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.
As I said, Israel and UK (and 23 other nations apparently) have had an open policy for some time now with no adverse effects.
We pretty much knew who the gay guys were when I served, nobody panicked. Military guys are not as immature as they are pictured in the movies sometimes.
If you tell active duty guys that they will be able to spend more time at home with their families if gays are allowed in, I think most will be on board, the homophobes will get in line.
You can cite all the little countries that have tried this, and that is to the detriment of their military, it does not mean we follow suit.
Take this to its conclusion, which living and bathing quarters do you assign gays and bisexuals to?
Do we go the route of just telling the young men and women full of raging hormones to live with their preferred sexual genders, and ask them to be nice? If so, then there is no reason to keep men and women from living in the same quarters, as long as we instruct them not to engage in sexual relations.
There is a very damn good reason why the military separates the living and bathing quarters of men and women, do these reasons no long matter? It might make you wonder why the hell we bothered in the first place, but it does not to the rest of us.
Even if you foolishly believe every gay man wants to have sex with every other gay man, the problems this would create have been played out between men and women already, which is why we keep them separated.
Just leave men and women in separate barracks. Ever been in a gym P.E. class where you all showered together afterwards. There were gay guys in there. Maybe even they snuck a peek at your pecker.
Were you violated? Doubtful.
Military are trained professionals. They will be just fine.
Gays are already there. The people who continue to support Don't Ask Don't Tell must believe that homosexuality is so incredibly disgusting and repulsive that even heterosexual soldiers who are trained for combat won't be able to handle hearing one of their co-workers say the words, "I'm gay". I think people need to give our soldiers a little more credit.
Gays are already there. The people who continue to support Don't Ask Don't Tell must believe that homosexuality is so incredibly disgusting and repulsive that even heterosexual soldiers who are trained for combat won't be able to handle hearing one of their co-workers say the words, "I'm gay". I think people need to give our soldiers a little more credit.
I never underestimate the dedication of any man or woman who chooses to join the military. If they go in as immature kids--and manage to stick it out--they usually come through it with a much more mature outlook on life than they had when they signed up.
I'm going to assume (and hope) that if/when DADT policy is repealed that those who can deal with it, will deal with as they should and those who cannot will get get out.
I also think that any who criticize Obama for not just going along willy-nilly with repealing DADT are not giving him credit for considering the long term ramifications. Once repealed, it's gone for good, so it isn't a decision to be made lightly.
I never underestimate the dedication of any man or woman who chooses to join the military. If they go in as immature kids--and manage to stick it out--they usually come through it with a much more mature outlook on life than they had when they signed up.
I'm going to assume (and hope) that if/when DADT policy is repealed that those who can deal with it, will deal with as they should and those who cannot will get get out.
I also think that any who criticize Obama for not just going along willy-nilly with repealing DADT are not giving him credit for considering the long term ramifications. Once repealed, it's gone for good, so it isn't a decision to be made lightly.
I agree with everything you said above Beach.
In your previous comment about my response to your post, what I was trying to get at was that Obama has brass on both sides of the issue who are telling him what to do in regards of DADT. There is no clear consensus on this issue. So who should he listen to?
As long as the top military advisers are telling Obama they don't think openly gay people in the military is a good idea, he is doing the right thing by listening to them. I know that libs think this is something to be decided by popular vote, but some decisions are best left to those who are qualified to make them.
The "brass" was against integrating the armed forces, but Truman went and did it anyway.
In your previous comment about my response to your post, what I was trying to get at was that Obama has brass on both sides of the issue who are telling him what to do in regards of DADT. There is no clear consensus on this issue. So who should he listen to?
Fair enough. I haven't followed what has come out regarding the advice he has been getting so didn't know about the split in consensus.
Found this article from February in the Washington Post. Looks like a decision will be made sometime this year.
The same way that women would disrupt unit cohesion if we did not keep their living quarters separate from those of the men.
I'll explain it another way. Lets say all sexual persuasions can now serve openly in the military. A unit commander gets six new Marines checking into his unit, one of each of the below six.
1 - one straight male
2 - one straight female
3 - one gay man
4 - one lesbian woman
5 - one bisexual female
6 - one bisexual male
The unit, base or battalion commander needs to assign these men and women to a room in the barracks, but the rooms are two or more person rooms, open squad bays, Quonset huts, tents, etc.... While trying to maintain proper order, discipline and morale, which people get assigned to which rooms? Now multiply this by a few hundred thousand soldiers, sailors, Marines or Airmen and we would end up with a sort of Peyton Place soap opera going on in the barracks.
All sexual persuasions CAN serve in the military. All sexual persuasions DO serve in the military.
What difference is it suddenly going to make if they are allowed to say 'I'm gay', considering that they are already there?
That by now is old. I work for a non-profit in DC working to repeal DADT. I'm also a veteran, so believe me I heard all the arguments on both sides of the fence. To me, the pro DADT crowd seriously believes that the gays will turn our military into a 24 hour orgy with sissies. We just had a huge lobby day with around 300 gays vets that went to the Hill to tell members of congress their stories. I truly believe that if the American public could see how professional we are, and how much we share common goals they would no longer be afraid of allowing us to serve openly in the military.
DADT is destroying too many lives, both personal and professional, and it needs to go.
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.
