• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama to End Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy

Coolguy said:
That's nice, I don't.
Click to expand...

You left service in '92? Don't you think the mind-set would change? I mean people I graduated with are much more allowing of homosexuals than older generations.
 
WI Crippler said:
Does equality help the military? Yes, and It helps more than just the military, as Dianna has pointed out
Click to expand...

The militarys job is to break things and kill people, an thing that detracts from that is pointless IMHO.

Equality for 1% of the population doesn't do much for the military.
 
Arch Enemy said:
You left service in '92? Don't you think the mind-set would change? I mean people I graduated with are much more allowing of homosexuals than older generations.
Click to expand...

It has changed, for the better. After the Aberdeen incidents the Army changed a lot of their policies, especially for sexual discrimination.

The same thing would happen with this.
 
WI Crippler said:
Ideally yes, but unfortunantley the stigma that we are all wiped clean in boot camp and are nice little programmed robots for the government simply isn't true. The military is made up of individuals who still carry their personal issues and fears with them through their service career. Some may carry their prejudices in as well, although I believe the tougher the service, the less discrimination you will have. Special Forces, you won't ever see or hear it because they know the value of each mans contribution moreso than a regular.
Click to expand...

I hear what you are saying. But if that were a major problem, we would be segregating our units currently. I think that argument is being used as a boogieman. It's not as big as people would want to pretend. I know plenty of white veterans that say "nigger" but never shot a black soldier.
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
The militarys job is to break things and kill people, an thing that detracts from that is pointless IMHO.

Equality for 1% of the population doesn't do much for the military.
Click to expand...

Apparently that 1% would increase the chances of Americans murdering Americans on the battlefield.
 
Did you guys know that over 350,000 black men served during WWI even though the military remained segregated until 1948? And then 2 years later even though the Jim Crow laws were going strong and much of the white majority within the U.S. was till under a racist spell, the U.S. entered the Korean war? Boy those social experiments. People sure do care about them until you have to go and fight a war for them.
 
MrVicchio said:
At the cost of disrupting the morale of others, the good of the few out weighs the good of the many? Yes that's good for unit cohesion and morale :roll:
Click to expand...

What will the majority be bummed about?
 
TheNextEra said:
Alright, so while doing your job, not in port, what time do you have looking for action? If not, why do you think gays would?
Click to expand...

You miss the point. And are side tracking into silliness now.

You work Lt. Joe, you're Chief is gay, you're E-5 is gay. The E-5 get's great evals, they seem to be friendly. Nothing out of bounds, just... friendly.

Reality is nothing is going between them, but what do you think folks will think?

Two E-5's fall in love, that's not a problem? We have enough of that crap going on with straight folk.

And if you don't think gay sex won't become a problem on post/base/ship if this happens you're nuts.
 
MrVicchio said:
The militarys job is to break things and kill people, an thing that detracts from that is pointless IMHO.

Equality for 1% of the population doesn't do much for the military.
Click to expand...

Ok, so the military won't deliver aid, or perform rescue missions in that case, or even stick around to rebuild some of the **** we broke since all we do is break things and kill people. Toys for Tots, the US Marines are no longer your sponsor. :roll:

Equality for 1% of the population doesn't harm the military either. Why should they be denied?
 
MrVicchio said:
And if you don't think gay sex won't become a problem on post/base/ship if this happens you're nuts.
Click to expand...

Not as big a problem as you think. Again, you seem to think gays are somehow less honorable than you and would not adhere to Navy regulations. Do you somehow think you are better than them?
 
MrVicchio said:
You miss the point. And are side tracking into silliness now.

You work Lt. Joe, you're Chief is gay, you're E-5 is gay. The E-5 get's great evals, they seem to be friendly. Nothing out of bounds, just... friendly.

Reality is nothing is going between them, but what do you think folks will think?

Two E-5's fall in love, that's not a problem? We have enough of that crap going on with straight folk.

And if you don't think gay sex won't become a problem on post/base/ship if this happens you're nuts.
Click to expand...
Same problems that we already have with straight sex. Fraternization is already against regulations.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
I hear what you are saying. But if that were a major problem, we would be segregating our units currently. I think that argument is being used as a boogieman. It's not as big as people would want to pretend. I know plenty of white veterans that say "nigger" but never shot a black soldier.
Click to expand...

Its not so much about the prejudice they bring with them, its about the stresses of deployment to combat. Most of the time in combat is not actually fighting. There is alot of down time, and thats usually when stupid **** happens, not during a battle per sey.
 
I see no arguments here that haven't been used over the decades as an excuse to discriminate against minorities and women. I'm particularly offended by the suggestion that our soldiers would deliberately frag gays during battle, just as I was offended when the same suggestion was offered decades ago in regards to integrating blacks into the military.

Discrimination is discrimination, no matter how you dress it up and put lipstick on it.
 
WI Crippler said:
Its not so much about the prejudice they bring with them, its about the stresses of deployment to combat. Most of the time in combat is not actually fighting. There is alot of down time, and thats usually when stupid **** happens, not during a battle per sey.
Click to expand...

Okay, but people usually don't get killed during that stupid **** do they?
 
Arch Enemy said:
You left service in '92? Don't you think the mind-set would change? I mean people I graduated with are much more allowing of homosexuals than older generations.
Click to expand...
I agree that things change with time and this will probably be one of them.
Your perception, as well as mine may be just that, our perception, and not actuality at all.
So I guess it boils down to what our perceptions are based on.
Mine, of the current situation, is third party info for the most part, and comes from remaining in contact with those who did not leave service like I did. They are the ones who are in charge now and have a greater overview as to how things actually are at Command and troop levels.
 
BTW, Mr. Vicchio, gay sailors won't get pregnant. You don't have to worry about that. ;)
 
DiAnna said:
I see no arguments here that haven't been used over the decades as an excuse to discriminate against minorities and women. I'm particularly offended by the suggestion that our soldiers would deliberately frag gays during battle, just as I was offended when the same suggestion was offered decades ago in regards to integrating blacks into the military.

Discrimination is discrimination, no matter how you dress it up and put lipstick on it.
Click to expand...

Like I said, the most harm would come from down time in combat and not during combat, IMO. But you are correct that discrimination is discrimination. Its not a huge leap for the military to correct this, since all they would have to do is apply rules already on the books. There doesn't need to be a "gay rights act" per sey, they just need to not care whether somebody is gay or not, and apply the laws evenly just like they do with everyone else.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Okay, but people usually don't get killed during that stupid **** do they?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen it, but I have seen guys beat each other down for things that didn't warrant a beatdown. Its more about an excuse, than a reason.
 
Coolguy said:
I agree that things change with time and this will probably be one of them.
Your perception, as well as mine may be just that, our perception, and not actuality at all.
So I guess it boils down to what our perceptions are based on.
Mine, of the current situation, is third party info for the most part, and comes from remaining in contact with those who did not leave service like I did. They are the ones who are in charge now and have a greater overview as to how things actually are at Command and troop levels.
Click to expand...

Your primary sources outweigh mine, as I have none.
 
DiAnna said:
I see no arguments here that haven't been used over the decades as an excuse to discriminate against minorities and women. I'm particularly offended by the suggestion that our soldiers would deliberately frag gays during battle, just as I was offended when the same suggestion was offered decades ago in regards to integrating blacks into the military.

Discrimination is discrimination, no matter how you dress it up and put lipstick on it.
Click to expand...
Please take the blinders off, there is no discrimination being done.
 
Coolguy said:
Please take the blinders off, there is no discrimination being done.
Click to expand...

....any blacks getting removed from the military for being black? Being removed from the military for sexual orientation is discrimination or do you not understand that signaling a particular group out because of something people who created DADT oppose is discrimination?
 
Coolguy said:
Please take the blinders off, there is no discrimination being done.
Click to expand...

It is discrimination by definition.

But then not all discrimination is bad. We discriminate against those convicted against sexual assaults on minors and not allow them to be day care operators or teachers for example.

IMO, the discrimination against gays in the military is wrong, but it is discrimination.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I am also saying that if you change a policy like this in the middle of a war you are gonna get someone killed. not one life is worth a social experiment/change for ones political agenda.
Click to expand...

You wanna know what really gets people killed?

1) Not having enough troops. Considering how overstretched our military already is, you'd think that the 12,500 gay soldiers kicked out of the military since DADT started might have been useful. Guess you don't think so.

2) Not being able to understand the enemy. We have a massive shortage of Arabic translators, which gets troops killed every day. It's a shame we kicked 80 of them out for being gay since 2003 alone, because otherwise some red-blooded straight American soldiers might not have been killed because of inadequate intelligence. But I guess you think that's far less important than whether or not the troops have to deal with QUEERS in their midst.


MrVicchio said:
Question for you "pro-gay military" folk:

What purpose is there in openly allowing gays to serve. What does this accomplish?
Click to expand...

Question for you "pro-black military" folk:

What purpose is there in openly allowing blacks to serve. What does this accomplish?
 
TheNextEra said:
It is discrimination by definition.

But then not all discrimination is bad. We discriminate against those convicted against sexual assaults on minors and not allow them to be day care operators or teachers for example.

IMO, the discrimination against gays in the military is wrong, but it is discrimination.
Click to expand...
Good post particularly from a liberal.;)

These days in some PC quaters it seems like the very suggestion of discrimination in anything should be a capital offense.

Personally I'm not a great fan of standing armies but I don't see many reasons why gays should not serve in the military but then again I don't see a lot of reason to rush into these sorts of things because of the clamours of a few PC thugs. It should be on the horizon but it isn't the biggest priority and should, like most things, be done with caution.

It is shame that today one has to point out what was once so obvious a truth to all. That just because something doesn't serve a function as far as the individual can see does not mean that it is functionless even in ways very different from its alloted reason for being and therefore institutional and value changes should be approached with a great degree of caution.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom