• 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!

Military recruiters told to accept gay applicants

My point is, make the regulations concerning homosexual relations the exact same rules as male on female or female on male relations. Why do you need two years do this?

The rules are already the same. Sodomy is illegal, per the UCMJ and it is applied to heteros the same way it's applied to homos.

And as far as the training and education goes, I'll ask the same thing... why do you need two years to plan, schedule and hold meetings with officers and soldiers and educate them on a new policy?

Because, you know as well as I do, that if the DoD whips something out in a few months, activists will be screaming to high heaven that they weren't given the oppurtunity to review it and give their blessing, thereby idicating some sorta discrimination. Not to mention, we are talking about the government.

I'm sure there are already rules in place to punish harassment (physical, mental, vocal, or otherwise), racism, bigotry, sexual relations within the military, etc... re-write those rules to include homosexuals.

There are, but they will need to be redefined. Two male soldiers making physical contact will take on a whole new meaning. Physical contact, while in uniform is already forbidden, however when that contact is between two soldiers of the same sex, it's been overlooked in the past. That can't be the case anymore.
 
Here are some military rules regarding females in the military:

During basic and AIT, sex is stricly forbidden.

At duty stations, sex is allowed in garrison but not while out in the field.

Sex is only allowed as long as it doesn't break the army's fraternization policy.

The military is very strict on adultery.

Junior enlisted can have sex with any other junior enlisted as long as neither is married or they are married to each other,

Junior enlisted can have sex with NCO's only who are in their unit if they are single or if they are married to each other. Sex between junior enlisted and NCO's in the same unit is strictly forbidden.

Senior NCO's (E-7 and above) may not have sex with junior NCO's (E-4 through E-6) in the same unit.

Officer may not have sex with any enlisted troops, whether in the same unit or not.

No, getting a single soldier pregnant is not an offense as long as the sex was consensual, it didn't violate rank rules, and he wasn't married.

The military does allow single parents in, but all pregnant females have the option of getting out.

You can get chaptered out for being a single parent and not having a family care plan. That usually ends up happening to a lot of single parents because they end up being a burden on their units for having to get extra time off and get out of stuff because of their kids.

While pregnant, female troops are pretty much not allowed to do anything; do field exercises, drive military vehicles, do heavy lifting, wear gear, go to rifle ranges, just about everything.

If they aren't married they have to come to some kind of custody agreement.


There is no question that accepting woman in combat roles with men meant more women in closer contact with men and has caused problems with discipline and moral. You flunk logic and ignore reality to deny it. If there were no woman in the military the problems wouldn't exist. The only decision to make is whether some greater good comes from having to deal with these problems. And how about the demand? There was not a great demand for women wanting to join the military. Insisting that women be given the same opportunity created the demand. That and college money. Men were capable of handling the military load without women. And the men still carry a much greater burden. The argument for not including women in combat roles had merit. But military readiness became less important and we gave into politics and impractical social equality.

As for gays, there will be some of the same types of problems but on a much smaller scale. I don't look at the dynamic with gay men in quite the same way as the hetero dynamic. I think we can accomodate gay men in the military better than we have accomodated women. If I had my choice I would accept gay men as part of an all male combat force before I would have accepted women in that role.
 
Actually the "Load" was not being handled as the Draft was done away with. In order not to inconvenience various tiers of the Middle Class and above the Military under orders accomodated itself to Women who were mostly from the Working Class or lower and with the same social issues as the Men .

There were always problems , but most never got beyond Unit level straightening out.

Some Gay Men were always there , but most others did not know they were Gay - believe it or not. That particular situation is about to end.
 
The rules are already the same. Sodomy is illegal, per the UCMJ and it is applied to heteros the same way it's applied to homos.

Except that it's not applied to heterosexuals at all. I don't think I've ever known a military man that didn't commit some form of sodomy during his service.
 
Actually the "Load" was not being handled as the Draft was done away with. In order not to inconvenience various tiers of the Middle Class and above the Military under orders accomodated itself to Women who were mostly from the Working Class or lower and with the same social issues as the Men .

There were always problems , but most never got beyond Unit level straightening out.

Some Gay Men were always there , but most others did not know they were Gay - believe it or not. That particular situation is about to end.

I don't really know what you are talking about. There are far greater men than women in the military still so men are still carrying the much greater load in combat. As far as accomodating to women, yes, it was partly a social welfare program.
 
Back
Top Bottom