Do you have any military background or experience? That might go a long way to explaining why it doesnt make sense to you.
The military is a fairly testosterone driven component, especially during times of combat. I can guarantee that there will be problems that disrupt he mission. The GREAT majority of soldiers of ALL races object to it. And BTW...next chance you get...have a conversation with blacks and hispanics and make sure you convince them that homosexuals are just like them. Like it or not...MOST people dont believe homosexuality is 'right' which is why consistently homosexual marriage is voted down. MOST believe dont believe we should 'mandate' the behavior as 'right.' And right or wrong, that is a prevalent attitude that still exists and simply will not work in a military environment.
No, I don't have a military background. However, I work at a place that has a very, very high number of veterans. Yesterday, I asked multiple co-workers about this very issue. These people served as officers, enlisted, and from various armed services (Navy, Marines, Air Force, Army). Some acknowledged there would be problems with allowing gay people (teasing, people being uncomfortable, problems arising when they start seeking benefits for their "partner"). Some of them are old enough that they were around when women were first allowed to truly serve (on active duty versus reserves). They witnessed the problems with that. NONE of them said, "It shouldn't happen." NONE. So your saying that the great majority of soldiers think this shouldn't happen is BS. Total BS. These people aren't lying to me. I saw the exact same concerns that apdst expressed in a prior post, but none of them said it should not happen. So excuse me if I take your words with a grain of salt.
Do we allow ALL gays? What about those flamboyant types who join to take advantage of the education and healthcare opportunites. How seriously do you think others might take them when they are issuing orders? can you possibly see how that might cause a disruption?
Personally, I do not think flamboyant types would want to serve. And if they did, so what? If the flamboyant gay person is a superior and someone refuses to take orders from the gay person, he/she should be punished as any soldier would be for failing to take orders.
What about housing constraints? shall we now house men and women together? Or should no one be allowed to house together? I know I know...its not a fear that gay men (or women) will attack their same sex roommates. But what is the difference between a man and a woman being compelled to house and shower together and hetero and homosexual men and women housing and showering together?
I agree. That would be a concern. Should it prevent gays from being able to serve? Nope.
There is the field concern...treating open wounds. Just out of curiosity...last time I checked open homosexuals where still not permitted to donate blood-do you know if that is still the case? Why is that? And what about those questions do you think people might find as a barrier to providing field medical treatment? Oh...I know...it will never happen.
I had not thought of this before. But aren't we in a situation where the individuals who provide field medical treatment are wearing rubber gloves? We could decide that in order for someone to be providing medical treatment, they have to undergo blood tests on a regular basis.
You see...we arent talking about a 9-5 job we arent talking about a job where you go home and have no further association. We arent talking about a job where you can up and quit if you dont like it. Join. experience it. Your understanding might change.
As a career NCO I cared about the safety of my people and mission accomplishment. Anything gets in the way of those two things, I wouldnt tolerate it.
I see what you're saying. But when as many people as I spoke with yesterday tell me that while there would be problems, it should happen, I stand by my position in this thread.
Thanks for your thoughts on this. I do appreciate it.
