• 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

The Democrats aren't going to have more power then they have right now for a long time.

Really? Because the way things are going, I only see them gaining more power unless they **** up drastically.

Either way, this isn't that huge of an issue. Ending DADT could cause problems, but in the long run it will work itself out.
 
Question for you "pro-gay military" folk:

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

Not sure. But doesn't the policy also have something in it about if your sexual orientation is made public, even if through no fault of your own then you're automatically removed from the military even if you've, to that point, served honorably? Seems like such a policy has demonstrably removed more honorable servicemen/servicewomen/officers then it has created.
 
Last edited:
Question for you "pro-gay military" folk:

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

As I just said in my previous post: "As long as the military is legally allowed to discriminate against gays, there will be no hope to end the discrimination they face in other facets of society."
 
Gawd, it's like people haven't heard of "friendly fire".
It will happen if this is implemented during war time.

And btw, it isn't discrimination.
 
Last edited:
Really? Because the way things are going, I only see them gaining more power unless they **** up drastically.

Either way, this isn't that huge of an issue. Ending DADT could cause problems, but in the long run it will work itself out.

I think the Democrats are about at the height of power that our country will really allow. I think they've gotten every vote that they can possibly get. All they have to from here, is down. It doesn't matter how well they do, they can't keep this strength.
 
Look at this thread, the fact that we are not unified on this issue should be a clue to you.,





Really?


simple. you take one guy who has an irrational fear of being assaulted by another's blood engorged member, now given this he may not be focusing on the mission. now rational or not you introduced this fear with your social engineering in the middle of a war, now instead of scanning and panning with his 50-cal for haji, he is thinking about that "damn fag" riding shotgun in the hmmwv.... his focus is lost. that potentially kills three-four people right there.






It may not be. but would you not air on the side of caution in the middle of 2 wars?


If irrational fears make a soldier lose focus, he has no business being a soldier.

How many male on male rapes happen between adult males outside of prisons? How many of these are actual acts of homosexuality (It's a crime about power)?
 
You've never been deployed then.

Yes, I have. working 18 hour shifts does not give a lot of time for "looiking for action".

Pull into port, and the first thought is "where's the action"?

Army deployments and Navy deployments are two different things. We didn't get "port breaks" when deployed.

What you are talking about is TDY to us.

Either way, if you are saying your Navy compadres can not handle themselves honorably while on port breaks, that is your problem, not the Don't ask Don't tell policy.

The Navy guys that I have worked with in Korea were always honorable.
 
I think the Democrats are about at the height of power that our country will really allow. I think they've gotten every vote that they can possibly get. All they have to from here, is down. It doesn't matter how well they do, they can't keep this strength.

Again, you may be right.
 
Gawd, it's like people haven't heard of "friendly fire".
It will happen if this is implemented during war time.

You think that our soldiers would murder another one just because he chooses not to put his penis into a vagina?
If so, then we have way more desperate issues than whether or not gays are allowed in the military
 
You think that our soldiers would murder another one just because he chooses not to put his penis into a vagina?
If so, then we have way more desperate issues than whether or not gays are allowed in the military
Maybe so, but it is a reason why it shouldn't be implemented during war time.
 
You think that our soldiers would murder another one just because he chooses not to put his penis into a vagina?
If so, then we have way more desperate issues than whether or not gays are allowed in the military

It has happened before, but if they're brave enough to join the military I'm sure they can probably put up with it.
 
If we can't do it during wartime all it says to conservatives is that what they need to do is use delaying tactics during peace and wait until some conflict breaks out and they'll be able to deny gays their rights forever.
 
Yes, I have. working 18 hour shifts does not give a lot of time for "looiking for action".



Army deployments and Navy deployments are two different things. We didn't get "port breaks" when deployed.

What you are talking about is TDY to us.

Either way, if you are saying your Navy compadres can not handle themselves honorably while on port breaks, that is your problem, not the Don't ask Don't tell policy.

The Navy guys that I have worked with in Korea were always honorable.

What's dishonorable about taking shore leave and finding some hotties to hook up with?
 
What's dishonorable about taking shore leave and finding some hotties to hook up with?

Nothing, as long as nothing illegal happens. So what is the problem with gays doing the same thing while in port?
 
If irrational fears make a soldier lose focus, he has no business being a soldier.

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.
 
Question for you "pro-gay military" folk:

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

It will lift the moral for those who currently are shamed into silence.
 
Nothing, as long as nothing illegal happens. So what is the problem with gays doing the same thing while in port?

Sigh. It has nothing to do with what people do in port....
 
It will lift the moral for those who currently are shamed into silence.

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:
 
Sigh. It has nothing to do with what people do in port....

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?
 
Back
Top Bottom