• 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!

2 Generals Wary About Repealing Gay Policy

Lightdemon said:
Are you saying a flamboyant gay man cannot be trained?

What would be the remedy for that? DADT? No. The remedy would to kick his ass out of the military, and NOT to make a blanket ban for all gays to enlist. That's just asinine.
Click to expand...

Im just curious...are you a deliberate idiot...or does it come natural to you? Do you refuse to accept that in a male dominated, testosterone driven environment where anger, and violence is a commonplace occurence that a fairly large number of soldiers might not be...lets just say eager...to take orders from a flamboyantly gay individual?

Im not here to ARGUE with you the merits. I DONT CARE if you agree or disagree...we wont be making policy changes. Im pointing out the problems. If you continue to stick your head in the...sand...well...fine...
 
VanceMack said:
Im just curious...are you a deliberate idiot...or does it come natural to you? Do you refuse to accept that in a male dominated, testosterone driven environment where anger, and violence is a commonplace occurence that a fairly large number of soldiers might not be...lets just say eager...to take orders from a flamboyantly gay individual?

Im not here to ARGUE with you the merits. I DONT CARE if you agree or disagree...we wont be making policy changes. Im pointing out the problems. If you continue to stick your head in the...sand...well...fine...
Click to expand...

You are showing an incredible ignorance of the military, and sell our military people short. They are very much capable of doing their jobs.
 
VanceMack said:
Yep...that explains the numbers. And it especially dilutes things when you draw in comparitive populations from countries were condoms and even aspirin are rare. Yep.
Click to expand...

And what do you do when you don't have a condom or birth control but you want to have sex without the risk of a pregnancy? You should probably think these things out a bit more before you post them.

If you don't believe me I can provide all the scientific literature in the world to support my arguments.
 
Redress said:
You are showing an incredible ignorance of the military, and sell our military people short. They are very much capable of doing their jobs.
Click to expand...

I am speaking truth to the potential problems. That you refuse to admit it shows your ignorance to the issue. You blindly want what you want and refuse to see the potential problems. Thats fine.

I work with soldiers today. I spent 20 years active duty. Im speaking my opinion absed on that. Im sure your vast military exposure and experience is radically different. In EVERY way. I will point out the non-politically correct problems others refuse to speak. Because I dont CARE if you like it or not.
 
CriticalThought said:
And what do you do when you don't have a condom or birth control but you want to have sex without the risk of a pregnancy? You should probably think these things out a bit more before you post them.

If you don't believe me I can provide all the scientific literature in the world to support my arguments.
Click to expand...

yes...statistics do a WONDERFUL job of promoting peoples positions.
 
Lightdemon said:
Are you saying a flamboyant gay man cannot be trained?

What would be the remedy for that? DADT? No. The remedy would to kick his ass out of the military, and NOT to make a blanket ban for all gays to enlist. That's just asinine.
Click to expand...


And not long after that we'll be hearing Liberals far and wide crying that he got kicked out because he's gay and it's right to throw his sexuality in anyone's face he wants.

Ultimately the support for gays serving openly in the military is all about that very thing. It's alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll about gays being able to annouce their gay'ness and not get kicked out of the service.
 
CriticalThought said:
And what do you do when you don't have a condom or birth control but you want to have sex without the risk of a pregnancy? You should probably think these things out a bit more before you post them.

If you don't believe me I can provide all the scientific literature in the world to support my arguments.
Click to expand...

Wait wait wait...thats funny....

"And what do you do when you don't have a condom or birth control but you want to have sex without the risk of a pregnancy?"

Let me guess...you have anal sex?

Wow.

I take it they are teaching that as an accepted means of birthcontrol now? Well...considering Obamas Education Czar...I guess that makes sense...
 
VanceMack said:
Im just curious...are you a deliberate idiot...or does it come natural to you? Do you refuse to accept that in a male dominated, testosterone driven environment where anger, and violence is a commonplace occurence that a fairly large number of soldiers might not be...lets just say eager...to take orders from a flamboyantly gay individual?

Im not here to ARGUE with you the merits. I DONT CARE if you agree or disagree...we wont be making policy changes. Im pointing out the problems. If you continue to stick your head in the...sand...well...fine...
Click to expand...

Amazingly, those same groups do pretty well at controlling themselves now. Many units know that one or more of their personnel is gay, and yet, there really aren't that many cases where good order and discipline are interrupted now. And, repealing DADT doesn't really change anything down in the ranks. Most of the changes would actually be in paperwork and policy. There would be no longer a need to sign the page 13s about DADT and being gay. Investigations would no longer need to be conducted on if a person is gay. They may still come up on a gay person's behavior, and whether they are acting professional or not, but this investigation could be done on a straight person also. Repealing DADT would give the military members who want out before their time is up one less way to get a general discharge, could help the military on retention of priority jobs. It does not mean that a gay military person has to come out as gay to anyone in the military at all. And it doesn't mean that it will suddenly ignite some desperate urge for a flood of gays to try to get into the military. It does mean that the military personnel who are gay won't have to worry so much about the wrong person finding out and getting them put out.

And the whole argument that they should keep their personal lives personal is not always so easy in a military life. Very few, if any, other jobs do you live so close to coworkers, so very often many of your friends are from your job and not outside it. And generally, especially in military towns, you will see personnel from all parts of your chain of command in places where you frequently go to hang out off duty, including bars, restaurants, clubs, movies, mall, grocery store, or even the gas station. It's quite hard to hide the fact that you are a guy at a romantic movie with another guy on a date if someone from your chain of command happens to be seeing the same movie with his wife and sees you holding hands with the other guy. And its really hard to justify saying no PDA off base, out of uniform if heterosexuals are allowed to do it.
 
Its great to see these two generals come forward and defend DADT....Its shows they are saying the hell with political correctness.....By defying Hussein Obama, Gates and Mullen they are putting their careers on the line......I know there are many more senior officers that feel as they do.....Lets hope they have the courage to step forward and voice the feelings on the issue.........Don't let our men be the subject of a social experiment......God knows with 2 wars they have enough to do already....Bless them all and keep them from harms way.......
 
roguenuke said:
Amazingly, those same groups do pretty well at controlling themselves now. Many units know that one or more of their personnel is gay, and yet, there really aren't that many cases where good order and discipline are interrupted now. And, repealing DADT doesn't really change anything down in the ranks. Most of the changes would actually be in paperwork and policy. There would be no longer a need to sign the page 13s about DADT and being gay. Investigations would no longer need to be conducted on if a person is gay. They may still come up on a gay person's behavior, and whether they are acting professional or not, but this investigation could be done on a straight person also. Repealing DADT would give the military members who want out before their time is up one less way to get a general discharge, could help the military on retention of priority jobs. It does not mean that a gay military person has to come out as gay to anyone in the military at all. And it doesn't mean that it will suddenly ignite some desperate urge for a flood of gays to try to get into the military. It does mean that the military personnel who are gay won't have to worry so much about the wrong person finding out and getting them put out.

And the whole argument that they should keep their personal lives personal is not always so easy in a military life. Very few, if any, other jobs do you live so close to coworkers, so very often many of your friends are from your job and not outside it. And generally, especially in military towns, you will see personnel from all parts of your chain of command in places where you frequently go to hang out off duty, including bars, restaurants, clubs, movies, mall, grocery store, or even the gas station. It's quite hard to hide the fact that you are a guy at a romantic movie with another guy on a date if someone from your chain of command happens to be seeing the same movie with his wife and sees you holding hands with the other guy. And its really hard to justify saying no PDA off base, out of uniform if heterosexuals are allowed to do it.
Click to expand...

And the reason is that most of those soldiers get in...do their job...and have earned their respect. I dont deny that.

For the who knows how many eth time...


I am not here to argue, defend...fight or anything else. Someone asked the question "what are some of the reasons WHY"

I answered that question. Dont like it? Fine. Disagree with it? FINE.

But if you maintain that openly gay individuals wont face the same type of problems they might face on...oh...say...a professional sports team...and that there wont be a problem with repealing DADT...then you are being intentionally and deliberately ignorant.
 
VanceMack said:
Wait wait wait...thats funny....

"And what do you do when you don't have a condom or birth control but you want to have sex without the risk of a pregnancy?"

Let me guess...you have anal sex?

Wow.

I take it they are teaching that as an accepted means of birthcontrol now? Well...considering Obamas Education Czar...I guess that makes sense...
Click to expand...

I'm speaking of what statistics say that Africans actually do. It is no secret that Africans have culturally used anal sex as a form of birth control because they lacked other methods such as condoms.

Regardless of how willfully you wish to believe AIDs is a gay disease, it is actually a disease of anal sex and intravenous drug use. Both gays and heterosexuals practice anal sex. That is the truth whether or not you want to accept it.

And let's be realistic. It's not like you are advocating that lesbians should be allowed to serve because they are the lowest risk group.
 
Last edited:
roguenuke said:
Amazingly, those same groups do pretty well at controlling themselves now. Many units know that one or more of their personnel is gay, and yet, there really aren't that many cases where good order and discipline are interrupted now. And, repealing DADT doesn't really change anything down in the ranks. Most of the changes would actually be in paperwork and policy. There would be no longer a need to sign the page 13s about DADT and being gay. Investigations would no longer need to be conducted on if a person is gay. They may still come up on a gay person's behavior, and whether they are acting professional or not, but this investigation could be done on a straight person also. Repealing DADT would give the military members who want out before their time is up one less way to get a general discharge, could help the military on retention of priority jobs. It does not mean that a gay military person has to come out as gay to anyone in the military at all. And it doesn't mean that it will suddenly ignite some desperate urge for a flood of gays to try to get into the military. It does mean that the military personnel who are gay won't have to worry so much about the wrong person finding out and getting them put out.

And the whole argument that they should keep their personal lives personal is not always so easy in a military life. Very few, if any, other jobs do you live so close to coworkers, so very often many of your friends are from your job and not outside it. And generally, especially in military towns, you will see personnel from all parts of your chain of command in places where you frequently go to hang out off duty, including bars, restaurants, clubs, movies, mall, grocery store, or even the gas station. It's quite hard to hide the fact that you are a guy at a romantic movie with another guy on a date if someone from your chain of command happens to be seeing the same movie with his wife and sees you holding hands with the other guy. And its really hard to justify saying no PDA off base, out of uniform if heterosexuals are allowed to do it.
Click to expand...

That explains the mass court martials we currently experience...

no...wait...
 
CriticalThought said:
I'm speaking of what statistics say that Africans actually do. It is no secret that Africans have culturally used anal sex as a form of birth control because they lacked other methods such as condoms.

Regardless of how willfully you wish to believe AIDs is a gay disease, it is actually a disease of anal sex and intravenous drug use. Both gays and heterosexuals practice anal sex. That is the truth whether or not you want to accept it.

And let's be realistic. It's not like you are advocating that lesbians should be allowed to serve because they are the lowest risk group.
Click to expand...

Lets be honest. I didnt engage this topic to advocate or fight. I ANSWERED A QUESTION...something most people are afraid to do. Rather than accept that there ARE INDEED issues and problems...I get to field a thousand different little spurts as to why there wouldnt be a problem by people that are blind to reality based on their own desires and what they think is right.

Personally? I HATE having the gay rights discussion. I hate to sound trite...but I work with many homosexual men and women and I enjoy their company. I dont identify them as gfay people that happen to be good people...I identify them as good people that happen to be gay. I associate with them...communicate with them...their sexuality is not my business or concern.

I do have significant military experience. A question was asked. I answered it. I got the typical shrill response. Im NOT surprised. It gets annoying...which is why I dont like the discussion.
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
And the reason is that most of those soldiers get in...do their job...and have earned their respect. I dont deny that.

For the who knows how many eth time...


I am not here to argue, defend...fight or anything else. Someone asked the question "what are some of the reasons WHY"

I answered that question. Dont like it? Fine. Disagree with it? FINE.

But if you maintain that openly gay individuals wont face the same type of problems they might face on...oh...say...a professional sports team...and that there wont be a problem with repealing DADT...then you are being intentionally and deliberately ignorant.
Click to expand...

That's fine, and I'm sure most gays understand that there will be some problems but they most likely won't be as bad as people think. Gloom and doom forecasts seem to rain heavy amongst military personnel, yet most turn out way less severe than originally predicted. And I argue for repealing DADT so adamantly because I see it as very unfair of the military to have such a policy when they have no real proof that allowing gays to serve openly will actually cause so much trouble or hurt good order and discipline. Instead they seem to be basing all the hesitations on fear of what might possibly happen and outdated beliefs about both homosexuals and heterosexuals. I'd be willing to bet that most homosexuals in or who would join the military are quite willing and able to conduct themselves in a professional manner. I'd also be willing to bet that most heterosexuals in the military can and will do the same. Sure there will probably be some problems, but that doesn't change the fact that DADT, and for that matter the UCMJ laws on sodomy in privacy period, are unfair and from a time of less tolerance and should go away. Transitions always take time and have problems but this one should not be put off any longer. Sometimes a "good time" never comes, and you have to do things anyway.
 
apdst said:
And not long after that we'll be hearing Liberals far and wide crying that he got kicked out because he's gay and it's right to throw his sexuality in anyone's face he wants.

Ultimately the support for gays serving openly in the military is all about that very thing. It's alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll about gays being able to annouce their gay'ness and not get kicked out of the service.
Click to expand...

It's actually alllllllllllllllll about having one set of rules for all people in the service.
 
roguenuke said:
That's fine, and I'm sure most gays understand that there will be some problems but they most likely won't be as bad as people think. Gloom and doom forecasts seem to rain heavy amongst military personnel, yet most turn out way less severe than originally predicted. And I argue for repealing DADT so adamantly because I see it as very unfair of the military to have such a policy when they have no real proof that allowing gays to serve openly will actually cause so much trouble or hurt good order and discipline. Instead they seem to be basing all the hesitations on fear of what might possibly happen and outdated beliefs about both homosexuals and heterosexuals. I'd be willing to bet that most homosexuals in or who would join the military are quite willing and able to conduct themselves in a professional manner. I'd also be willing to bet that most heterosexuals in the military can and will do the same. Sure there will probably be some problems, but that doesn't change the fact that DADT, and for that matter the UCMJ laws on sodomy in privacy period, are unfair and from a time of less tolerance and should go away. Transitions always take time and have problems but this one should not be put off any longer. Sometimes a "good time" never comes, and you have to do things anyway.
Click to expand...

Holy bat****.

If that was commonly accepted we would have had...like...4 posts on this thread.
 
Redress said:
It's actually alllllllllllllllll about having one set of rules for all people in the service.
Click to expand...

There is one set of rules....Its called the Uniform Code of Military Justice...Obey it or pay the price.............
 
I do not think it is too much to ask that we be cautious with such a policy change before doing so. I am principally for it, but I think it is sensible to admit that these matters are complicated even when we do not want to them to be.

For every one of the supporters, there may be at least one Navy Pride out there.
 
Navy Pride said:
There is one set of rules....Its called the Uniform Code of Military Justice...Obey it or pay the price.............
Click to expand...

And that set of rules says one person can do things that another doing the exact same thing will be discharged for.
 
Fiddytree said:
I do not think it is too much to ask that we be cautious with such a policy change before doing so. I am principally for it, but I think it is sensible to admit that these matters are complicated even when we do not want to them to be.

For every one of the supporters, there may be at least one Navy Pride out there.
Click to expand...

The current plan is a multi year plan to study and slowly implement the policy change.
 
Redress said:
And that set of rules says one person can do things that another doing the exact same thing will be discharged for.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't say....Its says the rules are the same for everyonw.....The military is not a female tea party.......Its not a democracy...Its a dictatorship.....You know the rules when you enlist......If you don't like them then stay the hell out...Let the men of the military fight our battles with out stupid distractions......
 
VanceMack said:
Lets be honest. I didnt engage this topic to advocate or fight. I ANSWERED A QUESTION...something most people are afraid to do. Rather than accept that there ARE INDEED issues and problems...I get to field a thousand different little spurts as to why there wouldnt be a problem by people that are blind to reality based on their own desires and what they think is right.

Personally? I HATE having the gay rights discussion. I hate to sound trite...but I work with many homosexual men and women and I enjoy their company. I dont identify them as gfay people that happen to be good people...I identify them as good people that happen to be gay. I associate with them...communicate with them...their sexuality is not my business or concern.

I do have significant military experience. A question was asked. I answered it. I got the typical shrill response. Im NOT surprised. It gets annoying...which is why I dont like the discussion.
Click to expand...

If your argument is that there will be problems as a result of repealing the policy, then you would be correct. I can't imagine how there wouldn't be. Changing just about any policy would lead to problems.

Of course, there are problems with the policy. Qualified units are being dismissed for just being gay even when there is no apparent signs that allowing them to serve openly would cause problems. In addition, our military is required more and more often to serve alongside gay and lesbian troops from foreign militarys.
 
Navy Pride said:
No it doesn't say....Its says the rules are the same for everyonw.....The military is not a female tea party.......Its not a democracy...Its a dictatorship.....You know the rules when you enlist......If you don't like them then stay the hell out...Let the men of the military fight our battles with out stupid distractions......
Click to expand...

Yes, it very much does have different rules for two otherwise identical people. If a strait mentions his orientation, no penalty, if a gay does, discharge.
 
Redress said:
And that set of rules says one person can do things that another doing the exact same thing will be discharged for.
Click to expand...

Again, you're wrong. The UCMJ makes sodomy illegal for straights the same way it's illegal for gays. Just like adultry is illegal, IAW the UCMJ and a married couple that engages in a swinger lifestyle, the service member in that couple can be subject to military discipline.

So, no, there isn't a double standard.
 
Redress said:
Yes, it very much does have different rules for two otherwise identical people. If a strait mentions his orientation, no penalty, if a gay does, discharge.
Click to expand...

As I thought, it's all about a gay soldier being able to advertise his/her sexuality to the rest of the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom