• 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!

Gay West Point grad testifies before Army

I've been married for 34 years. I was married over a monopoly board; we interrupted the game at the justices house in our flip flops and cutoffs. She wasn't big on decorum and consented to marry us. We would have "lived in sin" for 34 years but they were paying big BAQ and dependents allowances and I was just about to reenlist after an 11 month break in service and move to DC. It actually costs me to be married now (married tax penalty) but I hate lawyers and the government saying they have to somehow condone what is or isn't involved in my life. My wife and I have had a "gentlemens" agreement from day one in our relationship about who would get what when. The government is irrelevant because we are not going to ask it what we should do or to bless what we do. Does that answer your question?
 
Last edited:
And, you would find yourself in the stockade. The charges would stack up a mile high if you assaulted a gay soldier. Besides assault, you would probably get hit with descrimination, intent to rape and possibly intent to commit manslaughter. Those two soldiers who got smacked with double digit sentences in that other thread probably got smacked with intent to rape and that's why their sentences were so long.




hmm... I have been in plenty of fights with other service members... VA beach was the worst... Damn navy guys always startin crap and what not.... :lol:


I dunno. When one is in a combat unit, one tends to settle differences without the chain of command..... Maybe it was different for you?
 
I've been married for 34 years. I was married over a monopoly board; we interrupted the game at the justices house in our flip flops and cutoffs. She wasn't big on decorum and consented to marry us. We would have "lived in sin" for 34 years but they were paying big BAQ and dependents allowances and I was just about to reenlist after an 11 month break in service and move to DC. It actually costs me to be married now (married tax penalty) but I hate lawyers and the government saying they have to somehow condone what is or isn't involved in my life. My wife and I have had a "gentlemens" agreement from day one in our relationship about who would get what when. The government is irrelevant because we are not going to ask it what we should do or to bless what we do. Does that answer your question? If not, TS.

Whoa...don't get an attitude with me, sport. I was asking a question based on your assessment that the list I gave was all to suit attention starved females. Marriage was among that list so I was curious as to your take on the issue.

Forgive me for thinking you had a modicum of civility and enough social aptitude to understand the ebb and flow of conversation.
 
Whoa...don't get an attitude with me, sport. I was asking a question based on your assessment that the list I gave was all to suit attention starved females. Marriage was among that list so I was curious as to your take on the issue.

Forgive me for thinking you had a modicum of civility and enough social aptitude to understand the ebb and flow of conversation.

I have enough aptitude to grasp the tone of your post. "Fvch. That." My mouse battery just died while I was reading your response and I thought some tech from SF, CA had hacked through my McAfee. :lol:

I don't see the uncivility in my response. It's all true, stated as uncolored facts. Thank you for the opportunity to describe my perspective on the subject.
 
Last edited:
No one here is discussing males and females sleeping and showering together except you. Move on.

I'm using it as an example of the military's standard on billetting to illustrate my point. Since DADT hasn't been abolished, yet, it's the only barometer to work with. It won't be until the DoD addresses openly serving gays in the military that there will be another mark to gauge with.

I thought we were talking about sexual harassment. Now why in the world would a straight man sexually harass another man? :confused:

Are you saying it can't happen? If a soldier says to a gay soldier, "did you take it in the ass this weekend?", then that's sexual harrassment.


The same way I would feel if a male soldier was predatorial with any other soldier.

And, it is a soldier's right to request protection when he/she feels that her safety is being threatened by another soldier, especially if the threat of arm is sexual.



My first reaction isn't discharge and neither is the military's. Disciplinary proceedings are my first reaction, followed by stripping of rank, and finally discharge if the behavior is not corrected.

Um, no, not when it comes to sexual violations. The first step is courts martial, then discharge.



First you are assuming that sexual harassment will be rampant or more rampant than it currently is. Second, you are assuming that measures will be more drastic following DADT. There is nothing to indicate this. Not one shred of empirical evidence.

1 in 3 female soldiers experience sexual harrassment in the military, as sexual harrassment is defined by the DoD. It only stands to reason that sexual harrassment is going to increase if you throw gay on straight and straight on gay harrassment cases into the mix. It's totally unavoidable for the sexual offense rate to remain the same and sure won't go down. Right now, there are minimal cases because of DADT. Hell, the sexual offense rate will go up because of spite cases, alone, not to mention the cases where sexual offense actually takes place.



So now we're right back a t a "don't drop the soap" prison rape scenario? What makes you think that this is going to become some issue? Are you afraid the homos are going to start forcibly dipping their sticks in your honey pots spontaneously at the repealing of DADT?


It's human nature. If it wasn't, then sexual harrassment wouldn't even exist in our culture. The reality is, though, it does and the other reality is, sexual harrassment isn't confined to male on female misconduct. The scenarios will infinitesimal. To say that it isn't going to happen, is just plain denial.
 
I have enough aptitude to grasp the tone of your post. "Fvch. That." My mouse battery just died while I was reading your response and I thought some tech from SF, CA had hacked through my McAfee. :lol:

Actually, I live in L.A. now.
 
hmm... I have been in plenty of fights with other service members... VA beach was the worst... Damn navy guys always startin crap and what not.... :lol:


I dunno. When one is in a combat unit, one tends to settle differences without the chain of command..... Maybe it was different for you?

I very familiar with soldier fights and settling things with, "tree line counciling". However, we're talking about assaulting a gay soldier because he made you feel uncomfortable and if he files charges, you would do some seriously hard time over the incident.

The chain of command, if they have knowledge of such an assault, would have no choice but to pursue a criminal investigation. I'm sure that you are max attentive to a leader's responsibility in that kind of situation.
 
I very familiar with soldier fights and settling things with, "tree line counciling". However, we're talking about assaulting a gay soldier because he made you feel uncomfortable and if he files charges, you would do some seriously hard time over the incident.

The chain of command, if they have knowledge of such an assault, would have no choice but to pursue a criminal investigation. I'm sure that you are max attentive to a leader's responsibility in that kind of situation.




Meh, we took care of our own, didn't need the Chain of command. Never had a problem. Maybe in admin units or other clerical I could see it.... maybe
 
Meh, we took care of our own, didn't need the Chain of command. Never had a problem. Maybe in admin units or other clerical I could see it.... maybe


I understand how things happen "off the radar". But, you understand my point about a leader's responsibility to enforce the regulations, whether he likes it, or not. Right?
 
I understand how things happen "off the radar". But, you understand my point about a leader's responsibility to enforce the regulations, whether he likes it, or not. Right?




Yes, I sure do, that said, we took care of our own.
 
And, that's all fine and good, till that soldier you kicked the crap out of requests mast.

Ya know not every gay person is a drama queen tattle tale. And there are straight drama queen tattle tales that would out gay people to their COs.
 
Ya know not every gay person is a drama queen tattle tale. And there are straight drama queen tattle tales that would out gay people to their COs.

Because, God knows, Combat is like honey to the little drama queen flies of the military.

/sarcasm.
 
Ya know not every gay person is a drama queen tattle tale. And there are straight drama queen tattle tales that would out gay people to their COs.

You're right. There are no absolutes, in any case. However, DADT prevents a unit commander from asking a soldier if he/she is gay, regardless if that soldier has been outted, or not. Hence, the, "Don't ask", part. DADT is actually brilliant.

What's going to happen post-DADT is that soldiers soldiers will have access to a whole new truckload of complaints and vengence grievances.

"he's pickin' on me because I'm gay"

"She didn't promote me because she's gay and I'm straight"

"He's gay and I'm gay, but since I rejected his advances, he's out to get me"

"My gay company commander touched me. I want to file a sexual harrassent complaint against him/her"

It's gonna be a real pain in the ass.
 
You're right. There are no absolutes, in any case. However, DADT prevents a unit commander from asking a soldier if he/she is gay, regardless if that soldier has been outted, or not. Hence, the, "Don't ask", part. DADT is actually brilliant.

What's going to happen post-DADT is that soldiers soldiers will have access to a whole new truckload of complaints and vengence grievances.

"he's pickin' on me because I'm gay"

"She didn't promote me because she's gay and I'm straight"

"He's gay and I'm gay, but since I rejected his advances, he's out to get me"

"My gay company commander touched me. I want to file a sexual harrassent complaint against him/her"

It's gonna be a real pain in the ass.




There is a pun here. must resist..... :lol:
 
Don't worry, if you're unit is a charlie foxtrot, the enemy will save you trouble of offing yourself.

Surprisingly enough, even though I've spent thousands of hours in the company of armed personnel, no one has yet tried to frag me.
 
Can someone answer a simple question for me? Why are some supposedly manly testosterone-heavy men so obviously scared of gay men?
 
Back
Top Bottom