- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,534
- Reaction score
- 1,000
- Location
- Denver, CO
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
You prove my point.
You already want the military to fund implants for gay male soldiers.
...I...do?
You prove my point.
You already want the military to fund implants for gay male soldiers.
Ughh...Whatever. I made my point clear: The lawsuits that will follow if this isn't done right will cripple the US military.
I just don’t see why this law needs to be shoved through right now without checks and balances that will protect our military force.
I honestly don’t give a crap about why cross dressers do what they do. Neither do most soldiers. It isn't a social network you know?
SCOTUS will tie on it since Kagan will stand out. It'll be the Appeals court ruling that will decide it. And if you were a Senator who genuinely cared about the military then you would repeal it. It sounds like you wuold be a Senator more concerned politics.
No way will there be a tie.........The SCOTUS will uphold DADT by a 5 to 4 vote with Kennedy rendering the deciding vote,,,,,,,,,,,,
Actually if it makes it to a vote, it has a very good chance of passage. 5 Republicans have openly supported repeal of DADT and voted against it due to other reasons.
By the way, there will be rules in place, and the bill gives the military time to get ready for the change.
DADT should not be repealed! It should however be ammended...
For those gays who are outted, but who continue to behave professionally (that means NOT walking around hand in hand with other men or otherwise demonstrating affection, publicly), they should NOT have their service interrupted.
We CANNOT have men publicly kissing one another or publicly walking hand in hand while in the militatry!
Now, if we should ever NOT need a military then, whatever they want to is just fine with me...
PS.
I generally support GLBT issues....
A good chance of passing, definitely, but I wouldn't put it past GOP senators to say they're in favor of something, and say "oh I swear I'm only voting against it for procedural/whateverbull****Ijustmadeup reasons", and then when it comes time they go lock-step with their compatriots.
See: John McCain's repeatedly moving goalposts.
DADT should not be repealed! It should however be ammended...
For those gays who are outted, but who continue to behave professionally (that means NOT walking around hand in hand with other men or otherwise demonstrating affection, publicly), they should NOT have their service interrupted.
We CANNOT have men publicly kissing one another or publicly walking hand in hand while in the militatry!
Now, if we should ever NOT need a military then, whatever they want to is just fine with me...
PS.
I generally support GLBT issues....
Do you support straight soldiers walking around holding hands and kissing in public while in the military?
Do you support straight soldiers walking around holding hands and kissing in public while in the military?
Do you support straight soldiers walking around holding hands and kissing in public while in the military?
Navy, it can't be 5-4 since Kagan will have to recuse herself. Best to stop while you are behind sir.
Now, granted, I left the Navy decades ago, and things might have changed. We were told no signs of affection while in uniform, except the obvious cases of departure/returns from tours of duty.
Well if she does that it will be 5-3 in favor of upholding DADT...That is even better.........Thanks Redress.......
You did not know that Kagan would have to recuse yourself, but still feel qualified to make a prediction despite showing a lack of knowledge of SCOTUS?
I had heard some rumors to that effect but had not heard her say she will do that....Have you?
Why can't we?
Gays demonstrating affection publicly, is like a person who has a severe speech impediment, volunteering to give public speeches about the proper enunciation of syllables when fluently speaking in public.
Homosexuality is not a normal condition, no more than speaking with a lisp is a normal condition. However, both behaviors should be tolerated and most certainly not penalized, as neither are detrimental to society at large.
Gays demonstrating affection publicly, is like a person who has a severe speech impediment, volunteering to give public speeches about the proper enunciation of syllables when fluently speaking in public.
Homosexuality is not a normal condition, no more than speaking with a lisp is a normal condition. However, both behaviors should be tolerated and most certainly not penalized, as neither are detrimental to society at large.
It's very big of you to tolerate those with speech impediments. Very big.
It's not about me, personally! It's about society and how it behaves towards others. It's about minority groups and how they are received by society at large. It's about how we all interact together, in the most healthful and helpful manner possible without anyone losing rights or privileges as a result.
I have a cousin who speaks with a severe lisp. While he is both intelligent, talkative, and surprisingly articulate, some words he attempts to say, just sound comical. It's all we as family can do, NOT to laugh!
I know, it both sounds stupid and is stupid, but that's just how the human species is packaged.
Sorry!
Are you suggesting that the human species is packaged to regard open affection between homosexuals as disturbing?It's not about me, personally! It's about society and how it behaves towards others. It's about minority groups and how they are received by society at large. It's about how we all interact together, in the most healthful and helpful manner possible without anyone losing rights or privileges as a result.
I have a cousin who speaks with a severe lisp. While he is both intelligent, talkative, and surprisingly articulate, some words he attempts to say, just sound comical. It's all we as family can do, NOT to laugh!
I know, it both sounds stupid and is stupid, but that's just how the human species is packaged.
Sorry!
Are you suggesting that the human species is packaged to regard open affection between homosexuals as disturbing?