• 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!

'Don't ask' repeal fails in Senate

apdst said:
You want to be a soldier, or do you want to sit around and shoot the **** about your old man? It's not a ****ing social club.

Sorry that the world can't be perfect just to suit you, but there it is.
Click to expand...

I love how you didn't answer his question.
 
apdst said:
You want to be a soldier, or do you want to sit around and shoot the **** about your old man? It's not a ****ing social club.

Sorry that the world can't be perfect just to suit you, but there it is.
Click to expand...

So how come heterosexual soldiers are not required to give up marriage and forming a family but homosexual soldiers are? That goes beyond unfair to an outright denial of the very freedoms those soldiers are fighting for.
 
CriticalThought said:
It's apparantly some sort of gay sex act. I haven't exactly lead a prudish existance, but even I hadn't heard of it until he mentioned it on this forum.
Click to expand...

I wired up a daisy chain once; a series of 4. It was purdy awesome. I put 12 mother****ers on ice. Not bad, when all I had to do was fire off one rifle round.
 
apdst said:
Simple, create a regulation that prohibits talking about spouses.significant others, period. Problem solved. It's the military. Don't like it? get out, or don't join.
Click to expand...

That would cause more trouble, and problems in the military then letting LGBT soldiers serve openly.
 
CriticalThought said:
So how come heterosexual soldiers are not required to give up marriage and forming a family but homosexual soldiers are? That goes beyond unfair to an outright denial of the very freedoms those soldiers are fighting for.
Click to expand...

Life sucks, man. Didn't you get the memo?
 
apdst said:
You want to be a soldier, or do you want to sit around and shoot the **** about your old man? It's not a ****ing social club.

Sorry that the world can't be perfect just to suit you, but there it is.
Click to expand...

And, assuming that soldiers just concentrate on being a soldier 24/7 is not only a stupid assumption to make, it also doesn't even make sense to expect soldiers to be this way. Just because someone is considered "on duty" 24/7, does not mean that they do not get some personal time during that 24/7. And it is quite healthy for soldiers to make friendships with people within their units during that off-time (that really is just down time in the same place).
 
Your Star said:
That would cause more trouble, and problems in the military then letting LGBT soldiers serve openly.
Click to expand...

And, you know this, because of all your time in the bush leading soldiers?

You talk like you got some trigger time, but we all know you don't. Unless you can come up with some primer, which I doubt very, very seriously that you can.
 
CriticalThought said:
What is with you and daisy chains? I honestly find it strange that I'm gay and never even heard of it before, and then learned about if from you.
Click to expand...

Daisy is an old slang word for gay men, you have to be pretty old to have heard it used. NavyPride is probably old enough to have used the term himself. I heard it used in an old western movie, a black and white one, IIRC.
 
apdst said:
Life sucks, man. Didn't you get the memo?
Click to expand...

I did. The postscript was that it's our duty to make the best of it. Repealing DADT would go a long way in making life better for a lot of people.
 
apdst said:
Simple, create a regulation that prohibits talking about spouses.significant others, period. Problem solved. It's the military. Don't like it? get out, or don't join.
Click to expand...

Will not work. What part of this do you not understand? This proposal would either end up with a lot of people stressed out or disobeying such an order. It is completely unrealistic to expect this from anyone who has to spend 24/7 with a certain group of people for extended periods of time, even their down time.
 
roguenuke said:
And, assuming that soldiers just concentrate on being a soldier 24/7 is not only a stupid assumption to make, it also doesn't even make sense to expect soldiers to be this way. Just because someone is considered "on duty" 24/7, does not mean that they do not get some personal time during that 24/7. And it is quite healthy for soldiers to make friendships with people within their units during that off-time (that really is just down time in the same place).
Click to expand...

I did it! Then again, I was a real soldier and not a ****ing POG.
 
apdst said:
And, you know this, because of all your time in the bush leading soldiers?

You talk like you got some trigger time, but we all know you don't. Unless you can come up with some primer, which I doubt very, very seriously that you can.
Click to expand...

I don't need any of that, just a simple understanding of human behavior, and emotions.
 
roguenuke said:
Will not work. What part of this do you not understand? This proposal would either end up with a lot of people stressed out or disobeying such an order. It is completely unrealistic to expect this from anyone who has to spend 24/7 with a certain group of people for extended periods of time, even their down time.
Click to expand...

How do you know it won't work? Your chrystal ball told you? Or did you use your magic 8 ball?
 
Your Star said:
I don't need any of that, just a simple understanding of human behavior, and emotions.
Click to expand...

You would be better off with some trigger time. It would make you far more credible.
 
CriticalThought said:
I did. The postscript was that it's our duty to make the best of it. Repealing DADT would go a long way in making life better for a lot of people.
Click to expand...

It might make things worse. Reckon we'll see.
 
apdst said:
I did it! Then again, I was a real soldier and not a ****ing POG.
Click to expand...

I'd bet that not a lot of the other soldiers in your unit did it. Some people don't want to make friendships within the military, that's fine for them. Most people are not like that. Most people can be a good soldier and still share their personal life.
 
apdst said:
How do you know it won't work? Your chrystal ball told you? Or did you use your magic 8 ball?
Click to expand...

Because I have common sense. I know what the real world is like. It won't work.
 
apdst said:
You would be better off with some trigger time. It would make you far more credible.
Click to expand...

I find it strange that you would rather take away more freedom from our troops than allow some of our troops the simple freedom of serving without fear that their sexuality will get them discharged.
 
apdst said:
It might make things worse. Reckon we'll see.
Click to expand...

It certainly made life worse in the 19 other countries that allow gays to serve openly in thier mlitary. Oh wait...it didn't.
 
Your Star said:
Lifting DADT won't force people to not blow off steam, and it's weird that you think blowing off steam= being offensive to LGBT people.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't mean that, but guys do joke in ways that are not always sensitive to everyone's feelings.

But don't you think being nervous about being outed, and kicked out of the military is a bit too much to worry about for an 18 year old that is already doing a very stressful job?
Click to expand...
Probably, but that's what he signed up for.
 
CriticalThought said:
I find it strange that you would rather take away more freedom from our troops than allow some of our troops the simple freedom of serving without fear that their sexuality will get them discharged.
Click to expand...

You want gays to be able to serve and protect the integrity of our combat forces, or what? This ain't a ****ing playground where everything is perfect and everybody gets what they want. It's a fighting force, that has one priority: defeat the enemy and bring as many of our people home back in one piece.

You do realize that when a unit doesn't work right, people die. I knew a guy that died--during a training mission--because no one in his platoon was competant enough to call for a dustoff bird. This isn't about what's right, or fair, or neat, or cool, or PC, or groovy. It's about what's best for mission accomplishment and troop welfare and if that doesn't fall in line with your politics, then tough ****.

Grow up! Please?
 
CriticalThought said:
It certainly made life worse in the 19 other countries that allow gays to serve openly in thier mlitary. Oh wait...it didn't.
Click to expand...


How many of those armies have you served in? None, right? So, you really don't know.
 
X Factor said:
No, I didn't mean that, but guys do joke in ways that are not always sensitive to everyone's feelings.
Click to expand...

Key word, everyone's, why are you singling LGBT people out?

Probably, but that's what he signed up for.
Click to expand...

So it's wrong for him/her to seek out the comfort of a partner, but not a straight soldier to do the same? Please atleast acknowledge the hypocrisy in DADT.
 
roguenuke said:
I'd bet that not a lot of the other soldiers in your unit did it. Some people don't want to make friendships within the military, that's fine for them. Most people are not like that. Most people can be a good soldier and still share their personal life.
Click to expand...

They were substandard soldiers, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom