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 distrust of homosexuals may be influenced by their profligate sexual gratification, and their trolling in public places like washrooms. Heterosexual soldiers may not relish being alone, under fire, with someone who is sizing them up for non-military activities.
he has been in office for a year, he promised to end this, he has done nothing until his polls starting to drop like a rock~~~ hummmmm?
pandering, you think?
lol...He should have done everything the first day.
Republicans are very impatient, they have very high expectations for President Obama.
The distrust of homosexuals may be influenced by their profligate sexual gratification, and their trolling in public places like washrooms. Heterosexual soldiers may not relish being alone, under fire, with someone who is sizing them up for non-military activities.
Uhmm then women must hate serving with straight men. I remember sizing them up for non-military activities all the time. As a young hormone driven sailor they might not have liked what was crossing my mind.
Hortysir - I want your input, you being in the navy.
My only worry is concern: I wouldn't want women showering with men. And applying that same idea, I wouldn't want straight guys showering with gays. I feel it would be a little uncomfortable. But I'm not in the military, so I'm not entirely sure how relative my concern is. What's your take on it Hortysir.
Outside that, We ARE NOT the United Straights but The United States. This whole gay business is divisive. And we need to get over it. No one should care about anothers sex life and or relationships.
I get the women/men analogy. I do.
When I was in, women weren't allowed on combat vessels. (I was on a battleship) I honestly don't know the Navy's policy on that nowadays.
But, like I said earlier, besides boot camp the showers are separate curtained stalls. So unless some dude just prances down to the head in his birthday suit, it ain't like he's gonna see your junk!
And what makes ya think you're his type, anyway?! ("you're" is relative here, btw)
Guess what I'm trying to say is it's the same equipment. Much different than if it was women/men.
Most people focus on how the military handles male homosexuals. The reality is that it's female homosexuals who are discharged much more than male homosexuals.
Anyone who wants to serve and possibly give their life for this country should be commended. I doubt most people, straight or gay, view joining the military as means to hooking up.I am reminded of the words of a "true conservative" as opposed to a pseduo-conservatives, Barry Goldwater, who intimated that he did not care if a soldier was gay or straight as long as he shot straight.Amazing how pseduo conservatives always talk about limiting government, when all they want to do is limit government for their own purposes.It would be nice if everyone just kept their pants on and do their jobs with out this ever becoming an issue.
It essentially means a gay soldier cannot have a "life" outside of the military for fear of being caught. No civil union or marriage, no adoptive kids, no power of attorney documents. If they had a partner, that person is invisible in all aspects to the military. That's a lot to ask of someone who is already willing to give up their life.
And are people in opposition to letting go of DADT policy endorsing this situation? Overwhelmingly in this thread, no. What we are saying is that it's not as simple as knocking down one policy and believing that gays are now free. They're actually going to be in harms way. Even with a policy like separate berthing areas, you've now herded them into a situation where they'll be easily targeted by malevolent individuals (who are unworthy of service themselves, but managed to get by long enough to do damage to morale of all).
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
The policy is simply unfair. If hetero soldiers are allowed to talk about boyfriends, girlfriends, husbands, and wives, then shouldn't homo soldiers be allowed to do the same? If the argument is that heterosexuals are superior and deserve special rights, then I can see how DADT makes sense, but otherwise, it doesn't make sense.
First of all, being allowed to talk on the job isn't true. Manning GQ stations means no time for chit chat. Port calls or a break on the fantail is one thing, but on the job no. My crew could talk to me off the job about personal issues, but using it as excuse while on the job-- no way.
All of this would make more sense if you can see how vulnerable a gays career is when subjective criteria are introduced to someone having enough authority to damage them by targeting them with prejudices. Even paper pushers having access to sensitive files can abuse their authority on the job by being a birdie in the ear of others, feeding that info to malevolent characters. Gays have been in a position to advance much more readily than women or blacks because they have the advantage of knowing gay is not an obvious criteria in performance reviews. My own work history required I grow a filter on my ear for sexist stupidity to figure out what my job actually was. Blacks are burdened with that too. Gays currently are not, they have a cloaking device called DADT.
The policy is partially unfair and until ALL the policies surrounding gays are dealt with comprehensively, you are more likely to see increased volumes of injustice happening to gays because commands are insufficiently prepared to deal with or interpret things. Simple as that. Demanding the removal of this burden put on gays without doing that additional work will ultimately harm them. If you're willing to see them suffer, go ahead and rip down the policy, but know you've inadvertently facilitated malevolence & put hardship on all, not just the gay individuals in question. It's likely to produce resentments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01
Uhmm then women must hate serving with straight men. I remember sizing them up for non-military activities all the time. As a young hormone driven sailor they might not have liked what was crossing my mind.
I wouldn't say hate, more like nuisance. I do recall more than a few occasions in San D getting inappropriate whistles down the pier. I also recall donning my cheshire smile, wishing every single one of you walking hormones would be blessed with a teenaged daughter to give you the rude awakening you so richly deserved. Dick Cheney is rendered a lump of putty in the gaze of his daughter and can't back peddle fast enough for the rest of his god given life. muhhahahhaaaa
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
Most people focus on how the military handles male homosexuals. The reality is that it's female homosexuals who are discharged much more than male homosexuals.
Off base housing a roomate randomly assigned to me was gay. She let me in on it and I guarded that confidence for her protection. She was career military and an excellent role model for females new to service. Her work was impeccable, and her personal advice was invaluable to me. Had I lacked character or been prone to vindictiveness I could've thrown her under a bus at anytime in context of collective regulations at the time.
Similar to tabloid sleaze tactics, some regs don't even have to be around gay issues. EX. there was an officer targeted for having too many govt pens in the console of his car charged with theft of govt property. His accounting work made a superior look bad and retribution was swift. Not all could see it for what it was, but when smear campaigns take over, an officers career is all but ruined when reputations precede you at every duty assignment. A spate of poor performance marks when you're trapped at a duty station for 3yrs spells doom if you're on the outs with command.
Let me hear career military gays voting on this, and I'll vote their way IF they're willing to accept full consequence for their decision. I don't think McCain is a hypocrite, I think he suspects that generals haven't done all their homework in relation to other protocols leaning on this original DADT policy. Don't judge that book so quick. You're obviously frustrated and fed up with ignorance, but don't trip up so close to the finish line with naivete. Wackaloon religious right would love to use any misstep against you. You know this, just don't forget it.
PS I strongly support cease and desist of all investigations regarding sexual orientation. Right NOW.
Last edited by harborlady; 02-04-2010 at 03:26 AM..
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.
muhhahahhaaaa
