• 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!

Army discharges don't ask critic who told

Do you understand that the homosexual couple isn't being treated any different than a heterosexual couple?



No more openly than a hetero couple. Let's stick with one argument.

No they aren't. How is a hetero couple being allowed to kiss, but a homo couple not being able to equal?

And no, it's the same argument, with your answer there you are saying that DADT should be repealed. Because with DADT in place, a LGBT soldier can't not express their sexual orientation like straight soldiers can.
 
In case you haven't gotten the hint already, your pre-requisite of military experience in order to take part in this debate is irrelevant.

Actually, it's not. Have you spent time in a fighting position with a gay soldier? Have you spent time in a fighting position with any soldier? Again, be honest.
 
Actually, it's not. Have you spent time in a fighting position with a gay soldier? Have you spent time in a fighting position with any soldier? Again, be honest.

Let me ask you have you?
 
No they aren't. How is a hetero couple being allowed to kiss, but a homo couple not being able to equal?

And no, it's the same argument, with your answer there you are saying that DADT should be repealed. Because with DADT in place, a LGBT soldier can't not express their sexual orientation like straight soldiers can.

No member of the military is allowed to publically display affection.
 
Let me ask you have you?

Have I spent time in a fighting position with a gay soldier? I have no ****ing clue.

Have I spent time in a fighting position with a soldier? You bet your sweet ass I have.

Have you?!?
 
Have I spent time in a fighting position with a gay soldier? I have no ****ing clue.

Have I spent time in a fighting position with a soldier? You bet your sweet ass I have.

Have you?!?

It frankly doesn't bother me what someone's orientation is.
 
No member of the military is allowed to publically display affection.

Another member of the military has stated otherwise, and I doubt you aren't allowed to kiss in a movie theater?
Also I doubt the hetero couple would hardly be disciplined even if the Army were to crack down on this, while the LGBT soldier would be discharged.

In no way are LGBT soldiers equal in todays Army, and that is all kinds of ****ed up, and the fact that you fail to see that is disturbing.
 
Actually, it's not. Have you spent time in a fighting position with a gay soldier? Have you spent time in a fighting position with any soldier? Again, be honest.

One does not need military experience in order to clearly see that a prejudicial and discriminatory policy was wrongfully created and maintained for so long. The area where my military expertise is lacking is in how to smoothly implement the abolishing of DADT, and for that I think military experience should be relied on. But the policy itself is everyone's concern.

Now, are you going to debate the actual policy or just keep up the petty posturing? Because even people in the military disagree over DADT, so clearly military experience doesn't form objective opinions.
 
Have I spent time in a fighting position with a gay soldier? I have no ****ing clue.

Have I spent time in a fighting position with a soldier? You bet your sweet ass I have.

Have you?!?

Would your ability to fight, be hindered by removing DADT?
 
Another member of the military has stated otherwise, and I doubt you aren't allowed to kiss in a movie theater?
Also I doubt the hetero couple would hardly be disciplined even if the Army were to crack down on this, while the LGBT soldier would be discharged.

In no way are LGBT soldiers equal in todays Army, and that is all kinds of ****ed up, and the fact that you fail to see that is disturbing.

At this time, it is illegal for gays to serve in the military.
 
So, do you serve in a combat unit? Or some pogue piece-ass-unit that doesn't even qualify with a weapon anually?

You're a nuke in F L A, right? Not a whole buncha trigger time for ya?

What is your point? Actually, I'm in the Navy reserve, now. I was a nuke for almost 10 years, including time on a ship and in a shipyard.

However, my husband was a Marine, in a combat unit. He was a tow gunner. I went to the Marine Corps Ball with him, both as his gf and as his wife. I do know what I am talking about, at least to an extent. I know that he has no problem with homosexuals serving openly. He doesn't feel comfortable with men hitting on him, but since it has happened before now, he doesn't figure it will get worse just because homosexuals can now tell people they are homosexual.

And this bs about combat units and unit cohesion being affected is just that, crap. If you believe it, then prove it.
 
One does not need military experience in order to clearly see that a prejudicial and discriminatory policy was wrongfully created and maintained for so long. The area where my military expertise is lacking is in how to smoothly implement the abolishing of DADT, and for that I think military experience should be relied on. But the policy itself is everyone's concern.

Now, are you going to debate the actual policy or just keep up the petty posturing? Because even people in the military disagree over DADT, so clearly military experience doesn't form objective opinions.

You may not need military experience to see the prejudicial and discriminatory policy, but you do need military experience to see how this policy is beneficial to unit cohesion and the maintanance of discipline within the ranks.

Do you understand what unit cohesion and discipline in the ranks is? Care to explain--from your experience in the military--what that is?
 
At this time, it is illegal for gays to serve in the military.

It wasn't illegal for the US military to shoot minorities, but does that mean that the soldiers have to right to follow it?
 
You may not need military experience to see the prejudicial and discriminatory policy, but you do need military experience to see how this policy is beneficial to unit cohesion and the maintanance of discipline within the ranks.

Do you understand what unit cohesion and discipline in the ranks is? Care to explain--from your experience in the military--what that is?

BS. The policy does nothing to increase unit cohesion. The only thing it does is force good soldiers to lie about who they are.
 
And do you think that policy is wrong?

Do I think that it's wrong to disallow gays to serve in the military, based on their sexual orientation? Yes.

Do I think the DADT policy is wrong? No.
 
It wasn't illegal for the US military to shoot minorities, but does that mean that the soldiers have to right to follow it?

What the hell are you even talking about, dude?
 
You may not need military experience to see the prejudicial and discriminatory policy, but you do need military experience to see how this policy is beneficial to unit cohesion and the maintanance of discipline within the ranks.

If every other western nation has done it, yours can do it too. I find the unit cohesion remarks to be a flimsy excuse. The U.S. military is strong and has stood the test of time in many different conflicts, and has made many civil progressions from allowing blacks in, to women. I think it can handle integrating openly gay people. I'm not denying there are logistical concerns that need to be ironed out but all of the chickle-little comments about how it will ruin the military are so over the top it's laughable. Your government is smart, it's going to find a way. The bigots will just have to get used to it.

Do you understand what unit cohesion and discipline in the ranks is? Care to explain--from your experience in the military--what that is?

Yeah I know what unit cohesion is -- a flimsy excuse. The people who tend to make those excuses are the ones who just don't want a bunch of fags running around their base camp. I know you apdst and I know your view on things, so don't bother trying to hide it. You pride yourself on your staunch conservative values. This has little to do with unit cohesion and more to do with your brand of social morality.

The military is going to find a way. It has no choice. America is going to be brought into the modern world.
 
BS. The policy does nothing to increase unit cohesion. The only thing it does is force good soldiers to lie about who they are.

That's from your extensive military experience? What unit did you serve in? What was your APFT score? What was your RQ score? 'Splain to use how your service allows you speak with any kind of authority on the subject.
 
What the hell are you even talking about, dude?

It was not illegal for members of the US military to shoot American Indians, Chinese, blacks, and other minorities at the time, but in fact encouraged with a bounty system. Does it seem like a moral order to follow?
 
Do I think that it's wrong to disallow gays to serve in the military, based on their sexual orientation? Yes.

Do I think the DADT policy is wrong? No.

Please, this is bull. You can't have your cake, and eat it too. Either you think it's okay to discriminate, or you don't.
 
It's all political bs. It all runs down hill in the military.
 
If every other western nation has done it, yours can do it too. I find the unit cohesion remarks to be a flimsy excuse. The U.S. military is strong and has stood the test of time in many different conflicts, and has made many civil progressions from allowing blacks in, to women. I think it can handle integrating openly gay people. I'm not denying there are logistical concerns that need to be ironed out but all of the chickle-little comments about how it will ruin the military are so over the top it's laughable. Your government is smart, it's going to find a way. The bigots will just have to get used to

That's because you've never served in the military and you are from a country that has a piss poor military. I know people who have served in the RCA and curse it's policy regarding gays in the service. Care to tell us how your military experience differs from their's?



Yeah I know what unit cohesion is -- a flimsy excuse. The people who tend to make those excuses are the ones who just don't want a bunch of fags running around their base camp. I know you apdst and I know your view on things, so don't bother trying to hide it. You pride yourself on your staunch conservative values. This has little to do with unit cohesion and more to do with your brand of social morality.

The military is going to find a way. It has no choice. America is going to be brought into the modern world.

Only a person who has never spent time in the service would say that.
 
That's from your extensive military experience? What unit did you serve in? What was your APFT score? What was your RQ score? 'Splain to use how your service allows you speak with any kind of authority on the subject.

Sorry....but service in the military does not make one an expert on unit cohesion. All you have to do is look at country's in which gays are allowed to serve openly and you see there is no problem with unit cohesion.

The whole "unit cohesion" and "shower phobia" arguments are just tired stretchs from old homophobe fuddy-duddies who want the military to remain as prejudice and close-minded as they are. Today's military is much more diverse and tolerant than the military of the olden days.
 
Back
Top Bottom