Page 65 of 82 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 815

Thread: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

  1. #641
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,939

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    According to the UCMJ, penis in vagina is the only legal sex act that exists.
    And the reality is that hetero couples do more than just that too. If this was truly being enforced, even just investigations opened for those times when someone heard someone sharing about their experiences, we wouldn't have much of a military. I can't remember how many times I heard some guy I work with tell me how well the girl he was with gave head, or talked about whether or not the girl would take it anally. And girls aren't an exception. We used to talk amongst ourselves about who gave head and who didn't. That tells me that this is a outdated law that's main purpose is to use it against gay military members or as a way of getting the straights who gets caught somewhere on base extra punishment at the present time. It has nothing to do with good order and discipline, since almost everyone in the military, from E-1 to O-9 violates it. No one gives two cents if some guy in their unit got a bj from a girl or gave it to some girl anally, as long as guys aren't doing it to other guys. And that's a double standard.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  2. #642
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    According to the UCMJ, penis in vagina is the only legal sex act that exists.
    This is not true, this is pure exaggeration. The wording of the sodomy rule is right here in this thread. It's also irrelevant since article 125 is not what is used to discharge most DADT violators.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #643
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    This is not true, this is pure exaggeration. The wording of the sodomy rule is right here in this thread. It's also irrelevant since article 125 is not what is used to discharge most DADT violators.
    Hell, let them claim it. They seem perfectly happy being hypocrites.

  4. #644
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Flamboyant homosexuals are in the military now. Most are just responsible enough to keep that part of their life private.

    You must not have a lot of faith in the men and women serving if you actually believe that repealing DADT will truly cause such a large problem in the military.
    People need to stop thinking of this in terms of "the military". That is a generic and meaningless term that has no relevance to the actual issue at hand. Shift your focus to "combat units" and the potential problems become much easier to identify.

    Now, I know this may be hard for some people to accept, but the grunts are not your typical American. You have to be a little crazy to volunteer to spend seven months in Iraq or Afghanistan. And when I say spend seven months in Iraq and Afghanistan, I don't mean sitting inside a forward operating base, eating at the cafeteria and showering everyday. There is a world of difference...



    So, yes, grunts are pretty nasty people, and, yes, they typically don't like gay guys. Forcing these combat units to accept gays is a terrible move, and will cause problems.

    Luckily I have more. I've seen all the chiefs and officers, and most of the jr. enlisted of a department work very hard fighting to try to keep two highly intelligent and motivated sailors in the Navy. They actually had several boards among the upper chain of command to discuss whether or not to discharge them. Unfortunately, the circumstances behind the discovery of them being gay was too much against them. Most of the department was sad to see them go. Everyone knew one of them was gay, he didn't really hide it. It just wasn't a big deal. The only other person I knew that got out for being gay was a girl who turned herself in. We did have more in my department and in other departments on the ship, but it just wasn't a big deal.

    For the most part, I found that most of the sailors I've ever worked with don't really care if gays can serve openly or not.
    The policy should be changed so as to allow for commander's discretion. The zero tolerance policy we have now is nonsensical.

    Now, I can't really speak for the other branches, but my husband was a Marine, and he says he could care less. He knew of at least one gay guy in his unit, but it really wasn't a big deal. According to him, as long as they can do their job and aren't trying to use the fact that they are gay to get some special privilege, then it doesn't matter to him.
    What works for one unit may not work for another. Commander's need to have complete control over their men, and that includes the option of removing homosexuals from a volatile environment.

  5. #645
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    Does Ethereal still serve? If so, I think the military would have serious problems with his smoking marijuana. Because he smokes, it's okay to smoke. Because he's heterosexual, it's not okay to allow gay people to serve.
    I no longer serve, and while I did I refrained from smoking marijuana. One, because it's not conducive to combat readiness, and, two, because it was against the rules. It didn't matter that I feel like I have a right to smoke marijuana; the military did not allow for it so I followed the rules. All service members have to make sacrifices...

  6. #646
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And the reality is that hetero couples do more than just that too. If this was truly being enforced, even just investigations opened for those times when someone heard someone sharing about their experiences, we wouldn't have much of a military. I can't remember how many times I heard some guy I work with tell me how well the girl he was with gave head, or talked about whether or not the girl would take it anally. And girls aren't an exception. We used to talk amongst ourselves about who gave head and who didn't. That tells me that this is a outdated law that's main purpose is to use it against gay military members or as a way of getting the straights who gets caught somewhere on base extra punishment at the present time. It has nothing to do with good order and discipline, since almost everyone in the military, from E-1 to O-9 violates it. No one gives two cents if some guy in their unit got a bj from a girl or gave it to some girl anally, as long as guys aren't doing it to other guys. And that's a double standard.

    The reality is also, that heteros are subject to the law forbidding sodomy, just like gays are. So, you can't imagine how wrong you are.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #647
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    This is not true, this is pure exaggeration. The wording of the sodomy rule is right here in this thread. It's also irrelevant since article 125 is not what is used to discharge most DADT violators.
    No it is not. Combine Article 125-Sodomy and Article 80-Attempts and you'll get the picture. Are you familiar with Article 80 and how a soldier can be convicted of attempted murder for simply pointing an unloaded weapon at another soldier and pulling the trigger as a joke? The same law precedence applies to sodomy.

    Are you sure you were in the service? You don't seem to be very familiar with the UCMJ. What was your rate and rank?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #648
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,758

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I no longer serve, and while I did I refrained from smoking marijuana. One, because it's not conducive to combat readiness, and, two, because it was against the rules. It didn't matter that I feel like I have a right to smoke marijuana; the military did not allow for it so I followed the rules. All service members have to make sacrifices...
    You do recognize that this statement is somewhat hypocritical, Ethereal. Just saying.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  9. #649
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    No it is not. Combine Article 125-Sodomy and Article 80-Attempts and you'll get the picture. Are you familiar with Article 80 and how a soldier can be convicted of attempted murder for simply pointing an unloaded weapon at another soldier and pulling the trigger as a joke? The same law precedence applies to sodomy.

    Are you sure you were in the service? You don't seem to be very familiar with the UCMJ. What was your rate and rank?
    You combine them and you still have no case. Article 125 required penetration. Discharges for DADT tend to not be under article 125 or article 80. You have no case.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  10. #650
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: 2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    You combine them and you still have no case. Article 125 required penetration. Discharges for DADT tend to not be under article 125 or article 80. You have no case.
    You're so far off base, that there's no use in talking to you about it anymore.

    Educate yourself

    http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=dad...utf-8&fr=b1ie7
    Last edited by apdst; 02-28-10 at 04:54 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 65 of 82 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •