• 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 call for 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal, adviser says

Redress said:
Navy, she was groped and fondled against her will. The actions that ruined those reputations where the actions of those who acted inappropriately.

Now, can you prove that there was no sexual harassment in the navy before women could do ship duty as you claimed?
Click to expand...

I told you she just happened to bein the wrong place at the wrong time......She was naive and it was her first time at tailhook and she did not know what was ging one there and that a bunch of naval aviators (Both men and women) got drunk and partied..............

If you did not have women aboard ship then you tell me how there can be sexual harrassment?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
No one has a "civil right" to wear the nation's uniform.

People are rejected all the time for physical infirmities and behavioral issues.

Homosexuality is a behavioral issue.
Click to expand...

Being in the military is a privilege not a right..........
 
Redress said:
Yes that is sexual harassment. Now about that claim you made...
Click to expand...

what claim was that? you have to understand I am arguing with about 10 of you lefties at the same time most who have never served this country and have no clue what its like to be stationed aboard ship and I am not talking about a floating city that has all the comforts of home..........

Some of us served where there were no computers, email or phones to call home..........where if the mail caught up with you that you might get a letter once a month from your family.........
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
I told you she just happened to bein the wrong place at the wrong time......She was naive and it was her first time at tailhook and she did not know what was ging one there and that a bunch of naval aviators (Both men and women) got drunk and partied..............

If you did not have women aboard ship then you tell me how there can be sexual harrassment?
Click to expand...

Navy, drunk is not an excuse. She was forcibly groped and fondled. There is no way to spin that into something minor.
 
Navy Pride said:
Did you know that before they allowed women aboard ships we had no cses of sexual harrassment now every time a guy looks at a woman its sexual harrassment.............
Click to expand...

Navy Pride said:
what claim was that?
Click to expand...

I am willing to bet that before women could serve on ship, there was sexual harassment. You made the claim, not back it up.
 
Redress said:
Navy, drunk is not an excuse. She was forcibly groped and fondled. There is no way to spin that into something minor.
Click to expand...

According to Navy...the vast majority of men cannot control their sexual urges and sexually assault because of it.
Its the "I couldn't help myself" defense.
 
Redress said:
Navy, she was groped and fondled against her will. The actions that ruined those reputations where the actions of those who acted inappropriately.

Now, can you prove that there was no sexual harassment in the navy before women could do ship duty as you claimed?
Click to expand...

Place: Navy Recruit Training Center, Great Lakes, Illinois
Time: July to August, 1979
Issue: The cranks in the galley. To make passage through the lines of men waiting to be served, the cranks moving materiel would scream "Make a hole!" to get the men to move aside and allow them through.

By August this innocuous practice was banned because some dumb broad petty officer started writing recruits up for saying that in her presence, since the little darling's feelings were offended by men going about their business and treating her exactly like they treated everyone else in the galley.

That is sexual harassment. By the broad.

What innocuous customs and terminology is going to be forced to change because some gay gets his paisley panties in a wad by something a man said to him? How many men are going to have some totally bull**** demerit on his record because some gay got his widdle feelings hurt?

The military is the ULTIMATE Man's World. People who aren't men shouldn't force themselves in, and shouldn't be allowed to alter it to any less than what it is.

The US military is EFFECTIVE.

Why change it, when it works?

The military is meeting it's recruiting goals. Ergo, there's no practical need to allow perverts in the military.
 
Redress said:
Navy, drunk is not an excuse. She was forcibly groped and fondled. There is no way to spin that into something minor.
Click to expand...

Do you even read what I posted..........I said I don't condone it........I am just telling you what happened for 20 years at the tail hook conventions and if she had not gotten off the elevator on the wrong floor that day it would still be happening..........
 
Navy Pride said:
Do you even read what I posted..........I said I don't condone it........I am just telling you what happened for 20 years at the tail hook conventions and if she had not gotten off the elevator on the wrong floor that day it would still be happening..........
Click to expand...

Maybe you don't "Condone" it...but you most certainly "excuse it".
 
Navy Pride said:
Do you even read what I posted..........I said I don't condone it........I am just telling you what happened for 20 years at the tail hook conventions and if she had not gotten off the elevator on the wrong floor that day it would still be happening..........
Click to expand...

I am very aware of what happened. I served with a lt jg Dunleavy at the time Tailhook happened. His father, Admiral Dunleavy was forced to resign due to Tailhook. Several of our pilots where at that particular Tailhook.
 
Navy Pride said:
A lot of the discharges were also because gay made advances at straights, not just because they said they were gay..........Probably half the guys that said they were gay were lying........They just realized that they made a mistake in joining and this was the easiest way out..............
Click to expand...

Feel free to provide numbers and stats on that because I doubt it was significant.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Place: Navy Recruit Training Center, Great Lakes, Illinois
Time: July to August, 1979
Issue: The cranks in the galley. To make passage through the lines of men waiting to be served, the cranks moving materiel would scream "Make a hole!" to get the men to move aside and allow them through.

By August this innocuous practice was banned because some dumb broad petty officer started writing recruits up for saying that in her presence, since the little darling's feelings were offended by men going about their business and treating her exactly like they treated everyone else in the galley.

That is sexual harassment. By the broad.

What innocuous customs and terminology is going to be forced to change because some gay gets his paisley panties in a wad by something a man said to him? How many men are going to have some totally bull**** demerit on his record because some gay got his widdle feelings hurt?

The military is the ULTIMATE Man's World. People who aren't men shouldn't force themselves in, and shouldn't be allowed to alter it to any less than what it is.

The US military is EFFECTIVE.

Why change it, when it works?

The military is meeting it's recruiting goals. Ergo, there's no practical need to allow perverts in the military.
Click to expand...

Exacly, if it ain't broke don't fix it.........The left wants to use the military for social experimentation with both women and now gays serving openly.........That is not what the military is for.........Its to fight our wars and protect us not for social experimentation..........
 
Boo Radley said:
Feel free to provide numbers and stats on that because I doubt it was significant.
Click to expand...



Yeah, 14,000 discharges since 1993......I already posted the link.....If your to lazy to go back and read it then that is on you.........I am not looking it up again........
 
Navy Pride said:
Exacly, if it ain't broke don't fix it.........The left wants to use the military for social experimentation with both women and now gays serving openly.........That is not what the military is for.........Its to fight our wars and protect us not for social experimentation..........
Click to expand...

Most of the improvements the military has made is in fixing things that are not broke. Status quo is not effective for the military.
 
Navy Pride said:
Yeah, 14,000 discharges since 1993......I already posted the link.....If your to lazy to go back and read it then that is on you.........I am not looking it up again........
Click to expand...

Yeah...be sure to read that link of Navy Prides:

Military Attitudes
73 percent of military personnel are comfortable with lesbians and gays (Zogby International, 2006).
The younger generations, those who fight America's 21st century wars, largely don't care about whether someone is gay or not-and they do not link job performance with sexual orientation.
One in four U.S. troops who served in Afghanistan or Iraq knows a member of their unit who is gay (Zogby, 2006).
The Public Overwhelmingly Supports Lifting the Ban
Majorities of weekly churchgoers (60 percent), conservatives (58 percent), and Republicans (58 percent) now favor repeal (Gallup, 2009).
Seventy-five percent of Americans support gays serving openly - up from just 44 percent in 1993 (ABC News/Washington Post, 2008).
Ban Hurts Military Readiness
The U.S. must recruit and retain the greatest number of the best and brightest-especially during two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
Redress said:
Most of the improvements the military has made is in fixing things that are not broke. Status quo is not effective for the military.
Click to expand...

Well the status quo worked great in my 20 years of service but then we did not have to worry about some female accusing us of sexual harrassment if we looked at her the wrong way because there were no females aboard ships.......God knows we had our problems at sea on ships that were not floating cities with all the comforts of home but that was not one of them.........

And as far as gays usually every couple of months one could not control himself and was put on report, court martialed and discharged with a undesireable or bad conduct discharge.....I heard they are giving gays guys these days honorable discharges....what is with that?
 
Last edited:
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
'Zactly. If ya don't qualify, you're not in.
Click to expand...

disneydude said:
Maybe you don't "Condone" it...but you most certainly "excuse it".
Click to expand...

Yeah I kind of do..You never serving don't know what kind of pressure these naval aviators are under, especially in war time.......Ask John McCain he might tell you what its like flying off the decks of those carriers and coming back to the states years later...........You work hard and you play hard........Until this one woman it was all partying men and women both.....
 
Navy Pride said:
I told you she just happened to bein the wrong place at the wrong time......She was naive and it was her first time at tailhook and she did not know what was ging one there and that a bunch of naval aviators (Both men and women) got drunk and partied..............

If you did not have women aboard ship then you tell me how there can be sexual harrassment?
Click to expand...
this is appalling.
 
Redress said:
I am very aware of what happened. I served with a lt jg Dunleavy at the time Tailhook happened. His father, Admiral Dunleavy was forced to resign due to Tailhook. Several of our pilots where at that particular Tailhook.
Click to expand...

Yeah, what a crock, Officers with distinguised records forced to resign or be demoted..................
 
Navy Pride said:
Yeah, what a crock, Officers with distinguised records forced to resign or be demoted..................
Click to expand...

Yeah but it is okay if Officers with distinguished records to be kicked out for simply being gay right NP?
 
winston53660 said:
Yeah but it is okay if Officers with distinguished records to be kicked out for simply being gay right NP?
Click to expand...

Yeah if they break the law.......I know some of you lefties don't like it but we are a nation of laws..........

Try and stay on topic......
 
liblady said:
i meant your attitude was appalling, navy. the behavior is not excusable, despite your attempts.
Click to expand...

Like I have said many times....what consenting adults do in private is none of my business nor is it yours.........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom