• 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 call for 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal, adviser says

apdst said:
I think it's exactly why DADT is the most practical policy to deal with gays in the military. Do your job, keep your sex life private--as it should be--and everybody's happy.
Click to expand...

But a gay person's life will remain private. Just like it is now. Ending DADT doesn't give gays the right to post pictures of their sexual escapades up on the bulletin board.


No, but you kept assuming that the straight soldier would be the one with the issues. Your comments speaks for themslves.
Click to expand...

No, my comments relate what I'm trying to say. If you're reading something into my comments that isn't there then I'll try to do a little better job of writing them. But I'm no expert on this stuff man, I'm just asking questions.


And, in my opinion you're going to see more problems with female soldiers than you are male soldiers.
Click to expand...

Okay. Why?
 
apdst said:
It doesn't, but do you think there should be a regulation against talking about one's sexual escapades while on duty?
Click to expand...

Well obviously you do if one is gay. I'm concerned with people with people just living their lives. If a gay military couple get caught off base they can get busted were as a hetero couple won't.
 
Winnb said:
But a gay person's life will remain private. Just like it is now. Ending DADT doesn't give gays the right to post pictures of their sexual escapades up on the bulletin board.
Click to expand...

It will give them as much right to expose their sex life as straight soldiers.




No, my comments relate what I'm trying to say. If you're reading something into my comments that isn't there then I'll try to do a little better job of writing them. But I'm no expert on this stuff man, I'm just asking questions.
Click to expand...

Well, then leave some room for a gay soldier to be at fault as much as a straight soldier.




Okay. Why?
Click to expand...



Because it's been my experience that females are more homophobic than males, just like blacks are more homophobic than whites.

I would love to be a fly on the wall when a straight black soldier files a complaint against a gay white soldier. Whatta conundrum that'll be, eh?
 
apdst said:
I'm trying to educate you as to why the military doesn't allow gays to serve openly.
Click to expand...

Oh. That's what you're doing by waxing eloquent about sodomy in a discussion that has nothing to do with sodomy. :lamo

apdst said:
The section of the UCMJ is Article 125.
Click to expand...

You've said that several times (a meaningless fact that changes the discussion not in the slightest), and we're talking about dumping it. Can you wrap your head around this for just a second?

apdst said:
Stop worrying about when and where I get *****
Click to expand...

You seem to be awfully worried about when and where gay soldiers have sex. Why is their sex life ok to discuss, but not yours?

apdst said:
and start reading and comprehending.
Click to expand...

:rofl Physician.... :doh
 
winston53660 said:
Well obviously you do if one is gay. I'm concerned with people with people just living their lives. If a gay military couple get caught off base they can get busted were as a hetero couple won't.
Click to expand...

Nothing can happen to them off post, unless they get busted for public indecency, in which case a hetero couple would be in just much trouble for breaking the law.

If two gay soldiers are shacked up in an apartment together, then no one is going to know, or care. Now, if they get caught ****ing in the barracks, that's different. They would be in as much trouble as a hetero couple who got boinkin' in the barracks.

IMO, what this all boils down to is, that people want it to be ok for gay soldiers to stand in front of a battalion formation and say, "I'm gay and proud", even when a straight soldier couldn't get away it. It's almost as if ya'll want gay soldiers to have more rights than straight soldiers.
 
Glinda said:
You've said that several times (a meaningless fact that changes the discussion not in the slightest), and we're talking about dumping it. Can you wrap your head around this for just a second?
Click to expand...

The point is, that the president doesn't have the authority to dump any part of the UCMJ.



You seem to be awfully worried about when and where gay soldiers have sex. Why is their sex life ok to discuss, but not yours?
Click to expand...

You don't want me to tell you about my sex life, because if I did you would want a taste of this and then you would be packing your **** and moving to Louisiana.
 
apdst said:
Nothing can happen to them off post, unless they get busted for public indecency, in which case a hetero couple would be in just much trouble for breaking the law.

If two gay soldiers are shacked up in an apartment together, then no one is going to know, or care. Now, if they get caught ****ing in the barracks, that's different. They would be in as much trouble as a hetero couple who got boinkin' in the barracks.

IMO, what this all boils down to is, that people want it to be ok for gay soldiers to stand in front of a battalion formation and say, "I'm gay and proud", even when a straight soldier couldn't get away it. It's almost as if ya'll want gay soldiers to have more rights than straight soldiers.
Click to expand...


Oh don't be such a drama queen...you know if a gay soldier gets found out they will be kicked out.
 
apdst said:
It will give them as much right to expose their sex life as straight soldiers.
Click to expand...

:screwy

What does sexual intercourse have to do with being a soldier? Aren't there military rules that prohibit ANY/EVERY soldier from "exposing their sex life?"

Beyond this, why don't you give us some data on how often and freely straight soldiers currently flaunt this "right," and what happens to them when/if they are caught?

apdst said:
Because it's been my experience that females are more homophobic than males
Click to expand...

That settles it. You obviously live on some other planet.
 
apdst said:
You don't want me to tell you about my sex life, because if I did you would want a taste of this and then you would be packing your **** and moving to Louisiana.
Click to expand...

:lamo: :2rofll:

Well, you're definitely impressed by your penis, aren't you?

How 'bout everyone else here... you guys all want to jump this clown's bones, too?

:rofl :lol:
 
winston53660 said:
Yep sure do. They have fought to defend the rights of this nation just like others have.
Click to expand...

Seems to me that their sexual preference is irrelevant and as long as they keep their private life private, there shouldn't be a problem.

Ever notice it's not a problem until a gay soldiers makes a public statement about his/her sexual preference? See a pattern?
 
Glinda said:
What does sexual intercourse have to do with being a soldier? Aren't there military rules that prohibit ANY/EVERY soldier from "exposing their sex life?"
Click to expand...

Yes, there is.

Beyond this, why don't you give us some data on how often and freely straight soldiers currently flaunt this "right," and what happens to them when/if they are caught?
Click to expand...

Depends on the scenario and the scenarios are endless.
 
Glinda said:
:lamo: :2rofll:

Well, you're definitely impressed by your penis, aren't you?

How 'bout everyone else here... you guys all want to jump this clown's bones, too?

:rofl :lol:
Click to expand...

You would be too. You seem awfully curious about sex life. You must want me to lick my eyebrows for you.:2wave:
 
apdst said:
Yes, there is.
Click to expand...

Then DADT is pointless and must be abandoned, as all it does is discriminate against homosexuals.
 
The Mark said:
This should be interesting.

I've heard arguments from both sides of this issue which make good points.

Overall, however, I don't think it'll be much of a problem, if they do repeal it.

Time will tell, I suppose.
Click to expand...

That's how I feel about it but I wish that he would choose a less conflicted time to do this. I don't like making serious adjustments to military conduct policy while we are at war.
 
apdst said:
Seems to me that their sexual preference is irrelevant and as long as they keep their private life private, there shouldn't be a problem.

Ever notice it's not a problem until a gay soldiers makes a public statement about his/her sexual preference? See a pattern?
Click to expand...

Yeah sure I see a pattern. It is perfectly fine for a hetero soldier to say "hey I have a new boyfriend/girlfriend." Where as a gay soldier said that they would be kicked out.
 
Well I still don't know how ending DADT would cause problems for our military.

We have the most powerful, most disciplined, well trained, well supplied, and most technologically advanced military on earth. I just can't see how that can be brought down because someone knows a soldier, sailor, or marine is gay.
 
Winnb said:
Well I still don't know how ending DADT would cause problems for our military.

We have the most powerful, most disciplined, well trained, well supplied, and most technologically advanced military on earth. I just can't see how that can be brought down because someone knows a soldier, sailor, or marine is gay.
Click to expand...

I worry about the safety of gay soldiers that may think that DADT being repealed suddenly makes them safe from their less accepting peers.
 
jallman said:
I worry about the safety of gay soldiers that may think that DADT being repealed suddenly makes them safe from their less accepting peers.
Click to expand...

So you think their "less accepting peers" might beat the crap out of them?
 
jallman said:
I worry about the safety of gay soldiers that may think that DADT being repealed suddenly makes them safe from their less accepting peers.
Click to expand...

Then shouldn't our military should be more concerned with making rules that punish those "less accepting peers," instead of drumming their victims out of the service?
 
Did anyone notice the reaction of the Joint Chiefs at what Obama said? To say they were not excited about that is putting it mildly.....

I would not worry to much about it....Obams says a lot of things that never happens like moving out of GITMO in his first year of office.........

I personally believe the only way you can let gays serve openly aboard ship in the Navy is give them their own ship...........

Its never going to happen at least not in the Navy aboard Navy ships..........
 
Last edited:
Glinda said:
Then shouldn't our military should be more concerned with making rules that punish those "less accepting peers," instead of drumming their victims out of the service?
Click to expand...

I don't think more rules really stops an irrational animal from being aggressive. Homophobia is irrational. I just have a concern for "stray bullets" in war zones finding new homes in gay soldiers's backs when gay soldiers come out with an unreasonable expectation that policy is going to be reflective in behavior.
 
jallman said:
I don't think more rules really stops an irrational animal from being aggressive. Homophobia is irrational. I just have a concern for "stray bullets" in war zones finding new homes in gay soldiers's backs when gay soldiers come out with an unreasonable expectation that policy is going to be reflective in behavior.
Click to expand...

That's not saying much for our soldiers and marines.

What about the Navy or Air Force? They rarely have stray bullets since they rarely engage in the close combat and small arms fire that soldiers and marines do.
 
Winnb said:
That's not saying much for our soldiers and marines.
Click to expand...

No, that's not saying much for some individuals. And like it or not, there is a resentment against the repealing of DADT in our military and that resentment is prone to amplifying the false justifications that irrational individuals use to talk themselves into acting.

What about the Navy or Air Force? They rarely have stray bullets since they rarely engage in the close combat and small arms fire that soldiers and marines do.
Click to expand...

That doesn't negate safety issues from within. Just because it's not a stray bullet doesn't mean it may not be a stray beating or stray blunt object or any number of things. Don't be daft in focusing on a single hypothetical minutiae in an effort to deflect from the broader point.

If this were being changed during peace time, I would be 100% behind it because focus could be made on a transition process. However, I dont see that happening in a war zone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom