• 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

Conservative said:
My sincere hope is that if it is repealed that it works. If it doesn't, which liberals never admit can happen, we are in one helluva mess. In a large military like ours with 66000 gay or lesbians I fear that it puts into jeopardy their safety and security plus opens the military up to some massive legal battles. I asked on this thread the worse thing that can happen and no one has responded. how about you?
Click to expand...

The military has over 1000 bases. And that is bases alone. That number does not include the number of actual commands there are in the military. There are 289 Navy ships. Then there are the other units in the Navy, such as airwings and seabees and medical and security detachments. Then there are each of the individual units that make up the Army, including all the support units and special forces units. There are all the individual units that make up the Marine Corps. There are all the units that make up the Air Force. Plus, there are all those active duty support personnel for the National Guard and Reserve units around the country. Each of these have a separate chain of command. I am quite certain that not all of those gay personnel will be in the same unit.
 
So here you have America's best -- highly trained fighting men schooled in eighteen ways to kill a man, proud of their service, confident, self assured, the very epitome of toughness, discipline and valor, and the mere thought of a gay guy seeing their peepee gets them so twitterpated they end up reduced to a quivering mass of nerve-wracked insecurity.

I don't get it.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Being openly gay isn't sexual harassment. :doh:

You should just quote the exact words that you think proves your point. Good luck with that. :lol:
Click to expand...

So, you're saying that there's no way that a gay soldier could sexually harass another soldier?
 
apdst said:
Look at AR 600-20 and you'll find it.

It's a fact, that females can't be forced to share billets with male soldiers. Anyone that has been in any branch of the military, will confirm that for you. That same policy will be applicable to gay and straight soldiers, as well.

Ain't gonna happen. I thought you said you deal with the real world. Wasn't that you? Well, in the real world, the military isn't going to be able to force straight soldiers to share billets and vice-versa. Ask you brother and your husband. They'll tell you the same thing.
Click to expand...

And, as I've said before, there must be some proof that putting gays and straights together will cause massive issues/problems with sexual harassment. You have yet to show that this will happen. In fact, I have provided anecdotal evidence that it hasn't happened in units where gays were serving openly.

First of all, I specifically stated in what you posted that the military most likely wouldn't reverse its policy on separating genders. This doesn't mean that they legally couldn't. It means that the military can see that there would be a huge amount of issues that would arise from having men and women sleep/shower together. However, gay men and straight men and gay women and straight women already do sleep/shower together. The only difference with a repeal of DADT is that some people will find out that some of those men and women that they were showering/sleeping with are gay. This will have little affect, if any, on how those who are openly gay act around others in their units. It may have some affect on how some soldiers view those who have revealed themselves to be gay, but those issues can be dealt with by other rules already in the military.

And why do you keep insisting that I ask my brother or husband these questions? I have served time in the Navy. And, I know how things work. Also, my brother probably knows more about this issue than you could ever imagine. He is a heterosexual crossdresser. While in the Army, he told us that he wanted a sex change. He hid that part of his life from most everyone he worked with because many people believe that all crossdressers are gay.
 
Redress said:
Nowhere does it say you cannot shower or billet with some one you are attracted to. Try again.
Click to expand...

Gender segregated barracks are in accordance with the sexual harassment policy. You should already know that, petty officer.
 
apdst said:
So, you're saying that there's no way that a gay soldier could sexually harass another soldier?
Click to expand...

Wow, that is not even remotely like what he said.
 
apdst said:
So, you're saying that there's no way that a gay soldier could sexually harass another soldier?
Click to expand...

You have the worst reading comprehension ever.

No, that is not what I am saying. What does them being openly gay do that would make them more likely to sexually harass another soldier?
 
apdst said:
Gender segregated barracks are in accordance with the sexual harassment policy. You should already know that, petty officer.
Click to expand...

Barracks and billets not mentioned at all in the document you linked. Please try again. How about a quote with a section number?
 
roguenuke said:
And, as I've said before, there must be some proof that putting gays and straights together will cause massive issues/problems with sexual harassment. You have yet to show that this will happen. In fact, I have provided anecdotal evidence that it hasn't happened in units where gays were serving openly.

First of all, I specifically stated in what you posted that the military most likely wouldn't reverse its policy on separating genders. This doesn't mean that they legally couldn't. It means that the military can see that there would be a huge amount of issues that would arise from having men and women sleep/shower together. However, gay men and straight men and gay women and straight women already do sleep/shower together. The only difference with a repeal of DADT is that some people will find out that some of those men and women that they were showering/sleeping with are gay. This will have little affect, if any, on how those who are openly gay act around others in their units. It may have some affect on how some soldiers view those who have revealed themselves to be gay, but those issues can be dealt with by other rules already in the military.

And why do you keep insisting that I ask my brother or husband these questions? I have served time in the Navy. And, I know how things work. Also, my brother probably knows more about this issue than you could ever imagine. He is a heterosexual crossdresser. While in the Army, he told us that he wanted a sex change. He hid that part of his life from most everyone he worked with because many people believe that all crossdressers are gay.
Click to expand...

Common sense? Hence the reason that males and females aren't allowed to billet together. Wouldn't common sense indicate that males and females billetting together would cause more sexual harassment incidents. Yes?
 
apdst said:
So, you're saying that there's no way that a gay soldier could sexually harass another soldier?
Click to expand...

There's ways that straight men could sexually harass women while in the military, and they don't live together. There are sexual harassment rules in the military to deal with these things.

Also, are you saying that gays are the only soldiers capable of harassing other soldiers that they live with? Do you somehow think that nerdy soldiers aren't harassed for being nerdy? Do you think that black soldiers aren't harassed by some for being black? Do you think that non-Christian soldiers aren't harassed for not being Christian?
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
You have the worst reading comprehension ever.

No, that is not what I am saying. What does them being openly gay do that would make them more likely to sexually harass another soldier?
Click to expand...

I enver said that a gay soldier would be more likely to sexually harass another soldier.
 
roguenuke said:
There's ways that straight men could sexually harass women while in the military, and they don't live together. There are sexual harassment rules in the military to deal with these things.

Also, are you saying that gays are the only soldiers capable of harassing other soldiers that they live with? Do you somehow think that nerdy soldiers aren't harassed for being nerdy? Do you think that black soldiers aren't harassed by some for being black? Do you think that non-Christian soldiers aren't harassed for not being Christian?
Click to expand...

That's right and that's why they don't share housing, if they're not married...LOL
 
apdst said:
Common sense? Hence the reason that males and females aren't allowed to billet together. Wouldn't common sense indicate that males and females billetting together would cause more sexual harassment incidents. Yes?
Click to expand...

Did you know that the navy at least has coed barracks? Not the same room, but the same barracks.
 
apdst said:
Common sense? Hence the reason that males and females aren't allowed to billet together. Wouldn't common sense indicate that males and females billetting together would cause more sexual harassment incidents. Yes?
Click to expand...

It would cause all kinds of issues, the least of which would be sexual harassment. I'd be more worried about actual sexual assaults. And, I'd be more worried about mutual attractions leading to sex in the berthings, which could easily lead to pregnancies.

Gay men and straight men live together now. Gay women and straight women live together now. Men and women have never shared berthing spaces in the military. And most men and women have never shared such spaces in civilian public establishments/jobs either. They have however, most likely shared those spaces with gays in civilian life.
 
apdst said:
That's right and that's why they don't share housing, if they're not married...LOL
Click to expand...

Gays and straights do share housing though.

And, as has been posted here many times, it does not matter what the sexuality is of either person involved in a sexual harassment charge. A straight man can bring another straight man up on charges of sexual harassment if the first one is offended by sexual jokes that the other has told. Also, as I have told people on here many times, I knew way more straight men that were likely to "hit on" other straight men just to annoy or upset them.
 
apdst said:
Look at AR 600-20 and you'll find it.

It's a fact, that females can't be forced to share billets with male soldiers. Anyone that has been in any branch of the military, will confirm that for you. That same policy will be applicable to gay and straight soldiers, as well.
Click to expand...

So anyway, did you ever find this regulation?
 
roguenuke said:
Most of the people in the Navy have had many sexual partners, NP. I'd say that was also true for the other branches as well.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the Navy in itself represents the whole population of straight people which we are talking about when we speak of the gay population.......
 
disneydude said:
I'm sorry Redress...but when someone as self-righteous as NP comes on here and starts lecturing other's about morality and promiscuity, its hard not to point out the blatant hypocrisy. However....I get your point.
Click to expand...

Even your fellow lefties are tired of the same old crap you spew....Thank you Redress
 
X Factor said:
But it's not true that LGBT soldiers cannot do those things you mention, Star. Isn't the "don't ask" part about not investigating possibly gay soldiers? The military won't look to out you so long as you don't out yourself.
Click to expand...

That's not at all how it has worked in practice. You're just like McCain "It's not the policy it's not the policyit'snotthepolicy." **** what the policy says. What has actually happened is precisely what Your Star describes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom