• 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!

Obama to End Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy

independent_thinker2002 said:
You keep saying "gradually". I ask for clarification and you get out your thesaurus. It's either they are open about their sexual preference or they aren't. I don't know what you mean by gradual change.

Will it start by allowing them to say, "Sir, fabulous, sir!"?
Click to expand...

Well I'm not an expert on army procedure. Gradual could be that the rule is relaxed in some areas and not in others or for serving soldiers and not for recruits. So as one can be cautious.
 
Shewter said:
What the **** does that have to do with the topic?

Please keep your douchebaggery to yourself. :roll:
Click to expand...

Homosexuality is a dangerous lifestyle choice and not something we should use the military to experiment with nor to help normalize.

How are your comments relevant to the discussion?
 
The silenced majority said:
Homosexuality is a dangerous lifestyle choice and not something we should use the military to experiment with nor to help normalize.

How are your comments relevant to the discussion?
Click to expand...

The discussion has nothing to do with homosexuality being experimented with in the military.

If you think gay people are not in the military at the moment then you are one of the dumbest people to post in this thread.


Once again, you posting some "southernvoice" "Statistic" about siphilis and gay men have nothing to do with keeping or not keeping DADT.

By the way everyone, my new years resolution is to find a way to implement a lifeguard system in the gene pool.
 
Shewter said:
The discussion has nothing to do with homosexuality being experimented with in the military.
Click to expand...

What in your opinion would ending the "don't ask don't tell" policy be then?

People in the military will now be free to be openly gay. It's an experiment. Because it is an experiment, the military may or may not be destroyed or strengthened by it.

Homosexuality among men is generally a very dangerous lifestyle.

My non-membership to their identity-group doesn't change reality.

If you think gay people are not in the military at the moment then you are one of the dumbest people to post in this thread.
Click to expand...

Yeah & that's fine if they keep it to themselves. If it aint broke...

Once again, you posting some "southernvoice" "Statistic" about siphilis and gay men have nothing to do with keeping or not keeping DADT.
Click to expand...

Ending DADT would be a step toward normalizing a lifestyle choice that is dangerous health-wise. for men.

By the way everyone, my new years resolution is to find a way to implement a lifeguard system in the gene pool.
Click to expand...

Take your thing, put an ice-cube on it for an hour & use a very sharp pair of pruning shears.

Really insults is all you have at the end.

Insults and ridicule.
 
Last edited:
Hey Silenced, have you served in the military? If not, please do us all a favor and stick to your civil homophobic behavior.

Even some conservatives here that HAVE served in the military have said the DADT should be taken away, it is just a matter of whether it should be done in peace time or now.

There is a differences between Gays that have or are seriving in the military and Gays that are in the civilian world and never served, just as there is a differences between heterosexuals that have served or are serving in the military and heterosexuals that have not.
 
Last edited:
TheNextEra said:
Hey Silenced, have you served in the military? If not, please do us all a favor and stick to your civil homophobic behavior.
Click to expand...

Hey Nextera, have you ever served in the military? If not, do us all a favor and stick your politically correct identity-group phony grievance

Even some conservatives here that HAVE served in the military have said the DADT should be taken away, it is just a matter of whether it should be done in peace time or now.
Click to expand...

This is a dumb road to go down. Is this a military only forum? If so, I'll leave.

It doesn't matter what they think anyhow, I'm, entitled to my opinion.

Homosexuals acting as an identity group (just like any other left-wing identity-group) constantly couch their gripe with traditional culture as a civil right which they are being denied. If you stand opposed to their attempts to use their group-identity to make demands society, expect to be ridiculed, called a homophobe etc...:2razz:
 
RightOfCenter said:
Not that it should matter, but I believe he has. Or so he's said anyway.
Click to expand...


Well, he can stick his politically correct identity-group phony grievance anyhow.

There must be something really wrong with our society to need all these little identity-groups there to use the government to create the type of society they want.

Any Libertarian who disagrees with that, isn't a Libertarian.
 
RightOfCenter said:
Not that it should matter, but I believe he has. Or so he's said anyway.
Click to expand...


Well, he can stick his politically correct identity-group phony grievance anyhow.

There must be something really wrong with our society to need all these little identity-groups there to use the government to create the type of society they want.

Any Libertarian who disagrees with that, isn't a Libertarian.
 
FTR I'm thankful to everyone who has ever served in the US military.


Don't shoot me because I believe that people are individualistic by nature and do not need their opinions made for them according to their group-status.
 
The silenced majority said:
Hey Nextera, have you ever served in the military? If not, do us all a favor and stick your politically correct identity-group phony grievance
Click to expand...

Yes, I am retired Army, TYVM. Any more questions?

The silenced majority said:
This is a dumb road to go down. Is this a military only forum? If so, I'll leave.

It doesn't matter what they think anyhow, I'm, entitled to my opinion.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion, but if you do not understand the working of the military or the actions of someone in the military your opinion, is well........just that, an opinion, and not based on experience.

I was in the military and was in a unit where I served with a homosexual and frankly, was someone I could rely on in combat if need be.

So your homophobic nonsense is well just that, nonsense.
 
The silenced majority said:
FTR I'm thankful to everyone who has ever served in the US military.


Don't shoot me because I believe that people are individualistic by nature and do not need their opinions made for them according to their group-status.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree with that, man is a social creature and the intermediate, small-scale associations that long made up his everyday life such as family, work/gild, church and local community are very important to the formation of individual personality, meaning and freedom and to the creation of social order. It is the decline of these, the decline of community, that has caused many of the problems of modern society.

To quote Robert Nisbet.

Conservatives, from Burke on, have tended to see the population much in the manner medieval legists and philosophical realists (in contrast to nominalists) saw it: as composed of, not individuals directly, but the natural groups within which individuals invariably live: family, locality, church, region, social class, nation, and so on. Individuals exist, of course, but they cannot be seen or comprehended save in terms of social identities which are inseparable from groups and associations.

Of course this is different to the PC idiocy that has arisen since the 60s where rights for every "disadvantaged" and yet often non-meaningfully socially connected minority have occupied the minds of so many authoritarian or PC liberals. But one should not throw the baby out with the bath water, atomistic individualism is not a good thing.
 
Last edited:
The silenced majority said:
What in your opinion would ending the "don't ask don't tell" policy be then?
Click to expand...

Allowing them to inform others of their preference.

People in the military will now be free to be openly gay. It's an experiment. Because it is an experiment, the military may or may not be destroyed or strengthened by it.
Click to expand...

I'll accept that.

Homosexuality among men is generally a very dangerous lifestyle.

My non-membership to their identity-group doesn't change reality.
Click to expand...

Homosexuality among men is no more dangerous than heterosexuality. Women have the same orifices and more.



Yeah & that's fine if they keep it to themselves. If it aint broke...
Click to expand...

So you are only opposed to them letting people know they're gay?



Ending DADT would be a step toward normalizing a lifestyle choice that is dangerous health-wise. for men.
Click to expand...

Dangerous how? Once again it is no more dangerous than a heterosexual lifestyle.



Take your thing, put an ice-cube on it for an hour & use a very sharp pair of pruning shears.

Really insults is all you have at the end.

Insults and ridicule.
Click to expand...

You brought an irrelevant post to the table talking about STDs among gay men. We aren't talking about homosexuality and what it brings, we are talking about a policy that asks people NOT to state their sexual preference. You took it upon yourself to take it beyond the debate, the ridicule and insults should be expected, seeing how you arent taking this debate seriously either.
 
The silenced majority said:
Well, he can stick his politically correct identity-group phony grievance anyhow.

There must be something really wrong with our society to need all these little identity-groups there to use the government to create the type of society they want.

Any Libertarian who disagrees with that, isn't a Libertarian.
Click to expand...

And what does this have to do with not allowing gays to serve openly in the military?
 
The funny thing is that, if the US "bans" openly gay military personnel because of possible "sexual" advances and such things, then they should really also ban females (or males) from the military, since there is sexual tension there too!...

How about cutting off the balls of all soldiers like we do with dogs, so they wont think that much about sex, since it seems to be such a big problem? :shock:
 
Some of you are talking about homosexuals as if they are a different species. My god, folks, they are simply people like all of us. I've known dozens of homosexuals... some I liked immensely, some I disliked immensely, not because of their sexual preference but because of who they were as individuals.

To prevent homosexuals from serving in the military is simply legalized bigotry and blatant discrimination. There's no other definition of it. How can a nation evolve while a segment of society is being ostracized and discriminated against? The simple answer is that it can't.

This is all so damned simple. I honestly can't comprehend why so many are terrified to accept all individuals for what they are, rather than debase them because of their sexual orientation... or their gender or race, for that matter. There's no difference to me. There should be no difference under the law.
 
DiAnna said:
How can a nation evolve while a segment of society is being ostracized and discriminated against? The simple answer is that it can't.
Click to expand...
You mean like muggers and murderers are?

I think you need to choose your words better. Discrimination is not necessarily a bad thing.

I don't mean to imply anything about homosexuals here, just the loose reasoning.
 
Last edited:
Wessexman said:
You mean like muggers and murderers are?

I think you need to choose your words better. Discrimination is not necessarily a bad thing.

I don't mean to imply anything about homosexuals here, just the loose reasoning.
Click to expand...

Of course you meant to imply something about homosexuals. You just equated them with muggers and murderers, as if sexual preference that doesn't fit your personal mold is some kind of violent crime.

I think YOU need to choose your words better. *disgusted*
 
DiAnna said:
Of course you meant to imply something about homosexuals. You just equated them with muggers and murderers, as if sexual preference that doesn't fit your personal mold is some kind of violent crime.

I think YOU need to choose your words better. *disgusted*
Click to expand...

:rofl

Haha nice attempt to cover yourself but it is very transparent.

I didn't mention anything about the issue at hand, I was talking about your argument. Your argument could be applied in many circumstances and is wrong. Discrimination is certainly not always bad. That is all I said, that is all I meant, keep your defamatory opinions about my motives to yourself.
 
Wessexman said:
:rofl

Haha nice attempt to cover yourself but it is very transparent.

I didn't mention anything about the issue at hand, I was talking about your argument. Your argument could be applied in many circumstances and is wrong. Discrimination is certainly not always bad. That is all I said, that is all I meant, keep your defamatory opinions about my motives to yourself.
Click to expand...


Disingenuous, inflammatory and thoroughly unpleasant flamebait. If you don't have a rudimentory understanding of language, then it's not my problem. I won't respond to someone who is dishonest, unkind and manipulative. If you want to discuss the topic openly, let me know. Otherwise, bye.
 
DiAnna said:
Disingenuous, inflammatory and thoroughly unpleasant flamebait. If you don't have a rudimentory understanding of language, then it's not my problem. I won't respond to someone who is dishonest, unkind and manipulative. If you want to discuss the topic openly, let me know. Otherwise, bye.
Click to expand...

:rofl

Wtf? I question your argument and you accuse me of all sorts of things and then have a tantrum and run away.

These posts of yours really are absurd.
 
Last edited:
DiAnna said:
Disingenuous, inflammatory and thoroughly unpleasant flamebait. If you don't have a rudimentory understanding of language, then it's not my problem. I won't respond to someone who is dishonest, unkind and manipulative. If you want to discuss the topic openly, let me know. Otherwise, bye.
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Please simmer down with the personal attacks.
 
The silenced majority said:
Ending DADT would be a step toward normalizing a lifestyle choice that is dangerous health-wise. for men.
Click to expand...

That is idiotic. Do you think that smokers and drinkers should be banned from serving in the military? No? Then STFU. Kthxbai!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom