• 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!

Top uniformed officer: Gay ban should be lifted

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
WASHINGTON – The military's top uniformed officer on Tuesday made an impassioned plea for allowing gays to serve openly in uniform, telling a Senate panel it was a matter of integrity and that it is wrong to force people to "lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens."


The comments by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, set the stage for the Defense Department's yearlong study into how the ban can be repealed without causing a major upheaval in the military.

I don't know how many times I have heard the expression "Let's let the generals decide this issue". Well, the top general (actually, an admiral - same thing), has spoken. He is not only an Admiral, but is CHAIRMAN of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Will I now hear "Let's let generals other than the ones who disagree with me decide the issue"? Or will I hear "Let's let some random privates decide the issue, as long as they don't disagree with me"? Or possibly "Let's get an opinion from military cooks, as long as they don't disagree with me"?

Here is the way I see it -

1) If someone wants to defend the United States against its enemies, I don't care if he or she is gay, or straight, or whatever. Besides, his or her sexual orientation is none of my damn business, unless he or she is disrupting other troops by hitting on them. There are rules for that already in the military for straights. They will apply to gays too.

2) If gays serve in the military, I will also thank them for their service, because I love my country, and I know they do too.

To those who don't like the idea of gays serving in the military, you might as well prepare to accept it. It is going to happen sooner or later, and it is going to be a benefit to our military, rather than a liability.

Article is here.
 
Last edited:
Gays should be able to join the army because the army is the safe-guard of the nation, if you are denied the right to protect your nation, then you are consequentially denied the right to stand for your country, for your family, and for your ideas.

Cannot believe the side of the equation who are obsessed with the 2nd Amendment would disallow a man to protect his nation.

Lets move forward with this. Grant homosexuals the basic right to national defense, for ****s sake.
 
Its "Lets let the generals decide"....until the generals decide something that we don't like...then lets let someone else decide. :doh
 
It is up to congress not the military.


FOXNews.com - Gates Backs Repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'


But Gates cautioned Tuesday that no matter how much the Pentagon studies the issue, the "ultimate decision" rests with Congress.

A senior Pentagon official earlier told Fox News it does not appear the votes are there in Congress to actually change the law, but said it is not the Pentagon's role to get involved in that aspect.
 
I couldn't disagree with all the false claims Homosexuals make about how they are the victim of some gene, or any of the other nonsense they and others come up with.
I have a brother who was in the Army and was kicked out for being a homosexual. He now has AIDS and is dying, so I know a little about it. I hate the whole idea but I'm not worried that it's catching. I don't know any heterosexuals who go around bragging about it. Except for a few guys who like to talk about there score card. I doesn't come up in normal conversation that I have seen unless someone is hitting on someone else and that can be a real problem for some people.

Way too much time is and has been spent talking about this. There are rules that say if a male is caught having sex with a female on the base, the ship, or while on duty they are punished for it. That is the only rule they need, and the punishment should be extra duty not being kicked out of the service. A few homosexuals are good at what they do and it has nothing to do with Broadway Show tunes, or interior decorating.

We need to be focused on stopping the economic ruin of the Nation right now. Obama is coming up with really stupid things to divert our attention away from what he's doing.
 
I don't know how many times I have heard the expression "Let's let the generals decide this issue". Well, the top general (actually, an admiral - same thing), has spoken. He is not only an Admiral, but is CHAIRMAN of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Will I now hear "Let's let generals other than the ones who disagree with me decide the issue"? Or will I hear "Let's let some random privates decide the issue, as long as they don't disagree with me"? Or possibly "Let's get an opinion from military cooks, as long as they don't disagree with me"?

Here is the way I see it -

1) If someone wants to defend the United States against its enemies, I don't care if he or she is gay, or straight, or whatever. Besides, his or her sexual orientation is none of my damn business, unless he or she is disrupting other troops by hitting on them. There are rules for that already in the military for straights. They will apply to gays too.

2) If gays serve in the military, I will also thank them for their service, because I love my country, and I know they do too.

To those who don't like the idea of gays serving in the military, you might as well prepare to accept it. It is going to happen sooner or later, and it is going to be a benefit to our military, rather than a liability.

Article is here.

http://cmrlink.org/CMRDocuments/FGOM-SigList(1087)-033109.pdf

List includes two former CJCS.
 
Last edited:
I don't know how many times I have heard the expression "Let's let the generals decide this issue". Well, the top general (actually, an admiral - same thing), has spoken. He is not only an Admiral, but is CHAIRMAN of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Will I now hear "Let's let generals other than the ones who disagree with me decide the issue"? Or will I hear "Let's let some random privates decide the issue, as long as they don't disagree with me"? Or possibly "Let's get an opinion from military cooks, as long as they don't disagree with me"?

Here is the way I see it -

1) If someone wants to defend the United States against its enemies, I don't care if he or she is gay, or straight, or whatever. Besides, his or her sexual orientation is none of my damn business, unless he or she is disrupting other troops by hitting on them. There are rules for that already in the military for straights. They will apply to gays too.

2) If gays serve in the military, I will also thank them for their service, because I love my country, and I know they do too.

To those who don't like the idea of gays serving in the military, you might as well prepare to accept it. It is going to happen sooner or later, and it is going to be a benefit to our military, rather than a liability.

Article is here.

Let the enlisted people aboard ship decide........Mullin is clueless......He does not have the same hardship and E1 thru E6 has.........He has his own stateroom and shower.............Not the same for enlisted personnel..
 
good decision. most people in the military, i believe, don't have an issue with it.

mtm1963
 
Let the enlisted people aboard ship decide........Mullin is clueless......He does not have the same hardship and E1 thru E6 has.........He has his own stateroom and shower.............Not the same for enlisted personnel..

Yeah. And while we're at it, let's let servicemen decide whether they can join segregated or integrated military units.

/s
 
Cannot believe the side of the equation who are obsessed with the 2nd Amendment would disallow a man to protect his nation.

It's not that hard to believe. They favor the 2nd amendment, but mostly for themselves, and not so much for those who are different.
 
Let the enlisted people aboard ship decide........Mullin is clueless......He does not have the same hardship and E1 thru E6 has.........He has his own stateroom and shower.............Not the same for enlisted personnel..

Well, gee. You weren't slamming him like this before when you posted this:

Like I said, did you see the reaction of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when Obama made that statement?

Post number 180 in this thread
. So, tell me, do you think the reaction of the joint chiefs at the Obama speech is still what you thought it was? Or do you believe they are not now worth using to prop up your argument, when you clearly used them to prop up your argument before today? Or could it be that they can only be used to prop up your arguments as long as they appear to be on your side during a discussion, and conveniently discarded when they don't? It appears you want it both ways here.
 
Last edited:
Let the enlisted people aboard ship decide........Mullin is clueless......He does not have the same hardship and E1 thru E6 has.........He has his own stateroom and shower.............Not the same for enlisted personnel..


Enlisted serviceman's job is not to make decisions about the Military as a whole, their job is to do what is asked of them.

Of all people who should be mistaken of military roles...
 
I have no problems with gays being allowed to serve openly as long as they get no special treatment. Which is how it was supposed to be with women but that is not exactly the way it happend. The biggest problem I see with gays being in is that gay jokes are a pretty common past time with soldiers, with combat arms guys atleast. I mean think of all the slang that is used such as co&^holster for your mouth and I coudnt even count how many times I have called and been called dudes on my team fags or homos. I woud just hate to see tons of new harrassment cases poping up. Right or wrong what that does is distract the Army from fighting and training to fight wars. As long as gays are willing to be thick skinned like all the other combat arms guys need to be that I welcome them.
 
Don't worry it seems that from my experience most gay men have an excellent sense of humour. If anything I would be more concerned that guy soldiers would up the anty on crude homosexual humour. Gay guys, seem to love making references to penises, arses and semen (or is it seamen? :mrgreen:).

Besides if DADT exists within the U.S forces, it is more than likely that the c*ck holster slang for ones mouth, originated from a gay soldier. Probably a lot of the homosexual jokes stem from DADT homosexuals serving in the military!
 
Last edited:
Don't worry it seems that from my experience most gay men have an excellent sense of humour. If anything I would be more concerned that guy soldiers would up the anty on crude homosexual humour. Gay guys, seem to love making references to penises, arses and semen (or is it seamen? :mrgreen:).

I would think that if a gay or lesbian person joins the military, then they likely have some idea of what they're getting into, so most of the ones that do join would probably be pretty easy going about stuff like that.
 
I have no problems with gays being allowed to serve openly as long as they get no special treatment. Which is how it was supposed to be with women but that is not exactly the way it happend. The biggest problem I see with gays being in is that gay jokes are a pretty common past time with soldiers, with combat arms guys atleast. I mean think of all the slang that is used such as co&^holster for your mouth and I coudnt even count how many times I have called and been called dudes on my team fags or homos. I woud just hate to see tons of new harrassment cases poping up. Right or wrong what that does is distract the Army from fighting and training to fight wars. As long as gays are willing to be thick skinned like all the other combat arms guys need to be that I welcome them.

How prominent are racial jokes and slurs? If they're as prominent as homosexual jokes and slurs, it probably wouldn't be a problem.
 
If opposite sex attraction challenged people are openly allowed in the military, I think there should be some changes in the lodging set-up. Everyone should get their own room when able.

Additionally some other rules should be changed: right now in some bases in southwest Asia, where thousands of military people are there on temporary duty assignments, it is basically a crime for a man to be in a woman’s room or vice versa. This is to prevent potential sexual relations from occurring, however, for opposite sex attraction challenged people there are no such restrictions.
 
I hate to burst your bubble for all you "Feel good libs" that want DADT overturned but DADT won't be settled for a couple years and even with all the dems in the congress today they are way short of the votes needed to overturn it and by November it will be much worse because according to polls the GOP is expected to pick up a bunch of seats in the congress........I just heard this on CBS news hardly a bastion for conservative issues.............
 
Last edited:
Porchev;1058530492[B said:
]If opposite sex attraction challenged people are openly allowed in the military, I think there should be some changes in the lodging set-up. Everyone should get their own room when able. [/B]

Additionally some other rules should be changed: right now in some bases in southwest Asia, where thousands of military people are there on temporary duty assignments, it is basically a crime for a man to be in a woman’s room or vice versa. This is to prevent potential sexual relations from occurring, however, for opposite sex attraction challenged people there are no such restrictions.

Never happen aboard ship in the navy.......You live about a foot away from your shipmate...........
 
Its "Lets let the generals decide"....until the generals decide something that we don't like...then lets let someone else decide. :doh

I agree. I do not think danarhea would ever post a article "Top military officer: don't ask don't tell should stay".
 
Enlisted serviceman's job is not to make decisions about the Military as a whole, their job is to do what is asked of them.

Of all people who should be mistaken of military roles...

Enlisted people make decisins all the time........They are the ones the policy affects....they should have a say in it................
 
Well, gee. You weren't slamming him like this before when you posted this:



Post number 180 in this thread
. So, tell me, do you think the reaction of the joint chiefs at the Obama speech is still what you thought it was? Or do you believe they are not now worth using to prop up your argument, when you clearly used them to prop up your argument before today? Or could it be that they can only be used to prop up your arguments as long as they appear to be on your side during a discussion, and conveniently discarded when they don't? It appears you want it both ways here.


I don't think we will have to worry about this issue for a couple of years...I just heardd on the news that they don't have the votes in the congres to change the law now.........come the mid terms in November it will be much worse..............
 
I hate to burst your bubble for all you "Feel good libs" that want DADT overturned but DADT won't be settled for a couple years and even with all the dems in the congress today they are way short of the votes needed to overturn it and by November it will be much worse because according to polls the GOP is expected to pick up a bunch of seats in the congress........I just heard this on CBS news hardly a bastion for conservative issues.............

Any President can overturn DADT via executive order as his role as Commander-in-Chief.
 
Yeah. And while we're at it, let's let servicemen decide whether they can join segregated or integrated military units.

/s

What a smoking mirror....You usually do better then that..........
 
Enlisted people make decisins all the time........They are the ones the policy affects....they should have a say in it................

They are allowed to make decisions of moral judgment (rules of engagement type stuff). They aren't allowed to make decisions of policy.
 
Back
Top Bottom