Sidgaf
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Messages
- 160
- Reaction score
- 56
- Location
- Lost in Maryland
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Look just in time for Ma & Pa in Jesusland to vote.
That's why the military should handle this, vice having it shoved down their throats.
Because the military is not separate from the country. Those who serve are a part of this country, and still bound by, and protected by, our laws.
Well, What is more Precious to All of Us (Civilians) than Freedom of Speech (??) Therefore why can't a Pfc. tell a Brigadier General to "Go Get Fuc**d" and say "Have Fun Today- I'm Going into Town"
In the Civilian sector one can of course lose even a Sound solid good position in Industry by telling for example a CEO or equivilent the same thing. Someone at IBM,B of A, US Steel, Ford, MicroSoft, Quallcom, AIG, etc can do it any lose out totally - be even escorted off the premises - BUT - They don't get Locked up. In the Military YOU DO.
Anybody have a problem seeing it this way and WHY it's necessary??
Also, being that so many here are so full of advice on how the US Military should rearrange itself - I do wonder IF they've ever served .
Well, What is more Precious to All of Us (Civilians) than Freedom of Speech (??) Therefore why can't a Pfc. tell a Brigadier General to "Go Get Fuc**d" and say "Have Fun Today- I'm Going into Town"
In the Civilian sector one can of course lose even a Sound solid good position in Industry by telling for example a CEO or equivilent the same thing. Someone at IBM,B of A, US Steel, Ford, MicroSoft, Quallcom, AIG, etc can do it any lose out totally - be even escorted off the premises - BUT - They don't get Locked up. In the Military YOU DO.
Anybody have a problem seeing it this way and WHY it's necessary??
Also, being that so many here are so full of advice on how the US Military should rearrange itself - I do wonder IF they've ever served .
Speaking of authority, I wonder what Obama could do as Commander and Chief? Could he ignore the judges opinion and set the policy?
As for the Gay ruling when and if it proves to be a mistake that leads to death them the Judge who made the decision should face prison for manslaughter.
How would this lead to death?
The bigoted homophobes that brought DADT into law are embarassments to our country.So the next question is whether the DoJ can get a stay on this I would think. DADT's days are numbered, and this is just another step in the process.
He -could- if DADT was created under one of the powers of the CinC that are not subject to review.Actually no, he cannot.
How would this lead to death?
homophobe beating a gay dude to death the first time he looked at him funny when he dropped the soap in the shower? :lamo
I'm not really sure why you find that situation so amusing. :2razz:
Of course, seeing as there are already gay dudes in those shower rooms...
I'm not really sure why you find that situation so amusing. :2razz:
Of course, seeing as there are already gay dudes in those shower rooms...
Speaking of showering in the military...Gay guys/gals can shower together... why can't straight guys/gals shower together?? It seems like discrimination and unfair to allow gays to check out each others "complete package" in a semi-public forum and not let straights do the same. Forget the gender part... It's a double standard and sexual discrimination against straights. Why can't the military simply have unisex showers, foxholes, barracks... etc. makes sense to me... I'm a gonna rite my congressman. :lol:
I've been saying that for years. If you want "equality" then by god let it be equal.
try being in the field for two weeks with two shower trailers and 100 guys having to share one and 5 females getting the other all to themselves.
try living for months in a tent with the guys crammed in 8 per tent and the females living 2 per tent.
in order to pass my PT test, I have to do more pushups and run faster than a female that is half my age.
and then there are females who still bitch about not getting treated "fairly". they'd **** themselves if they actually got treated "fairly"
Speaking of showering in the military...Gay guys/gals can shower together... why can't straight guys/gals shower together?? It seems like discrimination and unfair to allow gays to check out each others "complete package" in a semi-public forum and not let straights do the same. Forget the gender part... It's a double standard and sexual discrimination against straights. Why can't the military simply have unisex showers, foxholes, barracks... etc. makes sense to me... I'm a gonna rite my congressman. :lol:
OMG, how many times does it take to explain that PFTs are based on a measure of overall fitness, not what is the minimum needed of each exercise for someone to do the job. There are basic physiological differences between men and women, including balance, strength, hormone levels that affect muscle growth, fat and muscle distribution, and center of gravity. All these things affect the effort it takes men and women to do certain excercises. It is much harder for a woman to do a full pushup than it is for a man at the same level of physical fitness because a woman has a different center of gravity than a man does. This is a major reason why during those fitness tests while in school, girls did pushups on their knees and boys did full pushups. Did you know that a woman's waist is above her bellybutton, while a man's waist is below? And did you ever wonder if those breasts that many women have wouldn't act as sort of counterweights in the effort of trying to do a pushup? It's not about lowering standards, it is about recognizing that men and women are not built the same.
Honestly, I wouldn't care one bit if men and women share living/showering spaces, but I do understand why this isn't done. I have shared a changing space with guys while I was active duty (our chief said it was okay as long as no one had problems with it). The majority of men and women in the military, and at a lesser degree, spouses, are not completely comfortable with sharing those spaces, mainly because it is not normal in our society to do so. It is quite common to see male and female bathrooms in the civilian world, not as normal to see gay and straight bathrooms. It is quite normal to see girls and boys separated in gym changing rooms/showers, not normal to see gays and straights separated. And, it really isn't just the "sexual attraction" part that makes it less comfortable, many men have no desire to hear about women's periods or much else that women might talk about while in groups of just women and vice versa. If it were more acceptable in society as a whole, then eventually men and women could share berthings and/or heads/showers, but it most likely won't happen for a long time, if ever, in the US military.
yeah, I 've heard all that before...it still doesn't make sense that a 47 y/o, 200 lb man has to do more pushups and run faster than a 120 lb 20 y/o female.
And did you ever wonder if those breasts that many women have wouldn't act as sort of counterweights in the effort of trying to do a pushup? It's not about lowering standards, it is about recognizing that men and women are not built the same.
There should NOT be two different sets of tests. If I am expected to do the same job as someone else, then we both should have passed the SAME training and fitness tests. Handicapping the women only handicaps the unit they're assigned to.
correct and if they are going to insist on two different sets of standards, then the feminists have no room to complain when the military makes decisions that there are certain fields in which females can't serve.
if it is logical to have different standards because men and women are built differently, then it is logical to have job restrictions because men and women are built differently.
You seem confused. Freedom of speak is not freedom from responsibility for that speech. Further, the odds of getting locked up for cussing out any officer are about nil. There are limitations to your freedom of speech as well.
By the way, I and many others who advocate for the repeal of DADT have in fact served. In fact, we have at least one active duty person here who advocates for it's repeal.
correct and if they are going to insist on two different sets of standards, then the feminists have no room to complain when the military makes decisions that there are certain fields in which females can't serve.
if it is logical to have different standards because men and women are built differently, then it is logical to have job restrictions because men and women are built differently.