• 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!

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

roguenuke said:
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?
Click to expand...


I was in the Army, infantry, for 12 years, from 1987 to 2000 and I never was taught that.
 
apdst said:
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%.
Click to expand...

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.
 
CriticalThought said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Jerry said:
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).
Click to expand...

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.
 
apdst said:
I was in the Army, infantry, for 12 years, from 1987 to 2000 and I never was taught that.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
roguenuke said:
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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
apdst said:
You just said that you choose not to, because of your family's wishes. Make up your mind!
Click to expand...

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.
 
CriticalThought said:
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.
Click to expand...

For some reason, this idea is absolutely abhorrent to some people.
 
CriticalThought said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
apdst said:
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.
Click to expand...

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:
apdst said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'm not really going to take any advice from a guy who wants an outright ban against gays.

The point is that I still want a family to come home to and I don't think it is fair that I have to choose between having a family and serving my country.
 
apdst said:
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?
Click to expand...

No. I never said that they were being taught to sniff out anyone. What is being taught is that gay personnel and/or openly gay personnel will be detrimental to unit cohesion, morale, and/or discipline.

The difference is that you now have guys who, while they may be willing to abide by DADT and accept that as long as a gay guy doesn't say he is gay, then he is an okay soldier. However, if a gay guy is allowed to say he is gay without any potential consequences, such as discharge, then problems will develop. This is especially true in units that don't have women.

And it isn't just those people in the guys command that will teach these things to soldiers. It is also upper brass, such as that Marine Corps Commandant, who will make such comments as public comments or respected military veterans who are publicly known, such as Sen. McCain, although they have no proof that such conduct will hurt morale, discipline or unit cohesion. They can believe that it is so, but it is not proof. And such beliefs would be based on biases and false stereotypes. Those biases and false stereotypes should be what are addressed and changed to preempt such issues.

Some of the others who might teach such things to servicemembers could be family members and/or respected family friends who have these false ideas.
 
apdst said:
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?
Click to expand...

Agree with you on this. The military at every level, except a couple of top ones it would seem, have other fish-to-fry. First and foremost, as mentioned by others, its about whether or not you carry your weight.
 
CriticalThought said:
I'm not really going to take any advice from a guy who wants an outright ban against gays.
Click to expand...

Wow! I never said that. How dense are you?

The point is that I still want a family to come home to and I don't think it is fair that I have to choose between having a family and serving my country.
Click to expand...

Well, any family that won't be there for you when you come, isn't worth coming home to.

A hard reality that you need to learn to accept: you don't get to choose your relatives.
 
Wiseone said:
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.
Click to expand...

That is a very good point. I don't think apdst has provided any decent argument for why he wants an outright ban aside that for some strange and completely unsubstantiated reason he believes that gays will flout their sexuality.
 
I've got a question for Apdst which relates directly to my service.

As you know I'm about half way through officer BOLC and I just finished an introduction to convoy operations. My instructor was a US Army Captain. Now what if he happened to be gay and was discovered to be gay in the middle of this training. Now keep in mind that I have to complete this training by Feb and report by March to Korea, there's no time to delay graduation simply because something had to be cut from training or shortened for whatever reason. We both know the Army never does that.

What do you think is more important to national security? Not being taught by a gay instructor, or knowing how to run a successful convoy in Korea, where I'm going in March, or perhaps Afghanistan later after that? Of course this isn't the only class on this topic and I will be getting on the job training, however it certainly has to be argued that not receiving this training will diminish my capacity as an officer.
 
apdst said:
Well, any family that won't be there for you when you come, isn't worth coming home to.

A hard reality that you need to learn to accept: you don't get to choose your relatives.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about my relatives. I'm talking about any future family I form. A family with a husband and kids.

I can't form such a family if I have to serve in the closet.
 
Last edited:
roguenuke said:
No. I never said that they were being taught to sniff out anyone. What is being taught is that gay personnel and/or openly gay personnel will be detrimental to unit cohesion, morale, and/or discipline.

The difference is that you now have guys who, while they may be willing to abide by DADT and accept that as long as a gay guy doesn't say he is gay, then he is an okay soldier. However, if a gay guy is allowed to say he is gay without any potential consequences, such as discharge, then problems will develop. This is especially true in units that don't have women.

And it isn't just those people in the guys command that will teach these things to soldiers. It is also upper brass, such as that Marine Corps Commandant, who will make such comments as public comments or respected military veterans who are publicly known, such as Sen. McCain, although they have no proof that such conduct will hurt morale, discipline or unit cohesion. They can believe that it is so, but it is not proof. And such beliefs would be based on biases and false stereotypes. Those biases and false stereotypes should be what are addressed and changed to preempt such issues.

Some of the others who might teach such things to servicemembers could be family members and/or respected family friends who have these false ideas.
Click to expand...

Never was taught that, either. Wanna try again?
 
apdst said:
The same thing applies.
Click to expand...

Well that was stupid. This is clearly not sinking into your brain.

If I get married to a man and adopt children while I am serving, then I will likely get kicked out.

I have to choose between forming a family or serving my country. There are no heterosexual soldiers who have to face that choice.
 
apdst said:
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?
Click to expand...

I have to contribute and add that no one I know who's been in the military or just entered it with my graduating class has any kind of training or direction teaching us to sniff out gays.

In fact the current guidance is to stay as far away as possible from the issue and you are actively encouraged to ignore any kind of behavior that could be considered homosexual unless it occurs in training areas, during duty hours, or in shared quarters, such as your barracks.

The reason is because its such a massive pain in the ass to start the process to chapter someone out of the Army for homosexual conduct, and it almost always makes for bad press as well. It also must be done through a court martial and the General Officer level, and those guys always want to focus on more important issues.

In fact, and I know Apdst will go nuts when i say this, people often ignore homosexual conduct when it occurs because of all the hassle enforcing DADT involves. In some situations a punishment would have been issued if it was simply heterosexual sex at an inappropriate time or place, however because its now homosexual conduct and requires a massively larger amount of the Army's time and money it sometimes goes ignored.
 
CriticalThought said:
Well that was stupid. This is clearly not sinking into your brain.

If I get married to a man and adopt children while I am serving, then I will likely get kicked out.

I have to choose between forming a family or serving my country. There are no heterosexual soldiers who have to face that choice.
Click to expand...

Another completely uninformed opinion about the service.

Join the Army, do a tour in Korea, get PS'ed at a forward camp and then tell your family they have to stay in the states for a year, without you, because you can't have dependents at that duty station.

Then, you can tell us about the tough family decisions that heteros have to make, while in the service.
 
apdst said:
Another completely uninformed opinion about the service.

Join the Army, do a tour in Korea, get PS'ed at a forward camp and then tell your family they have to stay in the states for a year, without you, because you can't have dependents at that duty station.

Then, you can tell us about the tough family decisions that heteros have to make, while in the service.
Click to expand...

It is a tough decision. However a hetrosexual service member can still have a family, a homosexual one cannot. See the difference?
 
apdst said:
Another completely uninformed opinion about the service.

Join the Army, do a tour in Korea, get PS'ed at a forward camp and then tell your family they have to stay in the states for a year, without you, because you can't have dependents at that duty station.

Then, you can tell us about the tough family decisions that heteros have to make, while in the service.
Click to expand...

Dude, if anyone is uninformed it is you. Try not being able to form any family for the enitre time you are in the military. One year? That is laughable compared to some gay soldiers who spend 4 years in the military before they can date, get married, and start a family.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom