This thread just makes me want to dance:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBXu-iY7cw&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube- In the Navy[/ame]
Why doesn't it matter. First of all, if they're active gays, they're violating the UCMJ but I guess that doesn't matter. Secondly, it does matter if they represent higher proportions, can you give an explanation for that?Gays are already in the military, so it doesn't really matter if they represent a higher proportion of HIV infections.
In other words, condone sodomy.What is at issue is whether they should be allowed to serve openly or if they must continue to serve secretly.
No, I'm worried they'll have just as much unprotected sex as they're having now when after decades of education, gay men still dominate the AIDS stats in this country and it's not even close.Are you afraid they are going to have more unprotected sex if they are allowed to serve openly than they would by being restricted to serving secretly?
Yes, I do. Especially in a tough economy, especially if we announce sodomy is no longer a concern.Do you think more HIV positive gay men will join the military if there is no DADT policy?
It is a valid health concern.....expecially since male gay men absolutely dominate that concern in this country.HIV is a valid health concern, but as far as I can tell, it has very little to do with DADT policy. It's pretty much just a red herring.
It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.