• 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!

McCain: 'Don't Ask' Repeal May Cause Troop Exodus

I'm a Shōrin-ryū gal, myself. :thumbs:
 
He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery. ~Harold Wilson
Click to expand...

Beep. 10 9
 
First, right before the British allowed gays to serve openly, there was this same fear that many of their troops would leave/not reenlist. In fact, they had a high ranking officer who did resign, but it had very little impact. And I think in the article I read, more than 12% of their troops claimed that they would leave the military, either right away or just not reenlist, if gays were allowed to serve openly there. It never happened. They saw no measurable affect whatsoever to their recruitment/retention when they allowed gays to serve openly. There may have been a few who did get out, and either decided to do something to get kicked out or just did not reenlist, but the number was so insignificant that they couldn't even distinguish who was getting out for just that reason or for other reasons.

Second, as others have said, why would a soldier/marine give up a job with good benefits and steady pay just because they may have to live with gay personnel (which, for the most part, they have already been doing), to go into a job market that sucks, especially for someone whose most likely skill is killing people. And the civilian world, for the most part, has made it illegal almost everywhere to discriminate against gays. So these guys, if they do find a comparable or better job, would most likely be working with openly gay people. Sure, they may not have to shower or live with those people, but they will still be working with them.

And, there are a lot of people who are trying to join or go back into the military. The Navy is barely accepting any returnees and I heard the AF isn't accepting any at all.

Prior Service Enlistments

The Navy is actively trying to decide who to not allow to reenlist in jobs that are overmanned. It's called Perform to Serve.

So if someone absolutely could not serve with someone who was openly gay, then I would be willing to bet that they can easily be replaced or their loss wouldn't really be a big deal. I highly doubt that 12% of our military is going to try to get out just because gays serve openly, not in this economy.
 
CriticalThought said:
ROFL. I use to live with one of those.

I'm geek gay, the easiest kind of gay to be since geeks usually don't get girls anyways. :)
Click to expand...

Man, why can't I be gay? Hanging out with dudes all the time, not having to put up with women when you don't want to, easy to get laid...

independent_thinker2002 said:
:prof You forgot penis.
Click to expand...

:rofl:

Glinda said:
I'm a Shōrin-ryū gal, myself. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

This is an honest debate, there's no call to go making up words. :mad:

roguenuke said:
First, right before the British allowed gays to serve openly, there was this same fear that many of their troops would leave/not reenlist. In fact, they had a high ranking officer who did resign, but it had very little impact. And I think in the article I read, more than 12% of their troops claimed that they would leave the military, either right away or just not reenlist, if gays were allowed to serve openly there. It never happened. They saw no measurable affect whatsoever to their recruitment/retention when they allowed gays to serve openly. There may have been a few who did get out, and either decided to do something to get kicked out or just did not reenlist, but the number was so insignificant that they couldn't even distinguish who was getting out for just that reason or for other reasons.

Second, as others have said, why would a soldier/marine give up a job with good benefits and steady pay just because they may have to live with gay personnel (which, for the most part, they have already been doing), to go into a job market that sucks, especially for someone whose most likely skill is killing people. And the civilian world, for the most part, has made it illegal almost everywhere to discriminate against gays. So these guys, if they do find a comparable or better job, would most likely be working with openly gay people. Sure, they may not have to shower or live with those people, but they will still be working with them.

And, there are a lot of people who are trying to join or go back into the military. The Navy is barely accepting any returnees and I heard the AF isn't accepting any at all.

Prior Service Enlistments

The Navy is actively trying to decide who to not allow to reenlist in jobs that are overmanned. It's called Perform to Serve.

So if someone absolutely could not serve with someone who was openly gay, then I would be willing to bet that they can easily be replaced or their loss wouldn't really be a big deal. I highly doubt that 12% of our military is going to try to get out just because gays serve openly, not in this economy.
Click to expand...

GET YOUR FACTS OUT OF MY MILITARY DANGIT
 
Deuce said:
This is an honest debate, there's no call to go making up words. :mad:
Click to expand...
It's not a made-up word, it's a different language...

Japanese, I think…

My youngest brother has been studying something called “Isshin-ryū”, which is I believe related.
 
I don't know, but it sounds like you guys are talking about whaling vessels. :lol:
 
The Mark said:
It's not a made-up word, it's a different language...

Japanese, I think…

My youngest brother has been studying something called “Isshin-ryū”, which is I believe related.
Click to expand...

It was a joke :p
 
Deuce said:
It was a joke :p
Click to expand...
I thought so.

But I'm so bad at recognizing such things that I've simply taken to responding as if they were serious, in most cases...

But if they meant it as a joke, my response sometimes confuses people, and that's never a bad thing… :mrgreen:
 
I am sorry to break it to you my left wing friends but repeal of DADT is a dead issue in the lame duck congress.........It will never come to the floor for a vote and if it did the democrats don't have enough vote to repeal the law.............
 
Navy Pride said:
I am sorry to break it to you my left wing friends but repeal of DADT is a dead issue in the lame duck congress.........It will never come to the floor for a vote and if it did the democrats don't have enough vote to repeal the law.............
Click to expand...
Why do you think only democrats are going to vote for it?
 
The Mark said:
Why do you think only democrats are going to vote for it?
Click to expand...



Because all 42 republicans signed a letter of unison in the senate........sorrry my left wing friend........
 
Navy Pride said:
Because all 42 republicans signed a letter of unison in the senate........sorrry my left wing friend........
Click to expand...

That's why they are called the "Party of No". They have no independent thought, no independent ideas....they only know how to unanimously say no.
 
Navy Pride said:
Because all 42 republicans signed a letter of unison in the senate........sorrry my left wing friend........
Click to expand...

I believe they let Scott Brown walk, though, because his next election campaign will be a tough one in a Democrat state.

Anyway, I guess Gate's and Mullins' statements didn't mean anything to the other Republicans. The fact that letting gays serve openly will not cause big problems just doesn't matter to people like McCain, whose own wife advertises that he's totally ignorant on the issue. They've got to be 'morally superior' (haha) and not alienate religious righters. Its another wedge issue, one of those things that is meaningless, but Republicans think it makes them look righteous to their base. Its all politics, Navy, my Republican friend, and nothing more.
 
Navy Pride said:
Because all 42 republicans signed a letter of unison in the senate........sorry my left wing friend........
Click to expand...
Really...

And what, in recent history, has led you to believe that politicians keep their word on anything - even if they sign a document attesting to that fact?

And I’m not your left wing friend.

I just like poking holes in people’s arguments.
 
disneydude said:
That's why they are called the "Party of No". They have no independent thought, no independent ideas....they only know how to unanimously say no.
Click to expand...

You lose again DD...It must be getting old........Re elect "Moonbeam" Brown for Governor :)You lefties never learn
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
Because all 42 republicans signed a letter of unison in the senate........sorrry my left wing friend........
Click to expand...

The letter said they would not pass anything till tax cuts had been extended...Why oh why can't you tell the whole story Navy?
 
The Mark said:
Really...

And what, in recent history, has led you to believe that politicians keep their word on anything - even if they sign a document attesting to that fact?

And I’m not your left wing friend.

I just like poking holes in people’s arguments.
Click to expand...

We shall see my left wing friend ROTFLMAO........
 
Redress said:
The letter said they would not pass anything till tax cuts had been extended...Why oh why can't you tell the whole story Navy?
Click to expand...

Those tax cuts are far from a done deal............Many a democrat is jumping ship and abandoning their president........
 
Navy Pride said:
You lose again DD...It must be getting old........Re elect "Moonbeam" Brown for Governor :)You lefties never learn
Click to expand...

How much do you know about California politics Navy.....we've had two decades of horrible Governors...who belonged to your beloved Republican party.
 
disneydude said:
That's why they are called the "Party of No". They have no independent thought, no independent ideas....they only know how to unanimously say no.
Click to expand...

You have to be the "Party of No" when you're facing the "Party of Always Wrong."
 
The Mark said:
Really...

And what, in recent history, has led you to believe that politicians keep their word on anything - even if they sign a document attesting to that fact?

And I’m not your left wing friend.

I just like poking holes in people’s arguments.
Click to expand...

The Contract With America went so well! :lamo
 
Navy Pride said:
You lose again DD...It must be getting old........Re elect "Moonbeam" Brown for Governor :)You lefties never learn
Click to expand...

and you NavyPride never make a valid point, would it be correct to assume that you are against the repeal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom