study the behavior of homosexuals? They perform all sorts of mental evaluations on troops throughout their military service. It is quite possible that from allowing gays to serve "openly", the military will study the behavior of homosexuals, and the information they gather will likely be used to determine the nature of homosexuality as it relates to all gays in military service and society.
Time will tell what happens as a result of this repeal.
I know personally someone who is ex-military who volunteers at the VA. There have been roundtable discussions with some men back from combat at the VA who disagree with the repeal and were quite vocal about how disgusted they were with the possibility that DADT would be repealed.
Just be prepared for the fallout.
You completely failed to address the question I asked. Here we go again.
You fear that allowing open homosexuals to serve in the US military will cause a great many serious problems - negative "fallout" as you call it. You're so confident of this you go so far as to say that people who disagree with you and believe the integration will be smooth are "delusional".
I present you with evidence. Over the 35 or so years, 37 countries have converted from not allowing homosexuals to serve to allowing open homosexuals to serve in the military. They've all done so without separate accommodation of any kind. In those militaries, there have been no problems whatsoever. No mass exodus - No problems with retention - No decline in recruiting - No increase in sexual assaults - No increase in sexual harassment claims - No negative effects on training - No negative effects on unit cohesion.
What (specifically) makes the US military different? Why were these 37 militaries able to adapt to open homosexuals in their ranks easily and without issues whereas for the US military to do so will be difficult and come with many issues? I would really appreciate if you'd address that question.
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.
No, dumbass...obviously not. It's the military. They will continue to go about their mission, which is to kill people and blow things up. What cities do is none of their concern.
