• 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

Navy Pride said:
That is a tough one...No one committed and I did not ask but I can tell you to the man they were adament against it. There was only 4 or 5 of us shooting the bull...they really said that the Navy has enough distractions now and does not need another.............
Click to expand...

What exactly is the Navy distracted with right now?

Pretty sure the Marines and Army are bearing the burden for the two wars we are currently involved in. I'd love to hear some Sailor tell me the Navy is bogged down with "distractions". Is that a joke?
 
Last edited:
Gardener said:
So you've lived the fantasy. Excellent!

Now, the challenge for a budding writer like yourself is how to utilize your experience to flesh out the fantasy, and to do so in a way that can draw the reader into your unique world of male erotica.

I know you have an opus in you!
Click to expand...

You have way to much time on your hands my left wing friend....I could suggest a hobby??
 
kansaswhig said:
What exactly is the Navy distracted with right now?

Pretty sure the Marines and Army are bearing the burden for the two wars we are currently involved in. I'd love to hear some Sailor tell me the Navy is bogged down with "distractions". Is that a joke?
Click to expand...

Unlike you I respect my comrades in other services so I will not knock them for your sadistic amusement....Judging by your disdain for your brothers in other branches of the service I doubt if you have ever visited that wall in D.C. that has the name of 58,000 heroes on it that paid the ultimate price for their country.........Believe it or not my left wing friend there are a bunch of Navy guys names on that wall to include Corpsman, SEALS and Mekong Delta swift boat crew members, and even some supply types like me who paid that price 6 of were personal friends of mine...

Now if you want to discuss this thread instead of talking **** I am ready otherwise don't ****ing bother me again.......
 
Polynikes said:
Obama to call for 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal, adviser says - CNN.com


President Obama will ask Congress Wednesday night to repeal the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that bars gays and lesbians from openly serving in, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod told CNN.

The request will be included in the president's State of the Union address, Axelrod said.

The issue has been a source of contention for heavy hitters on both sides of the issue, who are lining up for a fight.

In a message to Pentagon leadership, Gen. John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said it's time to repeal the law.

"As a nation built on the principal of equality, we should recognize and welcome change that will build a stronger more cohesive military," said Shalikashvili. His letter was sent out Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York, who supports repealing the policy
Click to expand...

Uh yeah simply repealing DADT means the military can seek gays out for elimination instead of passively letting them slip by. In other words, President Obama is about to pro-actively enforce discrimination against gays, as that's what was happening before DADT.

Simply repealing DADT is a half measure, and I'm no fan of half measures. I encourage President Obama to issue an executive order to fully legalize gays in the military; to allow them to claim lawfully married same-sex spouses; to allow the common knowledge of any given serviceman's homosexuality to have no impact on his or her career as a professional warrior.

Politics aside, I strongly believe this is the right thing to do.
 
Jerry said:
Uh yeah simply repealing DADT means the military can seek gays out for elimination instead of passively letting them slip by. In other words, President Obama is about to pro-actively enforce discrimination against gays, as that's what was happening before DADT.

Simply repealing DADT is a half measure, and I'm no fan of half measures. I encourage President Obama to issue an executive order to fully legalize gays in the military; to allow them to claim lawfully married same-sex spouses; to allow the common knowledge of any given serviceman's homosexuality to have no impact on his or her career as a professional warrior.

Politics aside, I strongly believe this is the right thing to do.
Click to expand...


Although I think DADT is working pretty wellif the cancel it I would love to see them go back to the way it was when I joined.........When you enlist you sign a statement that you are not a homosexual nor have you ever engaged in homosexual activities.........

That was pretty cut and dry.............
 
Navy Pride said:
Although I think DADT is working pretty wellif the cancel it I would love to see them go back to the way it was when I joined.........When you enlist you sign a statement that you are not a homosexual nor have you ever engaged in homosexual activities.........

That was pretty cut and dry.............
Click to expand...

Yeah I just signed that statement....
USMEPCOM reg 601-23

Although we have not and will not ask you about your sexual Orientation, you should be aware that homosexual conduct is grounds for discharge from the Armed Forces. This means that if you do one of the following, you could be involuntarily separated before your term of service ends:

  1. Homosexual acts. You engage in, attempt to engage in, or solicit another to engage in a homosexual act or acts. A “homosexual act” means touching a person of your same sex or allowing such a person to touch you for the purpose of satisfying sexual desires. (For example, hand-holding or kissing, or other physical contact of a sexual nature.)
  2. Homosexual statements. You make a statement that demonstrates a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts. This may include language or behavior that a reasonable person would believe intends to convey the statement that you are a homosexual or bisexual.
  3. Homosexual marriage. You marry or attempt to marry a person of your same sex.

You may not be discharged if you do or say these things solely to end your military service
Click to expand...

IMO that regulation should be taken down.
 
Last edited:
misterman said:
"attempt to marry"? Is that like attempted murder or something?
Click to expand...

Like if a gay couple goes to their local church and has a ceremony which is not legally recognized by the state; or if that couple jumps states and legally marrys in that state even though their home state doesn't recognize it; or if a license application is submitted where one same-sex person is in the section for the opposite sex.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Like if a gay couple goes to their local church and has a ceremony which is not legally recognized by the state; or if that couple jumps states and legally marrys in that state even though their home state doesn't recognize it; or if a license application is submitted where one same-sex person is in the section for the opposite sex.
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought of that. I figured it was more like attempted murder, you know, like the person you tried to marry says "nice try, but you can't get me that easily."
 
Navy Pride said:
I could suggest a hobby??
Click to expand...

Hobby? Navy, Navy, Navy -- You need to WRITE your male erotica before trying to sell it!! While I admire you for your interest in marketing, you need to have a good product to sell, first.
 
I don't think they should repeal DADT. Having (open) gays in the military would be like bunking men and women together, it's just no appropriate. In the military (from what I understand) you don't always have the privilege of personal privacy, making it all the more inappropriate for gays to be in the military.
 
digsbe said:
I don't think they should repeal DADT. Having (open) gays in the military would be like bunking men and women together, it's just no appropriate. In the military (from what I understand) you don't always have the privilege of personal privacy, making it all the more inappropriate for gays to be in the military.
Click to expand...

Gay men are not women. Gay women are not men. I don't know why this confuses people so much.
 
Redress said:
Gay men are not women. Gay women are not men. I don't know why this confuses people so much.
Click to expand...

True but gay men are attracted to men, and gay women are attracted to women. It would be inappropriate for men and women to shower together and live in close quarters because of sexual attraction. Homosexuality is no exception.
 
Redress said:
Gay men are not women. Gay women are not men. I don't know why this confuses people so much.
Click to expand...

Gay men think like women And Lesbians think like men when it comes to sex.........
 
Navy Pride said:
Gay men think like women And Lesbians think like men when it comes to sex.........
Click to expand...

I agree but I don't think that matters...unless you want to take women completely out of the military also.

IMO any able bodied citizen who is willing to serve should be permitted the honor.
 
The opposing arguments in this thread don't make sense.

There are already gays serving and showering with straight men. Removing DADT won't change anything. It doesn't mean that suddenly all gays in the military will be coming out of the closet, and putting their sexuality down on the record. Many will remain in the closet. It's no one's damn business. And if they do come out, then man up, and live with it.

Comparing the separation of men and women to the separation of gays and straights is stupid. In co-ed situations, men are the more predatory the vast majority of the time, which is why women get their separate housing. Do you seriously think one woman is going to feel comfortable among a dozen or so men, especially given the conservative nature of the military?

Likewise, do you really think a gay man is going to jump you in the shower, in the military... or that they are going to rape you? First of all, they are surrounded by homophobes who will probably kick their asses; second, why would they? They are there to serve their country like you are.

Grow a pair and stop making up fantasy situations where it's going to be a problem. It's not going to be. This is less about forcing gays to be out in the military and more to do with them being dismissed from service because the truth about their sexuality accidentally came out. That is a travesty. There have already been stories about men with years of good service behind them being discharged over it.

This makes me think about men I met in the far East who always took the actions of their wives as reflections of their personal honor. Stop blaming other people for how you feel, and deal with your own immature feelings.
 
Orion said:
The opposing arguments in this thread don't make sense.

There are already gays serving and showering with straight men. Removing DADT won't change anything. It doesn't mean that suddenly all gays in the military will be coming out of the closet, and putting their sexuality down on the record. Many will remain in the closet. It's no one's damn business. And if they do come out, then man up, and live with it.

Comparing the separation of men and women to the separation of gays and straights is stupid. In co-ed situations, men are the more predatory the vast majority of the time, which is why women get their separate housing. Do you seriously think one woman is going to feel comfortable among a dozen or so men, especially given the conservative nature of the military?

Likewise, do you really think a gay man is going to jump you in the shower, in the military... or that they are going to rape you? First of all, they are surrounded by homophobes who will probably kick their asses; second, why would they? They are there to serve their country like you are.

Grow a pair and stop making up fantasy situations where it's going to be a problem. It's not going to be. This is less about forcing gays to be out in the military and more to do with them being dismissed from service because the truth about their sexuality accidentally came out. That is a travesty. There have already been stories about men with years of good service behind them being discharged over it.

This makes me think about men I met in the far East who always took the actions of their wives as reflections of their personal honor. Stop blaming other people for how you feel, and deal with your own immature feelings.
Click to expand...

The basic concern behind gay men bunking with hetero men = co-ed bunks is valid. However, I think it's perfectly manageable. Enforcement of existing codes of conduct supplemented with an appropriate sleeping assignment where necessary should do the trick.

It's certainly nothing to end a service-member's career over.
 
Jerry said:
The basic concern behind gay men bunking with hetero men = co-ed bunks is valid.
Click to expand...

In your own words, why?

Jerry said:
However, I think it's perfectly manageable. Enforcement of existing codes of conduct supplemented with an appropriate sleeping assignment where necessary should do the trick.

It's certainly nothing to end a service-member's career over.
Click to expand...

What is your definition of an appropriate sleeping assignment?

I know this is anecdotal, but I've done volunteer programs where the men and women are separated. Of course, even though I don't go out of the way to flaunt my homosexuality in front of others, I don't hide my sexuality either. I've always roomed with men and there has been no problem.

Segregation is not the answer. That is not the definition of what a unit is.
 
Jerry said:
I agree but I don't think that matters...unless you want to take women completely out of the military also.
Click to expand...

Exactly! And that is why I brought up women serving earlier. All I got was "that's off topic." Maybe you can explain it better, as if it needs explaining.
 
Orion said:
In your own words, why?
Click to expand...

The part of a homosexual man's brain which interprets pheromones is identical to a heterosexual woman. The part of a homosexual woman's brain which interprets pheromones is identical to a heterosexual man.

It's been a while but if you would like I could dig up one of the studies I've already read on this. Please keep in mind, though, that I'm really trying to avoid a 'nature of sexuality' discussion.

It's my argument that while Navy's concern is valid, it is just as manageable as having women on the ship.

Orion said:
What is your definition of an appropriate sleeping assignment?
Click to expand...

If integration proves to be a problem, the military could simply assign homosexuals to bunks specifically for homosexuals only just as they do for women only. I'm not talking about creating special accommodations or even moving a single bunk on a ship, but merely assigning who sleeps where with sexual orientation in mind.

That's assuming there's even a problem to begin with.

Orion said:
Segregation is not the answer. That is not the definition of what a unit is.
Click to expand...

I think we need to afford people some time to acclimate to change instead of trying to get everything we want all at once. Other militarys have gays integrated with heteros and there's no significant problem, but those militarys have had gays mixed with heteros for a very long time. As the US is new to the scene, after allowing gays to serve openly, some small level of segregation might be a necessary evil for the short term.

If I had my way about it I would start with full integration with strict enforcement of rules of conduct, and only if a significant trend developed would I implement a back-up plan of segregating bunks.
 
misterman said:
Exactly! And that is why I brought up women serving earlier. All I got was "that's off topic." Maybe you can explain it better, as if it needs explaining.
Click to expand...

Having gay men mixed with hetero men is nothing to worry about due to the lack of mutual attraction.

Where there might be a problem is when gay men bunk with other gay men, or lesbians with other lesbians, since that's the situation which = hetero co-ed bunks.

My solution through managing sleeping arrangements has the advantage of there being so few homosexuals, and fewer still in the military. The introduction of women to the battle ship had a greater impact on the organizational structure of that ship then gays ever will precisely because there are far more women than gays.

The military created completely new sections for women, so how much less is it to simply have a Sailor sleep in male bunks designated for gays?

If we can integrate women, we can integrate gays.
 
Navy Pride said:
Unlike you I respect my comrades in other services so I will not knock them for your sadistic amusement....Judging by your disdain for your brothers in other branches of the service I doubt if you have ever visited that wall in D.C. that has the name of 58,000 heroes on it that paid the ultimate price for their country.........Believe it or not my left wing friend there are a bunch of Navy guys names on that wall to include Corpsman, SEALS and Mekong Delta swift boat crew members, and even some supply types like me who paid that price 6 of were personal friends of mine...

Now if you want to discuss this thread instead of talking **** I am ready otherwise don't ****ing bother me again.......
Click to expand...

You are the biggest drama queen I have ever seen. I bet you fit right in the Navy.

Don't tell me about combat casualties, old man. Those that really know don't even need to talk about it. Unlike you, who brings it up every chance he gets. That should tell everyone here all they need to know.

Just answer my question of how the Navy is apparently so distracted right now. That's what I asked. I didn't ask for an emotional diatribe, which was some lame attempt to paint me as lacking respect for the other services. If anyone on this entire forum lacks respect for others, it is you, sir.
 
Last edited:
kansaswhig said:
You are the biggest drama queen I have ever seen. I bet you fit right in the Navy.

Don't tell me about combat casualties, old man. Those that really know don't even talk about it. Unlike you, who brings it up every chance he gets. That should tell everyone here all they need to know.

Just answer my question of how the Navy is apparently so distracted right now. That's what I asked. I didn't ask for an emotional diatribe, which was some lame attempt to paint me as lacking respect for the other services. If anyone on this entire forum lacks respect for others, it is you, sir.
Click to expand...

Calling him a drama queen while accusing him of a lack of respect doesn't do your credibility any favors ;)
 
Jerry said:
Calling him a drama queen while accusing him of a lack of respect doesn't do your credibility any favors ;)
Click to expand...

I don't get it.

He is a drama queen.

He respects no one.

Those are two facts.

What's the problem?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom