• 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

ReverendHellh0und said:
How does legislatively make it not subject to a SCOTUS challenge? Don't you know how the constitution works friend? :confused:
Click to expand...

Well, currently it's on the books that we can't have openly gay people in the military. A federal judge ruled this unconstitutional. The supreme court can go back and rule her to be wrong and that it was perfectly legal.

If we do this legislatively, take DADT off the books all together, then the supreme court could only rule that somehow allowing gays into the military is against the law or goes against the constitution, which would be a laughable idea. Congress wouldn't be legislating whether DADT is constitutional, only that it's no longer a policy of the US.

I'd like to know if I'm mistaken somewhere...
 
Within Days I imagine some local TV Network affiliates will (by coincidence) have a Camera a crew(s) handy for some Really open Homosexual types to at least try to get into the Service.

Now, them actually Raising their Hands and taking the Oath is another matter - but some will enjoy the Hell out of the moment of the Recruiters having to deal with them.

We do need a few Generals to speak out about this Judge's decision which I think might not be Constitutional.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think at this point it's over. It's sad to see that it took a judges order instead of giving the military time to prepare for the change.
Click to expand...

They've had - what - 17 years? If that aint time I don't know what is.

Of course they spent that whole time trying to fight the future rather than slowly permit it to happen . .. thus leaving me to believe they would have just always fought it and never would have come to that conclusion on their own.
 
I personally don't care how it was done, just as long as it's done. Next up, legalize Gay marriage
 
Ned Racine said:
Within Days I imagine some local TV Network affiliates will (by coincidence) have a Camera a crew(s) handy for some Really open Homosexual types to at least try to get into the Service.

Now, them actually Raising their Hands and taking the Oath is another matter - but some will enjoy the Hell out of the moment of the Recruiters having to deal with them.

We do need a few Generals to speak out about this Judge's decision which I think might not be Constitutional.
Click to expand...

Because gay people are fighting for the right to be in the military just for the purpose of flaunting it in front of recruiter's faces?
 
roughdraft274 said:
Because gay people are fighting for the right to be in the military just for the purpose of flaunting it in front of recruiter's faces?
Click to expand...

You know - when people join the military for the wrong reasons they often are rooted out during boot processing.

Only true soldiers can actually graduate and join the force.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Because gay people are fighting for the right to be in the military just for the purpose of flaunting it in front of recruiter's faces?
Click to expand...


In some cases YES - because despite what the subgroup here thinks - it is frequently not about Social Progress or Fairness but confrontation and the persistent desire to offend.
 
Ned Racine said:
In some cases YES - because despite what the subgroup here thinks - it is frequently not about Social Progress or Fairness but confrontation and the persistent desire to offend.
Click to expand...

I challenge you to find more instances of gay people prancing into recruiter's offices to offend them for giggles, than instances of gays with honorable and valueable service being discharged from the military for no other reason than being gay.

Good luck
 
Ned Racine said:
In some cases YES - because despite what the subgroup here thinks - it is frequently not about Social Progress or Fairness but confrontation and the persistent desire to offend.
Click to expand...

Some - how many is some, by the way? 10 - 100 - 1000? And why deny *the whole* any liberties because of what *the some* decide to do?
 
Aunt Spiker said:
You know - when people join the military for the wrong reasons they often are rooted out during boot processing.

Only true soldiers can actually graduate and join the force.
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure of that. I was just wondering why Ned seems to think that some gays only want to offend and couldn't possibly want to defend their country...
 
Aunt Spiker said:
You know - when people join the military for the wrong reasons they often are rooted out during boot processing.

Only true soldiers can actually graduate and join the force.
Click to expand...

I doubt that. Or else there would be no point in having a draft.
 
megaprogman said:
I doubt that. Or else there would be no point in having a draft.
Click to expand...

A draft is a measure of desperation - a last resort - when ALL people who joined have been assigned, stationed, injured, rendered unable to fight or dead.
And in a draft they still don't take *everyone*
 
  • Like
Reactions: mac
Aunt Spiker said:
A draft is a measure of desperation - a last resort - when ALL people who joined have been assigned, stationed, injured, rendered unable to fight or dead.
And in a draft they still don't take *everyone*
Click to expand...



The above entry runs contrary to a lot of History. Also most of those thinking this policy change is a real plus either have No Service OR are individuals not wishing the US Military well.
 
Ned Racine said:
The above entry runs contrary to a lot of History. Also most of those thinking this policy change is a real plus either have No Service OR are individuals not wishing the US Military well.
Click to expand...

And I am proof that you are wrong, having military service and wishing our military well.
 
Redress said:
And I am proof that you are wrong, having military service and wishing our military well.
Click to expand...



That runs contrary to being a Pro Homosexual Bigot I think . Now obviously thing might have changed a bit in 4 decades BUT a lot of Men in Close confines quietly thinking about someone being Gay and knowing a few Openly are will never be the same thing and if YOu really want full equality and Gay Sex is no different than the usual kind - Why not just put everybody together - after all at that stage under certain peak circumstances who will then know who's gotten a rise out of who .
 
Ned Racine said:
That runs contrary to being a Pro Homosexual Bigot I think . Now obviously thing might have changed a bit in 4 decades BUT a lot of Men in Close confines quietly thinking about someone being Gay and knowing a few Openly are will never be the same thing and if YOu really want full equality and Gay Sex is no different than the usual kind - Why not just put everybody together - after all at that stage under certain peak circumstances who will then know who's gotten a rise out of who .
Click to expand...

Pro-Homosexual bigot? Please tell me you're going to make an arguement about how removing DADT removes youre right to not being around people you don't like. Basically tell me how its bigoted that you can't be a bigot. I love that one.

Also, believe it or not but I've never met a single person in the military who ever admited to quietly thinking about how many of the men around him are gay. People are NOT that paranoid even if they would feel uncomfortable around a gay person, well maybe you would be. Tell me, when you walk into a church, subway station, elevator, airplane, or any other crowded place do you seriously sit there and think quietly about who might be gay around you?

And lastly gay sex would follow the same rules as heterosexual sex in the military, although im sure the sodomy laws would be removed or ignored, like they are now. Its not like two gay servicemen are going to be sneaking off to the closet in their office or a tent or portie-potie in the field to have sex, at least they won't do it anymore than straight service members. And if they are caught they will be punished the same as when two straight soldiers go off and do that.
 
Ned Racine said:
The above entry runs contrary to a lot of History. Also most of those thinking this policy change is a real plus either have No Service OR are individuals not wishing the US Military well.
Click to expand...

You are strange. 'Most' people thinking this is a plus are...

As far as people who didn't serve thinking this is a plus: irrelevant. You didn't have to join the military at some point to be a reasonable, sensible American free of bigotry.

And the rest of the 'most' don't wish the military well? Wow. Are you really Navy Pride using someone else's computer?
 
Last edited:
Number One > Redress uses that Tagline "Pro Homosexual Bigot" - I didn't invent it.

Number 2> That fact that some of those most wanting this substantial change did not serve should be rather self evident.

Number 3> There maybe some Heavy Heterosexual Group activity around , but I've never been privy to it. Th stuff that once HEAVILY took place in SF Bath Houses kind of shows that some cannot control themselves.

Number 4> Obviously there are Gays in the Military and under like 98% of circumstances I'd leave them alone and in recent years MOST were left alone. Now this insane move (done for Political Reasons) will reinflame things.

Number 5> This will affect Discipline. Count on it.
 
Wiseone said:
Pro-Homosexual bigot? Please tell me you're going to make an arguement about how removing DADT removes youre right to not being around people you don't like. Basically tell me how its bigoted that you can't be a bigot. I love that one.

Also, believe it or not but I've never met a single person in the military who ever admited to quietly thinking about how many of the men around him are gay. People are NOT that paranoid even if they would feel uncomfortable around a gay person, well maybe you would be. Tell me, when you walk into a church, subway station, elevator, airplane, or any other crowded place do you seriously sit there and think quietly about who might be gay around you?

And lastly gay sex would follow the same rules as heterosexual sex in the military, although im sure the sodomy laws would be removed or ignored, like they are now. Its not like two gay servicemen are going to be sneaking off to the closet in their office or a tent or portie-potie in the field to have sex, at least they won't do it anymore than straight service members. And if they are caught they will be punished the same as when two straight soldiers go off and do that.
Click to expand...

My title is a joke that he does not know the origins of.
 
Ned Racine said:
Number One > Redress uses that Tagline "Pro Homosexual Bigot" - I didn't invent it.

Number 2> That fact that some of those most wanting this substantial change did not serve should be rather self evident.

Number 3> There maybe some Heavy Heterosexual Group activity around , but I've never been privy to it. Th stuff that once HEAVILY took place in SF Bath Houses kind of shows that some cannot control themselves.

Number 4> Obviously there are Gays in the Military and under like 98% of circumstances I'd leave them alone and in recent years MOST were left alone. Now this insane move (done for Political Reasons) will reinflame things.

Number 5> This will affect Discipline. Count on it.
Click to expand...

3) is the only one you gave a reason for so its all im going to address, I'm not going to debate against statements made without any kind of arguement behind them.

Like I mentioned, people in the service already have sex with other service members. And unless you are going to tell me that gay people have less control of their sexual urges than normal people, just because they are gay, you have no arguement. I'll give you an example, I know several couples who work together in the same building at my base. They can manage to not have uncontrolable sex on the job. And crazy as it sounds I know, gay people can have that kind of control too. In fact I would be inclined to believe gays can control their sexual urges better in places where its not welcome, because of the negative image associated with it. Now in the Army there's no "PDAs" public displays of affections, couples aren't even supposed to hold hands in uniform and on the job, gays will be given the same rules as anyone else.

Lastly, do you think that no straight people have engaged in orgies? I'm pretty sure its safe to say some have done it in SF bath houses too. Should we ban straight people from the military because of that kind of "stuff?" Or is there a double standard because they are gay? If thats the case I'd ask why there is a double standard, is it just cause you think its gross?
 
Wiseone said:
3) is the only one you gave a reason for so its all im going to address, I'm not going to debate against statements made without any kind of arguement behind them.

Like I mentioned, people in the service already have sex with other service members. And unless you are going to tell me that gay people have less control of their sexual urges than normal people, just because they are gay, you have no arguement. I'll give you an example, I know several couples who work together in the same building at my base. They can manage to not have uncontrolable sex on the job. And crazy as it sounds I know, gay people can have that kind of control too. In fact I would be inclined to believe gays can control their sexual urges better in places where its not welcome, because of the negative image associated with it. Now in the Army there's no "PDAs" public displays of affections, couples aren't even supposed to hold hands in uniform and on the job, gays will be given the same rules as anyone else.

Lastly, do you think that no straight people have engaged in orgies? I'm pretty sure its safe to say some have done it in SF bath houses too. Should we ban straight people from the military because of that kind of "stuff?" Or is there a double standard because they are gay? If thats the case I'd ask why there is a double standard, is it just cause you think its gross?
Click to expand...


Actually it is Pretty Gross however 2 decades ago I would have liked to see such SF images imposed on the Heartland just to show exactly what was headed their way eventually . You know some Shock Treatment.

Once again most Gays in the Military in the past dozen years or so had no heavy fear. Unless they ran into a Bad situation, outed themselves, Or just wanted OUT - then Life and career went on. Now emotions will really run high and Guess What(?) A lot of Credible Straight Men will get out ASAP because of this stupidity if it lasts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom