Page 11 of 24 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 235

Thread: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

  1. #101
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    77,916

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    It's not officially taught, like in a class room setting type situation. But it is taught in that the older or more experienced personnel will tell this to those junior personnel or respected military personnel will say such things in public and on public record. It only takes a quick look on this board, in threads like this where the phrase "allowing gays to serve openly will negatively impact unit morale, cohesion and/or discipline" or some variation of this phrase that is very similar to it are used often, especially by some of the more senior military personnel or older veterans. This is the phrase that is repeated over and over. Yet no one has any actual proof that this will happen. So why this phrase if they aren't taught it?

    I was in the Army, infantry, for 12 years, from 1987 to 2000 and I never was taught that.
    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.

  2. #102
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    01-13-18 @ 01:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,193

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Real men make their own decisions, based on their own wishes. If you were wishing to do something illegal, or immoral, you might have a point.

    A family that trully cares about it's members, supports their decisions, even if they disagree with those decisions.

    When my kids come of age and want to join the service, I will support that decision 100%. When they choose not to join the service, because they don't believe that it's for them, then I'll support that decision 100%.
    They would support me if I chose to serve and I haven't said that I won't. I'm waiting to see how the whole policy turns out.

  3. #103
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    77,916

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    They would support me if I chose to serve and I haven't said that I won't. I'm waiting to see how the whole policy turns out.
    You just said that you choose not to, because of your family's wishes. Make up your mind!

    Indecisiveness is a plague on the service.
    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.

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    There were 2 open gays in my BCT company. They were offered a general discharge, declined it, and it wasn't a problem. One of them was in my platoon, it wasn't a problem. Sorry, Navy, he wasn't trying to rape us in our sleep.

    Your typical runt and platoon ****-up is a far greater problem (and has more to fear from his buddies) than does your typical gay man who enlists. It's just not a big deal.

    Now, people like MSgt come on and start talking about tight fire teams; everyone needs to listen to those concerns. Romantic feelings can **** up a fire team and get people killed (which is why we shouldn't seek co-ed fireteams).
    I agree. The military can roll with this just fine. Be a worthless jerk, regardless of persuasion, and it will be taken care of. Do your job, and be a soldier, and all is OK.

  5. #105
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    12-22-17 @ 12:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,154

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I was in the Army, infantry, for 12 years, from 1987 to 2000 and I never was taught that.
    Really?

    It's in the actual policy against homosexuals. So are you saying that had no information on why homosexuals are not allowed in the military?

    United States Code: Title 10,654. Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces | LII / Legal Information Institute

    Notice this part:
    (14) The armed forces must maintain personnel policies that exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk to the armed forces’ high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
    It is actually in the policy, and I'm pretty sure in the page 13 regarding homosexual conduct in the military (although this I could be wrong about).

    And it is taught, whether you realize it was taught to you or not. Otherwise, most of those who are against repealing DADT wouldn't use the almost exact phrasing for doing so.
    "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.

  6. #106
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    77,916

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Really?

    It's in the actual policy against homosexuals. So are you saying that had no information on why homosexuals are not allowed in the military?

    United States Code: Title 10,654. Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces | LII / Legal Information Institute

    Notice this part:


    It is actually in the policy, and I'm pretty sure in the page 13 regarding homosexual conduct in the military (although this I could be wrong about).

    And it is taught, whether you realize it was taught to you or not. Otherwise, most of those who are against repealing DADT wouldn't use the almost exact phrasing for doing so.
    So, because of that, seniro NCO's teach the soldiers in their charge to sniff out gays and expose them?

    Again, I never received that directive during my 12 years. Nor, did I issue any such directive as a senior NCO. I doubt very seriously, that you'll find anyone that did.

    What the hell do I know. Right?
    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. #107
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    01-13-18 @ 01:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,193

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You just said that you choose not to, because of your family's wishes. Make up your mind!
    I have good reason to be indecisive. At present, I don't really have the desire to spend several years in the closet, so my family has a good point. If the policy is repealed then I could serve without having to fear getting kicked out. If I served after a repeal I would probably still keep my sexuality to myself, but I could date and get married if I wanted.

  8. #108
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    52,235

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I have good reason to be indecisive. At present, I don't really have the desire to spend several years in the closet, so my family has a good point. If the policy is repealed then I could serve without having to fear getting kicked out. If I served after a repeal I would probably still keep my sexuality to myself, but I could date and get married if I wanted.
    For some reason, this idea is absolutely abhorrent to some people.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  9. #109
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    77,916

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I have good reason to be indecisive. At present, I don't really have the desire to spend several years in the closet, so my family has a good point. If the policy is repealed then I could serve without having to fear getting kicked out. If I served after a repeal I would probably still keep my sexuality to myself, but I could date and get married if I wanted.
    It's about serving your country, not about being out of the closet. If you're no more dedicated than that, then you should definitely choose to stay out of the service.

    Your hubby isn't going to be out there on the battlefield with you.
    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.

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    No, but I think that that is why DADT abolitionists are so atimate about gays serving openly.

    Whyelse would they be sooooo opposed to lifting the ban and keeping DADT in place? They're not content with gays just being able to serve in the military, they want it flaunted in everyone's face, that gays are serving in the military.
    Or maybe they actually care about the rights of those service members. Think if you were unable to talk about your romantic life openly with your friends, or ever have an open relationship with someone you love. And if you're hidden relationship was found you would lose your job.
    I support removing DADT but believe me its because I care more about my fellow service members who may be gay, and the former service members I know, some who are my friends, who are gay and were found out.

    Do you really think that the removal of a Company Commander, platoon sergeant, or any other valuable service member is not harmful to national security? Of course the Army and military is smart enough to make sure that on one is irreplaceable, but it doesn't mean their replacement is instant and their replacement is just as good.

    And seriously if you argument against DADT is only based on you don't want people being smug to you than for God's sake grow a spine.

    Also I edited my post earlier, probably while you were replying to the original, so could you go back and look at it again?
    Last edited by Wiseone; 11-12-10 at 12:05 AM.

Page 11 of 24 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... 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
  •