• 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!

Marine officer: Gays, straights shouldn't share housing

I am with those veteran's and active duty people who support allowing gays to serve openly. We have some of both, so you need to stop with the whole "you don't understand the military" crap.


My FRA lodge got a letter back that 200 of our 207 members signed asking that active duty members be allowed to resign and receive some type of annuity if DADT is overthrown......It was signed by the Under Secretary and he said if that happened they would look into it........I will try and get a copy at our next lodge meeting and post it her.............

As far as you knowing more vets then me.....I have forgotten more vets then you will ever know.........I won't get in a pissing contest with EX junior petty officer though.....Its undignified...........
 
My FRA lodge got a letter back that 200 of our 207 members signed asking that active duty members be allowed to resign and receive some type of annuity if DADT is overthrown......It was signed by the Under Secretary and he said if that happened they would look into it........I will try and get a copy at our next lodge meeting and post it her.............

As far as you knowing more vets then me.....I have forgotten more vets then you will ever know.........I won't get in a pissing contest with EX junior petty officer though.....Its undignified...........

Your FRA lodge is not going to have any luck with that. It just will not happen, nor should it. There is no basis for the military doing anything like that.

I never said I knew more vets. Why do you have to make stuff up?
 
Your FRA lodge is not going to have any luck with that. It just will not happen, nor should it. There is no basis for the military doing anything like that.

I never said I knew more vets. Why do you have to make stuff up?

No offense but I will stick with the word of the Under Secretary of Navy before yours OK..........

As far as vets go I really could not figure out what you were saying......
 
Last edited:
No offense but I will stick with the word of the Under Secretary of Navy before yours OK..........

As far as vets go I really could not figure out what you were saying......

What I am saying is you claim that vets oppose letting gays serve openly, but in point of fact, a fair number of support it.

The undersecretary of the Navy said he would "look into it". He may do just that, but it will not happen. Nowhere in the agreement to join any branch of the military does it say you will not have to serve with openly gay people.
 
What I am saying is you claim that vets oppose letting gays serve openly, but in point of fact, a fair number of support it.

The undersecretary of the Navy said he would "look into it". He may do just that, but it will not happen. Nowhere in the agreement to join any branch of the military does it say you will not have to serve with openly gay people.

well I think 200 out of 207 is a pretty big margin against it..........

We shall see what happens....If the active duty members are not treated with the respect they deserve if DADT is overthrown all of the FRAs might go together in a class action suit...........You see this a big thing to the Navy we love and served in..........stay tuned............
 
well I think 200 out of 207 is a pretty big margin against it..........

We shall see what happens....If the active duty members are not treated with the respect they deserve if DADT is overthrown all of the FRAs might go together in a class action suit...........You see this a big thing to the Navy we love and served in..........stay tuned............

I just have this hilarious mental image of that lawsuit.

Judge asks clerk what first case it today. Clerk says "well, we got this class action lawsuit filed on behalf of sailors, worried that some day, maybe, on occasion, possibly, under certain circumstances, it is not impossible that some one might check out their junk in the shower. They want any sailor who chooses to be allowed to get out with an honorable and separation pay."
 
I just have this hilarious mental image of that lawsuit.

Judge asks clerk what first case it today. Clerk says "well, we got this class action lawsuit filed on behalf of sailors, worried that some day, maybe, on occasion, possibly, under certain circumstances, it is not impossible that some one might check out their junk in the shower. They want any sailor who chooses to be allowed to get out with an honorable and separation pay."

Even though you served in the Navy for a short period of time you are really clueless about what it is all about......Like the naming of a brand new ship.....You could care less what they name it.......A lot of us know heroes who have died for this country and are much more deserving then somewhen who betrayed the military...........
 
Even though you served in the Navy for a short period of time you are really clueless about what it is all about......Like the naming of a brand new ship.....You could care less what they name it.......A lot of us know heroes who have died for this country and are much more deserving then somewhen who betrayed the military...........

And when all else fails, Navy falls right back to calling names and minimizing the service of others.
 
And when all else fails, Navy falls right back to calling names and minimizing the service of others.

If that offends you I apologize but all I can go by is what you type and when you basically say its no big deal what you name a ship or I don't care what how the straight guys feel about DADT if its overturned..Just get use to it..Then I can tell your clueless.........

Maybe its because aboard ship you were part of a transient squadron.....You were not ships company and have no idea how that feels..Your allegiance was to the squadron not to the ship you were on.......You might feel different otherwise.........

I had 2 AK2s working for me aboard the USS SACRAMENTO (AOE-1) who were also part of the Helo detachment......They were a lot like you in that they had no feel what it was like to be ships company.............
 
If that offends you I apologize but all I can go by is what you type and when you basically say its no big deal what you name a ship or I don't care what how the straight guys feel about DADT if its overturned..Just get use to it..Then I can tell your clueless.........

Maybe its because aboard ship you were part of a transient squadron.....You were not ships company and have no idea how that feels..Your allegiance was to the squadron not to the ship you were on.......You might feel different otherwise.........

I had 2 AK2s working for me aboard the USS SACRAMENTO (AOE-1) who were also part of the Helo detachment......They were a lot like you in that they had no feel what it was like to be ships company.............

Navy, I could have served aboard the Reagan and it would not have bothered me. Should democrats be excused from serving about ships named for republicans, or vice versa? The ship is important. It's history and tradition is important. The name is just what is painted on the side. And for some one who does not care about what other sailors think, I actually said if it bothered people, change it. Give it up, namecalling and putdowns are not debate Navy. And after this ****, I don't want to ever hear you bitch about people talking about you, your service, or going off topic again. It's hypocritical.
 
Navy, I could have served aboard the Reagan and it would not have bothered me. Should democrats be excused from serving about ships named for republicans, or vice versa? The ship is important. It's history and tradition is important. The name is just what is painted on the side. And for some one who does not care about what other sailors think, I actually said if it bothered people, change it. Give it up, namecalling and putdowns are not debate Navy. And after this ****, I don't want to ever hear you bitch about people talking about you, your service, or going off topic again. It's hypocritical.

Who said anything about democrats or republicans? :confused: You really have a complex redress........Lighten up........Regardless of what ship you were on you were a transient.......Everyone in your squadron was....You have no clue what its like to be ships company........The same as the 2 AK2s that worked for me...You can't change that............

If that bothers you its to bad...........
 
Who said anything about democrats or republicans? :confused: You really have a complex redress........Lighten up........Regardless of what ship you were on you were a transient.......Everyone in your squadron was....You have no clue what its like to be ships company........The same as the 2 AK2s that worked for me...You can't change that............

If that bothers you its to bad...........

Navy, you are, sadly, clueless about what you are speaking of. You are also hypocritical for going off topic when you tend to bitch at others for doing it, and you are hypocritical by making this about me, when you bitch at others for doing that.
 
Navy, you are, sadly, clueless about what you are speaking of. You are also hypocritical for going off topic when you tend to bitch at others for doing it, and you are hypocritical by making this about me, when you bitch at others for doing that.

All you do when you lose is try and make the topic about the other poster...You say the same thing to everyone ........I have a box for of PMs from other people on you and I try and defend you but I am done now............Find someone else to kibitz with young lady......Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
 
My FRA lodge got a letter back that 200 of our 207 members signed asking that active duty members be allowed to resign and receive some type of annuity if DADT is overthrown......It was signed by the Under Secretary and he said if that happened they would look into it........I will try and get a copy at our next lodge meeting and post it her.............

As far as you knowing more vets then me.....I have forgotten more vets then you will ever know.........I won't get in a pissing contest with EX junior petty officer though.....Its undignified...........

I have told you one major reason why this won't happen NP. It would be way too easy for many disgruntled sailors (or other service members), to just take advantage of such an offer without having any problem with gays whatsoever, they just want out of the military before their contract is up and still receive their honorable discharge. And if you offer them money to get out, you better believe there will be people lining up to take it that have absolutely no problem lying that they have some issue with being around openly gay people. The Navy, I know, offers some huge bonuses to rates that are severely undermanned. I could have reenlisted in 2008 for $60K or more. So it would be absolutely absurd for the military to offer compensation for people who may feel uncomfortable with a change in the military's rules a chance to get out with an honorable discharge and compensation, especially when the military would have to offer the discharge to all personnel, even in critical ratings/jobs.

Besides, NP, weren't you the one who was complaining about having to pay extra taxes if same-sex marriage was federally recognized? Yet now you are supporting an effort to try to get the government to pay millions in compensation to servicemembers who may or may not actually be uncomfortable living with someone who may find them attractive, even though with DADT every servicemember who joins knows that it this is possible now. Do you realize how much money the government would actually have to spend to pay those getting out and then to recruit and train more servicemembers to take their place?
 
I have told you one major reason why this won't happen NP. It would be way too easy for many disgruntled sailors (or other service members), to just take advantage of such an offer without having any problem with gays whatsoever, they just want out of the military before their contract is up and still receive their honorable discharge. And if you offer them money to get out, you better believe there will be people lining up to take it that have absolutely no problem lying that they have some issue with being around openly gay people. The Navy, I know, offers some huge bonuses to rates that are severely undermanned. I could have reenlisted in 2008 for $60K or more. So it would be absolutely absurd for the military to offer compensation for people who may feel uncomfortable with a change in the military's rules a chance to get out with an honorable discharge and compensation, especially when the military would have to offer the discharge to all personnel, even in critical ratings/jobs.

Besides, NP, weren't you the one who was complaining about having to pay extra taxes if same-sex marriage was federally recognized? Yet now you are supporting an effort to try to get the government to pay millions in compensation to servicemembers who may or may not actually be uncomfortable living with someone who may find them attractive, even though with DADT every servicemember who joins knows that it this is possible now. Do you realize how much money the government would actually have to spend to pay those getting out and then to recruit and train more servicemembers to take their place?

You don't know what is going to happen.............I don't either..............We both have and opinion........You side with the gays......I side with the straights...I can honestly tell you I would not to serve with gays openly and I know many guys that feel like me...........

Your right I am a conservative and I always want to cut spending and taxes......That said I also want to do what is eight for my shipmates...I truly believe in my heart of hearts that if this unwanted act is pushed at them then they should be allowed to resign and be compensated for it........especially the guys who have reenlisted and had planned to make the Navy a career.......Since this is Obama's and the lefts Idea (DADT) they better figure out how to pay for it................

The guys that joined in the future would know what they have to face.......I think recruiting would be really tough and you would probably have to institute a draft.........
 
All you do when you lose is try and make the topic about the other poster...You say the same thing to everyone ........I have a box for of PMs from other people on you and I try and defend you but I am done now............Find someone else to kibitz with young lady......Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Navy...you tried to make this about me, not the other way around.
 
I don't believe enlisted in the Navy aboard ship or Marines will ever accept gays serving openly in the military

Well, this is certainly something that is going to take a long time.

....If DADT is overturned then I believe their contract was violated and they should be given the opportunity to resign and paid a bonus upon their leaving......

DADT created problems. It actually damaged the services. With DADT, individuals (gay or straight) only had to announce sexual preference and they were processed. It became an easy out for many whether they were gay or not. The amount of NJPs and Court Martials skyrocketed in the 90s because DADT forced the military to address the issue instead of largely ignoring at as it once did.


.......You know as well as I do that the military is there for one reason and that is to fight our wars and protect us......It is not there for social experimentation......

Not experimentation, but it has been in the military where social growth has always led the way in America. While blacks were riding in the backs of busses in parts of America and before Affirmative Action, they were walking in patrols along side white men in Korea. And as the general population struggled with equality, blacks and white called each other brother in Vietnam. Women also pushed forward in the military long before they achieved status in the civilian sector. We had female commanders and bomber pilots long before it was frowned upon to slap your secretary on the ass. Today we have admirals and generals. How many female CEOs are there?

The point I am making is that because the military is an institution of obedience to orders, it is perfect for forcing social growth - not as an experiment, but as an inevitable move for an advancing society. Gays have been the exception. It's the military that lags this time.


I talk to enlisted people all the time and 90% of them hate the idea of DADT being lifted......They believe it will have a huge effect on morale and unit cohesion........

That's because to most military personel, DADT is all they know. Its a knee jerk reaction to the prospect of the future. DADT has been a pain in the ass. Before DADT, gays were just not discussed. After DADT, the subject became a burden because it was forced to the spotlight.

But they are correct. It will have a huge affect on morale and unit cohesion here and there. But for the most part, it won't because gays aren't going to throw themselves parades in front of their platoons.

I agree with the Commandant of the Marine Corps my friend..........

Well, I do too. But what are you agreeing with..........

"I would not ask our Marines to live with someone that's homosexual if we can possibly avoid it," Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway told a Web site in an interview posted Friday. "And to me that means we've got to build [barracks] that have single rooms."

Asked about the possibility of gay and straight Marines living together, Conway told the site Military.com that he would "want to preserve the right of a Marine that thinks he or she wouldn't want to do that -- and that's the overwhelming number of people that say they wouldn't like to do so."

Conway said the Marine Corps is the only branch of the armed services that houses two to a room. http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/03/26/marines.gay.housing/index.html



He didn't state that gays should not be allowed to join. What he stated was that the Marine Corps would have to deal with the issue in the barracks. A straight Marine will not get along with a gay Marine in the same room for the most part. There will have to be a degree of segregation for a while and this will affect morale and unit cohesion. The civilian's knee jerk reaction is to tell the straight Marine to suck it up or get out. But is this practical? Gays in the Marine Corps will not be very common. It is a very alpha male service and a very prescribed culture. Those kind of gays that will join will behave much like those gays who have already joined. They will not look for attention. But because we do have a distinct type of culture in the Corps, there will be hazings, beatings, and whatever else to come over this. This means fracturing units, Court Martials, and headaches for all. But this will pass. The integration of blacks in the Marine Corps, went from racial tension to racial joking. We throw jokes back and forth and drink beers over it. Eventually, gays will be enjoying the jokes too.

In my opinion, it is probably too soon for this to happen. But how long do we deny the inevitable?
 
Last edited:
Even though you served in the Navy for a short period of time you are really clueless about what it is all about......Like the naming of a brand new ship.....You could care less what they name it.......A lot of us know heroes who have died for this country and are much more deserving then somewhen who betrayed the military...........

Navy....once again....demeaning the military service of someone he disagrees with.

Navy Supports the military as long as you agree with him. If you don't....he is the biggest disser of the military there is.
 
There comes a point where straight people are just gonna have to get over it. I mean come on!
 
Well, this is certainly something that is going to take a long time

Your right and there will be a lot of problems along the way.....There will be violence against gays and vice versa....It will affect unit cohesion and morale..I don't envy you my friend if this comes to pass.........I am hoping they will come to their senses when they see how enlisted feel about this.....

DADT created problems. It actually damaged the services. With DADT, individuals (gay or straight) only had to announce sexual preference and they were processed. It became an easy out for many whether they were gay or not. The amount of NJPs and Court Martials skyrocketed in the 90s because DADT forced the military to address the issue instead of largely ignoring at as it once did.

I know it did...They should go back to the way it was when I enlisted..They flat asked you and if you lied and later they found out you were discharged with a UD or a BCD...

Not experimentation, but it has been in the military where social growth has always led the way in America. While blacks were riding in the backs of busses in parts of America and before Affirmative Action, they were walking in patrols along side white men in Korea. And as the general population struggled with equality, blacks and white called each other brother in Vietnam. Women also pushed forward in the military long before they achieved status in the civilian sector. We had female commanders and bomber pilots long before it was frowned upon to slap your secretary on the ass. Today we have admirals and generals. How many female CEOs are there?

The point I am making is that because the military is an institution of obedience to orders, it is perfect for forcing social growth - not as an experiment, but as an inevitable move for an advancing society. Gays have been the exception. It's the military that lags this time.

I am sorry I can never compare what happened to black and gays......I enlisted in 1956.....We had black guys in my division and department and there never was a problem.....Its not really the same.......In my 22 years in the Navy I have seen gays make unwanted advances against straights.......

[That's because to most military personel, DADT is all they know. Its a knee jerk reaction to the prospect of the future. DADT has been a pain in the ass. Before DADT, gays were just not discussed. After DADT, the subject became a burden because it was forced to the spotlight.

But they are correct. It will have a huge affect on morale and unit cohesion here and there. But for the most part, it won't because gays aren't going to throw themselves parades in front of their platoons. /QUOTE]

And in a time when we are fighting 2 wars....Its just flat dumb........


Well, I do too. But what are you agreeing with..........


I know that off the record the Commandant feels as we do......Off the record most senior officers feel that way but they know if they speak up its their career.........I don't talk to senior officers that much but I do talk to senior enlisted and they say this will not work.........

And I am adamant that if they ram this through then any enlisted career man should be given the option of retiring and be paid a separation bonus......


Lifting DADT will effect Marines and shipboard navy people more then anyone else.......
 
There comes a point where straight people are just gonna have to get over it. I mean come on!

It's funny how you can substitute a few words and get exactly the same debate over race from 50 or so years ago. Watch:

There comes a point where white people are just gonna have to get over it. I mean come on!

I have yet to see an argument against gays in the military that wasn't used against blacks in the military, or women.
 
You don't know what is going to happen.............I don't either..............We both have and opinion........You side with the gays......I side with the straights...I can honestly tell you I would not to serve with gays openly and I know many guys that feel like me...........

Your right I am a conservative and I always want to cut spending and taxes......That said I also want to do what is eight for my shipmates...I truly believe in my heart of hearts that if this unwanted act is pushed at them then they should be allowed to resign and be compensated for it........especially the guys who have reenlisted and had planned to make the Navy a career.......Since this is Obama's and the lefts Idea (DADT) they better figure out how to pay for it................

The guys that joined in the future would know what they have to face.......I think recruiting would be really tough and you would probably have to institute a draft.........

I know this is going to happen for two reasons NP. I was a nuke. I know nukes. First, even in school, we had nukes who would sign the paperwork saying they were gay just to get out. After my class lost 5 people in two or three weeks to this, our class Master Chief told us that the next person who came to his office to sign paperwork saying he was gay (all the ones who had signed the paperwork were male), would have to call their mother right there in front of the Master Chief and tell her that they were gay and that is why they were getting out of the Navy. After that, no one else signed the paperwork. Second, I had a conversation with one of the nukes in my division that amounted to him trying to figure out ways that he could get out of the Navy before his contract was up, but still be able to keep his honorable discharge. He was severely stressed out, and just wanted to be out of the Navy. We had openly gay men in our department. No one cared. But I guarantee you that if you even just offered personnel a chance to get out before their contract was up, without compensation, you would have plenty of people, especially nukes, that would take the offer while not actually having any problem serving with gays. And with compensation, you would be lucky if we had enough personnel left to operate half of our ships. I bet you would even have a lot of homosexual personnel taking the offer.

Also, this offer wasn't even talked about when men had to start serving with women, so I don't know why you think that this is a good idea or some right of any of our servicemembers. We do not sign a contract that says that we will not have to serve with people we are uncomfortable with. No one signs a contract to be in the military that says current rules of the military cannot be changed while you are in the military, or you can get out and be compensated. I think you are grasping at straws here NP.
 
I know this is going to happen for two reasons NP. I was a nuke. I know nukes. First, even in school, we had nukes who would sign the paperwork saying they were gay just to get out. After my class lost 5 people in two or three weeks to this, our class Master Chief told us that the next person who came to his office to sign paperwork saying he was gay (all the ones who had signed the paperwork were male), would have to call their mother right there in front of the Master Chief and tell her that they were gay and that is why they were getting out of the Navy. After that, no one else signed the paperwork. Second, I had a conversation with one of the nukes in my division that amounted to him trying to figure out ways that he could get out of the Navy before his contract was up, but still be able to keep his honorable discharge. He was severely stressed out, and just wanted to be out of the Navy. We had openly gay men in our department. No one cared. But I guarantee you that if you even just offered personnel a chance to get out before their contract was up, without compensation, you would have plenty of people, especially nukes, that would take the offer while not actually having any problem serving with gays. And with compensation, you would be lucky if we had enough personnel left to operate half of our ships. I bet you would even have a lot of homosexual personnel taking the offer.

Also, this offer wasn't even talked about when men had to start serving with women, so I don't know why you think that this is a good idea or some right of any of our servicemembers. We do not sign a contract that says that we will not have to serve with people we are uncomfortable with. No one signs a contract to be in the military that says current rules of the military cannot be changed while you are in the military, or you can get out and be compensated. I think you are grasping at straws here NP.



As far as allowing men serving with women aboard ship I expect that was a very popular decision for the young enlisted in the Navy.......Gays serving openly is a different matter..........

Of course Nukes would like to get out early.....They got all that free schooling and now want to go on the outside and take advantage of it......
 
Back
Top Bottom