Page 20 of 24 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 235

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

  1. #191
    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 CriticalThought View Post
    I think such a system would be counterproductive. The military has to discriminate. For example, soldiers who are too weak minded, fat, short, unstable, stupid, etc. are discriminated against. Furthermore, just because gays are allowed to serve openly does not mean that their superiors should have their hands tied if they start flouting their sexuality in such a way that it begins to cause problems. Gays can be smart and simply choose not to tell people about their sexuality unless they know they are going to be cool with it.
    I think you went a little overboard in trying to make a case for "discrimination". Can we acknowledge without listing that "discrimination" as you mention it exists, and is legal, everywhere ? i.e. There are certain non-biased qualifications with almost any job, usually under the umbrella of minimum standards, etc. The issue here, and the discrimination of concern, is with regard to what our Courts have established, as in race, creed, sex, etc., in that "You may not discriminate because of ...... ". The law has never been that an organization cannot discriminate.

  2. #192
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,131

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    I think you went a little overboard in trying to make a case for "discrimination". Can we acknowledge without listing that "discrimination" as you mention it exists, and is legal, everywhere ? i.e. There are certain non-biased qualifications with almost any job, usually under the umbrella of minimum standards, etc. The issue here, and the discrimination of concern, is with regard to what our Courts have established, as in race, creed, sex, etc., in that "You may not discriminate because of ...... ". The law has never been that an organization cannot discriminate.
    If that is the case, then I say just extend the same discrimination protections that are currently offered for race and sex in the armed forces to sexual orientation. You don't need a whole new DADT policy, you just need to do what has worked with racial integration and women integration.

  3. #193
    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 CriticalThought View Post
    If that is the case, then I say just extend the same discrimination protections that are currently offered for race and sex in the armed forces to sexual orientation. You don't need a whole new DADT policy, you just need to do what has worked with racial integration and women integration.
    Well, that would sound like a format for Congress to enact new legislation upon, which is one solution to the issue. The other, as oft mentioned, is for the Courts to rule that sexual orientation is protected, even in the military. I am not sure which remedy will come first, if either.

    I personally am for a repeal of DADT, and would like it to be simplified to just do your job and STFU if you have a sex issue. I do not assume to know how SCOTUS would rule on the base issue, and suspect that the votes are not there in Congress, even now with the lame duck session. The blue dogs are content to let the Courts decide, IMMHO.

  4. #194
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,514

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    If that is the case, then I say just extend the same discrimination protections that are currently offered for race and sex in the armed forces to sexual orientation. You don't need a whole new DADT policy, you just need to do what has worked with racial integration and women integration.
    If racial and sexual discrimination didn't exist, you might have a point. However, discrimination does exist.
    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.

  5. #195
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,131

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

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    If racial and sexual discrimination didn't exist, you might have a point. However, discrimination does exist.
    I'm sure the military already has policies to limit racial and sexual discrimination in the forces. Why can't it simply use similar policies for sexual orientation? Why do we need a DADT policy instead of simply following the same path of racial integration and sexual integration?

  6. #196
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,997

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I'm sure the military already has policies to limit racial and sexual discrimination in the forces. Why can't it simply use similar policies for sexual orientation? Why do we need a DADT policy instead of simply following the same path of racial integration and sexual integration?
    In fact, the military has a policy against discrimination based on sexuality. I know this is true. I looked at the training on it the other day. Since the only person in someone's chain of command who can start an investigation into someone's sexuality, no one else is allowed to discriminate in any way against someone who is suspected of being gay or bi or even who out right says they are gay, but they have not been investigated and/or discharged because of it.

    The only issue with it right now, is that if, during the investigation into a discrimination claim based on sexuality, evidence is found that proves the person who was being discrimination against is homosexual, then they can be processed out under DADT. However, this is not supposed to stop the original discrimination claim from being investigated completely, and if the person was being discriminated against due to their sexuality, then the one who was discriminating can still be punished for it. The policies are already in place to deal with discrimination based on sexuality.
    "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.

  7. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Yeah...I don't believe that one bit. I know Marines and they claim that calling each other "fag" and "fairy" is pretty common in the service.
    Well add this soldier to that list. We call things "gay" all the time. Instead of "final formation" it's "final-fag" because final formation is gay (there's no reason to form up the whole company to get a head count and tell us the rules when you can just have the PG give you the count and post the rules on the bulletin board in each platoon's bay). Instead of "fireguard" it's "fire-fag" because fireguard duty is gay (no-one smokes in the barracks since Vietnam and all the cleaning duties fireguard performs could be accomplished in 1 hour by the whole platoon).

    You're confusing common vernacular venting frustration with an actual social bias.

    I have news for you: even the females in my platoon will ask if you need to borrow some Vagisil if you're sandbagging it during PT. Even the female sergeants will ask males if they have sand in their vagina when they go to sick call. Feel like throwing up? Your own battle buddy will make a motion like he's holding back your hair.

    That doesn't mean anyone is biased against women.
    Last edited by Jerry; 11-13-10 at 10:51 AM.

  8. #198
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,514

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I'm sure the military already has policies to limit racial and sexual discrimination in the forces. Why can't it simply use similar policies for sexual orientation? Why do we need a DADT policy instead of simply following the same path of racial integration and sexual integration?
    Sure, they have those policies in place. Wanna know what? Discrimination because of race, sex, creed, color and religion happens, anyway. Nothing will stop covert discrimination. A DADT policy will go along way to protect gays and straights from being discriminated against.

    Personally, I don't think throwing gay soldiers to the wolves is a good idea, not at first, anyway. If, after a few years and we see how things are going, then maybe it will be time to lift any and all DADT restrictions.

    Anyone that thinks we can make the transition, overnight is living a fantasy.
    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.

  9. #199
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,514

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I'm sure the military already has policies to limit racial and sexual discrimination in the forces. Why can't it simply use similar policies for sexual orientation? Why do we need a DADT policy instead of simply following the same path of racial integration and sexual integration?
    Sure, they have those policies in place. Wanna know what? Discrimination because of race, sex, creed, color and religion happens, anyway. Nothing will stop covert discrimination. A DADT policy will go along way to protect gays and straights from being discriminated against.

    Personally, I don't think throwing gay soldiers to the wolves is a good idea, not at first, anyway. If, after a few years and we see how things are going, then maybe it will be time to lift any and all DADT restrictions.

    Anyone that thinks we can make the transition, overnight is living a fantasy.
    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. #200
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

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

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Sure, they have those policies in place. Wanna know what? Discrimination because of race, sex, creed, color and religion happens, anyway. Nothing will stop covert discrimination. A DADT policy will go along way to protect gays and straights from being discriminated against.

    Personally, I don't think throwing gay soldiers to the wolves is a good idea, not at first, anyway. If, after a few years and we see how things are going, then maybe it will be time to lift any and all DADT restrictions.

    So you think discrimination prevents discrimination


    Anyone that thinks we can make the transition, overnight is living a fantasy.
    This transition has been going on for a while now.

Page 20 of 24 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... 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
  •