• 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!

Fox News Poll: Most Voters Say Allow Gays to Serve Openly

Gina said:
However, and I believe this has already been pointed out somewhere in this thread, gays are already in the military and in the rest of society. How is repealing DADT "social engineering". It's done.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are, but not openly. Even if gays are allowed to serve openly in the military, DADT should be left in place to prevent discrimination. I think the total abolition of DADT, regardless of the status of gays in the military, will be a huge mistake.



Why would new billets need to be constructed? Gays are there already.
Click to expand...

New billets will be required when gays and straights refuse to share the same living quarters.





Demands like refusing to lie about who they are in order to serve in the military?
Click to expand...

Why do gays have to lie about who they are? No one can ask them if they're gay, so they aren't in a position to be forced to lie.
 
apdst said:
Yes, they are, but not openly. Even if gays are allowed to serve openly in the military, DADT should be left in place to prevent discrimination. I think the total abolition of DADT, regardless of the status of gays in the military, will be a huge mistake.
Click to expand...

There's a disconnect for me here. How can gays serve openly and DADT remain in effect?



apdst said:
New billets will be required when gays and straights refuse to share the same living quarters.
Click to expand...

The way they did when the service was racially integrated?



apdst said:
Why do gays have to lie about who they are? No one can ask them if they're gay, so they aren't in a position to be forced to lie.
Click to expand...

Of course they have to lie. Some have been discharged when it was discovered they were emailing their love interests. I posted a link where one was anonymously outted when his affairs were discovered. He answered truthfully when interrogated about the claims and was of course found to be guilty of "being gay" and discharged.

In order to stay in the service, he would have had to lie like a rug.
 
Gina said:
There's a disconnect for me here. How can gays serve openly and DADT remain in effect?
Click to expand...

To prevent discrimination. Why would you want to remove a safe gaurd that would allow gays to be identified and targetted by unit leaders and other soldiers? IMO, abolition of DADT will result in straight on gay, as well as gay on straight, discrimination.





The way they did when the service was racially integrated?
Click to expand...

You mean all the riots of the 1970's? Comparing sexual preference to race is the most indiotic argument in defense of the abolition of DADT that there is, to date, because there are more black and latino homophobes than there are white homophobes.





Of course they have to lie.
Click to expand...

No, they don't. Do you know what the, "DA", part of DADT means?

Some have been discharged when it was discovered they were emailing their love interests.[/quote]

Let's see the evidence, because I'm betting that there's way more to that story that what you would have us believe.

I posted a link where one was anonymously outted when his affairs were discovered. He answered truthfully when interrogated about the claims and was of course found to be guilty of "being gay" and discharged.
Click to expand...

And, he's a ****ing idiot, because it's his right under DADT to refuse to answer questions about his sexuality.

In order to stay in the service, he would have had to lie like a rug.
Click to expand...

No, all he would have to do is refuse to answer the questions, citing DADT as his right to do so.

If you completely remove DADT, you give a commander the right to ask and remove a soldier's right to refuse to tell.

You just opened gays and straights alike to untold incidences of discrimination. Good job!!
 
So to prevent discrimination, we need to discriminate.

:shock:
 
Deuce said:
So to prevent discrimination, we need to discriminate.

:shock:
Click to expand...

To prevent discrimination, we need to not give officers and NCO's the legal ability to idenetify and target gay soldiers.

Please, explain why you would allow a leader/commander to directly ask a soldier if he/she is gay, then use that information to discriminate against that soldier? I don't see any good coming from that.
 
apdst said:
To prevent discrimination. Why would you want to remove a safe gaurd that would allow gays to be identified and targetted by unit leaders and other soldiers? IMO, abolition of DADT will result in straight on gay, as well as gay on straight, discrimination.
Click to expand...

Huh? They are targeted now. One slip and they can lose their career. DADT is no safeguard. It's a trap door out of the service.

How does DADT prevent gays from discriminating against straights?

apdst said:
You mean all the riots of the 1970's? Comparing sexual preference to race is the most indiotic argument in defense of the abolition of DADT that there is, to date, because there are more black and latino homophobes than there are white homophobes.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I was quite young then, I'm unaware of race riots in the military during the 1970's. Also the Harry Truman desegregated the service on July 26, 1948. I'm unaware if there riots then.

Race is not sexual orientation, however the resultant discrimination has the same effect.

Bigotry is not limited to whites. That still should not have any bearing on the elimination of DADT.

apdst said:
No, they don't. Do you know what the, "DA", part of DADT means?
Click to expand...

Of course no one should ask, but people gain enemies in the service or any job those people want to know, so they investigate in order to gain an advantage.

See below, DA was violated:

apdst said:

Some have been discharged when it was discovered they were emailing their love interests.



Let's see the evidence, because I'm betting that there's way more to that story that what you would have us believe.
Click to expand...


Army dismisses gay Arabic linguist - Military- msnbc.com

While investigators were never able to determine who the accuser was, “in the end, the nature and the volume of the evidence and Sgt. Copas’s own sworn statement led me to discharge him,” Zellmer said.

Military investigators wrote that Copas “engaged in at least three homosexual relationships, and is dealing with at least two jealous lovers, either of whom could be the anonymous source providing this information.”

Shortly after Copas was appointed to the 82nd Airborne’s highly visible All-American Chorus last May, the first e-mail came to the chorus director.

“The director brought everyone into the hallway and told us about this e-mail they had just received and blatantly asked, ’Which one of you are gay?”’ Copas said.

Copas later complained to the director and his platoon sergeant, saying the questions violated “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“They said they would watch it in the future,” Copas said. “And they said, even specifically then, ’Well, you are not gay are you?’ And I said, ’no.”’

The accuser, who signed his e-mails “John Smith” or “ftbraggman,” pressed Copas’ superiors to take action against him or “I will inform your entire battalion of the information that I gave you.”​


So much for DA part of DADT.

apdst said:
And, he's a ****ing idiot, because it's his right under DADT to refuse to answer questions about his sexuality.
Click to expand...

You can see he did lie the first time they violated DADT. Also, he was probably aware of the evidence against him and at that point, it's useless to lie and possibly face perjury charges.



apdst said:
No, all he would have to do is refuse to answer the questions, citing DADT as his right to do so.

If you completely remove DADT, you give a commander the right to ask and remove a soldier's right to refuse to tell.

You just opened gays and straights alike to untold incidences of discrimination. Good job!!
Click to expand...


What straight man would refuse to answer if asked that question? In refusing to answer, a gay man would then be answering, yes? Like taking the 5th. The implication is guilt.

I'm still wondering, how do gays discriminate against straights if DADT is removed?
 
Gina said:
Huh? They are targeted now. One slip and they can lose their career. DADT is no safeguard. It's a trap door out of the service.
Click to expand...

You totally misunderstand what DADT is designed to do. Gay bans in the military didn't start with DADT. DADT took away a commander's legal ability to question a soldier about his/her sexuality. Even if gays are allowed to serve openly, DADT needs to remain in place.

How does DADT prevent gays from discriminating against straights?
Click to expand...

It prevents a heterophobe from discriminating against a straight soldier because of his sexuality. And, please, let's don't act like it can't happen. We all know it can, does and will.



I'm sorry, I was quite young then, I'm unaware of race riots in the military during the 1970's. Also the Harry Truman desegregated the service on July 26, 1948. I'm unaware if there riots then.
Click to expand...

Race is not sexual orientation, however the resultant discrimination has the same effect.

Bigotry is not limited to whites. That still should not have any bearing on the elimination of DADT.



Of course no one should ask, but people gain enemies in the service or any job those people want to know, so they investigate in order to gain an advantage.

See below, DA was violated:




Army dismisses gay Arabic linguist - Military- msnbc.com

While investigators were never able to determine who the accuser was, “in the end, the nature and the volume of the evidence and Sgt. Copas’s own sworn statement led me to discharge him,” Zellmer said.

Military investigators wrote that Copas “engaged in at least three homosexual relationships, and is dealing with at least two jealous lovers, either of whom could be the anonymous source providing this information.”

Shortly after Copas was appointed to the 82nd Airborne’s highly visible All-American Chorus last May, the first e-mail came to the chorus director.

“The director brought everyone into the hallway and told us about this e-mail they had just received and blatantly asked, ’Which one of you are gay?”’ Copas said.

Copas later complained to the director and his platoon sergeant, saying the questions violated “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“They said they would watch it in the future,” Copas said. “And they said, even specifically then, ’Well, you are not gay are you?’ And I said, ’no.”’

The accuser, who signed his e-mails “John Smith” or “ftbraggman,” pressed Copas’ superiors to take action against him or “I will inform your entire battalion of the information that I gave you.”​
Click to expand...


That's right, DA was violated. Because of that, Sgt. Copas had the legal right not to answer any questions regarding his sexuality. Appears to be a lack of leadership in that particular unit, but, we are tlaking about a ****ing chorus, so we can't expect them to live up to the traditions of discipline and leadership of the United States military.



You can see he did lie the first time they violated DADT. Also, he was probably aware of the evidence against him and at that point, it's useless to lie and possibly face perjury charges.
Click to expand...

Under the UCMJ, as with the Constituion, Sgt. Copas would have had the right to face his accuser. There's no way that the Army could have charged him with perjury.






What straight man would refuse to answer if asked that question?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't. And, I would cite DADT as the reason that I refused to answer the question.


In refusing to answer, a gay man would then be answering, yes? Like taking the 5th. The implication is guilt.
Click to expand...

It don't work like that.

I'm still wondering, how do gays discriminate against straights if DADT is removed?
Click to expand...



Because it would allow the Perez Hiltons of the world to openly question straight soldiers about their feelings toward gays and gay issues, then allow those straight soldiers to be discriminated against. Agian, let's don't act like all gays are perfect, wonderful, fair, cool and understanding people that would never, ever do anything wrong, such as discriminate against a straight soldier, or show favoritism toward a gay soldier.

If you want to hear the crybaby **** of, "I didn't get promoted because my gay commander doesn't like straights", then remove DADT and let the games begin.

I think that the proponents of the abolition of DADT think that when it happens, everything is going to right in the world and bad things aren't going to be a result and that just ain't how it's going to be.
 
apdst said:
You totally misunderstand what DADT is designed to do. Gay bans in the military didn't start with DADT. DADT took away a commander's legal ability to question a soldier about his/her sexuality. Even if gays are allowed to serve openly, DADT needs to remain in place.
Click to expand...

With DADT eliminated, a commander still will not be allowed to question a soldier's sexuality. You still have not made a case.


apdst said:
It prevents a heterophobe from discriminating against a straight soldier because of his sexuality. And, please, let's don't act like it can't happen. We all know it can, does and will. [/ QUOTE]


Some people will discriminate and I'm sure there is already discrimination if a homophobe suspects. As you pointed out, that situation will be more prominent too. Women are in the same position, are they not? But neither circumstance is a reason to not allow gays to serve openly or women to serve at all.

Discrimination takes place in other venues of society and we have to deal with it there.

apdst said:
That's right, DA was violated. Because of that, Sgt. Copas had the legal right not to answer any questions regarding his sexuality. Appears to be a lack of leadership in that particular unit, but, we are tlaking about a ****ing chorus, so we can't expect them to live up to the traditions of discipline and leadership of the United States military.
Click to expand...

Why can't you expect that they live up to the rest of military standards? It's still the military with all the rules in full effect, yes? He was also an Arabic linguist, which are very important at this point in time considering the countries in which we are fighting.


apdst said:
Under the UCMJ, as with the Constituion, Sgt. Copas would have had the right to face his accuser. There's no way that the Army could have charged him with perjury.
Click to expand...

They never identified his accuser, remember? But they had clear evidence and even without his confession, he would have been discharged.

apdst said:
I wouldn't. And, I would cite DADT as the reason that I refused to answer the question.

It don't work like that.
Click to expand...

You don't think the commanders would come away with an impression from a refusal to answer? They can't act against you, but they are human and it would raise suspicion.

apdst said:
Because it would allow the Perez Hiltons of the world to openly question straight soldiers about their feelings toward gays and gay issues, then allow those straight soldiers to be discriminated against. Agian, let's don't act like all gays are perfect, wonderful, fair, cool and understanding people that would never, ever do anything wrong, such as discriminate against a straight soldier, or show favoritism toward a gay soldier.

If you want to hear the crybaby **** of, "I didn't get promoted because my gay commander doesn't like straights", then remove DADT and let the games begin.

I think that the proponents of the abolition of DADT think that when it happens, everything is going to right in the world and bad things aren't going to be a result and that just ain't how it's going to be.
Click to expand...

Let us not pretend that the opposite is not true either and isn't going on now with those who suspect someone.

Gays are in every realm of society and it hasn't fallen apart yet. Your predictions sound similar to those made when the service was integrated. It didn't fall apart then.

I don't believe those of us who want the repeal of DADT think for a second, it will right all wrongs. That would be fool hearty and naive.

Again, not to equate homosexuality with race, we cannot go on discriminating against a class of Americans because of what "might" happen if we "allow" them to be who they are.
Click to expand...
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Teaching information and teaching morals are two different things, NP.
Click to expand...

I want my chilldren to have the same morals my wife and I have....I don't know if you have kids or not but its very difficult to raise children these days...There are so many obstacles they have to face that were not there when we were kids, drugs, porn open sexuality.....I wanted to teach and tell my kids about these things not some liberal teacher with and agenda.....I want the teachers to teach what they are paid to teach, especially in grade school......I will take care of the rest......It worked out well in my family and thus far it has worked out well with my kids and their families........

I give my children the info and when they become adults they make their own decisions.........

We live in a conservative family....No one takes drugs, been in jail or protests our military......We believe in live and let live.........
 
Navy Pride said:
I want my chilldren to have the same morals my wife and I have.... .........
Click to expand...


What? That having sex with a married woman while her husband is off serving this country is OK and something to brag about?

Navy....you are being hypocritical just like all those other "Family Value" folk who are really saying "Do as I say, not as I do".

I understand that people do things that are wrong in their youth...and if you had taken the stance that, yes I did this, but I was wrong and I have repented for it, I would give you a break here....

But not even a week ago you were here boasting about this....

That is not the high values that you proclaim to have and want your children to have....is it?
 
disneydude said:
What? That having sex with a married woman while her husband is off serving this country is OK and something to brag about?

Navy....you are being hypocritical just like all those other "Family Value" folk who are really saying "Do as I say, not as I do".

I understand that people do things that are wrong in their youth...and if you had taken the stance that, yes I did this, but I was wrong and I have repented for it, I would give you a break here....

But not even a week ago you were here boasting about this....

That is not the high values that you proclaim to have and want your children to have....is it?
Click to expand...
are you serious?
 
Navy Pride said:
I want my chilldren to have the same morals my wife and I have....I don't know if you have kids or not but its very difficult to raise children these days...There are so many obstacles they have to face that were not there when we were kids, drugs, porn open sexuality.....I wanted to teach and tell my kids about these things not some liberal teacher with and agenda.....I want the teachers to teach what they are paid to teach, especially in grade school......I will take care of the rest......It worked out well in my family and thus far it has worked out well with my kids and their families........

I give my children the info and when they become adults they make their own decisions.........

We live in a conservative family....No one takes drugs, been in jail or protests our military......We believe in live and let live.........
Click to expand...

I have no problem at all with that. But I would have a problem with you if you attempt to dictate YOUR idea of morals to others, who have different ideas on what is right and wrong.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
I have no problem at all with that. But I would have a problem with you if you attempt to dictate YOUR idea of morals to others, who have different ideas on what is right and wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to get over the "We believe in live and let live" part. :rofl

But I do believe it is a parents responsibility to instill in their children traits they deem to be acceptable. Some times it works, some times it doesn't.

I imagine it was hard raising children and being full time military. For that, Navy has all my respect. Right or wrong, a lot of father's these days could care less.

Say what you want about NP but I suspect he is a wonderful dad very much loved by his family.
 
Captain America said:
I'm still trying to get over the "We believe in live and let live" part. :rofl

But I do believe it is a parents responsibility to instill in their children traits they deem to be acceptable. Some times it works, some times it doesn't.

I imagine it was hard raising children and being full time military. For that, Navy has all my respect. Right or wrong, a lot of father's these days could care less.

Say what you want about NP but I suspect he is a wonderful dad very much loved by his family.
Click to expand...

True that, but he is also set in his ways...... Just like myself. Yea, I am getting old myself, and have a lot of "set" views. I love Goldwater Conservatism, and can't understand why so many are abandoning it. Or, just maybe, the world is moving on, and leaving the opinions of gnarly old mother****ers like myself in the dust. Same could apply to NP. At any rate, I remember when the world was a better place, and people talked to each other instead of over each other. I bet NP also waxes nostalgic for another era.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
True that, but he is also set in his ways...... Just like myself. Yea, I am getting old myself, and have a lot of "set" views. I love Goldwater Conservatism, and can't understand why so many are abandoning it. Or, just maybe, the world is moving on, and leaving the opinions of gnarly old mother****ers like myself in the dust. Same could apply to NP. At any rate, I remember when the world was a better place, and people talked to each other instead of over each other. I bet NP also waxes nostalgic for another era.
Click to expand...

I hear ya. I miss Goldwater. :(

We're all just a buncha old dinosaurs fartin' dust.

Some of us just fart more dust than the others. That's all. :rofl
 
danarhea said:
I have no problem at all with that. But I would have a problem with you if you attempt to dictate YOUR idea of morals to others, who have different ideas on what is right and wrong.
Click to expand...

Then you have a problem with the public school system because when it comes to human sexuality and homosexuality that is exactly what the teachers are doing in a lot of liberals schools instead of teaching the classes they are paid to teach........They are teaching there values to our kids without our permission and when comes to grade school that is outrageous........
 
Navy Pride said:
Then you have a problem with the public school system because when it comes to human sexuality and homosexuality that is exactly what the teachers are doing in a lot of liberals schools instead of teaching the classes they are paid to teach........They are teaching there values to our kids without our permission and when comes to grade school that is outrageous........
Click to expand...

Can you provide an example?
 
danarhea said:
I have no problem at all with that. But I would have a problem with you if you attempt to dictate YOUR idea of morals to others, who have different ideas on what is right and wrong.
Click to expand...

Sadly I think we all do that to a certain extent.........
 
megaprogman said:
Can you provide an example?
Click to expand...

I'm sure there is an example out there. Not to gigantic proportions as some would have to believe but I'm sure that somewhere in San Francisco there is an elementary class learning about Adam and Steve. Not that that's a bad thing. :roll:

But, never in my world, in my children's or grandchildren's schools, have I ever heard of such a thing taking place. And I do live in a blue state.

But, that being said. I don't want the school to be teaching my kids about Adam and Steve. That's MY job and I will decide how to better educate my children on issues of morals and character. I want the schools to teach my kids math, history, english, and other nuts and bolts studies. I don't want the school's to teach my kids morals any more than I want my government to dictate morals. (That includes FAUXNews)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom