• 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!

House approves repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell'(edited)

I would have Rachel Maddow's reverse-babies. Smart is hot.

reverse babies-you would want her to get YOU pregnant? strange, that's really strange

maybe some swedish doctor could make it happen though!
 
then go for Pam Karlan. LIke MadCow she is a lesbian. But she is much much smarter. It isn't close. She was a Junior Phi Beta Kappa at Yale, a supreme court clerk and considered one of the best far left law professors in the USA. She's also prettier than madcow. In college she had a crush on my suite mate (who got a Rhodes BTW). I was sort of shocked when she told me when I ran into her at a lecture she did at the local law school that she was a lesbian.

I hate you and your Ivy League life. :2razz:
 
I hate you and your Ivy League life. :2razz:

that life ended say 25 years ago. My wife isn't ivy. my friends aren't Ivy (for the most part). true both my brothers each have two Ivy degrees as does one sister in law but most of my friends come from the shooting sports and several never went to college.
 
that life ended say 25 years ago. My wife isn't ivy. my friends aren't Ivy (for the most part). true both my brothers each have two Ivy degrees as does one sister in law but most of my friends come from the shooting sports and several never went to college.

I wouldn't care about that. In fact, I'd probably surround myself with non-Ivy league people. The best I hope now is that I can get my kids there. It's cool. I'll just stew in jealousy a little longer.
 
I am secure enough in my manhood to say such things.

I am trying to figure out the biological possibility of your desires.
 
I am trying to figure out the biological possibility of your desires.

I didn't say it was a desire. I said I would do it.

If she, you know, asked me to or something.
 
I didn't say it was a desire. I said I would do it.

If she, you know, asked me to or something.

I think he's wondering how in the hell it would even be possible, without surgical modifications beyond the level we can accomplish at this time (that I am aware of, at least)...
 
dadt's movement today, fyi:

we all saw yesterday the quite surprising development that saw reid surrender on the omnibus, removing the threat of hot warfare which would surely see dadt (and dream and start) held hostage

reid's removing that foul fight off his floor was sposed to clear the way

but today the party of no has found a new brouhaha---start

start passed procedurals wednesday with the exact 67 a treaty needs to be ratified

however, marverick mccain and limber lindsey graham, two of the 67, are this morning all a-moan

their hassle is harry's pushing dream and dadt up for passage saturday morning, or so reid says

it's all very political, bear with me

mccain and graham are trashing it thus: start is serious business, it deserves debate and airing, harry's hustling these openly political blueprints is, well:

“The talks are lines that if you were serious about foreign policy, we would focus on it in a serious way,” said Graham. “And the idea of having a debate on a major treaty regarding nuclear arms between now and Christmas and dealing with the 9/11 bill, the DREAM Act, repealing ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ with no amendments is inconsistent with that.”

you all know mccain

but lindsey, who's sposed to be so limp wristed, was republican point man for 2 years on TWO of our nation's most hi profile politicals---energy and immigration

and the deliberate drawler dealt death to both, to the great satisfaction of lipton lovers everywhere

ie, i would not take the threats of these two men too lightly

it very well might be that harry (on behalf of whom) is gonna have to choose between his dadt and his start

by all accounts, dream is a dreary load

now, what's quite odd in all this is how obama has stated repeatedly that start is his top priority in the duck

it doesn't make sense, as that particular parlay with putin is easy pickings in the spring, boehner's house is not needed for ratification, republicans led by lugar are eager, all they demand is open air

but it is what it is, obama had his reasons

Momentum builds in Senate for 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal - Scott Wong - POLITICO.com

Republicans threaten to derail START - Shira Toeplitz - POLITICO.com

stay up
 
Last edited:
dadt's movement today, fyi:

we all saw yesterday the quite surprising development that saw reid surrender on the omnibus, removing the threat of hot warfare which would surely see dadt (and dream and start) held hostage

reid's removing that foul fight off his floor was sposed to clear the way

but today the party of no has found a new brouhaha---start

start passed procedurals wednesday with the exact 67 a treaty needs to be ratified

however, marverick mccain and limber lindsey graham, two of the 67, are this morning all a-moan

their hassle is harry's pushing dream and dadt up for passage saturday morning, or so reid says

it's all very political, bear with me

mccain and graham are trashing it thus: start is serious business, it deserves debate and airing, harry's hustling these openly political blueprints is, well:



you all know mccain

but lindsey, who's sposed to be so limp wristed, was republican point man for 2 years on TWO of our nation's most hi profile politicals---energy and immigration

and the deliberate drawler dealt death to both, to the great satisfaction of lipton lovers everywhere

ie, i would not take the threats of these two men too lightly

it very well might be that harry (on behalf of whom) is gonna have to choose between his dadt and his start

by all accounts, dream is a dreary load

now, what's quite odd in all this is how obama has stated repeatedly that start is his top priority in the duck

it doesn't make sense, as that particular parlay with putin is easy pickings in the spring, boehner's house is not needed for ratification, republicans led by lugar are eager, all they demand is open air

but it is what it is, obama had his reasons

Momentum builds in Senate for 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal - Scott Wong - POLITICO.com

Republicans threaten to derail START - Shira Toeplitz - POLITICO.com

stay up


I personally think that the DADT needs to be ammended, NOT appealed! If it does get completely appealed, there's going to be violence and diffraction within every area of the military.

Homosexuality is NOT that widely accepted within our society yet. Let's just keep it under the radar and act like we don't see the slip hanging, even if it IS hanging just a tad...
 
I personally think that the DADT needs to be ammended, NOT appealed! If it does get completely appealed, there's going to be violence and diffraction within every area of the military.

All evidence points to this not being the case. It has not happened in other militaries that have made the change. No one has yet to point to any actual positive evidence it will happen. It is an emotional fear, nothing more.

Homosexuality is NOT that widely accepted within our society yet. Let's just keep it under the radar and act like we don't see the slip hanging, even if it IS hanging just a tad...

I don't agree. Even 20 years ago you might have had a point about homosexuality being accepted, but I don't think you do today. Polling on the issue suggests strongly that gays are fairly well accepted these days.
 
All evidence points to this not being the case. It has not happened in other militaries that have made the change. No one has yet to point to any actual positive evidence it will happen. It is an emotional fear, nothing more.



I don't agree. Even 20 years ago you might have had a point about homosexuality being accepted, but I don't think you do today. Polling on the issue suggests strongly that gays are fairly well accepted these days.

Both gays and transgenders are still being openly attacked in broad daylight on our city streets! They remain large targets for employment discrimination.

As a society, we've made some improvement of note. However, we're still nowhere near the finishline. We're not even at the midpoint, yet.

Do you have any idea about the actual depths of ignorance concerning gender variance and sexual orientation within this country?

Not to mention the fact that many of our male youth join the military for confirmation of manhood, development of higher self-esteem, and improvement upon self-identity imagery.

Fewer enlistees will enlist due to fear of proximity with gays because as we all know, it easily rubs off!
 
Re: DADT repeal still has a shot!

Remember, the will of the people is tantamount, unless the people are wrong--conservative logic.

Liberal logic says the people are always wrong.
 
Both gays and transgenders are still being openly attacked in broad daylight on our city streets! They remain large targets for employment discrimination.

As a society, we've made some improvement of note. However, we're still nowhere near the finishline. We're not even at the midpoint, yet.

Do you have any idea about the actual depths of ignorance concerning gender variance and sexual orientation within this country?

Not to mention the fact that many of our male youth join the military for confirmation of manhood, development of higher self-esteem, and improvement upon self-identity imagery.

Fewer enlistees will enlist due to fear of proximity with gays because as we all know, it easily rubs off!

First of all, how often are gays or transgendered people being attacked in the middle of the day in the US? I haven't heard of too many cases of that happening. And, are gays and transgendered people the only ones who are ever attacked like that in the US in broad daylight? I think that you need to back this claim up with some evidence.

Also, why should we allow fear of violence to keep us from ensuring that everyone is able to be treated fair and equally? Especially in a case like this, where if a homosexual person honestly doesn't want to take the risk of violence against him/her, then all they have to do is not reveal their sexuality to others. The repeal of DADT does not mean that homosexuals will have to tell what sexuality they are. It means that they can tell if they wish to do so without fearing discharge or other punishment, just like heterosexuals now.

I highly doubt that retention or recruitment will go down due to gays being allowed to serve openly in our military. Our military is already turning people away except for certain jobs. And most of the branches will not take most prior service veterans, unless their previous job is extremely undermanned. To add to all of this, our economy is crappy right now. If someone is going to give up a good job with good benefits because they may have to work/live with gays, then they are not exactly making good career choices. Most civilians are for the repeal of DADT, and the younger generations are for it more in greater numbers than older generations. Those younger generations are the ones who are going to be the recruits.

Last, both young men and women join the military for many different reasons, and most people join for more than just one reason. I don't personally see how allowing gays to serve openly would take away from a guy in the military being able to feel "more manly".
 
All large cities have police departments where you can conveniently contact them yourself and find out how frequently our gay and transgender youth are being attacked. They're being attacked, verbally, physically, and via the internet. C'mon! Where have you been?
Haven't you heard about all of the bullying going on within our schools. Even the teachers and staff have taken an offensive role in attacking our sexual minority kids.

Openly gay males will have more than their share of both blatant resentment and violence demonstrated against them. There are males who would only be so happy, as to smoother any of them in their sleep. Many will consider it an absolute dishonor to serve along side of a shipmate who is openly gay. Some will consider it a slap in the face to have to share the same berthing areas with men who are openly gay. They will resent standing near them while relieving themselves in the restroom. If they serve in the same combat unit during missions, beware! Trust me, I've personally sat in on the ignorance. I know exactly how deep and vast is the ignorance deposit.

It's truly ubiquitous! And I Ain't Kiddin' Either!

At the risk of sounding Neanderthalic, all I can say is the following:

If we're still going to be stupid enough to have wars, then men as warriors want to be led by other men who can be though of as strong leaders. Most American men would have a problem seeing a gay male as that strong leader.

Most warriors want to be led by the fearless, the courageous, and the ruthless. Most American men would have a problem seeing a gay male in that manner.

Finally, most men feel as though they want to belong to a strong group. They look for every link within the chain to be at least as "strong" as they are "strong". Warriors feel as though men draw strength from other men. If they should weaken for just an instant, they want to have the assurance that they can rely upon their brothers for a perk in the inspiration war rage, crazed bloodletting, and the concentrated, testosterone-filled drive to kill, maim, and destroy all opposed members facing them. Once they see this element within others, they then feel inspired to do the same. Most military men don't feel that they could rely upon gays feeling that way about it.
 
Last edited:
Both gays and transgenders are still being openly attacked in broad daylight on our city streets! They remain large targets for employment discrimination.

Strait people are attacked in broad daylight on our city streets. Nothing is 100 % safe, and some people will always attack those different from them. It is not a significant problem. Gay people don't live in fear of attack for being gay, as such attacks are rare.

As a society, we've made some improvement of note. However, we're still nowhere near the finishline. We're not even at the midpoint, yet.

We are well past the midpoint. When I was a kid and my mother came out, she was treated like complete **** by every one. My half brother(same father different mother) now does not even comprehend why people would treat gays differently, nor do people of his generation. He is a mere 13 years younger than I. Gays are considered if not normal, at least unthreatening and perfectly acceptable by the majority of people.

Do you have any idea about the actual depths of ignorance concerning gender variance and sexual orientation within this country?

Yes, and it is nothing like what it was. When I was a kid, people worried I would catch teh gay from my mom.

Not to mention the fact that many of our male youth join the military for confirmation of manhood, development of higher self-esteem, and improvement upon self-identity imagery.

All fine reasons to enlist, both for straits and gays.

Fewer enlistees will enlist due to fear of proximity with gays because as we all know, it easily rubs off!

I don't think hardly any one believes that any more.
 
Re: DADT repeal still has a shot!

Liberal logic says the people are always wrong.

Actually, it's this artificial notion of the "will of the people" that conservatives have created. The will of the people is the United States Constitution. There is no other will of the people in this country. There is the will of the majority of voters, but that is not the will of the people. That is 51% of the people imposing their will on 49%. You don't get to pretend that 49% of voters are not part of the "people" just because they were not part of the majority. As far as whether you believe a majority is right or wrong, that usually depends on what side of the majority you were on.
 
All large cities have police departments where you can conveniently contact them yourself and find out how frequently our gay and transgender youth are being attacked. They're being attacked, verbally, physically, and via the internet. C'mon! Where have you been?
Haven't you heard about all of the bullying going on within our schools. Even the teachers and staff have taken an offensive role in attacking our sexual minority kids.

Openly gay males will have more than their share of both blatant resentment and violence demonstrated against them. There are males who would only be so happy, as to smoother any of them in their sleep. Many will consider it an absolute dishonor to serve along side of a shipmate who is openly gay. Some will consider it a slap in the face to have to share the same berthing areas with men who are openly gay. They will resent standing near them while relieving themselves in the restroom. If they serve in the same combat unit during missions, beware! Trust me, I've personally sat in on the ignorance. I know exactly how deep and vast is the ignorance deposit.

It's truly ubiquitous! And I Ain't Kiddin' Either!

At the risk of sounding Neanderthalic, all I can say is the following:

If we're still going to be stupid enough to have wars, then men as warriors want to be led by other men who can be though of as strong leaders. Most American men would have a problem seeing a gay male as that strong leader.

Most warriors want to be led by the fearless, the courageous, and the ruthless. Most American men would have a problem seeing a gay male in that manner.

Finally, most men feel as though they want to belong to a strong group. They look for every link within the chain to be at least as "strong" as they are "strong". Warriors feel as though men draw strength from other men. If they should weaken for just an instant, they want to have the assurance that they can rely upon their brothers for a perk in the inspiration war rage, crazed bloodletting, and the concentrated, testosterone-filled drive to kill, maim, and destroy all opposed members facing them. Once they see this element within others, they then feel inspired to do the same. Most military men don't feel that they could rely upon gays feeling that way about it.

According to the FBI, there was a total of 1223 crimes motivated by sexual orientation in 2009. Compare that to 3199 by race. Should we disallow other races to serve because of the risk of racial violence?

Table 1 - Hate Crime Statistics 2009
 
Re: DADT repeal still has a shot!

Liberal logic says the people are always wrong.

Well, as long as we're making up bull****, conservatives think all poor people are poor because they're stupid and inferior!
 
According to the FBI, there was a total of 1223 crimes motivated by sexual orientation in 2009. Compare that to 3199 by race. Should we disallow other races to serve because of the risk of racial violence?

Table 1 - Hate Crime Statistics 2009


The only problem with that statistic, is that sex orientation crimes and transgender related crimes are much less likely to get reported.

When a black or latino is attacked, there are multitudes of fellow community members ready to stand up in their defense, while all the while identifying with the predicament.

Many gays feel as though if they weren't so mess up in the first place, nobody would have bothered them. They therefore, feel as though they brought the attack on by themselves. Another thing is that many gays are still in the closet. If not in the closet for all, they are at least in the closet insofar as employment is concerned. Some gays have been harassed by the police and therefore, tend to steer clear of law enforcement.
 
Re: DADT repeal still has a shot!

Well, as long as we're making up bull****, conservatives think all poor people are poor because they're stupid and inferior!

Wow!!! You really dove into the deep end of all the BS, that time!!!
 
The only problem with that statistic, is that sex orientation crimes and transgender related crimes are much less likely to get reported.

When a black or latino is attacked, there are multitudes of fellow community members ready to stand up in their defense, while all the while identifying with the predicament.

Many gays feel as though if they weren't so mess up in the first place, nobody would have bothered them. They therefore, feel as though they brought the attack on by themselves. Another thing is that many gays are still in the closet. If not in the closet for all, they are at least in the closet insofar as employment is concerned. Some gays have been harassed by the police and therefore, tend to steer clear of law enforcement.

This is entirely and completely false. Feel free to try and offer some kind of evidence to back it up. You seem to have no idea what gays are like.
 
Back
Top Bottom